Space and Muslim Urban Life: At the Limits of the Labyrinth of Fez (Culture and Civilization in the Middle East)

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

This book develops academic understanding of Muslim urban space by pursuing the structural logic of the premodern Arab-Muslim city, or medina. With particular reference to The Book of Walls, an historical discourse of Islamic law whose primary subject is the wall, the book determines the meaning of a wall and then uses it to analyze the labyrinthine space of Fez. One of a growing number of studies to address space as a category of critical analysis, the book makes the following contributions to scholarship. Methodologically, it breaks with the tradition of viewing Islamic architecture as a well-defined object observed by a specialist at an aesthetically directed distance; rather, it inhabits the logic of this architecture by rethinking it discursively from within the culture that produced it. Hermeneutically, it sheds new light on one of North Africa’s oldest medinas, and thereby illuminates a type of environment still common to much of the Arab-Muslim world. Empirically, it brings to the attention of mainstream scholarship a legal discourse and aesthetic that contributed to the form and longevity of this type of environment; and it exposes a preoccupation with walls and other limits in premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, and a mythic paradigm informing the foundation narratives of a number of historic medinas. Presenting a fresh perspective for the understanding of Muslim urban society and thought, this innovative study will be of interest to students and researchers of Islamic studies, architecture, and sociology. Simon O’Meara is Assistant Professor of History of Art at the American University of Kuwait. He researches the sociological dimensions of Islamic art and architecture, with a regional focus on the art and architecture of North Africa.

CULTURE AND CIVILIZATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST Series Editor Ian R. Netton University of Leeds This series studies the Middle East through the twin foci of its diverse cultures and civilisations. Comprising original monographs as well as scholarly surveys, it covers topics in the fields of Middle Eastern literature, archaeology, law, history, philosophy, science, folklore, art, architecture and language. While there is a plurality of views, the series presents serious scholarship in a lucid and stimulating fashion. 1. Arabic Literature – An Overview Pierre Cachia 2. Modern Arab Historiography Historical Discourse and the Nation-State Youssef Choueiri 3. The Philosophical Poetics of Alfarabi, Avicenna and Averroes The Aristotelian Reception Salim Kemal 4. The Epistemology of Ibn Khaldun Zaid Ahmad 5. The Hanbali School of Law and Ibn Taymiyyah Conflict or Concilation Abdul Hakim I Al-Matroudi 6. Arabic Rhetoric A Pragmatic Analysis Hussein Abdul-Raof 7. Arab Representations of the Occident East-West Encounters in Arabic Fiction Rasheed El-Enany 8. God and Humans in Islamic thought Abd al-Jabbar, Ibn Scna and al-Ghazalc Maha Elkaisy-Friemuth 9. Original Islam Malik and the madhhab of Madina Yasin Dutton 10. Al-Ghaz1l2 and the Qur9an One Book, Many Meanings Martin Whittingham 11. The Birth of the Prophet Muhammad Devotional Piety in Sunni Islam Marion Holmes Katz 12. Space and Muslim Urban Life At the Limits of the Labyrinth of Fez Simon O’Meara

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE At the Limits of the Labyrinth of Fez

Simon O’Meara

First published 2007 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2007. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” © 2007 Simon O’Meara All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data O’Meara, Simon. Space and Muslim urban life : at the limits of the labyrinth of Fez / Simon O’Meara. p. cm. — (Culture and civilization in the Middle East ; 12) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Walls—Morocco—Fès. 2. Space (Architecture)—Morocco—Fès. 3. Islamic cities and towns—Morocco. 4. Building laws (Islamic law) I. Title. NA9053.W3O44 2007 721′.2096434—dc22 2006039503 ISBN 0–203–94707–X Master e-book ISBN ISBN10: 0-415-38612-8 (hbk) ISBN10: 0-203-94707-X (ebk) ISBN13: 978-0-415-38612-8 (hbk) ISBN13: 978-0-203-94707-4 (ebk)

A World it is to see, how large, how populous, how well-fortified and walled this citie is. Leo Africanus, “Of Fez the Principall Citie of all Barbarie”

CONTENTS

viii ix

List of Illustrations Preface & Acknowledgements Introduction

1

1

Premodern Fez

6

2

Social and Religious Dimensions of Walls

19

3

Legal Dimensions of Walls: The Book of Walls

29

4

The Juridic Basis of The Book of Walls

39

5

Shame and the Significance of Walls

49

6

Zef/Fez

57

Conclusion

68

Appendix: A Representative Sample of Cases and Case Titles from The Book of Walls

72 80 82 123 146

Glossary Notes Bibliography Index

vii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Plates 1.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19.

Aerial view of Fez medina: neighborhoods Oued Chorfa to Moulay Idris. (Courtesy Hachette Photos Presse, Paris © Georg Gerster / Rapho) Fez medina: neighborhood Zerbatana Fez medina: neighborhood Douh Fez medina: neighborhood Oued Sowafine Fez medina: neighborhood Ain Azliten Fez medina: neighborhood Rahbat Zebib Fez medina: neighborhood Oued Rachacha Fez medina: neighborhood Qalqaline Fez medina: neighborhood Gezira Fez medina: neighborhood Guerniz Fez medina: neighborhood Sidi Al-Aouad Fez medina: neighborhood Keddan Fez medina: neighborhood Zekak Arouman Fez medina: neighborhood Laayoun Fez medina: neighborhood Qouas Fez medina: neighborhood Qantrat Bourous Fez medina: neighborhood Lemtiyine Fez medina: neighborhood Ain Azliten Fez medina: interior of the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque

Figures 1.

2.

Map of Marinid Fez. (After Roger Le Tourneau, Fez in the Age of the Marinides, trans. Besse Alberta Clement [Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1961] © 1961 by the University of Oklahoma Press, Publishing Division of the University) Map of Idrisid Fez. (After Evariste Lévi-Provençal, La fondation de Fès [Paris: Larose, 1939] )

viii

6 8

PREFACE & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

“Space reaches from us and construes the world,” wrote the poet Rilke. This book develops understanding of the complexity and varieties of space by analyzing the construction of one distinctive type of world, the premodern Arab-Muslim city, or medina, specifically, Fez, Morocco. Focusing on the structural element that defines so much of a medina for this period, namely, the wall, or limit, the book uses religious, legal, and literary sources to interpret this element and investigate the architectural space of Morocco’s all but inscrutable city. Revealed in the analysis are policies and ideologies that underpinned the longevity and relative ubiquity of this type of urban environment, and the extent to which a protective concept of shame informed its space. In addition to forming part of a small but growing number of North African and Middle Eastern studies that address space as a category of critical analysis, the book’s original contribution to scholarship is threefold. Methodologically, it breaks with the tradition of viewing Islamic architecture as a static, clearly defined object observed by a specialist at an aesthetically directed distance; instead, it inhabits the logic of this architecture by rethinking it discursively from within the culture that produced it. Hermeneutically, it sheds new light on one of North Africa’s oldest medinas, thereby illuminating a type of environment still common to much of the Arab-Muslim world. Empirically, it brings to the attention of mainstream scholarship a legal discourse and aesthetic that contributed to the form and longevity of this type of environment; it identifies a preoccupation with walls and their like in medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture; and it exposes a mythic paradigm informing the foundation narratives of a number of historic medinas. In writing the book, my aim was not just to help render a particular type of space increasingly accountable to academic thought and to try to reveal something fundamental about the medina environment as a whole, as a world, but also to provoke the following realization. That the walls which still today define so many historic Arab-Muslim medinas are more than just background bricks and mortar, but once signified a protective notion of ix

PREFACE & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

shame and commonly symbolized a politically, juridically, and religiously desired form of gendered urban society; a society which walls helped coerce into existence.1 The book began life as a doctoral dissertation under the supervision of Professor Ian Netton at the University of Leeds, funded by an A.H.R.B. studentship. In that form, it also benefited from the input of a number of additional people, most notably Dr. Alex Metcalfe and Professors Dale Eickelman and Kevin Reinhart. To them I extend once more my heartfelt thanks. As a manuscript revised for publication, the book has been much improved by the suggestions and corrections of Mr. Daoud Casewit and Professor Lynn Higgins. To both readers I am profoundly grateful; that I have not always followed their counsel reflects only upon me, and any errors are my own. Other people who have contributed to the completion of the book are too many to list, sufficiently long has the project been from its inception, but the following individuals and institutions must be singled out for mention, so important has their input been: my current employers, the American University of Kuwait, who awarded a grant to cover the copyright fees; Dr. John Gibson, Mr. Samuel Thompson, and Mses. Holly Shaffer and Naomi Stone, who provided critical and inspiring feedback when it was needed; Dr. Mustapha Foudil, who supplied a copy of one the historical sources on walls; Mr. Sayeed Rahman, who patiently verified obscure citations; Ustadh Hajwiri of Dar al-Basith bookstore in Fez, who suggested and obtained hard-to-find titles; my publishers, Routledge, for permission to reproduce the parts of Chapter Six that recently appeared in Cities in the Pre-modern Islamic World: The Urban Impact of Religion, State and Society, ed. A. K. Bennison and A. Gascoigne (Abingdon: Routledge, 2007); Ms. Susan Peters, who shared her knowledge of the city; and Professor Roland Higgins, who made the connection between the receding arch and the receding desert. Finally, and above all others, I owe an unpayable debt of gratitude to my wife and parents. The former made the project bearable, not to say achievable; the latter have unstintingly supported me throughout my education and academic career. Regrettably, my father did not live to see the published book; to his lasting memory it is dedicated. In the book, the transliteration of Arabic follows the system recommended by the International Journal of Middle East Studies. Diacritical marks are used consistently on quotations, italicized technical terms, book titles, and where appropriate, personal and place names. Unless stated otherwise, all translations are mine. Foreign words found in The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary are treated as English words, neither italicized nor presented with diacriticals. All dates refer to the Common Era (C.E.).

x

Plate 1 Aerial view of Fez medina: neighborhoods Oued Chorfa to Moulay Idris. (Courtesy Hachette Photos Presse, Paris © Georg Gerster / Rapho)

Plate 2 Fez medina: neighborhood Zerbatana

Plate 3 Fez medina: neighborhood Douh

Plate 4 Fez medina: neighborhood Oued Sowafine

Plate 5 Fez medina: neighborhood Ain Azliten

Plate 6 Fez medina: neighborhood Rahbat Zebib

Plate 7 Fez medina: neighborhood Oued Rachacha

Plate 8 Fez medina: neighborhood Qalqaline

Plate 9 Fez medina: neighborhood Gezira

Plate 10 Fez medina: neighborhood Guerniz

Plate 11 Fez medina: neighborhood Sidi Al-Aouad

Plate 12 Fez medina: neighborhood Keddan

Plate 13 Fez medina: neighborhood Zekak Arouman

Plate 14 Fez medina: neighborhood Laayoun

Plate 15 Fez medina: neighborhood Qouas

Plate 16 Fez medina: neighborhood Qantrat Bourous

Plate 17 Fez medina: neighborhood Lemtiyine

Plate 18 Fez medina: neighborhood Ain Azliten

Plate 19 Fez medina: interior of the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

Much is said today in the name of space, not all of it convincing. Few, however, would doubt that to different spaces belong different natures, or the related claim by the Andalusian philosopher Ibn al-‘Arabc (d. 1240) that “places affect subtle hearts [ . . . . ] Just as spiritual dwellings differ in excellence, so, too, do bodily ones.”1 This nature of space is experiential in part and the difficulties involved in analyzing it are hence many, but including it within the investigative framework of scholarship enhances our understanding of the world that each society creates, inhabits, and competes to reproduce. By way of contrast, a world collapsed of its space offers to knowledge a flattened picture, revealing little of the interactions and interrelations between things, and between things and ourselves. Additionally, investigating space highlights the stakes and struggles involved in instigating, maintaining, and replicating environments, and thus serves as a reminder that space is not just a social phenomenon, but also a political and ideological concern. The following book investigates the spatial nature of an environment conventionally, but awkwardly categorized as the Islamic city. Problematic when taken on its own, the category becomes more meaningful when sorted according to region and time. This book, for example, focuses on the ArabMuslim city from approximately 1400–1800, a period henceforth referred to as premodern. During this time span a particular morphology was consistently maintained and reproduced throughout much of North Africa and the Middle East, with only limited modifications.2 Hence, the relevance of investigating the nature of its space, of learning why and how it was upheld and replicated; for with the onset of modernity, the process fragmented to an end. The Islamic city’s valorization by restricted subclasses serves as a reminder that for all its shortcomings, the category yet signifies a reality: an urban “family resemblance,” similarities shared in full or part by a chronologically comparable but geographically diverse range of Muslim-majority medinas.3 Included amongst these similarities for at least the premodern Arab-Muslim city is the labyrinthine web of frequently narrow and half-lit streets, alleys, and cul-de-sacs that unites the urban infrastructure and does 1

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

so much to define the space.4 Indicative of neither urban laissez-faire nor the indigènes’ purportedly irrational mind as once was held, this complex arrangement of partitioned thoroughfares and passages reveals a deliberately structured, readily defensible, and environmentally efficient habitat capable of supporting a large population.5 If this book insists on the term labyrinth to refer to it, it does so solely in the sense of a convoluted network of segmentalized, interconnecting passageways bordered by tall, seemingly impenetrable walls. These walls do more than border the passageways. They form them.6 Were there no walls, there would be no paths and alleys, no labyrinth, to speak of; they are a typically ubiquitous, unavoidable presence in this period of the Arab-Muslim city, as the photographs of Fez medina in Plates 2–18 show. Extensively defining the city’s space, they suggest that any inquiry into the nature of this space should pay them heed; a counsel confirmed by the Tunisian architect and scholar, Ali Djerbi, and validated by the extent to which premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture was preoccupied with walls and their like. Regarding Ali Djerbi, he writes: [The walls of the medina] steer our changes of place; enclose, delimit, and protect our activities, objects, and tools; receive us and make us pass from one location to another. They separate and structure the architectural space, and by way of this they allow us to dwell. They can, therefore, signify the nature of this dwelling (demeure).7 Regarding premodern Arab-Muslim culture’s preoccupation with walls, the following snapshot must suffice, as the phenomenon is dealt with at length in the coming chapters. From “God’s Boundaries” in the Qur’an and “threshold propriety” in the Hadith, to the divisions of licit and illicit in daily life, Muslim and protected non-Muslim in administrative life, and the “House of Islam” and the “House of War” in political life, premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture’s preoccupation with walls and their like was considerable and more than metaphorical. Fundamentally an architectural disposition, the preoccupation took built expression in the labyrinthine structure of many of the region’s medinas, and territorial expression in their residential quarters and non-Muslim enclaves. It also took legal expression in The Book of Walls, a discourse of Islamic law pertaining extensively to the upkeep and regulation of walls within medinas; gendered institutional expression in so-called “respectable” women’s veiling; and religious institutional expression in spatial techniques for suggesting the existence of another world just beyond the visible horizon. If this preoccupation could be used to identify the meaning of a wall in premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, the resulting interpretation could then be applied to the structure of the premodern Arab-Muslim medina and 2

INTRODUCTION

the space this structure defines, analyzed. In inhabiting, or more correctly “haunting” the labyrinth’s logic this way, the space it organizes would be apprehended from within the organizing principles of urban Muslim culture; not regarded from an external and socially exceptional viewpoint, the customary position for architectural histories of the Middle East and elsewhere. When, for example, Roger Le Tourneau describes Fez in his classic study of the medina, he does so from the grave: the hillside tombs and cemeteries overlooking the city. The medina is physically just too dense and pressing for his contemplation: he cannot see it how he wants to; and so he exits it, the better to describe it.8 More recently, in Heghnar Watenpaugh’s study of Ottoman Aleppo, subtitled Imperial Architecture and Urban Experience, the author substitutes an ordinary, or unselfconscious, everyday experience of the city and its monuments for the experience had by architectural historians of today and “cultured eyes” and members of the ruling elite then.9 These privileged, predominantly outside figures experience the city and its buildings by self-consciously viewing them from a social remove, an aesthetically dictated distance, or both.10 No matter how interesting it is to know the composition and aspect of a city according to an outsider, as John Gulick shows in his comparison of foreign and native views of contemporary Tripoli, Lebanon, “[s]ince the foreigner or outsider is not socially involved, he does not, in actual fact, see the same over-all image [of the city and its buildings] as clearly, if at all.”11 Moreover, because cities and their spaces are seldom just beheld by a few from on high, but bodily experienced by many from within, a position accounting for this most unspectacular of commonplaces is worthwhile trying to find. Rarely is it satisfying to know only the outward, formal aspects of a medina – its madrasas, mosques, and mausoleums, say. One would like also to know its space. For in this space commingle what these monuments are in historical time and selectively frame out of time, with the lives, values, and beliefs of those subject to them. And from this space arise a society’s representations of the world and the inhabitants’ place in it, which in turn re-inform the space.12 Such are the book’s hypothesis and rationale. Their setting, Fez, the millennial medina of contemporary Morocco. The reasons for this choice include Fez’s status in Islamic urban studies, making it a logical academic choice;13 its premodern historiography, presenting a civic identity necessary for comparative purposes;14 and above all, its extensive and notoriously forbidding labyrinth.15 Of this imposing habitat the expatriate novelist Paul Bowles wrote, “The blank wall is its symbol [ . . . . ]”;16 additional evidence, if any were needed, of the validity of pursuing the space of the medina across its walls. Given the importance of Fez to the history of Islamic civilization in general and the academic study of Islamic urbanism in specific, it is surprising that its space per se has never been investigated.17 For in making the 3

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

investigation, not only is a light cast upon one of the Muslim world’s best preserved habitats, a UNESCO World Heritage site since 1981, but also illuminated are other historical medinas whose physical and institutional structures similarly indicate a preoccupation with walls and other limits. Illuminated, too, is the shared culture these medinas belonged to and the way of life they enabled. To make the investigation, the book proceeds as follows. Chapter One describes the history and architectural composition of premodern Fez and shows how the city is not only structurally defined by walls, but historically determined by them, too. Chapter Two commences a review of the social and religious dimensions of walls in medieval and premodern urban ArabMuslim culture, that Chapter Three completes with a treatment of the aforementioned legal discourse whose predominant concern is walls, The Book of Walls. It is necessary to include medieval culture in this review, because at least with regard to walls and their like, the clean division and clear distinctions implied by the periods, medieval and premodern, are not necessarily borne out in quotidian reality. Chapter Four is the most technical of the book, in that it seeks the juridic basis of The Book of Walls; it is also the most important, methodologically speaking. Since Islamic law ( fiqh) is built upon known juridic bases (sg. aUl), were the basis of the discourse identified, what lies at the heart of walls – what walls are – would also be identified. The identification would necessarily be a legal one, but because Islamic law lies at the core of urban Muslim culture, to identify a wall legally is also to identify it culturally, albeit normatively. “Islamic law,” wrote the Islamicist Joseph Schacht, “is the epitome of Islamic thought, the most typical manifestation of the Islamic way of life, the core and kernel of Islam itself.”18 Chapter Five refines the conclusion of this chapter, defining walls in terms of a protective notion of shame and corroborating this interpretation upon evidence from the historical corpus of rithA” al-mudun, elegies on medinas vanquished or abandoned. With a wall so interpreted, the space a labyrinth such as premodern Fez defined is simultaneously grasped, and in the final chapter this understanding is compared to what premodern Fez itself understood of its space. An analysis of the city’s foundation legend reveals its constituent elements to be literary topoi: ritual re-enactments of a mythic foundation paradigm recorded in the Prophet’s biography, regarding the creation of Medina as the archetypal Islamic political state. Shown lying at the heart of this paradigm is the investigation’s definition of a wall and the space this wall in turn defines. To achieve these findings, my approach is informed by the theories of space developed by the philosopher and urban critic Henri Lefebvre. For Lefebvre, space is both a social production and a medium through which social life is produced and reproduced.19 Contrary to more benign theories, space is not an environmental, architectural concern only, something outside of us, waiting to be filled with our objects and actions; but part of us, 4

INTRODUCTION

pervading our values and beliefs, narratives and strategies. Space is thus a complex phenomenon, and accordingly this investigation aims to achieve only a partial, albeit fundamental analysis of the space of Fez, for its focus is limited to the space’s architectural aspect, to the walls that order the labyrinthine city. As indicated earlier, such an analysis matters, whether partial or full, for in restoring space to the investigative framework of scholarship, a medium that helps give context and continuity to a society becomes increasingly accountable to academic thought.

5

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

1 PREMODERN FEZ

Divided into three parts, Fez today comprises the medina (FAs al-BAlC ), Fez Jedcd (FAs al-JadCd ), and the Ville Nouvelle. The medina is the heart of the city (fig. 1), the historic Arab-Muslim habitat founded in 789 by the grand patriarch of contemporary Morocco, eponym of the Idrisid dynasty, and great grandson of the Prophet, Moulay Idrcs I (d. 791).1 Menacing the medina’s borders, the imperial nexus of Fez Jedcd dates to 1276 and consists of the Sultan’s palace, barracks, and administrative quarters, as well as the area that became the Jewish enclave, or mellah (mallAS) (“Hims” in fig. 1). The Ville Nouvelle, or “New Town” is the modern part of the city, established by the French four years after the signing of the Protectorate in 1912, at some distance from both the medina and Fez Jedcd. As it has continued to expand

Marinid Palace Leper House

ou

Je u

RABAD AN-NSARA d FEZ JEDID Lalla Ghriba e AL-MADINAT AL-BAYDA Ou Jami‘az-Zhar Jami‘ al-Hamra

Bab al-Hadid

Bab Semmarin

n ytu

z Fe

Laundrymen

Jami‘al-Kabir

a ud m

Bab Ftuh

Bab al-Hamra

Bab Jedid

Bab Jiaf

HIMS (Mellah)

Oued B

Bo

Bab as-Sba‘

Ou ed

Bab Bou Jat

lou d

S

RB

BU

SU

M as

Bab Mahruq

Khara

Madrasa al-‘Attarin Madrasa Misbahiya Jami‘ al-Qarawiyyin Bab Khukha eb Madrasa as-Saffarin r Jami‘ al-Andalus Madrasa Bou ‘Inaniya Madrasa as-Sahrij & Madrasa as-Sba‘iyyın MEDINA

FORMER ALMOHAD KASBAH

Marinid Gardens

Bab Sidi Bou Jida

Bab Gisa

a

dZ

e Ou

0

500 1000

2000

3000 feet

Figure 1 Map of Marinid Fez. (After Roger Le Tourneau, Fez in the Age of the Marinides, trans. Besse Alberta Clement [Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1961] © 1961 by the University of Oklahoma Press, Publishing Division of the University)

6

PREMODERN FEZ

exponentially, so it has come to comprise a multitude of new areas, each with its own name.2 Unless stated otherwise, all subsequent references to the city of Fez are to the medina and Fez Jedcd alone. The current chapter provides a portrait of the city from approximately 1300–1600, with the aim of showing how walls were both physically definitive and historically determinant of it for this period. If it were demonstrated that the premodern city had a particular relationship to its walls, subsequently learning the meaning of these walls would enable the apprehension of its space. The years 1276–1554 are commonly considered a golden age for Fez, branding for it an institutional identity that persisted long after the Marinids and Wavvasids, the two dynasties associated with the period, had ended.3 Three examples drawn from present-day or near-present-day Moroccan religious, political, and educational life illustrate this claim: the cult of Idrcs II (d. 828), son of Moulay Idrcs I; officially sanctioned sharifianism, or the ideology that accords rights and virtues to the shurafA”, the descendants of the Prophet; and madrasa-based education. All are thought to originate or develop during this time.4 The period is widely referred to as the Marinid age, for although the Marinids were themselves overthrown in 1465, their successors, the Wavvasids, were a collateral branch of this dynasty, perpetuating its policies and making no lasting mark on the city.5 It was the Marinids who marked Fez, permanently stamping it with more than an institutional identity, but a structural one, too. To them belong the aforementioned Fez Jedcd, seven of the eight colleges, or madrasas, a number of mosques, and most importantly of all, an architectural style, decorative program, and construction technique that remained standard for both domestic and monumental buildings during the next five centuries.6 This structural, artistic, and institutional stamp, coupled with the fact that the Marinid dynasty oversaw the composition of the city’s canonic history, makes the years 1276–1554 a pertinent dynastic epoch in which to anchor the investigation of premodern Fez’s architectural space.

Marinid Fez: history Not the least effect of monumental architecture is to render a coherent image of conflicting times and spaces.7 Such is the case of Marinid Fez, which in the absence of an earlier canonic history to oppose it, manages to retroject itself to its Idrisid origins, engendering the illusion that the city came into being like Pallas Athena: monumental, tremendous, and as both the foundation and burial site of a descendant of the Prophet, sacrosanct.8 Of course, this effect is not exclusively architectural, but enmeshed in a political and religious ideology that since Marinid times has made of Fez the cradle of orthodox Islam, and via its scholars, or ulema, the guarantor of legitimate Islamic rule in the country.9 7

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

Gumara, Rif

When this illusion is countered with reference to the only significant source for early Fez, namely, the Arab geographers, it becomes clear that the city came into being as one of a series of fortified townships built by the warring Idrisids in their efforts to colonize the Western Maghrib.10 And although it rapidly grew in size and population, for at least the first two hundred years Fez was a functional but unadorned place: largely agrarian, somewhat rude, and frequently violent.11 Al-Muqaddisc (d. after 988), for example, describes the inhabitants as “sluggish and ignorant. Scholars are few; mobs abundant.”12 Adding to this impression of a city of poor standing, al-Ya‘qebc (d. 897) notes that only the river coursing through the medina is called Fez, not the place itself.13 This wayward identity is explicable not on Fez’s juvenescence alone, but also on the fact that until 1069 the city consisted of two medinas separated by a tributary of the Jawhar river: al-WAdC al-KabCr, improbably called Fez by al-Ya‘qebc.14 A source of some confusion amongst historians, the twin sites are nowadays dated to 789 and 808 respectively.15 The first date marks the founding of MadCnat FAs by Moulay Idrcs I; the second date, the founding of al-“Aliyya (also, al-“Fliya) by his son Idrcs II (fig. 2). Both medinas were walled and autonomous, and both rivalrous of the other; hence the internecine violence so remarked upon by the geographers. It is not certain

Bab Hisn Sa“dun Bab Abi Sufyan

A

Bab al-Furs

Bab al-Hadid

A

LI

Bab al-Kanisa

D

IN

Jami “ al-Ashyakh

S

A

Bab al-Faraj

Leprosarium

F

Bab alMukhfiyya

A

M

- ‘A AL al-Wadi al -K a

Bab asShibuba

T

Bab al-Fasil

YY

Jami“ al-Ashraf

Bab Ifriqiya

Bab al-Qibla

bir

Bab al-Fawwara

0

a l- W

ad

200

400

600

800 Metres

Current perimeter walls Approximate configuration of the Idrisid perimeter walls

a l-

Za

200 100

n ytu

i

Figure 2 Map of Idrisid Fez. (After Evariste Lévi-Provençal, La fondation de Fès [Paris: Larose, 1939])

8

PREMODERN FEZ

when the name MadCnat FAs, Fez, came to include both agglomerations, but according to numismatic evidence, not until at least the late tenth century: no Idrisid coins have been found with the name FAs; only al-“Aliyya and al-“Aliyya MadCnat IdrCs.16 This evidence, combined with the fact that in the mid-eleventh century both cities were expanded and Fez “became as [if ] one city,”17 establishes the name of Fez for both sites by no later than 1069.18 Such is borne out by the geographers posthumous to al-Ya‘qebc, all of whom refer to the double medina as Fez.19 During the reign of the Almoravids (1069–1146), and enclosed definitively within one perimeter wall,20 Fez acquired a reputation for more than just rusticity, but Maliki legal scholarship and the Jewish inhabitants’ vigor in trade.21 Basing his account on Umayyad records, never visiting Fez in person, al-Bakrc (d. 1094) is impressed by the size of the city, including its two principal edifices, the Al-Qarawiyycn and Al-Andalus Friday mosques (sg. jAmi“ al-kabCr).22 He is no less impressed by the artificial canalization that supplied water throughout the city, turning the three hundred-plus mills, irrigating the gardens and fruit trees, and sourcing the twenty-some public baths.23 The importance of this description notwithstanding, it is only during the reign of the succeeding dynasty, the Almohads (1120–1269), that Fez is portrayed in terms more indicative of a city of stature and power.24 Whilst still noting the ongoing internecine violence, al-Idrcsc (d. 1166) also notes the beauty of the city, the “nobility of [its] architecture, houses, and palaces [ . . . . ] All around are gushing fountains of flowing water, surmounted by domes; also, intricate baths, plasterwork tracery, and other sorts of ornament.”25 A few decades later, Yaqet (d. 1229) distinguishes Fez with the title SARira, capital or “mighty dwelling,” and the words “a grand and famous city.”26 The Marinids build upon this fame. With the foundation of the imperial nexus Fez Jedcd in 1276, Fez became their capital and the medina their prized possession: admired and most probably displayed to visitors from the vantage point of a hillside palace just beyond the northern perimeter wall.27 They also oversaw the formation of what would become the city’s orthodox history.28 The Marinids made Fez their capital; their historians made it illustrious, destined to be inviolable.29 Only two Marinid histories of Fez remain today, out of what is thought to have been a total of at least eight.30 They are RawR al-qirVAs, dated to 1326 and of imprecise paternity;31 and Zahrat al-As, dated to either 1365 or 1367 and attributed to ‘Alc al-Jazna’c (n.d.).32 Both are histories of Fez, but whereas the canonic RawR al-qirVAs devotes many of its pages to events and people apart from Fez, the shorter Zahrat al-As does not.33 It, rather, is devoted specifically to the city’s construction from the moment of foundation to the mid-fourteenth century, providing an almost verbatim, occasionally more plausible copy of the history recounted in RawR al-qirVAs, supplemented with new information.34 These “improvements” on RawR al-qirVAs make Zahrat al-As a convenient document for the investigation of Fez and 9

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

explain why reference will be made to it as well as the more celebrated RawR al-qirVAs in the coming pages and chapters. Regarding its author, nothing more than his name is known, but given his detailed knowledge of the mosques and other mortmain (waqf, Subus) elements of Fez, one theory is that he was a functionary in charge of the medina’s considerable waqf property.35 As for the author of RawR al-qirVAs, not even his name is certain, but it is thought that he was a native of Fez, most likely from a distinguished family.36 Amongst contemporary historians of premodern Morocco (al-Maghrib al-AqUA”) there is debate regarding the reasons for the sudden irruption of this historiography of Fez. Maya Shatzmiller has suggested it was part of a deliberate strategy to alienate the inhabitants of Fez medina from their Marinid rulers by enhancing the Idrisid, Prophetic lineage of their city, thereby highlighting the Marinids’ illegitimacy.37 Additionally, she sees in the historians’ lengthy treatments of the medina’s religious institutions a protest at the Marinids’ disregard for the upkeep and maintenance of the mosques.38 Whilst it is plausible that the Marinids contributed minimally to mosque maintenance, and true that the histories sanctify the Idrisid ancestry of the medina, the historian Herman Beck is not alone in interpreting these facts otherwise.39 Along with a number of others, he finds in the histories evidence of a pro-Marinid ideology, one legitimating the dynasty.40 He is also persuaded of a campaign, led by the author of the RawR al-qirVAs, to attach the otherwise rebellious local shurafA” to their city, centralizing them there, allowing the Marinid authorities better to control them.41 The means of achieving this attachment, Beck argues, was to obscure the role of Idrcs I in the foundation of Fez and ascribe the city instead entirely to his son, Idrcs II, whose descendants still occupied the home he had built, DAr alQayVEn.42 With the success of RawR al-qirVAs, subsequent histories of Fez repeated this narrative, canonizing it, ensuring that Fez and Idrcs II became indissolubly linked in the local imagination, thereby paving the way for the discovery in 1437 of Idrcs II’s incorrupt body in the ruins of the mosque opposite DAr al-QayVEn.43 There is much that recommends Beck’s reading of Marinid historiography of Fez, not least the fact that it explains why historians from Marinids times onwards have insisted on seeing in Fez’s twin foundations just one actor, Idrcs II. Only in 1938 was this myth exposed.44 It is, however, beyond the scope of the present chapter to discuss further the historiography of Fez, leaving that for Chapter Six, and instead to use the information the historiography provides to help describe the premodern city’s formal intramural composition.

Marinid Fez: monumental composition Spanning an area of approximately 340 hectares, the perimeter walls today no longer contain the city that spills onto the land beyond. This, however, is 10

PREMODERN FEZ

an aspect of the present crisis of overcrowding, not something known during the period under review, when a significant swathe of Fez was left green and unbuilt: a ring of gardens, cemeteries, and open spaces immediately inside the walls.45 If a recent census has conservatively recorded 169,000 people residing in the medina and Fez Jedcd, a population level of 675 inhabitants per hectare (excluding the palace), between 1300–1600 the population would likely have been no greater than that at the end of the nineteenth century: about 100,000, a population level of 400 inhabitants per hectare, one-fifth of them in Fez Jedcd.46 During this period, the medina’s inhabitants were divided between two banks, or “ ‘adwa-s” (sg. “udwa): ‘Adwat al-Qarawiyycn and ‘Adwat alAndalus. Representing the development of the original foundations of Fez, al-“Aliyya and MadCnat FAs respectively, these banks took their names from two waves of immigrants: Arab horsemen from Kairouan, Tunisia (IfrCqiya) in 804–5, and refugees from Andalusia (al-Andalus) in 817–18.47 Serving as a reminder of these historical events, the medina’s principal Friday mosques, the Al-Qarawiyycn and Al-Andalus, whose foundations date to the midninth century, are today still the city’s major monuments, followed in the Marinid period by the colleges.48 Regarding the monumental quality of the latter, the art historian Robert Hillenbrand remarks: The lavishness of the royal patronage in these madrasas leaps to the eye [ . . . with] a breathtaking parade of ornament. The cool sheen of tiled floor and dadoes gives way to the lacy filigree of stucco set off by the subtle mellow patina of the ancient woodwork. It is like stepping inside a casket of jewels.49 Undoubtedly, the monumental space of Marinid Fez comprised these two Friday mosques and seven madrasas, but if the definition of monumental means something other than just big buildings, then the space would have comprised more besides.50 Lefebvre, for example, defines monumental space as that which offers “each member of a society an image [ . . . ] of his or her social visage [ . . . A] collective mirror more faithful than any personal one.”51 “[Monumental space] permits,” he continues, “a continual back-andforth between the private speech of ordinary conversations and the public speech of discourses, lectures, sermons, rallying-cries, and all theatrical forms of utterance.”52 Exemplifying these remarks by way of a cathedral, he writes: The use of the cathedral’s monumental space necessarily entails its supplying answers to all the questions that assail anyone who crosses the threshold. For visitors are bound to become aware of their own footsteps, and listen to the noises, the singing; they must breathe the incense-laden air, and plunge into a particular world, that of sin and redemption; they will partake of an ideology; they will 11

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

contemplate and decipher the symbols around them; and they will thus, on the basis of their own bodies, experience a total being in a total space.53 On this view, for at least the medina’s freely circulating, male members, the intramural monumental space of Marinid Fez would have comprised institutions such as the neighborhood mosques (sg. masjid) and public baths, or hammams, in addition to the Friday mosques and madrasas. That both were more than occasional objects of monumental design and lavish decorative programs is proven by what is known of them today.54 That they were also discrete, ordered, and transparent universes, in the sense of Lefebvre’s self-disclosing, doubt-resolving cathedral, can be assumed for the mosques, where staging the faithful’s temporary withdrawal from this world to remember God liturgically in the next was their primary raison d’être,55 and surmised for the hammams from anachronistic accounts, memoirs, and studies.56 Of the latter, one of the most compelling is by the Tunisian sociologist Abdelwahab Bouhdiba, who writes: A whole area of sexual life is organized around the hammam: the real and the refusal of the real, childhood and puberty, transition and initiation, are integrated in a kind of constellation of meanings crystallized in the hammam [ . . . . ] In the hammam one rediscovers oneself and becomes reconciled with one’s own childhood.57 Comprised, too, in the medina’s intramural monumental space would have been the many fonduks, or merchants’ inns. Often buildings of remarkable size and elegance, the fonduks served for the benefit and glory of commerce, and as described by Leo Africanus (d. ca. 1550), a one-time resident of the medina, also for contained social transgression: transvestism, alcoholism, “vulgarity and villainy.”58 Leo Africanus also describes another commercial institution that would have been part of the city’s monumental space: the qayUariyya, or lockable market of precious goods, located at the heart of the medina. “This burse,” he writes, “you may well call a city, which being walled round about has twelve gates, and before every gate an iron chain [ . . . . ]”59 For a city by then renowned as a pole of Sufism, or Islamic mysticism, one might have expected the adherents’ sanctuaries, or zAwiyas also to have belonged to the monumental space, as they undoubtedly would for later centuries.60 However, to judge by the records for 1300–1600, with possibly one exception, no significant, discrete intramural sites seem to be associated with the institution,61 the Sufis’ institutional stronghold remaining the sanctuaries and most especially the hermitages (sg. rAbiVa) located beyond the perimeter walls (sg. sEr).62 By contrast, these perimeter walls would have been included in the monumental space, and also the massive gates (sg. bAb) 12

PREMODERN FEZ

set within them.63 The gates partly functioned as a tax point for incoming goods, a sign of their and their carriers having entered the city’s jurisdiction;64 one of the gates, Bab Mahruq, also serving for the display of severed heads of state enemies: a cautionary sign for all entrants.65 The perimeter walls, whose form dated to the Almohads and Marinids, and to a lesser extent the Sa‘dids (1554–1659), functioned as both a military defense and a symbolic threshold between civilization and wilderness, security and fear.66 As described by the novelist of present-day Fez, ‘Izz al-Dcn Tazc: The city walls, with all of their history, mythology, and murderous insularity, portioning out their shade between the inside and the outside, stretching into people’s lives and houses and shops, as if drawing fixed borders for the city, outside of which one cannot move [ . . . . ] The city walls still remain, enclosing everything inside, opening onto the desert, hearkening to the voices of the dead and the raging of the winds.67 Other defensive structures of the city that should likely also be counted as part of the monumental space include the Almoravid citadel, or kasbah located at the westernmost limits of the medina, adjacent to Bab Bou Jeloud.68 According to Leo Africanus, it was huge, the size of “a whole town,” and in his time served as a courthouse and a prison big enough for 3,000 inmates.69 The ramparts and especially the double-tower entry gate (burj ) of the Marinid mellah in Fez Jedcd should likewise be counted, inasmuch as they served to keep the Jews to a restricted area, out of other areas and protected positions – the trading wealth of the qayUariyya, for example.70 And in a related but reverse manner, the palace walls and entry gate must count as defensive components of the city’s monumental space: protection of the sultan, viz. the restriction of access to him. For although relations between the imperial court of Fez Jedcd and the medina were mostly strained, it is inconceivable that the court had no place in the medina inhabitants’ collective self-image, Lefebvre’s definition of monumental space. Leo Africanus’ description of a Wavvasid sultan’s exit from within his palace walls, for example, reminiscent of Delacroix’s celebrated painting of an ‘Alawid royal exit there three centuries later, suggests a pomp hard to ignore: When the king is to ride forth, the master of ceremonies signifies so much unto certain harbingers or posts, whereupon the harbingers give notice thereof unto the kinsfolk, unto his nobility, his senators, captains, guardians, and gentlemen, who presently arrange themselves before the palace gate. At the king’s coming forth of the palace, the harbingers appoint unto each man his place and order of riding. First and foremost go the standard-bearers, next the 13

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

drummers, then follows the chief groom of the stable with his servants and family. After him comes the king’s pensioners, his guard, his master of ceremonies, his secretaries, his treasurer, and last of all his chief judge and his captain general. At length comes the king accompanied with his principal counselor, or with some other great peer. Before the king also ride certain officers belonging to his person, whereof one carries his sword-royal, another his shield, and the third his crossbow. On each side of him march his footmen, one carrying a pair of stirrups, another the king’s partizan, the third a covering for his saddle, and the fourth a halter for his horse [ . . . . ] After the king follows the captain of the footmen, then the eunuchs, the king’s family, the light horsemen, and last of all the crossbows and harquebusiers.71 Meriting inclusion, too, as defensive components of the monumental space are the archways and doors separating the city’s neighborhoods (sg. SEma) from each other and sometimes individual houses from their neighborhoods.72 Internecine violence was a feature of Fez long before the period under review, as noted by the Arab geographers discussed earlier, but with the increasing autonomy of the city’s individual neighborhoods over time, so the violence is specifically noted to occur across the neighborhoods’ borders; hence the need to mark and gate them.73 Finally, in this account of the city’s intramural monumental space, the following public utilities must be mentioned and included: the ornamented fountains (sg. saqAya), frequently inscribed with dedicatory verses;74 the fourteenth-century hydraulic clock opposite madrasa Bou ‘Inaniya;75 the thirteenth-century hospital (maristAn) Sidi Frej;76 and, where they existed, the mosques’ minarets, which, like the hydraulic clock, imposed a concept of time upon the inhabitants’ lives. If, as observed by Le Tourneau, the monumental space of Marinid Fez seems limited in terms of civic institutions, that is not to say the city was sparsely built.77 The opposite is true, as shown in a late-twelfth century inventory of the medina’s infrastructure, reportedly compiled by the Customs and Excise supervisor (mushrif ) of the time: In the days of the Almohad [sultan] al-Manuer [r. 1185–99] and his son Musammad al-Nauir [r. 1199–1214] there were [in Fez]: 785 mosques; 42 chambers for ritual ablution (dEr al-wuRE”); 80 fountains; 93 hammams; 472 watermills; 89,236 domestic houses (dEr al-suknA); 17,041 adjoining, smaller houses (maUArC);78 469 fonduks; 2 qayUariyyas, one on either bank; 9,082 shops; 2 mints (sg. dAr li-alsikka), one on either bank; 3,094 embroiderers; 47 soap factories (dEr “amal al-UAbEn); 86 tanneries (dEr al-dabbAgh); 116 dyers (dEr li-al-UabbAgh); 12 iron and copper foundries (dEr sabk al-SadCd wa 14

PREMODERN FEZ

al-nuSAs); 11 glass factories (dEr “amal al-zujAj); 1170 bread ovens; 400 stone papermaking machines. All this was inside the city.79 The source of this inventory, Zahrat al-As, ends the account with a description of the industries packing the river banks, its author concluding that within the city during this time “there were neither gardens nor houses with internal gardens, except in [the neighborhood of ] Zayten b. ‘Aviya.”80 In this conclusion lies an indication of just how densely built Fez could be, even at this stage of its history. As the inventory shows, the biggest cause of this density were the domestic houses, and although the quoted number is clearly not accurate – at the close of the nineteenth century, for example, there were 5,200 houses81 – it is representative of the fact that the greater part of medieval and premodern Fez comprised domestic space: houses and neighborhoods.

A city defined and determined by its walls In the article “La médina, un art de bâtir,” the Tunisian scholar Moncef M’halla reduces the category of the historical Arab-Muslim medina to its basic component: the wall. Calling the wall the generic medina’s “spinal column,” he considers it “the key element of an architecture of which the house is the base module; the minimal unit of a ubiquitous composition that gives form to the medina.”82 Such a generalized reduction holds true for Marinid Fez in specific. As just seen in the Almohad inventory of the city, the basic building block was the dAr (pl. dEr): at its simplest, a walled enclosure, or cell;83 at its more elaborate, a house – an enclosure about an open courtyard.84 The madrasas, fonduks, a number of the neighborhood mosques, and the houses followed the second pattern;85 the hammams, shops, workshops and factories, smaller houses (maUArC ), and ovens, none of which involved a courtyard, followed the first. Both patterns of enclosure were defined by walls. Given premodern Fez’s and the generic Arab-Muslim medina’s reliance on the dAr, it is no wonder that the enclosure has been called “the fundamental concept of architecture in the Islamic world.”86 And given the dAr’s reliance on walls, no wonder that M’halla should in turn consider them the “Gordian knot” of Arab-Muslim urbanism: a very significant percentage of an historic medina’s structure is defined by the enclosures’ walls.87 Its buildings are set out by them; its streets are delineated by them. This definitive quality of a wall is explicit to the etymology of one of the two Arabic words for the enclosure’s external or party wall, namely, SA”iV (pl. SCVAn), “that which surrounds an area.”88 Implicit to the second word, jidAr (pl. judrAn, judur), is the idea of the party wall and the accompanying concept of consensual contiguity, whereby the owner of a pre-existing dAr is obliged to make a “gift” of one or more of his external walls for his future neighbors to build on. As explained by the lexicographer Ibn Manwer 15

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

(d. 1312): “Scbawayh [d. 796] said [the jidAr] is that which they manage to construct the most numbers of by constructing the least. And so they say: ‘Three walls.’ ”89 In M’halla’s sensible interpretation of this ancient but terse definition, because of the concept of consensual contiguity, when a new dAr is built, only three walls are needed for it; the fourth being supplied by the dAr adjacent to it – the party wall.90 This concept is readily apparent in Fez medina’s cellular structure, as the aerial photograph of the city shows (Plate 1) . If walls are definitive of historic Arab-Muslim medinas in general, they were particularly so for premodern Fez, where they formed an integral part of its individual history and historical self-identity. Concerning the latter, two local, late medieval or early premodern proverbs bespeak the importance accorded by the inhabitants to their medina’s enclosing web of walls: If Fez were revealed from its walls (SCVAn), the dark-eyed virgins [of Paradise] would appear. But if the secluded virgins left [their] covers, they would be stricken with wilt and debasement.91 Knowledge springs from the hearts of the people [of Fez], just as water springs from its walls (SCVAn).92 Orally transmitted from generation to generation, these two proverbs have documentary value precisely because of their orality: they were once part of local lore, for they spoke to notions the inhabitants of Fez collectively held about themselves and their city.93 As the linguist Algirdas Greimas observes of proverbs and their usage: One has the impression that the speaker [of a proverb or dictum] voluntarily abandons their own voice and borrows another in order to utter a segment of speech ( parole) that does not belong to them only, and which they but cite.94 The same impersonal orality also renders them undatable beyond their late medieval or early premodern provenance.95 As Greimas again observes: When inserted into the chain of an ongoing discourse, the archaizing formulation of proverbs and dictums seems to return them to an indeterminate past, conferring upon them a kind of authority that invokes the “wisdom of the ancients.”96 Replete with Qur’anic references (44:54, 55:72, and 56:22), the first proverb will be treated further in Chapter Five. Alluded to in the second proverb is Idrcs II’s legendary speech at the foundation of Fez, to be discussed in Chapter Six. 16

PREMODERN FEZ

Concerning the individual history of Fez and the part of walls therein, from the city’s foundation to the signing of the French Protectorate in 1912, Fez has been conquered and seized at least fourteen times. Sometimes these were short-lived reprisal attacks by the ruling powers against the medina’s notorious resistance to external authority.97 More often they were full-scale invasions by emerging dynasties aspiring to rule, aware that without Fez conquered or at least subdued, rule would be meaningless.98 In both cases, walls played a key role. The following is an account of this role for the eleventh to seventeenth centuries. In the Marinid historiography of Fez, the city’s Idrisid origins confer upon Fez an inherent self-importance, one which the subsequent dynasties only succeed in reaffirming.99 Fez may be conquered in name and have to accept outsiders as rulers, but it will affect an obdurate, frequently belligerent and disdainful autonomy.100 It will occupy itself with itself, and to conquer it in more than just name, rulers are compelled to grasp it from the inside. They must build and raze monuments. Representing the medina as thoroughly worked upon by these rulers, RawR al-qirVAs and especially Zahrat al-As relate the walls they erect or destroy, beginning with the Zanata ruler, Denas al-Maghrawc (r. 1049–61): During this period the emirs and kings continued their constructions in Fez, to such a point that the inhabitants went to build in the outskirts of the two medinas [ . . . . ] One of the rulers, Denas b. mamama b. al-Mu‘izz b. ‘Aviya b. Zcrc [al-Maghrawc], ringed both these outskirts with ramparts, and built there mosques, fonduks, hammams, and so forth, [such that] Fez became as [if ] one city.101 Upon Denas’ death, his two sons ‘Ajcsa and al-Futes continued their father’s work. Less extensive in scope, their constructions were of a military order only: “Al-Futes fortified (SaUUana) the Andalus bank of Fez, building there a citadel for his residency [ . . . . ] ‘Ajcsa fortified the Qarawiyycn bank, building there a citadel for his residency.”102 These fortifications proved of no avail before the Almoravids. To this dynasty RawR al-qirVAs and Zahrat al-As ascribe many structural, military, and conceptual changes: During the period of the Almoravids, the dividing ramparts that were built by the Idrisids between the two banks of Fez were demolished, and [also those] between the outskirts of the two banks. The ramparts at the top of WAdC al-KabCr were renovated [ . . . ] as were the ramparts at the bottom of it [ . . . . ] Bridges were built between the two banks for passage from either side [ . . . . ] Concerning the greatest ruler of the Almoravids, Yesuf b. Tashf cn [r. 1061–1106], he hardly stopped from adding to the number of 17

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

mosques, fountains, baths, and fonduks (khAnAt) in Fez, and from repairing its ramparts. From Cordoba, he brought a team of skilled mill-makers, and of these mills he built many [ . . . . ] During his rule the two banks of Fez became one.103 The demise of the Almoravids occurred at the hands of the Almohads, and the two histories recount the changes this dynasty wrought in terms similar to the Almoravids, namely, buildings constructed and institutions established.104 Also recounted is a telling anecdote about the Almohads’ military founder, ‘Abd al-Memin b. ‘Alc al-Kemc al-Zanatc (r. 1130–63). Whereas all previous rulers had seen fit to build walls in Fez, ‘Abd alMemin acted otherwise. Having forced his entry into the city by damming the river until it burst the perimeter walls, he tore down what remained of these walls, replacing them with figurative ones made of “swords and justice”: In the year 1148 the ruler ‘Abd al-Memin b. ‘Alc ordered the tearing down of most of the ramparts of Fez, saying: “We have no need of ramparts. Instead, our swords and our justice will be our ramparts.”105 The situation remained that way until Ya‘qeb alManuer [r. 1184–99] began rebuilding what had been torn down.106 Had the authors of RawR al-qirVAs and Zahrat al-As been interested in describing Fez Jedcd, not just the medina, they might have seen in this imperial complex a similar wall-related effort to dominate the old city. Placed just outside the medina’s ramparts, Fez Jedcd was nothing short of a giant citadel, controlling much of the medina’s water supplies and policing its activities.107 In part, the madrasas the Marinids built inside the medina were an extension of this attempt to direct the medina: a form of intellectual policing.108 Finally, had the two historians been writing at a later period, they would surely have noted the late-sixteenth century Sa‘did constructions threatening the medina. The north and south bastions (sg. burj ) on the hills immediately beyond the medina, with cannon trained upon the medina, are Sa‘did, as are the three bastions and additional artillery redoubts added to the ramparts of Fez Jedcd nearest to the medina.109 “A World it is to see, how large, how populous, how well-fortified and walled this citie is,” wrote Leo Africanus of Fez, even before the Sa‘did additions there.110 From the foregoing portrait and analysis of the premodern city, the wall’s status as definitive of Fez’s structure and determinant of its history and identity suggests that just as the city has been apprehended through its walls, so may its space be, too.

18

SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSIONS OF WALLS

2 SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSIONS OF WALLS

As a type of boundary, walls were a means by which medieval and premodern Islamic law separated the lawful (SalAl ) from the forbidden (SarAm).1 Sufficiently important were they to the law that a discourse pertained to them: the aforementioned Book of Walls, to be discussed in Chapter Three. As a type of boundary, walls were also a means by which medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture separated outside from inside, secular from sacred; as will be shown or has already been described, along this divide stood partitioned men from women, non-Muslim from Muslim, this world from the next. Of course, most societies have recourse to walls for purposes as various as ritual, habitation, protection, and control,2 but as this and the next chapter will demonstrate, medieval and premodern ArabMuslim societies had an especial reliance upon them. The present chapter treats the more exclusively extralegal social and religious dimensions of walls, providing a contextual introduction to the following chapter’s analysis of The Book of Walls. To recap the investigation’s hypothesis, were it known what a wall was in premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, then something fundamental about the space of premodern Fez, a city defined and determined by its walls, would also be known. The Book of Walls contains the data necessary to make this identification. Whatever else a wall is, premodern or modern, empirically it is a limit, or threshold: a frontier and liminal “space between” (Zwischenraum), between here and there.3 Simultaneously conjoined and divided at the limit, here and there are turned about at their point of contact, the wall acting like a non-reflecting mirror. Configured by the tensions of this liminality, a wall is frequently fetishized at its most vulnerable points, with decorative, supplementary frames placed about apertures, windows, and doors, even upon the blindest, most “silenced” (muUmat) of historic medina walls.4 If a door is more commonly considered the threshold, in reality it is but a gap in a wall.5 The wall is the threshold, and the door its point of traversal.6 Most of these observations are explicit in a Qur’anic passage on a wall (sEr) and its door.7 In the hereafter, this wall divides the believers from the hypocrites, and divine mercy from divine punishment. The believers occupy 19

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

its inside; the hypocrites, vainly crying out to be allowed across, its outside. Their cries can be heard by those on the inside, but not via the door; it is kept shut, part of the bodily impenetrable threshold between the two groups, which the wall establishes and upholds. Kept shut, the door is a tantalizing symbol of this impenetrability, an indication of how close the conjunction, but great the divide between the saved and the damned: a wall’s breadth, across which mercy and punishment are reversed. The significance of a wall’s threshold qualities notwithstanding, a wall is empirically also a screen, or cover; a function of particular importance to medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, with its traditional enclaustration and veiling of women. Both aspects of walls – threshold and cover – are discussed in detail below. Belying my attempt to treat them for clarity’s sake as if they were discrete, both aspects are in fact inter-related.

Walls as thresholds Asking what makes a mosque a mosque, Robert Hillenbrand responds: “The answer is forbiddingly simple: a wall correctly orientated towards the qibla, namely the Ka‘ba within the Masjid al-Haram, Mecca.”8 The immediate purpose of this qibla wall is to orient the believers’ prostrations of ritual prayer, but as Dominique Clevenot demonstrates in his book Une esthétique du voile, another purpose is attributed to this wall: “separation and promise.”9 His argument begins with the sutra. Etymologically a veil, but technically a mark or object placed on the ground by an individual in prayer, the sutra symbolically separates the worshipper from the world: before it no one may pass, and beyond it the worshipper “cannot” see.10 For Clevenot, the qibla wall represents the communal extension of this sutra, and he contends that in blocking the believers’ vision, the qibla wall “renders material the archetypal gap (la fracture idéale) separating men from God.”11 From within the mosque, the qibla wall marks the threshold between this world and the next; the next world may not be seen, but to the faithful it is promised, the qibla wall guaranteeing its invisibility whilst simultaneously offering “to the imagination access to a paradisiacal beyond.”12 An authoritative hadith would appear to support this interpretation: The Prophet led us in prayer and then mounted the minbar. With his hand he pointed in the direction of the mosque’s qibla and said: “Since leading you in prayer just now, I was shown paradise and hell depicted on the surface of this wall ( jidAr). I never saw, as I saw today, into good and evil. I never saw, as I saw today, into good and evil.”13 The wall to which the Prophet is allegedly referring in this hadith is the qibla wall, and the scenes he is reportedly shown on it come from its nether side. 20

SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSIONS OF WALLS

With the development of Maghribi mosque architecture under the Almoravids and Marinids, funerary spaces were sometimes added behind the qibla wall of Friday mosques. Thought to be the first of them, the Almoravid funerary annex of Fez’s Al-Qarawiyycn mosque serves as a good example: within it the dead were placed, and prayers said over the body from inside the mosque, before the qibla wall.14 This architectural institution was followed by the Almoravid mosque in Tlemcen, Algeria – a small space behind the qibla wall’s mihrab;15 the Marinid mosque in Fez Jedcd – a large annex;16 the Marinid madrasa Bou ‘Inaniya in Fez – an annex;17 and the Marinid mosque in Mansura, near Tlemcen – another small mihrab space.18 Although the practical purpose of the institution was to prevent the deceased from polluting the mosque’s interior,19 the symbolic purpose was surely to indicate and help ensure the departed soul’s passage to the heavenly hereafter.20 The Marinid sultans Abe al-masan ‘Alc (r. 1331–48) and Abe ‘Inan Faris (r. 1348–59) appear to have favored this symbolism: the latter is buried in the funerary annex of Fez Jedcd’s Friday mosque, and the former lies behind the qibla wall of the mosque of his name in the Chella necropolis, Rabat.21 In Cairo of the same period, the Mamluk sultan Nauir al-Dcn al-masan (r. 1347–51 and 1354–61) intended to be buried behind the qibla wall of his mosque.22 And once more in Morocco, but some two-and-a-half centuries later, a number of Sa‘did sultans and their families also lie buried behind another qibla wall, that of the Al-Manueriyya mosque in Marrakech’s citadel, or kasbah. This necropolis, brought to near artistic perfection by its builders and craftsmen, is the famous “Saadien Tombs,” sealed off from view until the early-twentieth century. Nowadays indissociable from the qibla wall, the mihrab is commonly a mosque’s most ornate element, located neither before nor behind the qibla wall, but within it.23 Most frequently in the form of a recessed, arcuated niche, the mihrab is thought by some to signify an absent presence: that of the Prophet as Imam.24 Ambiguous, because presence and absence at once co-exist, this signification draws upon the mihrab’s location within the liminal, equally ambiguous qibla wall.25 An alternative signification, as proposed by Clevenot again, is that of a door inviting the believer to traverse the wall and pass beyond immediate reality.26 This interpretation, too, draws upon the mihrab’s location within qibla wall, for without the wall, there would be no door for traversal. Finally, although there are difficulties inherent to interpreting the mihrab in terms of the illuminated niche (mishkAt) mentioned in the Qur’an’s celebrated “Verse of Light” (Ayat al-nEr), the mihrab’s location within the qibla wall substantiates such an interpretation.27 Only in such an unworldly space, neither of this world nor the next, could such an extraordinary light shine forth: God is the light of the heavens and the earth. The similitude of His light is as a niche wherein is a lamp. The lamp is in a glass. The 21

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

glass is as it were a shining star. (This lamp is) kindled from a blessed tree, an olive, neither of the East nor of the West, whose oil would almost glow forth (of itself) though no fire touched it. Light upon light, God guides unto His light whom He will. And God speaks to mankind in allegories, for God is Knower of all things.28 As has been suggested by others, to study Islamic architecture in its monumental aspects only is to neglect its numerous vernacular aspects. In the words of Guy Petherbridge: Monuments and public buildings do not [ . . . ] exist in isolation, but play a particular symbolic role in a total spatial and hierarchic system of building and decorative forms, serving to reinforce political and social structure and religious belief. Because of their status and massiveness of construction, such buildings tend to survive while associated domestic and utilitarian complexes of a contemporary date are destroyed. To consider monumental architecture without these associated complexes is to create an unbalanced and perhaps erroneous impression of the nature and development of Islamic architecture and its relationship to the society that formed it.29 Regarding domestic architecture in particular, to neglect its study is not only to disregard the numerically greater part of Islamic architecture,30 but also to underestimate the priority accorded to it in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Muslim thought.31 In the Qur’an and Hadith, seven words are used to refer to a house or dwelling place, most frequently dAr and bayt, which appear 49 and 65 times respectively in the Qur’an alone.32 God has a house (bayt), variously qualified by the Qur’an as “the house,”33 “the first house,”34 “the sacred house,”35 and “the ancient house,”36 amongst other terms.37 The Prophet, his wives and descendants are popularly associated with this house as “the people of the house” (ahl al-bayt), a Qur’anic phrase that for Sunni Muslims has become their sobriquet alone.38 The hereafter is a house (dAr), qualified by the Qur’an as “the house,”39 “the house of residence,”40 and “the final house,”41 to name but three such qualifications. Hell, too, is referred to in the Qur’an as a house (dAr); for example, “the evil house”42 and “the house of perdition.”43 In Muslim thought, lastly, the entire world is divided into a number of houses (sg. dAr), including the “House of Islam,” where Islamic law prevails, and the “House of War,” where it does not.44 Given this importance accorded to domestic space in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Muslim thought, it is hardly fanciful to suggest that the rule of Islam is one of the house, not the castle or palace. As Juan Campo expresses this idea: “The establishment of Islam is intimately connected with the creation, appropriation, and expansion of Muslim domestic space.”45 The Prophet’s 22

SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSIONS OF WALLS

biographer Ibn Issaq (d. 768) says as much when he recounts the events that followed the foundation of the Prophet’s house-cum-mosque in Medina: When the Prophet, peace be upon him, had settled himself in Medina; when the Emigrants had gathered about him; and [when] the matter of the AnUAr [or Medinan “Supporters”] had been resolved, the rule of Islam was established (istaSkama amr al-IslAm). Ritual prayer was instituted; alms-giving and fasting, prescribed. Punishments (SudEd ) were instituted; halal and haram, determined. Islam took up residence (tabawwa”) amongst them.46 Within the House of Islam the individual households that comprise it are themselves subject to rules. Drawn from the Qur’an and Hadith, these behavioral rules reflect a number of concerns, a principal one being the negotiation of the houses’ thresholds. In the Qur’an, for example, believers are taught the comportment expected of them when at the front door of another: O you who believe! Enter not houses (sg. bayt) other than your own without first announcing your presence and invoking peace upon the folk thereof. That is better for you, that you may be heedful. And if you find no one therein, still do not enter until permission has been given. And if it be said to you: Go away again, then go away, for it is purer for you. God knows what you do. [It is] no sin for you to enter uninhabited houses wherein is comfort for you. God knows what you proclaim and what you hide.47 Later in the same sura, believers are told: “When you enter houses, salute one another with a greeting from God, blessed and sweet.”48 In the Hadith, this concern with threshold propriety is amplified, affecting not only visitors, but also residents. When a believer leaves his own house, for example, he should follow the Prophet’s example and say: In the name of God, I trust in God. In You I seek refuge neither to stray nor to be led astray; neither to trip nor to be tripped; neither to commit wrong nor to be wronged; neither to play the fool nor to be fooled.49 Upon returning to his house, the same believer should say: “O God, I ask from you the best entrance and the best exit. In the name of God we enter; in the name of God we exit; and in God our Lord we trust.” He then should greet his family.50 As in the Qur’an, however, threshold propriety is a greater cause of anxiety for household visitors, to judge by the Prophet’s undisguised intolerance of threshold impropriety. Two examples serve as illustrations: 23

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

A man from the Banc ‘fmir sought entry (ista”dhana) to the Prophet, who was in his house. The man said: “May I enter?” God’s Messenger said to his servant: “Go out to this person and teach him how to seek entry. Tell him: Say ‘Peace upon you. May I come in?’ ” The man heard him and said: “Peace upon you. May I come in?” The Prophet gave him permission, and he went in.51 I heard Jabir saying: “In order to repay my father’s debt, I went to the [Prophet’s house] and knocked upon the door. He said: ‘Who is it?’ I said: ‘It is I.’ He said: ‘I, I,’ as if he hated it.”52 Exactly as the Qur’an teaches, visitors should precede their entrance by announcing themselves and greeting the occupants. This announcement should consist of name and title; not ambiguous abbreviations. That is correct threshold propriety, or isti”dhAn, and that is what the Prophet is reported as teaching.53 The Prophet is also reported as explaining both the immediate and wider reasons for isti”dhAn. The immediate reason is the prevention of uninvited, unlicensed eyesight into the house: A man was peering into the Prophet’s chambers (Sujar) through a hole. The Prophet had a comb and with it he was massaging his head. He said: “Had I known you were looking, I would have stabbed you in the eye with it. Isti”dhAn was promulgated for the sake of [illicit] looking.”54 The wider reason and context for isti”dhAn is that the house is a sacred enclave, or Saram, scarcely less inviolable than other enclaves held sacred in Muslim thought, including the Sarams of Mecca and Medina (al-Maramayn) and the zAwiya of Idrcs II, Fez. “The Prophet said: ‘The house is a Saram. Whoever enters your Saram [without permission], kill him!’ ”55 It is beyond the scope of this book to discuss all the reasons why the house is a Saram, but one reason is that the house is traditionally considered the domain of women, a fact that will be pursued below when discussing the gendered aspects of walls.56 Although the seclusion of women within the house is not Islamic in origin, and in the Qur’an is apparently applied to the Prophet’s wives only, in the Hadith are found the clear beginnings of an ideological alignment between all believing women and domestic space.57 In the case of ritual prayer, for example, women are encouraged to observe this in the house;58 they may only leave for the mosque with their husband’s or father’s permission.59 Presumably, had the norms witnessed in the Hadith been other than the restriction of women beyond the house, there would have been no need for these women to ask permission to leave.60 Just as in the Qur’an, then, the Hadith defines the house as “a moral center”;61 but now all believing women are subject to its rules. 24

SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSIONS OF WALLS

With the historical development of urban Arab-Muslim culture, the ideological linkage of women with domestic space begins to take semantic expression. Maram, for example, becomes an honorific for a man’s wife;62 and derivatives of Saram, namely, SarCm (the English “harem”), Suram (sg. Surma), and SirmiyyAt (sg. Sirmiyya), come to connote the wives and/or the women of the family.63 “Bint ad-dar” and “mulat dar” are present-day colloquial Moroccan epithets for a demure young woman and a wife respectively; their literal translations are “girl of the house” and “owner of the house.”64 “Sitt al-bayt” is the latter epithet’s Middle Eastern equivalent; its translation is “lady of the house.” In this historical development, the house has become the women’s realm; the realm outside the house, perforce that of the men. The walls of the house are the realms’ threshold; as defined by the sociologist Pierre Bourdieu regarding the Algerian Kabyle house, “a magical boundary [ . . . ] the place where the world is reversed.”65 The walls are “magical” not in a hyperbolic sense owing to their role in demarcating gendered realms, something that will be discussed below, but because of the symbolic logic societies have ascribed to them and their liminality. Kabyle villagers, for example, consider sitting on a house’s main threshold a means of “closing the passage to happiness and prosperity”: women are told never to sit near it holding their infants; young children and brides are told not to traverse it too often.66 In southern Morocco, as observed by the anthropologist Edward Westermarck at the start of the twentieth century: [The Awlad Bou ‘Azcz tribe] kill a sheep or a fowl and wet with its blood the ground where the walls will stand. When the entrance is ready, they kill another sheep or fowl over the threshold [ . . . . ] When the house is ready a third sacrifice is made, a sheep being killed over the threshold, and its meat is served at the so-called “ärs d-dAr, “the wedding of the house,” to which the men and women of the village are invited.67 According to the same source, further south in Morocco, in the coastal region near Agadir, villagers throw flour, oil, and salt in the trench made for the walls; and where the main entrance is designated, a “perfectly white sheep is slaughtered [ . . . ] its bleeding body taken along the trench three times from right to left.”68 Finally, in case it should be thought that these and other threshold rituals pertain to rural areas alone, Westermarck also observes that in Fez “a buck-goat or a ram is slaughtered when the walls of the house are ready and it is just going to be roofed.”69 In Fez, too, according to RawR al-qirVAs and Zahrat al-As, prophylactic talismans in the shape of a rat, a bird with a scorpion’s tail in its beak, and globes (tafAfCS) used to stand above the original mihrab of the Al-Qarawiyycn 25

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

mosque;70 later, when the mosque was extended, they were moved to surmount the mosque’s “anaza, or courtyard mihrab.71 The same sources also report an enormous turtle left buried alive beneath one of the mosque’s main doors.72 And although these two sources are referring to monumental, not domestic architecture, as an echo of the Prophet’s house-cum-mosque in Medina, the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque is symbolically speaking a house.73 Like a house, it has its Saram;74 and like a house, crossing its threshold is to undergo a reversal of sorts: from the world of commerce and action, to that of worship and remembrance.75 Within this “house,” the numerous thresholds created between the arched piers of the prayer hall (Plate 19) are additionally considered the “abode of devils” (ma”wA al-ShayAVCn), blameworthy (makrEh) to stand on in prayer.76

Walls as cover Recounted in the Qur’an is a story prescient of medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture’s gender-based engagement with walls. Moses and a mysterious stranger, traditionally called Khirr, enter a village and come across a wall ( jidAr) on the verge of collapse.77 Despite the villagers’ inhospitality, and much to Moses’ incredulity, the stranger rebuilds it for free. Later, he explains why: As for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city. Beneath it, a treasure that was theirs. Their father had been a righteous man and your Lord intended they should come of age and bring forth their treasure as a mercy from their Lord.78 Whereas in the preceding section of this chapter the function of a wall was shown to be liminal, here it is protective: covering, barring, secluding. The orphans’ treasure is at risk of theft once exposed to the villagers’ eyes, and to maintain its invisibility the wall is rebuilt. Upon this function the traditional enclaustration of women in medieval and premodern urban ArabMuslim culture will come to depend. Although the seclusion of women in medieval and premodern urban ArabMuslim culture was absolute neither in theory nor practice, but concomitant upon factors including the means of individual families and the social status of each woman, there is no doubt that it occurred and was meant to occur for a sizeable segment of female society.79 In the binary logic of the wall, so-called “respectable” Muslim women (sg. muSUana) and their unmarried daughters belonged within the privacy of the house or, at the very least, the semiprivacy of the neighborhood.80 Premodern Fez was no exception to this logic, as indicated by the following report of a judge, or qadi there, Abe al-masan al-oaghcr (d. 1319):

26

SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSIONS OF WALLS

At the time when Shaykh Scdc Abc al-masan al-oaghcr became qadi of Fez, the women of the city (nisA” al-balad ) used to leave [their neighborhoods] a great deal, and so he placed agents on every main thoroughfare (shAri“) to prohibit their exit.81 Fearing for the corruption of the agents through direct contact with the women, he put vats of glue on these thoroughfares for the agents to soil the clothes of those women who ventured out. The women stopped [going out].82 Premodern Fez was also no exception to women’s use of the SijAb, or veil83 as a mobile extension of the house, permitting them to leave the house and neighborhood because covered and largely unrecognizable, at least at times when qadis and other authorities had not banned them.84 An undated proverb, for example, states that the “beauty of Fez lies in its water, its air, and the covering of its women,”85 and in Leo Africanus’ description of Fez, he recalls that: [When women] go abroad, they put on certain long breeches, wherewith their legs are all covered, having also, after the fashion of Syria, a veil hanging down from their heads, which covers their whole bodies. On their faces likewise they wear a mask with two little holes only for their eyes to peep out at.86 Fifty miles west of Fez, in the city of Meknes, Leo Africanus likewise recalls that “gentlemen’s wives never go forth of the doors but only in the night season, and then also they must be so veiled and muffled that no man may see them.”87 In these three examples, and across urban Arab-Muslim culture of the period, the SijAb is a continuation of the binary logic of the wall: it is like a wall. This is so, not because a veiled woman bears a resemblance to the minimally adorned, “silenced” medina wall, a resemblance often noted by nineteenth-century European travelers88 and rendered explicit in the words of Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328): “[Women must be] veiled with clothing and houses.”89 Rather, the SijAb is like a wall, because in the Qur’an and urban Arab-Muslim culture of the period, its functions are those of a wall, namely, screen and threshold. As a screen in the Qur’an, the SijAb functions to seclude Mary from her family;90 to hide the sun, turning day into night;91 and to veil the acuity of the unbelievers, distinguishing them from the Prophet and the believers.92 As a threshold in the Qur’an, the SijAb divides the damned from the saved in the Hereafter,93 a divide exegetes called a wall (sEr).94 And as both a threshold and screen in the Qur’an, the SijAb is a medium of communication: across it believers make requests of the Prophet’s wives95 and God speaks to humans.96 In medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, apart

27

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

from its function as the institutionalized veiling of women, the SijAb functioned as the equally institutionalized curtaining of caliphs and rulers from their household and/or subjects.97 Like God’s communications with humans, and believers’ requests of the Prophet’s wives, in this instance the SijAb acted simultaneously as threshold and screen: it signified the ruler’s otherness, his extraordinary status, whilst also shielding his audience from “the radiance of his countenance.”98 For Muslim mystics, meanwhile, the SijAb was a barrier that rendered humans insensitive to divine reality.99 Reminiscent of one of its functions in the Qur’an (41:5), it is described by the Sufi al-mallaj (d. 922) as “a curtain interposed between the seeker and his object, between the novice and his desire, between the swordsman and his mark [ . . . . ] It is not God who wears a veil, but the creatures He has veiled.”100 In conclusion to this survey of the social and religious dimensions of walls in medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, it may fairly be said that the culture’s engagement with a wall’s liminal and screening functions, in particular, was extensive. In a religion where the injunction to maintain “God’s limits” (SudEd AllAh) is exhorted of believers, such a conclusion is perhaps unsurprising.101 Observing limits was a religious requirement; establishing them above all about women, along the gender divide, appears to have been a cultural preoccupation.

28

LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF WALLS: THE BOOK OF WALLS

3 LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF WALLS: THE BOOK OF WALLS

In view of the social and religious dimensions of walls in medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, the subject of the previous chapter, it would be surprising if Islamic law had added nothing to the subject. As a system covering public and private, religious, civil, and political life, Islamic law cannot but have occupied itself with that fundamental element of urban social life: the screen and threshold, the wall. The Book of Walls comprises this engagement for medieval and premodern Sunni Islamic law: a discourse composed of opinions (aqwAl) and court records (nawAzil ) pertaining to disputes concerning the Arab-Muslim medina’s architectural environment, with external and party walls a major theme. Called fiqh al-bunyAn, building law, in the Arabic speaking world, these opinions and records might even be said to have walls as their sole theme in view of the synonymy between the words wall (SA”iV) and building (bunyAn) recorded by the medieval lexicographer Ibn Manwer.1 This synonymy has been already suggested in the Introduction and Chapter One when discussing the fact that so much of a medina’s architectural environment was dependent on walls; a window or door, for example, being unthinkable without a wall in which to place it. In this synonymy, walls are implicit to any discussion of building, including any building-related dispute. Where walls form neither the explicit nor implicit subject matter of the disputes recorded in The Book of Walls, they frequently form part of the proposed solution. For example, in the matter of overlooking a neighbor’s house, infringing thereby the occupants’ right to privacy, a wall might have to be erected as a screen and offending windows and doors bricked up; or in the case of noisy movements from a domestic stable, a wall might have to be built to insulate the sound; and so forth. Where architecture is not treated at all in The Book of Walls, but gardens, trees, bees, birds, and dogs, for example, these partake of the discourse’s capacity to treat a variety of seemingly disparate elements related to the built environment.2 As stated in the Introduction, The Book of Walls provides access to normative cultural thought regarding walls. Were the juridic basis of this thought

29

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

identified, the core terms in which walls were legally considered within premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture would also be known, and with them the normative meaning of a wall. “Basis,” the dictionary confirms: “A thing on which anything is constructed and by which its constitution or operation is determined.”3 Commencing this identification process, the current chapter analyzes the history and composition of the discourse, exemplifying it by way of its bearing upon issues of privacy and the seclusion of women. Chapter Four concludes the process. Despite the hiatus between the pioneering work of Robert Brunschvig and that of Besim Hakim, there is now growing awareness of an historical element of Sunni Islamic law that concerns the regulation of the Arab-Muslim medina’s architectural environment, most especially its neighborhoods, a large proportion of its fabric. Brunschvig’s distinction was to offer Western scholarship an appraisal of this regulation, drawing extensively from two key medieval texts: KitAb al-QaRA” wa nafy al-Rarar “an al-afniya wa al-Vuruq wa al-judur wa al-mabAnC wa al-saSAt wa al-shajar wa al-jAmi“ (The Book of Judgement and Elimination of Harm regarding Public Spaces, Streets, Walls, Buildings, Courtyards, Trees, etc.), by Ibn al-Imam (d. 991 or 997) of Andalusia; and KitAb al-I“lAn bi-aSkAm al-bunyAn (The Book of Pronouncing Building Rulings) by Ibn al-Ramc (d. after 1333) of Tunisia.4 Forty years later when Hakim came to the subject, an unpublished Ph.D. thesis referring to the above titles had been written, but little else;5 and although his book Arabic-Islamic Cities: Building and Planning Principles tends to over simplification and has been criticized for being partisan, it was instrumental to the development of the subject as an area of academic research.6 In quick succession, other works followed its publication, culminating in the three-volume Ph.D. thesis of Jean-Pierre Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville.”7 The merit of these works notwithstanding, none satisfactorily researches the origins and, more importantly, the extent of this legal engagement with the medina’s architectural environment. When such research is done, it becomes clear that this engagement is not restricted to the handful of wellknown, discrete titles, such as those by the aforementioned Ibn al-Imam and Ibn al-Ramc. Rather, it becomes possible to talk of an entire corpus – an institutionalized discourse – of Sunni Islamic law, that may conveniently be called The Book of Walls after two of the titles it comprises: al-Marjc al-Thaqaf c’s (d. circa 1200) KitAb al-MCVAn (The Book of Walls), and ‘hsa b. Dcnar’s (d. 827) KitAb al-JidAr (The Wall Book);8 that dates from approximately the tenth to the nineteenth century; and that established a legal aesthetic of urban architectural space, with walls as a principal concern. The current chapter presents this research.

30

LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF WALLS: THE BOOK OF WALLS

The history and genealogy of The Book of Walls As with much of Islamic law, the origins of The Book of Walls can be traced to the Qur’an and Sunna, but little more than perfunctorily, especially with regard to the Qur’an. The Qur’an contains no verses from which rulings (aSkAm) are derived for The Book of Walls; only two or three verses that refer obliquely to urban architectural matters and that are cited occasionally in the discourse in the context of rulings derived from elsewhere. For example, regarding the harm (Rarar) caused by smoke from public ovens and baths, Ibn al-Ramc cites the verse, “Then watch for the day when the sky will bring forth a kind of smoke plainly visible” (44:10).9 The actual ruling forbidding such smoke is, however, based on opinions established by the eponymous leader (imAm) of the Maliki law school, Malik b. Anas (d. 796), and his disciples.10 If the Qur’an occupies an auxiliary position only in The Book of Walls, the discourse’s substantive material from Islamic law’s two primary sources comprises just hadiths. In the Hadith, the Prophet is reported engaging with the urban environment in more than an extralegal capacity. Examples include, “Do you know the rights of the neighbor? [ . . . ] You must not build to exclude the breeze from him, unless you have his permission,”11 and “A neighbor has pre-emption rights over his neighbor’s property. If they share common access and the neighbor is absent, then the other should wait for his return.”12 Some of these hadiths find their way into the discourse. Common ones include: “A neighbor should not forbid his neighbor from inserting wooden beams in his wall”;13 “If you disagree about the width of a street, it is made seven cubits”;14 and “Whoever wrongfully appropriates a foot of ground will [on the Day of Resurrection] be enclosed in the Seven Earths.”15 As with the Qur’an, however, these and other hadiths ultimately serve little more than a supplementary role; the width of medina thoroughfares, for example, is frequently either more or less than the seven cubits recommended in the Hadith. Furthermore, many are the occasions in The Book of Walls where no hadith is cited in relation to rulings.16 The one that does get much mention is of general import, without any specific bearing upon urban architectural matters, namely, “In Islam [there is] no harm or return of harm.”17 As will be seen in Chapter Four, the driving force of wall-related law is not the Qur’an and Hadith, but legal opinion and custom. In the near-absence of programmatic material from the Qur’an and Sunna, one must look to the eponymous leaders of the law schools, most especially the Maliki and Hanafi schools, to find the discourse’s practical origins.18 In these leaders’ teachings, related and compiled by disciples, is found the first properly substantive wall-related Islamic law.19 For the Hanafi school, to which, for example, KitAb al-MCVAn belongs, the principle compilations

31

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

are by the two disciples considered by some to be the true founders of the Hanafi law school: Ya‘qeb Abe Yesuf (d. 798) and especially Musammad al-Shaybanc (d. 804).20 Compilations by the latter include al-JAmi“ al-kabCr (The Major Collection), al-JAmi“ al-UaghCr (The Minor Collection), and KitAb al-AUl (The Source Book).21 For the Maliki school, to which the texts of Ibn al-Ramc and Ibn al-Imam belong, the principle compilation is the multivolume al-Mudawwana al-kubrA (The Great Law Compilation), commonly referred to as just the Mudawwana. Compiled by the Kairouanese qadi known as Sasnen (d. 855), the contents are but an earlier narration from Malik’s most prominent disciple, Ibn al-Qasim (d. 806). Taking the Mudawwana as an example, although its engagements with the urban architectural environment are rarely wall-specific and include additional issues such as property bequests (waUayA), they establish the pattern and many of the precedents for The Book of Walls. For instance, in the chapter pertaining to property division and allotment (qisma), Sasnen asks Ibn al-Qasim a hypothetical question about someone prevented by his neighbors from building an oven, hammam or mill on his empty lot (“arUa). Ibn al-Qasim responds: “If what is built will harm the neighbors because of smoke or other comparable nuisances, then they can prevent the project, because Malik taught that one is prevented from harming neighbors.”22 Earlier in the same chapter, Ibn al-Qasim is asked about the division of streets and walls (qismat al-VarCq wa al-jidAr). For a wall that is to be divided between two co-proprietors, he responds: “I did not hear anything from Malik on this matter, but my opinion is that so long as no harm comes from it when it is divided, then it may be divided.”23 These and similar teachings find their way into The Book of Walls. Roughly contemporary with Sasnen and Ibn al-Qasim, other disciples and associates of Malik were also giving opinions and judgements concerning the urban architectural environment. Such figures include ‘Abd Allah b. Wahb (d. 813); Ashhab (d. 819);24 Ibn al-Majishen (d. 827); ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-makam (d. 829); Muvarrif (d. 835);25 Aubagh (d. 840);26 and Musammad b. Sasnen (d. 870). Included, too, are ‘Abd al-Malik b. mabcb (d. 853), author of an influential imitation of the Mudawwana, the WARiSa;27 and Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Asmad al-‘Utbc (d. 869), author of the Mudawwana’s alleged supplement, the Mustakhraja, or “Utbiyya. From these scholars’ teachings The Book of Walls is also comprised. Ibn al-Ramc acknowledges as much in the introduction to his contribution to the discourse: This is a book that compiles building-related questions concerning walls, the elimination of harm, and gardens and mills from [the following sources]: government administration records, the books of our contemporaries, the court records of qadis, and the fatwas of muftis;28 from the Mudawwana, the WARiSa, and the “Utbiyya, the book of ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-makam, the book of Ibn Sasnen, 32

LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF WALLS: THE BOOK OF WALLS

the book of Ibn ‘Abdes,29 and the NawAdir;30 from what notaries follow in their legal formularies (wathA”iq),31 such as the notaries Ibn al-Qasim32 and Ibn Mughayth,33 and from [the formulary called] al-MutCViyya;34 and [lastly], from what qadis follow of the judgements (aSkAm) of Ibn Abc Zamancn,35 the judgements of Ibn Hisham,36 and the judgements of our master, the learned, the ascetic, the devout, and God-fearing Abe Issaq b. ‘Abd al-Rafc‘,37 may God grant him success and guide him.38 The period 950–1350 marks a particular moment for The Book of Walls that might with due levity be considered a golden age, for during this time at least five extant discrete texts on wall-related law were written: the aforementioned KitAb al-MCVAn and books of Ibn al-Imam and Ibn al-Ramc, as well as one by Musammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Zubayrc (d. 989), KitAb al-Abniya (The Book of Buildings)39 and another by Ibn Rushd “al-Jadd” (d. 1127), KitAb al-QaRA” wa al-araRCn wa al-dEr (The Book of Jurisdiction, Terrains, and Houses).40 It is these discrete texts, as well as two or three others written, or reported written outside of this period,41 that has led at least one contemporary scholar to consider them a distinct genre of Islamic law.42 Their importance notwithstanding, they are, however, just one part of a much larger corpus of legal writings on the architectural environment; for the available evidence suggests that the more regular form of The Book of Walls is one of chapters (sg. kitAb, bAb), sections (sg. faUl ), or sometimes just individual cases of longer legal works. In other words, indiscrete texts forming but one topos of Islamic law’s exhaustive literature. For the most part, the legal works to which these chapters and sections belong are either compilations of judgements of the type mentioned by Ibn al-Ramc or compilations of fatwas of the type implied by him. Of the two earliest, but non-extant, allegedly discrete texts of The Book of Walls, Ibn Dcnar’s aforementioned KitAb al-JidAr and Ibn ‘Abd al-makam’s (d. 829) KitAb al-QaRA” f C al-bunyAn ( The Book of Jurisdiction in Building), the second is now thought not to have been a book (kitAb) but a chapter (also kitAb) of a legal compilation, al-MukhtaUar al-kabCr f C al-fiqh.43 The first text was perhaps the same.44 Ibn Sahl’s (d. 1094) “Mosques and houses” certainly belongs to a compilation of judgements, his ASkAm al-kubrA,45 as does Ibn Abc Zayd al-Qayrawanc’s (d. 996) “Jurisdiction in building,” that belongs to his NawAdir.46 Similarly, Ibn Farsen’s (d. 1396) “The leaning wall” belongs to his TabUirat al-SukkAm;47 Ibn Hisham’s (d. 1209) “The book [or chapter] of claims regarding the wall” belongs to his MufCd al-SukkAm;48 and al-Bajc’s (d. 1081) “The division of [goods and chattels] between partners, the hire of [those qualified to make and record divisions], and all claims regarding walls,” and “On the elucidation of judgements [regarding] harm, the inviolable perimeters of wells, gifts, acts of mortmain, and charitable donations” belongs to his FuUEl al-aSkAm.49 33

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

Regarding the fatwa compilations, two categories exist: those limited to a single mufti, and those comprising fatwas from a number of muftis. To the first category belongs, for example, the compilation of Ibn Rushd “al-Jadd”;50 scattered in it are fatwas such as “A question concerning he who joins his wall to the wall of his neighbor,”51 “On overlooking houses from [a] minaret,”52 and “On he who installs a door or shop opposite the door of his neighbor’s house on a through-passage.”53 To the second category of fatwa compilation belong, for example, al-Burzulc’s (d. 1438) JAmi“ masA”il alaSkAm,54 al-Wansharcsc’s (d. 1509) al-Mi“yAr al-mu“rib,55 and al-Wazzanc’s (d. 1924) al-NawAzil al-jadCda al-kubrA and al-NawAzil al-UughrA.56 In these works are found numerous wall-related fatwas, mostly in the chapters pertaining to property division and allotment, partnership (sharika) and, above all, harm.57 If the more usual form of the discourse is chapters or sections of longer texts, history offers some reasons for the appearance of the discrete works. In the introduction to his edition of Ibn al-Imam’s text, Musammad al-Namcnaj argues that the population increase in tenth-century Andalusia was the underlying cause of this particular work, because it resulted in a sudden, unlegislated strain to be placed the urban architectural fabric.58 A similar argument most probably applies to the other texts, too. This is an acceptable proposition when one looks at the uneven urban growth experienced throughout the Arab-Muslim world during the first seven centuries of Islam: the greatest growth occurred between the tenth and fourteenth centuries, ending with the Black Death of 1349, exactly the time-frame of the discourse’s “golden age.”59 The proposition is also acceptable when one considers the extent to which solutions to new problems, arrived at in one locale but not contained or known in the source books (ummahAt) of the law schools, might have been found helpful for solving similar problems elsewhere. There are, for example, some twenty extant manuscripts of Ibn al-Ramc’s work in the contemporary Arab-Muslim world, a clear indicator of its historical utility.60 Compiled in the form of generalized, viz. non-place-specific legal cases plus their assessments (aSkAm),61 these discrete works would have represented concise summaries of the principal teachings of a law school with regard to the architectural environment, and manuals of potential solutions.62

An aesthetic of space It would be wrong to consider The Book of Walls a prescriptive code for the upkeep and replication of the Arab-Muslim medina’s architectural environment. Rather, the discourse represents a proscriptive legal aesthetic for helping achieve the same results; an aesthetic that came into force only when contested and/or transgressed. That is to say, The Book of Walls records from a legal perspective building-related conflicts – contestations and/or transgressions – plus their solutions that occurred in, and referred to, the 34

LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF WALLS: THE BOOK OF WALLS

medina environment’s semi-private and public spaces. It collapses these spaces to their generic architectural elements, commonly walls, effectively encoding the spaces for articulation in later texts of the discourse as well as related discourses, for example the Sisba discourse, regarding the policing of markets and their environs.63 In this process, The Book of Walls established and embodied a legal aesthetic of urban architectural space: a way of talking and thinking about, or judging this space, and hence organizing it.64 This aesthetic was flexible, as it was informed by local custom and commonly negotiated via an application mechanism responsive to local conditions, both to be discussed in the next chapter. By way of example of this process, listed below is a selection of case titles from the twelfth-century KitAb al-MCVAn. In the examples, the conflicts have occurred long ago and been resolved, and the action of collapsing the architectural spaces to which they refer is complete: If two men contest a party wall; On the wall between two neighbors and neither one has roofing, and one of them permits the other to place a roof over the wall. Then he appears to him and says: “Remove your roof!”; If a man buys a wall and no mention is made of its land, the sale occurs on the wall without the land. Then it is said to the purchaser: “Remove your wall!”; If a man buys half a wall; If a man establishes a wall [next] to another, and does no more than that, the wall belongs to the place by its land; If the bottom of a wall belongs to one man and the top of it to another; On the collapsed wall: if one of two owners wants to rebuild it but the other refuses, can the latter be forced to rebuild it?65 For comparative purposes, whilst a similar engagement with the architectural space of medieval London is found in the Assisa de Edificiis, the origins of which probably date to the late twelfth century, what appears unique to The Book of Walls is the number of texts it comprises, its longevity, and geographical reach.66 As stated earlier, The Book of Walls is not an isolated book or two, but in the Social Sciences sense of the term, a discourse.67 Precisely when it constituted such a discourse is difficult to say with certainty, but presumably no later than the mid-tenth century, the starting point of what this chapter has called the discourse’s golden age. Concerning the aesthetic established and embodied by this discourse, crucially it derives in part from an undatable moment of a particular type of architectural space that precedes the formation of the discourse, is collapsed and recorded in the discourse, and is maintained and perpetuated by the discourse. The aesthetic cannot, therefore, be considered fully original to Islam, for there is no compelling reason to suppose that the type of space 35

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

from which it first derives reflects more than a type of architecture in existence before the Prophet, his companions and successors, and inherited by them. Certainly, this space was later modified by Islam: the discourse’s interventions regarding the placement of external doors and windows, ensuring visual privacy, are a good example (see below), an architectural equivalent of the Qur’anic requirement for the covering of nakedness and vulnerability (“awra).68 But modification by Islam is not the same as origination by Islam, and hence the discourse cannot be used to prove the validity of the title of the so-called Islamic city category discussed in the Introduction. Of course, the Prophet and his companions inherited much from the world around them, and this fact in no wise diminishes the originality of Islam, nor merits calling the religion anything other than Islam, its culture Islamic or Muslim. In that regard, referring to the Islamic quality of the category does make sense: the individual components of the category might have originated elsewhere, but in their translation and re-orchestration they formed an historical urban fabric broadly recognizable as Islamic. Premodern Fez is a case in point: the degree to which the city was determined and defined by its walls, when combined with the importance accorded to walls in the Qur’an, Hadith, and Muslim culture, bespeaks its Islamic quality. Issues of privacy in The Book of Walls As discussed, The Book of Walls established a flexible aesthetic to which the medieval and premodern Arab-Muslim medina’s public and semi-private spaces were expected to conform. In Lefebvre’s critical terminology of space, this type of aesthetic belongs to a society’s representations of space: the conceptualized spaces of professionals (scientists, planners, and so forth), that are “tied to the relations of production and to the ‘order’ which those relations impose, and hence to knowledge, to signs, to codes.”69 In any given society, such representations form the dominant space.70 Competing with them are a society’s representational spaces: the largely non-verbal, symbolic spaces directly lived by the society’s inhabitants, that overlay physical space and afford a shelter for the imagination.71 An example is the domestic house. As Gaston Bachelard shows in his study of the Western imagination, The Poetics of Space, the house is the imagination’s primary shelter, “one of the greatest powers of integration for the thoughts, memories, and dreams of mankind.”72 Although no equivalent research exists for the psychic dimensions of the Muslim house, Paul Wheatley has hinted at their significance,73 and Fatima Mernissi’s semi-scholarly, semi-autobiographical account of her childhood house in Fez offers anecdotal support. In this account, Mernissi provides eloquent descriptions of the cathartic reveries and theatrics of the girls and women cloistered there, inspired from being there.74 Representational spaces, however, form no part of The Book of Walls, except as absences: lacunae of domestic privacy (“awra),75 demarcated by the rulings 36

LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF WALLS: THE BOOK OF WALLS

proscribing the overlooking (iVVilA“) and exposure (kashf ) of domestic houses.76 These rulings form an important part of the discourse and have been the subject of extensive commentary by present-day scholars.77 As many of them have noted, they are premised upon the need to keep the women of the houses invisible to prying eyes outside.78 Whilst not made explicit in the discourse, this premise is in conformity with the notion of the house as Saram, discussed in the previous chapter.79 A common cause of overlooking and exposure in this manner were the neighborhood minarets and the muezzins who ascended them. Frequently higher than the houses of the vicinity, these minarets inevitably looked onto their open courtyards and interiors, such that the muezzins were privy to the view. For The Book of Walls, this constitutes a clear case of harm, as the following example illustrates: Ibn Rushd [“al-Jadd”] was asked about a minaret that was added to a mosque, some of the neighbors having complained about being exposed by it. [The petitioner asked]: “Is there a teaching on this? Our religious leaders (a”immatunA) allowed a man with a tree in his house to climb it in order to gather the fruit, despite their having speedily admonished the ascent of [the minaret], stopping its use for the call to prayer. Their counsel has been largely disregarded by the people of piety and those who intend no harm.” [Ibn Rushd] responded: “I have scrutinized and devoted myself to [your] question, and [I conclude that] the mosque’s minaret is not the same as the tree in the man’s house. Climbing the tree in order to harvest the fruit is an occasional event; climbing the minaret for the call to prayer occurs repeatedly everyday. In Ashhab’s narration, [Imam] Malik’s counsel prohibiting the climbing and scaling of [a minaret] confirms what you have been counseled, the import of which is correct. To this [counsel] I add: If [the muezzin] is able to overlook houses in certain directions only, then he should be prevented from reaching the offending side [of the minaret] by constructing a barrier between it and the other [sides]. We have to do this on many of our minarets here in Cordoba.80 It was not just in Cordoba that overlooking from minarets caused problems; Fez also had its difficulties. In 956, for example, the minaret of the AlQarawiyycn mosque had to be destroyed and rebuilt because it was too high and overlooked houses.81 In the centuries that followed, the rulers themselves took an interest in who made the call to prayer, ensuring that only muezzins known for their chastity and trustworthiness in “prudently averting their gaze from the harems of Muslims, not overlooking their domestic privacy” could climb the minarets by day.82 Finally, so commonplace was the problem of overlooking in Fez that the market inspector Khalid b. ‘Abd 37

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

Allah (d. before 1365) was compelled to order the lowering of the minarets to below house level.83 In summary of this chapter, The Book of Walls is a medieval and premodern discourse composed of discrete and indiscrete texts pertaining to the built environment, that established a proscriptive legal aesthetic of urban Arab-Muslim architectural space. Extensively preoccupied with walls, either explicitly or implicitly, the discourse is the legal equivalent of the religious and social preoccupation with walls and their like described in Chapter Two. As such, it provides a means by which the present investigation can define a wall from within the principles of premodern urban ArabMuslim culture and apply this definition to Fez. Although the walls of Fez are not specifically treated by The Book of Walls, the individual components of the discourse having mostly come into existence as solutions to particular cases generalized for use elsewhere, the historical examples of overlooking and exposure recorded for Fez confirm that the discourse was applied to them. As in Chapter Two, women had a bearing upon these walls in that they presented a requirement for the privacy and seclusion that the walls provided. As a corollary to this and the previous chapter’s demonstration of a legal, religious, and social preoccupation with walls and their like in medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, it is not far-fetched to borrow the anthropologist Lévi-Strauss’ formula regarding totems and venture the proposition that for this culture walls were “good to think.”84 In the coming chapters, this activity will be referred to as “wall thought.”

38

THE JURIDIC BASIS OF THE BOOK OF WALLS

4 THE JURIDIC BASIS OF THE BOOK OF WALLS

If the study of Islamic architecture is commonly concerned with a building’s intended meaning, studying walls within the discourse of Islamic law represents another approach. Lessening the emphasis upon visual perception and reading strategies broadly informed by semiotics, broadly conceived, it seeks not a building’s intended meaning, but allows for a range of meanings that are based upon social compliance and participation. As Lefebvre notes: A monumental work, like a musical one, does not have a “signified” (or “signifieds”); rather it has a horizon of meaning: a specific or indefinite multiplicity of meanings, a shifting hierarchy in which now one, now another meaning comes momentarily to the fore, by means of – and for the sake of – a particular action.1 Accordingly, the study of architecture is optimally not only about what an architect or patron meant by a particular edifice, but also what meanings that edifice comes to have for the people affected by it.2 As is often noted by scholars seeking a building’s intended meaning, even where such can be found, it rarely survives beyond a certain period.3 This is because, alongside it, a building also generates experience-based mnemonic and associational meanings through direct or indirect usage.4 Whilst these meanings are limited by the user’s enculturation, they almost invariably outnumber the intended meaning, and almost always outlive it’.5 In the case of medieval and premodern Arab-Muslim architecture, some of these users’ meanings are part of the buildings’ fabric; for as will be shown in the identification of The Book of Walls’ juridic basis, the external and party walls of many of the buildings are founded in “urf, a society’s customs or conventions. To recap the book’s premise: The Book of Walls is the legal embodiment of an historical urban Arab-Muslim preoccupation with walls and their like, what the previous chapter termed “wall thought.” Were the juridic basis of the discourse identified, the core terms in which walls were legally considered within premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture would also be known and the normative meaning of a wall established. 39

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

Methodological requirements aside, an additional reason recommends identifying The Book of Walls’ juridic basis: comprehension of the discourse’s most apparent application procedure. With the exception of Van Staëvel concerning Ibn al-Ramc,6 the discourse has yet to be comprehended in this way, resulting in a view that The Book of Walls embodies rulings that are necessarily applicable today.7 As will be shown, because of the discourse’s “amal-based application procedure that was time- and placespecific, this view is wrong. A required step in the identification of the discourse’s juridic basis, comprehension of this application procedure should prevent future false expectations.

The application procedure of The Book of Walls: )amal In the previous chapter it was argued that The Book of Walls established a legal aesthetic by which medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim space was, in part, maintained and reproduced. This aesthetic was not inflexible, a prescriptive code, but negotiable according to local needs and conditions; hence, for example, the variations in layout and aspect between different medinas, including those within the same geographical region.8 The most apparent procedure by which the discourse was applied by judges would appear to account for this negotiability. For as will be demonstrated for at least the Maliki texts of The Book of Walls, as early as the tenth or eleventh century what existed of the discourse was encompassed by a local court practice called “amal, a fact suggestive of “urf, local custom or convention, as the discourse’s likeliest basis.9 The meaning of 0amal The contemporary, “textbook” definition of “amal dates and locates this local court practice to late-fifteenth century Morocco, describing it as both the instance of the isolated or weak opinion (shAdhdh or Ra“Cf ) prevailing over the best attested or preponderant opinion (mashhEr or rAjiS), and the opinion that must always be followed in judgement.10 Although this definition comes from Joseph Schacht’s and Noel Coulson’s standard introductory texts to Islamic law, it is based on the pioneering Western studies of “amal by Louis Milliot and Jacques Berque.11 As such, it is more memorable than original, lingering on in later scholarship regarding the subject.12 Recently, the textbook definition has been exposed as historically incomplete, with undue importance accorded to the seventeenth-century metered “amal text al-“Amal al-fAsC and its doctrinaire formula: “The “amal ruling must prevail over the best attested opinion. It cannot be neglected.”13 The new research shows that whereas the textbook definition makes of “amal a practice-over-theory ruse and inflexible doctrine, the history of “amal does not unfailingly bear this out.14 It appears to hold true for sixteenth-century 40

THE JURIDIC BASIS OF THE BOOK OF WALLS

and later “amal, as primary evidence illustrates, for example al-Majjauc’s (d. 1688) statement: A judge’s divergence from the practice of the courts is a cause of suspicion and censure; rather, a judge must conform to the [“amal] in cases in which there exists one, and follow the dominant opinion only in matters in connection with which no [“amal] is established.15 For earlier centuries, however, the same is not so clear. Although the origins and justification of “amal ultimately lie in the collective “Practice of the People of Medina” (“amal ahl al-MadCna) that was established by the Prophet’s residency there, as local court practice “amal is something different, with a juridic significance only.16 To date, the earliest attested appearance of this restricted usage of “amal belongs to tenth-century Andalusia, principally Cordoba: in the legal formulary of a Cordovan notary known as Ibn al-‘Avvar (d. 1009), reference to local court practice is made some twenty times.17 Contrary to the textbook definition, therefore, even by this early period “amal would seem to be a recognized juridic phenomenon; one pertaining neither to “Morocco” (Schacht) nor “northwest Africa” (Coulson), but Andalusia. By way of comparison, for Morocco and Tunisia of this period, examined records show no mention of court practice.18 Not until the twelfth century does it show in them: in the work of al-Mazarc (d. 1141) for Tunisia19 and Ibn ‘Iyad (d. 1179) for Morocco.20 Concerning this twelfth-century record for Morocco, although it cannot be taken to mean that “amal had authority there, but just in Andalusia, principally Cordoba to where the entry is sourced, the fact that during this period Cordoba was a legal (“ilmC ) capital of both Andalusia and Morocco would suggest that “amal did have authority there.21 Even if it did not, Ibn ‘Iyad also provides evidence suggestive of a specifically Moroccan (maghribC ) “amal in operation there at this time. Discussing the permissibility of a partner in a jointly owned house compelling the others to sell their shares in order for him to build an apartment, Ibn ‘Iyad refers to a Moroccan judicial practice allowing this based upon an opinion of Ibn al-Qasim. He says: “Via this [opinion], the Moroccan judiciary used to pass judgement.”22 As Serrano Ruano remarks of this statement: “Probably this is one of the oldest references to the legal practice in the Far Maghrib.”23 Were either evidence historically the case, institutionalized “amal in Morocco began much earlier than the date proposed by the textbook definition. The latter date would appear to be premised on the existence of another metered “amal text from Fez, al-LAmiyya, that was composed in the latefifteenth century and that refers to a local court practice increasingly emancipated from the authority of Andalusia.24 This premise betrays the textbook definition as restricted in scope to the period of Moroccan history when Muslim Andalusia had ceased to exist as a cultural and political power; in 41

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

other words, to the post-Marinid period, when it is meaningful to refer to intellectual currents in Morocco as “Moroccan” (Schacht) or “north-west African” (Coulson). With time, as “amal became established in Andalusia, Tunisia, and Morocco, so its remit grew, leading eventually to the desirability of recording some or all of it;25 hence the appearance of the “amal texts, al-LAmiyya and al-“Amal al-fAsC, for example, versified to be remembered.26 Until that moment, however, evidence suggests there was no absolute compulsion for a judge to adhere to the “amal, and no notion that “amal was a judgement solely in accord with the weak or isolated opinion.27 For at least this earlier period, therefore, “amal must be thought of not just in terms of local court practice, with its concomitant emphasis on procedure at the interface between plaintiff and judge, but also in terms of a reasoning process for realizing an authoritative but not obligatory regional guide to help judges differentiate between competing opinions pertaining to any given case (mas”ala). The opinion marked as the “amal ruling indicated the one they were expected to apply in the judgement; frequently the mashhEr, or best attested opinion. In this way, “amal formed part of taqlCd: the mechanism a law school possessed to ensure doctrinal uniformity.28 0Amal and The Book of Walls As a term denoting the acceptance of legal authority, taqlCd can be dated with certainty to the eighth century;29 but as a term meaning a law school’s mechanism of doctrinal unification, it dates to the tenth century.30 As the latter meaning took root within all the main Sunni law schools, so it gained currency, such that by the close of the eleventh century in Andalusia many jurists there were ranked according to its criteria.31 Given taqlCd ’s acceptance in Andalusia at this period, it is unsurprising to find dating to the eleventh century a legal text in part devoted to the “amal operative there: al-Bajc’s FuUEl al-aSkAm wa bayAn mA maRA “alay-hi al-“amal “inda al-fuqahA” wa al-SukkAm (The Division of Judgements and Clarification of the “Amal according to Jurists and Judges).32 As noted in Chapter Three, in this work are found a small number of cases concerning the built environment. Among the competing opinions these cases contain, two are marked as the “amal rulings.33 Here, then, is early evidence that wall-related law was applied via the procedure of “amal. And just as al-Bajc’s text does not mark the start of “amal in Andalusia, so neither does it mark the start of wall-related “amal there. In the court records compiled by the aforementioned Ibn al-‘Avvar in the tenth century, of the twenty or so times “amal is mentioned, one is to an “amal ruling related to walls.34 With the continued development of taqlCd within the law schools, and thus the growth of “amal, when Ibn al-Ramc came to write his book in fourteenth-century Tunis he referred to “amal rulings with frequency.35 But 42

THE JURIDIC BASIS OF THE BOOK OF WALLS

these references are a fortuitous supplement and not a distinguishing mark of the discourse, which provides a record of legal cases broadly related to walls, not a record of “amal rulings related to walls. Ibn al-Ramc and to a lesser extent al-Bajc are exceptions in that they specifically mention the “amal ruling in addition to the cases’ competing opinions. For the most part, the other contributors to the discourse do not; they merely organize these competing opinions according to the notions of casuistry and taqlCd existent at that time.36 That Ibn al-Ramc is so diligent in recording the “amal rulings of his city is one reason why he is important to the current investigation: he confirms “amal as the discourse’s most apparent application procedure.37 Cited below is an example from his book. In the ranking of divergent opinions and identification of the mashhEr, or best attested opinion, the example also demonstrates Ibn al-Ramc’s competence in casuistry and taqlCd: [The dispute] regarding the wall owned by one man that provides a screen (sitr) against another man, and either it collapses or the owner wants to raze it completely. Can he be forced to repair or rebuild it? We advocate categorizing this type of wall in three ways. Either it is a strong wall that is not feared to collapse and its owner wants to raze it; or it is a weak wall that is feared to collapse and its owner wants to raze it; or it is [a wall] razed by the will of God. Concerning the first category, namely, the strong wall not feared to collapse: [ . . . ] if the owner razes it for his own benefit, is he compelled to restore it or not? There are four opinions: ‘hsa b. Dcnar taught in the “Utbiyya that if he razes it for his own benefit or [with the intention] of restoring it, but is unable to do so or he finds he can manage without it, then he is not compelled to restore it. Rather, he says to the other man: “Screen yourself on your own land, if you want!” Ibn al-Qasim taught the same in the MajmE“a38 on the authority of Malik, as did Ashhab and Ibn Nafi‘.39 The second opinion is from the WARiSa:40 Ibn al-Majishen, Sasnen, and Ibn Kinana41 taught that the owner is compelled to restore it, whether he likes it or not, even if the wall is weak, because it constitutes harm. The owner must do this because [the wall] became his neighbor’s right at the time [the neighbor’s] house was built in its screened protection. The third opinion is also from the WARiSa: Ibn mabcb taught that the owner is compelled to build it, but that he should not be rushed to do so, the neighbor being told that he should screen himself in the meanwhile, assuming that he can find a screen. If he cannot [find a screen], and his domestic privacy is thereby compromised (la-hu “awra), the owner of the wall is compelled to restore it [immediately], whether he likes it or not. [ . . . ] The fourth opinion: Yasya42 taught on the authority of Ibn al-Qasim, if the wall is strong then 43

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

he is compelled to restore it. If it is weak, then he is not. The best attested opinion is that he is not compelled [to restore it]. The fatwa and “amal ruling follow this opinion (wa bi-hi al-fatwA wa al-“amal).43 In addition to its function as part of taqlCd, “amal has long been considered a means of alleviating hardship (RarEra) and realizing the common good (maUlaSa).44 By determining the “amal ruling of any particular case according to circumstances of place and time, “amal provided flexibility and local sensitivity within a legal system frequently portrayed today as static and unreasonable. Given this sensitivity to local conditions, it is unsurprising to find that Western scholars and Muslim jurists alike have commonly viewed a society’s customs or conventions, “urf, as the procedure’s pivot and the “amal ruling’s decisive determinant.45 In the words of the Moroccan jurist al-Zaqqaq (d. 1507), for example: “Should it be said that some of [the “amal rulings] I have reported are [based upon] weak opinions: Yes, indeed! But upon “urf is [“amal] dependent.”46 In a qualified jurist’s hands, the customs of a region (most commonly a city) indicated the opinion best suited to this or that case in litigation there. With repetition, this opinion became the regional “amal ruling, until – ideally – circumstances of time and place changed, causing the ruling to be revoked.47 As a result of this process, “amal and its rulings have sometimes been considered akin to an Islamic, or juridically sanctioned redaction of a society’s customs;48 for “urf is firstly a cultural, not a legal category, and often includes practices considered contrary to the Sharia (al-SharC“a), God’s divine will. As a result of this process, too, the link between “amal, The Book of Walls, and “urf is established: the discourse was applied via “amal, which in turn was dependent on “urf. In summary of this discussion of The Book of Walls’ application procedure, the fact that the most prominent procedure is “amal indicates a close relationship between the discourse and “urf. This indication will be pursued below. The relationship itself, meanwhile, is physically suggested by a country’s different architectural vernaculars. In medieval and premodern Morocco, for example, only houses of Fez were noted for their height, commonly three to four stories, sometimes surmounted by a belvedere, or “menzeh” (manzaha).49 The building medium used for them was stone, brick, and cedar,50 unlike the fortified urban complexes, or “ksur” (quUEr) of the Tafilalt region, where it is still pisé, mud brick and palm tree.51 And so forth; architectural conventions influencing the choice of “amal rulings applied from the discourse.

)Urf and the juridic basis of the discourse The foregoing treatment of “amal has indicated a relationship of “urf with The Book of Walls: in the application of the discourse within the medina environment, custom or convention played its part. In terms of the 44

THE JURIDIC BASIS OF THE BOOK OF WALLS

investigation’s stated aim to identify the juridic basis of the discourse, however, a relationship of “urf with the discourse is not the same as “urf underpinning the discourse. The following section is devoted to addressing this shortcoming by showing how The Book of Walls’ principal justification, or proof (dalCl ) from the Sharia depends upon custom to exert legal effect. The argument is that, because this proof ’s meaning is obscure, in order to determine its significance for any given case referring to it, it is subject to clarification (takhUCU) governed by “urf. The hadith L1 ¡arar wa l1 ¡ir1r and The Book of Walls It is commonly observed by scholars of the discourse, that of the Sharia proofs referred to in it, the hadith “No harm or return of harm” (LA Rarar wa lA RirAr) is fundamental.52 Hakim, for example, considers it “one of the most frequently quoted and used in building matters”;53 Kahera and Benmira conclude that, regarding “habitat, the neighborhood, the home and the street, inferences of spatial form were implicitly derived from the axiom lA Rarar wa-lA RirAr”;54 and ‘Azab asserts: “The principle LA Rarar wa lA RirAr occupies a broad chapter in Islamic building law, and upon it are built innumerable rulings. It has influenced the procedure of building in Islamic cities.”55 These and other observations are born out in a passing review of the individual texts comprising the discourse. In Ibn al-Imam’s text, for example, of the thirty times a hadith is cited, LA Rarar wa lA RirAr appears the most at eight times.56 In Ibn al-Ramc’s KitAb al-I“lAn it has even greater ubiquity, appearing five of the ten times a hadith is cited in the first quarter of the book alone.57 And in KitAb al-MCVAn, although the hadith is not itself cited, the concept of harm is invoked at least ten times;58 these invocations are metonymic of the hadith and its legislative value, as the following case illustrates. In the case the concept of harm is summoned, and because of the hadith’s legislative value, a judgement is reached: It was mentioned in the words of Abe Sufyan al-Darc [n.d.], God have mercy on him: If the house in question is adjacent to other houses and its owner wants to build an oven in it for the continual baking of bread, like those ovens used in stores, or [he wants to place in it] a flour mill or a fuller’s pounder, he is not permitted to, because such harms his neighbors with unavoidable, exorbitant harm (Rarar fASish).59 A fair (Sasan) but incomplete (mursal ) hadith related by Malik among others,60 LA Rarar wa lA RirAr is said to be one of five hadiths upon which all fiqh is based.61 This importance notwithstanding, because of the hadith’s complex linguistic form, its precise meaning is uncertain.62 And because 45

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

the qualified jurist is required to pay attention to the grammatical and linguistic form of the words constituting any proof in order to deduce its legislative value, LA Rarar wa lA RirAr has been the subject of frequent analysis and interpretation.63 Such is illustrated by Ibn al-Ramc’s own, inconclusive attempt to explain it, in which he refers to a number of other interpretations: The ulema differ as to the meaning of the hadith, with some saying LA Rarar wa lA RirAr: do not harm yourself and do not harm other than yourself. Ibn mabcb said: “larar” and “rirar” are two words with one meaning, that are repeated to emphasize prohibition. Perhaps Arabic inflection has kept both [meanings]. “larar” is the noun and “rirar” is the verb. The hadith’s wording “la rarar” means harm does not befall one person from another, even if the person did not intend it. And the wording “la rirar” means one person does not deliberately harm another. Al-Khashanc 64 taught: “larar” is what benefits you, but disadvantages your neighbor. What he means is that “rarar” is what someone intends to benefit from, but in which is harm to another; and “rirar” is the deliberate harming (iRrAr) of another. Our Lord, great is His splendour and holy are His names and attributes, said: “And there are those who put up a mosque by way of ‘rirar’ and infidelity.”65 It is conceivable that the meaning of “rarar” is that one of two neighbors harms the other, and the meaning of “rirar” is that both of them harm each other. The Prophet, upon whom be peace, forbade both aspects. [ . . . ] In his book Mu“Cn al-quRAt, Qadi Ibn ‘Abd al-Raf c‘ taught: The interpretation of “rirar” is that you harm yourself in order that someone other than yourself is harmed.66 The hadith L1 ¡arar wa l1 ¡ir1r and its clarification by 0urf Whilst “urf is but one of several means for the clarification of ambiguities and obscurities in the sources of Islamic law, it is a vital one. As the Moroccan jurist al-Tawdc b. Seda (d. 1795) said of it: “Urf “particularizes the general, specifies the equivocal, and determines the indeterminate.”67 In addition to helping determine the meaning of judgements, contracts, and so forth established under Islamic law, “urf is of value in clarifying linguistic ambiguities within the two principal sources of this law, the Qur’an and Sunna.68 As Muhammad Kamali explains this: In determining the scope of [words of generic, non-particularized meaning within the sources], reference is made not only to the rules of language but also to the usage of the people, and should there be a conflict between the two the priority is given to the latter.69 46

THE JURIDIC BASIS OF THE BOOK OF WALLS

Considered one of the two categories of “urf, “the usage of the people,” or verbal “urf (al-“urf al-lafWC ) consists of a people’s words and expressions that are immediately understood without ratiocination or a requirement for context (bi-lA qarCna wa lA “alAqa “aqliyya).70 As illustrated by Muuvafa al-Zarqa’: This [category of “urf ] is the case [for example] with the word “dirhams,” with its meaning of a country’s common currency, regardless of the currency’s type and value, including the paper money of today, despite the fact that originally dirhams were silver coins of specified weight and fixed value. It is also the case with the word “al-bayt”: in some countries it means “room,” in others, the house in its entirety.71 LA Rarar wa lA RirAr, specifically its generic word “harm” (Rarar, RirAr), is a third case of this category of “urf. With reference once more to Ibn alRamc’s attempt to explain the hadith, as just seen in the excerpt cited previously, he commences his treatment with the ulema and their definitions. From these definitions he does not proceed to choose one; rather, in the paragraphs that follow the cited material, he leaves the hadith’s meaning hanging, turning his attention to the “many aspects” of harm within a legal context. These aspects he divides and subdivides into old and new, supporting them on the opinions of Ibn Rushd and Ibn ‘Abd al-Raf c‘, and extending them on the view of Ibn Hisham.72 Finally, he ends his treatment by choosing to clarify the “many aspects” of harm in the legal cases to come, saying: “The aspects of harm are many. They will become clear via legal cases concerning them.”73 As a result of this choice, the meaning Ibn alRamc ascribes to the hadith and its concept of harm comes covertly, imprecisely, and piecemeal within the legal cases referring to it; not in an explicit definition. For the legal cases he cites do not explain the hadith and its concept of harm; they just use both. As such, they bear witness to the meaning of harm current at the time and place of each individual case, their compiler, Ibn al-Ramc, presuming of his audience the correct understanding of this variable meaning. From just such a presumption follows the prerequisite of muftis and judges to be knowledgeable of the “urf of the regions of their jurisdiction: only by knowing what constitutes harm for a particular region can they pronounce an acceptable opinion or judgement.74 Examples corroborate this interpretation. In a court case from Medina in 1573, a judge is asked about an individual who opened two windows in his second-floor apartment and thereby overlooked another’s house. In order to decide the case on the basis of the hadith LA Rarar wa lA RirAr, the judge turns to local master masons (sg. mu“allim, muhandis al-“amA”ir al-sulVAniyya bi-al-MadCna) and asks if the opened windows are considered a harm in the region.75 As al-Hathloul summarizes this case: “For the judge to decide that intrusion onto the privacy of neighbors inflicted harm and damage, he had 47

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

to look back to the acknowledged social conventions.”76 In a case reported by Ibn Sahl, two jurists from the Cordovan advisory council (ahl al-shErA) give contradictory opinions regarding the legality of an overhead architectural projection (raff ), the second jurist dismissing the first’s conception of harm.77 Finally, Ibn al-Ramc reports a case about a man who opened a window in his house and was thereby able to overhear the conversations in his neighbor’s house. This neighbor took him to court complaining of harm, but the advisory council (ashyAkhunA) disagreed as to whether or not this constituted harm. The judge decided it did not, and that became the “amal ruling for Tunis.78 In conclusion, although the hadith LA Rarar wa la RirAr inevitably has status in building matters for allegedly being a Prophetic utterance, legislatively speaking it exerts itself via the clarifying role of “urf. Because the hadith is the principal proof of The Book of Walls, this is to say that “urf is the discourse’s juridic basis and governing principle, hardly the first time custom has determined an area of Islamic law.79 Lying at the basis of the legal embodiment of “wall thought,” governing the terms in which a wall was considered in medieval and premodern Islamic law, custom lies at the heart of the normative meaning of a wall. In the next chapter, the significance of this finding will be elaborated and refined.

48

SHAME AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WALLS

5 SHAME AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WALLS

In the image of a house whose weak foundations show in the fissures tracing its walls, the customs of a people show in their medina walls. Based in “urf, these external and party walls uphold and reveal “urf. They tell of a society that has built for itself a coherent environment in which all legally capable (mukallaf ) members are, to varying degrees, patrons and recognized participants: a “people’s” environment, coded through Islamic law. But so broad and all-encompassing a category is “urf that, in the absence of finer definition, what shows is otherwise impenetrable, too general for further significance. In order for the walls to become more telling, something that draws “urf ’s focus is required: a defining factor, one marking “urf ’s limit. Etymologically “the known,” “urf and its cognate synonym ma“rEf are the opposite of munkar, etymologically “the unknown.”1 Semantically, too, they are opposites. In the Qur’an, munkar is what is disavowed and unacceptable to Muslims; “urf and ma“rEf, what is appropriate and acceptable (and hence in Islamic law, customary or conventional).2 Whatever draws a divide between these terms, marking what is acceptable from what is not, draws a definition of “urf.

The shame factor In The Power of Shame, the philosopher Agnes Heller argues that in contrast to the other emotions, all of which precede culture, shame is coeval to culture, allowing for entry and conformity to it. In feeling shame, a person shows awareness of societal norms, of what is and is not acceptable.3 As Sartre expresses this idea: “Shame is by nature recognition. I recognize that I am as the Other sees me.”4 Shame, in other words, reveals a person’s separation from others, allowing him or her to join others, namely, society or culture; because what is not first separated cannot be joined. Heller and Sartre are not alone in claiming this of shame. Whether in the context of ancient Greece, medieval Iceland, or contemporary America, a number of psychologists, scholars, and philosophers agree that shame plays its part in the socialization of the individual.5 Instead of reducing it to 49

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

disgrace or humiliation only, its prevalent meaning in the contemporary Western world, these and other academics recognize shame as a complex phenomenon, acknowledging its plural forms.6 As exemplified by Léon Wurmser, these forms are: “I am afraid that exposure is imminent and hence terrible humiliation” – shame anxiety. “I have been exposed and humiliated, I want to disappear as this being” – shame affect in the broad sense. [ . . . ] “I must always hide and dissemble, in order not to be exposed and disgraced” – shame as preventive attitude.7 How true is any of the above for Muslim culture? In the following pages, this question is addressed by looking at the status of shame, firstly in the Qur’an and Hadith, and then in Arab-Muslim societies. Because the answer indicates shame as the defining factor of “urf, and thus as what shows in medina walls, the spatial, quasi-architectural dimension of shame is next examined, prompting a conclusion regarding the significance of walls in historical urban Arab-Muslim thought. Lastly, this meaning is verified against textual evidence: a medieval and premodern Arab-Muslim poetic corpus whose subject is women, walls, and ruin. In an authoritative hadith, the Prophet is reported as saying: “Every religion has its moral character, and the moral character of Islam is shame.”8 Other authoritative hadiths endorse this importance of shame to Islam. For example: Inside of you are two natural traits loved by God: forbearance and shame;9 When God wants to destroy a servant, He strips him of his shame;10 Among the teachings that people learnt from the first prophecy is: if you feel no shame, then do as you please!11 Shame does not occur, except for the better;12 Shame is of faith;13 All shame is good.14 In contrast to its often negative status in contemporary Western culture, in these Prophetic hadiths, shame is valued, prized as an integral part of Muslim life.15 Comportment should be shame-led: shameful; not shameless. The Qur’an is less forthcoming on the subject, but in one clear reference we are told that the Prophet knows shame; not always his guests: O ye who believe! Enter not the dwellings of the Prophet for a meal without waiting for the proper time, unless permission be granted you. But if ye are invited, enter, and when your meal is ended, disperse. Linger not for conversation. Lo! that would cause 50

SHAME AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WALLS

annoyance to the Prophet, and he would be ashamed of you ( fa-yastaSiyC min-kum); but God is not ashamed of the truth (wa AllAhu lA yastaSiyC min al-Saqq).16 Occurring in the context of what Chapter Two called threshold propriety, this reference belongs to the spatial dimension of shame, to be discussed below. Of issue now is the word used for shame in this verse: istaSyA, to feel SayA”, to feel shame – to be ashamed; etymologically, to seek SayA”, to seek shame. The same word as used in the above hadiths, SayA” is cognate with Sayya (to live), SayAt (life), and al-Mayy (“He Who Lives,” God), suggestive of shame as affirmative of life: something not to be avoided, but sought.17 Such an interpretation would mirror the other Qur’anic meaning of istaSyA: to preserve life, to spare it.18 In Arab-Muslim societies, there are a number of dialect terms for shame, and even more related to shame. Comprised in the first category is SayA”, but also “ ‘eb” (“ayb) and “sasham” (Sashm; also “sashuma” and Sishma). Anthropologists have recorded some of their usages; they reflect the complexities accorded to shame by the scholars referred to earlier, and include shame as a preventive, or preservative attitude and an agent of enculturation. Unni Wikan, for example, observes that among the poor of Cairo: [“ ‘Eb”] is one of the first words people hear and, throughout their lives, it remains the most common. I have no count of the types of actions to which the word is applied: they range from trifling misdeeds or accidents, such as insulting a guest, gossiping, stealing and miserly behavior, to acts judged horribly immoral, such as homosexuality, female adultery or loss of virginity before marriage. [“ ‘Eb”] refers to actions, not people. Thus, a child whose mother scolds him “ ‘eb” does not necessarily think he has fallen in grace, only that his behavior is at fault. [ . . . ] Among the Cairo poor, “ ‘eb” is such a vital word that there is not a toddler who does not understand what it means.19 Wikan concludes that so embedded is “ ‘eb” in this society’s cultural background, that it is used without reflection, enacted rather than thought.20 This, too, is in keeping with the earlier discussion of shame: it is a learnt reflex. Of “sasham,” Lila Abu-Lughod observes that for the Awlad ‘Ali tribe of Egypt’s Western Desert: It lies at the heart of ideas of the individual in society [ . . . . ] [It] involves both feelings of shame in the company of the more powerful and the acts of deference that arise from these feelings. In the first instance, Sasham is conceptualized as an involuntary experience [ . . . ;] in the second, as a voluntary set of behaviors 51

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

conforming to the “code of modesty.” [ . . . ] [T]he primary goal of socialization is to teach [children] to understand social contexts and to act appropriately within them – which means knowing when to taSashsham [to exhibit “sasham”]. Mothers often scold their children with the imperative, which can be translated as “behave yourself ” or “act right” and which implies, “have some shame.”21 Similar usages of “sasham,” or more specifically “sashuma,” are recorded for Moroccan society by Susan Schaefer Davis, Dale Eickelman, and Soumaya Naamane-Guessous, the latter asserting that it divides conventional from unconventional, perforce secretive behavior.22 Regarding terms related to shame, they include sharaf, “irR, wajh, namus (Turkey), izzat (Pakistan), nif, and Surma, all of them signifying notions of “honor.”23 A moral value like shame, but pertaining to a person’s character, not their actions,24 honor is considered reciprocal to shame,25 such that where anthropologists and others have characterized this or that Muslim society as one in which honor is emphasized, shame is usually also implicated, if not always mentioned.26 “IrR is one of the most common and historically important of these honor terms and serves as an example of this reciprocity. As Bichr Farès explains it, “irR is “a sort of partition or curtain separating the individual from the rest of mankind”: a preservative, like shame.27 If Sartre’s and Heller’s identification of shame as a primary factor of socialization was thought to apply to Western culture and societies only, the foregoing theological and anthropological accounts have shown its adequacy for Arab-Muslim culture and societies, too. To the objection that the anthropological accounts pertain to contemporary societies only and thus cannot be used as evidence for societies of an earlier period, the answer is threefold. First, the status of shame in the Qur’an and Hadith suggests the accounts’ fit for earlier societies, too. Second, the importance of honor and by implication, shame, in pre- and early Arab-Muslim societies, also suggests this fit.28 Third, choosing shame as “urf ’s defining factor is not the same as choosing what different societies constitute as shame, namely, the contexts which should prompt shameful behavior when encountered. These contexts are variable, and in the absence of historical accounts, difficult to know. Acting as a preservative, shame marks what is acceptable, what is customary in these societies. Preventable actions not triggering its response in the perpetrator, for example the Prophet’s shamelessly lingering dinner guests, marking the unacceptable. In this way, shame draws a definition of “urf. The spatial dimension of shame That honor has a temporal dimension has been noted by academics.29 With few exceptions, that shame has a spatial dimension has not.30 This spatial dimension is important, for it is what makes shame architecturally of 52

SHAME AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WALLS

interest. Wurmser hints at it when he says that in shame there is “an object pole, in front of whom one feels ashamed, and the subject pole, for what one feels ashamed.”31 Although the object pole, or audience, need not be real, but imagined, typically shame unfolds across the two poles; across, in other words, space – be it inner and imaginary or outer and perceptible.32 In this unfolding, some of the resulting effects are spatial. As will be seen, it is predominantly these that justify noting shame as spatial in part. Shame occurs in space, but its effects alter the perception of space. “Shame never occurs in a thing, but adorns it,” the Prophet is reported as saying.33 In this authoritative hadith, the Islamic purpose of shame is concisely expressed: to cover things beautifully and thereby preserve them (from view and/or injury.)34 What is held to require covering in Muslim culture varies with societies, but in the Qur’an it is partly explained as one’s genitals ( furEj, saw”At).35 It is a requirement that applies to believing men and women alike: Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and preserve ( yaSfaWE) their genitals [from view]. That is purer for them. Truly God is well acquainted with what they do. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and preserve their genitals [from view].36 Clothing (libAs) provides an obvious solution to this requirement for visual preservation. Such is how the exegete al-pabarc (d. 923), for example, glosses the Qur’anic verse,37 and how The Encyclopaedia of Islam adumbrates the meaning of libAs: “that which conceals or covers the pudenda.”38 In covering the genitals this way, clothing replicates and hence guarantees the Islamic purpose of shame. This is spelt out in the following Qur’anic verse, where both real and metaphorical clothing are mentioned: “O Children of Adam! We have bestowed clothing upon you to cover your genitals and to be of finery. But the clothing of piety (libAs al-taqwA), that is best.”39 As al-pabarc glosses this verse, one accepted meaning of “the clothing of piety” is shame (SayA”).40 In replicating the Islamic purpose of shame, clothing highlights the first of shame’s spatial effects: separation. Men and women’s face veils are an example. Just as these separate or distance the wearer from their immediate surroundings,41 so the experience of being ashamed is commonly one of separation, of being cut off and effaced, accompanied by distancing acts acknowledging one’s error and/or inferior position.42 As Abu-Lughod describes the experience for the Awlad ‘Ali tribe: To taSashsham from someone involves neither eating nor drinking in front of him or her, nor smoking [ . . . . ] One also assumes a rigid posture and does not speak or look the superior in the eyes. These acts imply formality on the one hand and self-effacement on the other, both means of masking one’s nature, of not exposing oneself 53

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

to the other [ . . . . ] Inequality is thus expressed as social distance, which is marked by Sasham’s formality, effacement, and, ultimately, avoidance.43 In this experience of separation, space appears reversed: the second of shame’s spatial effects. Where before there was proximity to another, now there appears distance; what was close, now appears apart; and what was inferior, now appears elevated: dignified and remote. Once more, clothing replicates and thus guarantees this effect, as in the case of the Tuareg face veil (tegelmoust in Air Tuareg dialect). As observed by the anthropologist Robert Murphy, the “Tuareg wear the veil highest and conceal their faces most completely when among those who are closest to them and know quite well who they are.”44 This self-concealment is never more apparent than when a Tuareg is in the presence of his father- or mother-in-law, “for the Tuareg state that reserve and shame are the essence of conduct toward the senior affine and [ . . . ] they partially express this with the veil.”45 Importantly, the shame experienced need not result from one’s own error or social position, but from another’s want of shame, or faux-pas.46 Such is the case of the Qur’anic verse cited previously in which the Prophet is described as ashamed of the guests’ lingering in his house. It cannot be proved, but it is surely no coincidence that the verse’s next words introduce the requirement of speaking to the Prophet’s wives from behind a screen (SijAb).47 The wives’ Qur’anic status as different to other women requires a spatial counterpart, a marker of their apartness amidst the cramped closeness of the early Medina community: a physical screen replicating the Islamic purpose of shame and thus guaranteeing their separate status.48 As stated earlier, it is the spatial dimension of shame that makes it architecturally of interest. From the foregoing analysis of this dimension, in seeming to separate a person from the people around them, apparently reversing their proximity to them, it can even be said that shame acts architecturally, that it acts like a wall. This is because, psychologically speaking, being ashamed involves the two functions of walls discussed in Chapter Two: separation and reversal. On this view, in Muslim societies, crossing shame’s threshold, having shame, radically repositions a person’s stance before others and the world.

An interpretation of walls With shame shown as the defining factor of “urf, this interpretation follows. Telling of “urf, medina walls more clearly tell of shame. Upholding and revealing their foundations in “urf, these external and party walls signify shame. To be understood as more than an ahistorical conceit, this interpretation requires corroboration via cultural evidence. Such evidence either comes from or echoes the historical corpus of Arab-Muslim rithA” al-mudun, poems 54

SHAME AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WALLS

on cities vanquished or abandoned. Part of the ancient, elegiac genre of Arabic poetry known as marthiya, the corpus takes the form of lamentation (rithA”) for lost cities and homelands, and frequently centers on the perceived disgrace of women when no longer secluded by walls.49 As discussed above and in Chapter Two, whereas in the Qur’an it is a believer’s genitals and the wives of the Prophet that require screening, with the historical development of urban Arab-Muslim culture this requirement becomes leveled at so-called “respectable”, or muSUana Muslim women in particular. Henceforth, their domain is the house. In the rithA” al-mudun corpus, this requirement finds poetic expression: as envisioned by the poets, upon the ruination of the domestic walls that ensured their seclusion, women are subject to immodest deterioration. Ibn Sharaf al-Qayrawanc (d. 1068), for example, recounts the fate of a group of women made destitute after an unspecified calamity (khuVub) in Kairouan. Where before these women had never heard of the open desert, now they view it as their home;50 and where before seclusion formed their horizons, now what secludes them is the horizon itself.51 Stumbling across the rocks and earth, they are reduced to gathering their buried rags; and where before no eye had ever set itself upon them, now censure blackens their eyelids with the sun.52 In Ibn ‘Assal’s (d. after 1064) lament for Barbastro, Spain, sacked by the Christians in 1064, the violent exposure of the women is emblematic of the city’s humiliation that was incurred, explains the poet, by the inhabitants’ grievous sins. In a carefully drawn parallel, women and sins now stand for all to see: With their horses [the polytheists] violated the harems of the ancestral houses [ . . . . ]53 Secluded and veiled in their inner chambers, [the women] were forced outside, unable to conceal themselves [ . . . . ]54 Had it not been for the Muslims’ wrongdoings and perpetration of heinous sins, none of which can be concealed, over them no knight would have been victorious for the Christians [ . . . . ]55 Finally, in Ibn al-Labbana’s (d. after 1091) rithA” on the public flight from Seville of the family of the defeated ruler Musammad II al-Mu‘tamid (r. 1069– 91), following the Almoravids’ victory over him, we find “[the women’s] veils lowered, not covering the [once] secluded maidens. [Their] faces torn, [like] shredded garments.”56 In conformity with religious and popular notions asserting a woman’s inherent nakedness or vulnerability and need for cover (“awra), as expressed, for example, in the exegete al-Bayrawc’s (d. 1389) formula, “A freewoman’s entire body is “awra,”57 for these and other poets it would seem that the walls secluding a woman do not just cover her otherwise uncovered, or shameless body, but are her shame. Once beyond them, she is defenseless against physical and moral degradation. The Andalusian polymath Ibn mazm 55

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

(d. 1064) echoes this sentiment in his shock at re-encountering a former servant girl he had once considered the epitome of beauty, chastity, purity, and modesty.58 That was ten years ago, when she was sixteen and part of his family’s household in Cordoba; before plague, political upheaval, pillaging and sacking had forced him to flee, his beloved Cordoba and Umayyad dynasty to deteriorate, and her to be thrown from shelter into ruin: Her charms had all but changed. Gone was her bloom; extinguished, that splendor; dwindled, that essence that had conjured visions of flashing blades and Indian mirrors. That radiant blossom which had once drawn stares of wonder, leaving eyes helpless, was wilted [ . . . . ] All this was due to a decreased care for herself and the loss of the shelter that had nurtured her in the days of our dynasty, when protection extended [to all]. It was due, too, to being debased by going outside on unavoidable tasks, something she was sheltered and kept from before. For women are as fragrant herbs: when not tended to, they decline; and as a building: when not cared for, they fall into ruin.59 Just as in the rithA” al-mudun corpus where the figure of a broken woman may serve as a metaphor for a ruined city,60 so in this passage Ibn mazm is perhaps alluding to Cordoba even as he describes the tragic decline of a former servant girl. In a late medieval or early premodern proverb about Fez, cited in Chapter One, women are used in a similarly figurative way: sheltered virgins representing the medina’s hidden soul. Like the rithA” almudun corpus and its echo in Ibn mazm, these women are also subject to a vile destiny once beyond their sheltering walls. In language identical to that of Ibn mazm, they are subject to wilt and debasement (dhubul wa ibtidhAl ): “If Fez were revealed from its walls, the dark-eyed virgins [of Paradise] would appear. But if the secluded virgins left [their] covers, they would be stricken with wilt and debasement.”61 In conclusion, the evidence presented from the corpus of the rithA” al-mudun and its echo in other literary sources corroborates the interpretation that a wall signifies shame. In the language of lamentation, when women are represented outside of the house walls that protect them, they are subject to shameless degradation. With this interpretation, something fundamental about the space of premodern Fez is apprehended, to be discussed in the final chapter.

56

ZEF/FEZ

6 ZEF/FEZ

“Fez is a mirror.” So runs a third historical proverb of the city.1 It seems fitting, in view of the book’s interpretation of a wall as significant of shame, a site of separation and reversal, the spatial effects of shame. Defined and determined by its walls, premodern Fez was a city of distancing, nonreflecting transpositions: an architectural embodiment of shame. At a fundamental level, such must also have been the city’s space, so extensively was it bound by walls. On this view, although the medina comprised a variety of qualitatively different spaces within its perimeters – mosques, abattoirs, ovens, and houses, for example – unevenly informing them all would have been a shame-laden, break-and-rotate space. What was considered shameless in the mosque might well have been allowed in the abattoir, but both settings remained part of the mirror-like stage of Fez and its space of separation and reversal. That this space is not an anachronistic fiction, but rooted in historical evidence can be shown by comparing it to the identity local historiography accords the city. On the basis that the first walls narrated of Fez should be analyzed for what they reveal of the premodern city’s own, ideologically construed identity, this chapter focuses on the city’s foundation legend recounted in the historiography. The chapter links this legend to an originary foundation process and shows that ritually re-enacted in the narrative is a mythic paradigm of Islamic state formation, of which, in the form of separation and reversal, a wall forms the heart. Isolating the paradigm emphasizes the extent of “wall thought” in medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture; deciphering the paradigm and exposing the legend’s debt to it show how premodern Fez construed its own identity and what that identity comprised.

The foundation legend of Fez in light of the Life of the Prophet Early and medieval Muslim claims that biblical and antique sites lie at the foundations of a number of Islamic medinas have received academic consideration.2 Given almost no consideration are the legends related of 57

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

these and other medinas at the moment of their foundation or Islamic refoundation.3 This is an oversight, for although medieval Arab authors often show a fascination for the marvelous and unusual, and thus cannot always be relied on for objectivity, the contrived, semi-literary elements, or topoi shared by a number of these legends indicate more than just heightened imagination. As will be argued, they indicate a ritual re-enactment of a Prophetic foundation paradigm and suggest that for at least some Muslims, whether or not a perfect Islamic city ever existed historically, ideologically it existed as a recurring expression of the alleged miracle of Islam and its perceived capacity to generate salvific urban space. With reference to the foundation legends of a number of historic Arab-Muslim cities, most especially Fez, demonstrating that there are such shared topoi will form the first part of this argument. The topoi will be isolated from the Fez legend and then shown to compare to the other legends. In the second part of the argument, these topoi will be examined regarding the possibility that a paradigm from the Prophet’s biography, or sCra informs their existence. For the sake of clarity, because the term “legend” will subsequently be differentiated from that of “myth,” although its meaning in the argument broadly follows ordinary usage, namely, a story “associated with some particular place or culture-hero,”4 specifically it follows the anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski: [Legends] refer to subjects intensely stimulating to the natives; they are all connected with activities such as economic pursuits, warfare, adventure, success in dancing and in ceremonial exchange. Moreover, since they record singularly great achievements in all such pursuits, they redound to the credit of some individual and his descendants or of a whole community; and hence they are kept alive by the ambition of those whose ancestry they glorify.5 Legends of Foundation In the earliest extant histories of Fez, the fourteenth-century RawR al-qirVAs and Zahrat al-As, a nearly identical legend is recorded regarding the medina’s foundation by Idrcs II. The politically motivated and historically inaccurate attribution of this foundation to him, not his father Moulay Idrcs I, is not of issue here. (As will be seen, this attribution gains its symbolic charge by occurring within the re-enactment of a Prophetic foundation paradigm: Idrcs II borrows status from the Prophet.6) Instead, what is of issue are the contrived elements of the narrative that indicate the legend was most probably forced to conform to a prior model. These topoi are four: the elevated and then glorified status of the city’s founder; the eremitic monk with his scriptural prophecy; the physical act of foundation, in which a matrix of power is established, ruled over by the founder; and the ruins of the ancient city Zef 58

ZEF/FEZ

(SAf ), out of which Islam arises supreme. Concerning the first three, the legend reads as follows: Ibn Ghalib [n.d.] mentions in his history, that when Imam Idrcs decided to build [Fez] and was standing in the site so as to mark it out, he passed by an old man, one of the Christian monks, over one hundred and fifty years of age, in retreat in a hermit’s cell (Uawma“a) nearby. [The monk] stopped Imam Idrcs, greeted him and said: “Emir! What do you wish to do between these two hills?” [Idrcs] said: “Between them I wish to mark out a city as a dwelling for me and my children after me, wherein God on high is worshipped, His book is recited, and His limits (SudEd) are upheld.” The old monk said: “Emir! I have good news for you.” “What would that be, monk?” “Some monk before me in this monastery, dead now a hundred years, told me he had found in his books of knowledge (kutub “ilmihi) that on this site there was once a city called Zef, in ruin for seventeen hundred years; that a man called Idrcs, belonging to the family of the Prophet, would renew it, revive it from oblivion, make stand its ruins; and that its importance would be great, its destiny momentous. In it, the religion of Islam would last until the Last Day.” Idrcs said: “Thanks be to God. I am Idrcs. I am from the Prophet’s family, God bless him and grant him salvation, and I shall build it, God willing.” This event strengthened his resolve to build [Fez], and he commenced digging its foundations.7 Whereas the elevated and then glorified status of the alleged founder Idrcs requires little comment, so obviously contrived and formulaic is it, and likewise the monk with his scriptural prophecy, with respect to the physical act of foundation some remarks are necessary. The verb used is ikhtaVVa: to mark out a site, physically to draw its limits.8 Once established, upon these boundaries will stand the walls of both the perimeter fence and the buildings within.9 In physically drawing the city’s limits this way, an inside and outside is established: outside lies what is wild and excluded; inside, what is domesticated and belongs. In Bourdieu’s terminology, a “field of power” (champ du pouvoir) is instituted: a society’s preeminent governing matrix, pertaining to the principles of domination and authority and the political struggles arising in relation to them.10 This matrix is alluded to in a speech given by Idrcs immediately before he strikes the ground in construction of the city’s first walls. Invoked is a realm of obeisance and a community defined by law: When Imam Idrcs, may God be pleased with him, decided to build Fez [ . . . ] he raised his hands to the sky and said: “O God! Make [of Fez] a house of religious knowledge and law (dAr “ilm wa fiqh), 59

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

wherein Your book is recited and Your ordinances (sunna) and limits upheld. Make its people cleave to the Sunna and Orthodoxy11 for as long as you make [the city] last.” Then he said: “In the name of God the Clement the Merciful; praise be to God; ‘The earth belongs to God; He gives it as a heritage to such of His servants as he pleases; and the end is best for the God-fearing.’ ”12 He then took the pickaxe in his hand and commenced digging the foundations.13 Concerning the fourth of the legend’s topoi, namely, the story of Zef, whereas drawing the city’s limits is an act of separation, building upon an ancient site is one of continuity, with one important distinction: the physical and religious trajectories of Zef are reversed in Fez. Zef is in ruins, Fez is on the rise. Zef is pre-Islamic and pagan, Fez is avowedly Islamic; a contrast exemplified by an inscribed marble bust unearthed from the ruins, testifying to heathen practices there,14 and a Prophetic hadith apparently foreseeing Fez’s Islamic pedigree.15 In transforming Zef ’s physical and religious trajectories this way, reversal not only gives rise to Fez, but is memorialized in the city’s name. Recounting the origins of the city’s name, the legend explains: It is said that when the construction [of Fez] was finished, Imam Idrcs, may God be pleased with him, was asked: “What will you call it?” He said, “I shall call it by the name of the city that was here before on this site, which the monk told me was that of an eternal town built by the Ancients and fallen into ruin [seventeen hundred] years before Islam. The name of that town was Zef. I shall reverse this name and call [the city] by [the result].” [The result] was Fez, and [the city] was named after it.16 According to the foregoing analysis, four elements stand out in the foundation legend of Fez: the elevated status of the founder, further glorified in the account; the figure of the monk and his scriptural prophecy; the demarcation of a political matrix, what Bourdieu calls the field of power; and the reversal of a prior state, or the ascendancy of Islam and salvific urban space. In order to prove that these are indeed topoi and not just isolated elements peculiar to Fez only, they must be found to compare with other foundation legends. Given the city’s early date, the foundation legend of Kairouan is the first in this comparison. On the authority of Ibn ‘Idharc’s (d. after 1320) history of North Africa and Andalusia, Kairouan was founded in 671 by the one of the followers (tAbi“En) of the Prophet, the legendary conqueror and martyr ‘Uqba b. Nafi‘ al-Fihrc.17 Ordering the start of the construction, Ibn Nafi‘ is told that the chosen site is covered in wild, impenetrable vegetation and haunted by lions, snakes, and other predatory beasts. Immediately, he gathers the eighteen of 60

ZEF/FEZ

his men who are companions (aUSAb) of the Prophet and heads for the site, where he calls out: “O snakes and lions! We are companions of the Prophet, God bless him and grant him salvation. Depart from us! We [mean] to settle [here]. Whatever we find of your type after this [warning], we shall kill!” On hearing this, all the beasts and their young depart, and the people enter in safety, never to see another predatory animal there for forty years. Ibn Nafi‘ could now begin his construction, firstly marking out the limits of the government quarters (dAr al-imAra) and Friday mosque.18 In this legend, the elements shared with Fez are three: the elevated status of ‘Uqba b. Nafi‘, who is then glorified in his miraculous eviction of the predatory beasts; the reversal of a prior state; and the demarcation of a field of power. Regarding the second element, whereas Fez moves from paganism to urbane Islam, here the reversal is from wild, savage nature to urbane Islam. Regarding the third, in the form of the government quarters, or dAr al-imAra, and the Friday mosque, the establishment of a dominant authority and community is clearly stated. As Paul Wheatley says of these two Islamic institutions, they are “signatures of power in the urban landscape.”19 In 762, almost one hundred years after the foundation of Kairouan, the Abbasid caliph al-Manuer (r. 754–75) founded Baghdad.20 As recounted by the exegete and historian al-pabarc on the authority of the father of one Musammad b. Jarir (n.d.), the foundation legend begins with al-Manuer in the area of a village called Baghdad. Thinking about building his city there, he sees a monk and asks: “In your books, do you find a city to be built here?” “Yes,” the monk replies, “Miqlau is to build it.” At this, al-Manuer exclaims: “In my youth, I was called Miqlau.”21 Next in the account, on the authority of a certain Sulayman b. Mujalid (n.d.), al-Manuer orders the city’s limits to be marked out and its foundations dug.22 Finally, on the authority of an unnamed source or sources, al-Manuer appears to repeat these last actions, but in the following way. Wanting to see what the city will look like when it is finished, the caliph orders its limits marked out with ashes and then “enters through each gate, and walks along the walls, arcades, and squares.” At last exiting, he orders cotton seed and oil to be placed on the outline, ignites them, and “in the flames [comes to] understand the city and recognize its design.” He gives the order to dig.23 Beyond the striking image of the field of power – the caliph surveying his city of fire – the elements of the Baghdad legend that also belong to the Fez legend are the figure of the monk and the scriptural prophecy of the future city. As has been pointed out by others, prophecies from monks and their books appear to be a necessary ingredient of Muslim foundation legends.24 In addition to Fez and Baghdad, examples include the Umayyad city of Wasiv25 and the Abbasid city of al-Rafiqa,26 not to mention those legends which echo the monk-and-book theme, for instance the old crone seer of Madcnat al-Zahira, Andalusia.27 For present purposes, however, the best example of a comparable legend is that of Samarra, Iraq, because in this 61

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

legend is found not only a monk with his bookish prophecy, but all the elements of the Fez legend. In al-Ya‘qebc’s description of the city he calls Surra Man Ra”A,28 the foundation story is reported on the authority of one Ja‘far al-Khushshakc (n.d.), a member of the royal entourage out scouting locations for the new capital. After visiting and rejecting a number of sites, the entourage eventually arrives at the future location of Samarra: a desert, inhospitable and empty but for a Christian monastery. Entering the monastery in person, the caliph al-Mu‘tauim (r. 833–42) asks the monks the name of the place. They reply: “In our ancient books we find that this site is called Surra Man Ra”A; that it was the city of Shem, son of Noah; and that after [many] ages it will be rebuilt at the hand of a resplendent king [ . . . ] who will settle there, as will his son.” On hearing this prophecy, al-Mu‘tauim swears to build the city and summons his architects (muhandisEn). He then proceeds to mark out limits of the Friday mosque and the area for his administrative officers, secretaries and others, the dAr al-imAra.29 As stated above, all the elements of the Fez legend appear in this account: the glorification of the founder, a “resplendent king”; the figure of the monk; the scriptural prophecy of the future city; the reversal of a prior state – both undomesticated nature and pre-Islamic ruin;30 and the demarcation of a field of power. Their appearance confirms the elements of the Fez legend to be more than an isolated occurrence, but topoi;31 and renders worthwhile the pursuit of an ur-text after which they were possibly modeled. Following Stephen Humphreys’ recovery of a Qur’anic paradigm informing the narrative structure of early Islamic historiography, the second part of this chapter considers the possibility of a sCra paradigm informing the foundation legends.32 The argument is that the legends are ritual re-enactments of this paradigmatic myth. The Prophet, Medina, and the Myth of Foundation Malinowski defines myth as “a warrant, a charter, and often even a practical guide to the activities with which it is connected.”33 The anthropologist Edmund Leach follows this definition,34 but amends it in one significant way: myth refers to a corpus of often contradictory, mostly oral sacred traditions; not single traditions in isolation.35 For Leach, both the Bible and Qur’an qualify as myth;36 and on this view, so, too, does the sCra.37 Meaning literally “way of going,” or “way of acting,” sCra also means “biography,” and with the definite article placed before it, al-sCra, “the Prophet’s biography.”38 For Muslims, the value of this latter biography could scarcely be greater, “almost a holy writ,”39 because as stated in the Qur’an, the Prophet is their exemplary model (uswa Sasana).40 Nevertheless, the Prophet’s sCra is not a biography in the modern sense of the word, but compilations drawn from a corpus of often contradictory oral traditions purporting 62

ZEF/FEZ

to portray aspects of his life.41 As such, it qualifies as myth in Leach’s definition. And because for Muslims “the life of Musammad represents the most crucial stage of a sacred history that began with the creation of the world,”42 it qualifies as myth in the broader sense, too. As Mircea Eliade, for example, defines the term: Myth narrates a sacred history; it relates an event that took place in primordial Time, the fabled time of the “beginnings.” [Myths] describe the various and sometimes dramatic breakthroughs of the sacred [ . . . ] into the world. It is this sudden breakthrough of the sacred that really establishes the World and makes it what it is today.43 Usefully, Leach’s restricted definition of myth and Eliade’s broader one overlap on the basic purpose of myth, namely, something to be ritually reenacted in the present.44 Both scholars, in other words, adhere to Malinowski’s definition of myth as a social charter: in re-enacting the charter, myth comes to life, often in the form of legend. Ibn Issaq’s SCra is one of the very earliest sCra compilations. No longer extant in its original form, it best survives in a recension of al-Bakka’c (d. 799), as redacted by Ibn Hisham (d. 834).45 In that format it found favor with early and medieval Muslim historians;46 it is considered the most prominent of all the sCra compilations;47 and according to Montgomery Watt, it represents “the basic work on the subject.”48 In that format, too, it is the compilation chosen for the following analysis, and hereafter is referred to only as the SCra. In it, a number of events are reported that bear close resemblance to the topoi of the foundation legends. As already stated, the argument is that these topoi are ritualized re-enactments of the SCra’s mythic events, the latter representing something akin to a foundation paradigm. This paradigm comprises three parts: Bascra the monk; the Prophet’s arrival in Medina; and the so-called Constitution of Medina. BaSîrA the monk According to the SCra, when the Prophet was a boy his guardian and uncle, Abe palib, took him to Syria in a merchants’ caravan. On their way they stopped near a monk in his hermit’s cell. The monk’s name was Bascra, he was well versed in Christian knowledge, and in his cell he had a book, allegedly handed down from generation to generation. Numerous caravans had passed him over the years, but never had he taken any notice of them; until this year, when he invited the travelers to a feast he had prepared for them. All came except the Prophet, who on account of his youth was left to guard the baggage. Looking at his guests, Bascra knew that one of them was missing and requested him to attend. When the Prophet duly arrived, 63

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

Bascra saw upon his body traces of a description found in his book (“indahu); and when at the end of the feast Bascra asked him questions, in the Prophet’s answers lay traces of this description, too. Finally, when Bascra examined the Prophet’s back, between his shoulders he found the Seal of Prophecy, also just as described in his book. Immediately, he went up to Abe palib and said: “Take your nephew back to his city and guard him carefully against the Jews, for if they see him and know about him what I know, by God they will do him harm! A great event belongs to this nephew of yours, so get him home quickly.”49 As Armand Abel has observed of this story’s place within Muslim tradition, in the figure of Bascra is “the witness, chosen at the heart of the most important scriptural religion, of the authenticity of the Prophetic mission.”50 At the time to which the story refers, Islam has yet to be preached, but in Bascra its foundations are prepared: its prophet’s credentials guaranteed by scripture. In this way, too, function the bookish monks of the foundation legends: they guarantee both the cities’ and their founders’ Islamic credentials.51 The Prophet’s Arrival in Medina Approximately four decades after his encounter with Bascra, the Prophet left Mecca for Medina, then called Yathrib. In the Muslim calendar, this emigration, or hijra marks the start of year one of the Islamic era (622 C.E.). After frustrating, turbulent, and finally insufferable beginnings in Mecca, the new religion of Islam was about to enter a period of consolidation. According to the SCra, on the fourth day after his arrival in Yathrib the Prophet founded the religion’s first mosque, on the southern fringes of the oasis in a place called Quba’.52 The next day he left Quba’ and headed towards the centre of the oasis, giving his camel free rein, for she was divinely commanded. Where she finally halted was outside an agricultural enclosure belonging to two orphans. The Prophet bought it from them, taking it as the site for his new mosque and living quarters. He then gave the order for both edifices to be built, and along with the Emigrants and AnUAr (“Supporters”) labored in their construction, singing: “There is no life but the life of the next world. O God, have mercy on the Emigrants and AnUAr!”53 Whilst both mosques in this account are important for the development of Islam, the second is especially so, for in Muslim tradition it is known as the Prophet’s Mosque;54 it is commonly considered the model for all subsequent mosques;55 and in the details of the SCra’s account, as Jeremy Johns has shown, its foundation is “a calque upon the foundation of the Temple of Jerusalem.”56 In these three ways, this mosque is more than just a second, or supplementary mosque, but an originary foundation, marking 64

ZEF/FEZ

the establishment of Islam’s temporal and spiritual authority. The SCra confirms this interpretation in a passage that follows the mosque’s foundation, the signing of the so-called Constitution of Medina, and the institution of fraternity between the Emigrants and AnUAr: When the Prophet, peace be upon him, had settled himself in Medina; when the Emigrants had gathered about him; and [when] the matter of the AnUAr had been resolved, the rule of Islam was established (istaSkama amr al-IslAm). Ritual prayer was instituted; alms-giving and fasting, prescribed. Punishments were instituted; halal and haram, determined. Islam took up residence amongst them.57 Although neither mosque-foundation account in the SCra shows the Prophet personally marking out the sites, demarcating their limits, in helping to build the second mosque he performs a related action. A field of power is in the process of construction; one completed with the signing of the so-called Constitution of Medina. The Constitution of Medina Consisting of approximately fifty clauses, the Constitution of Medina, as it is misleadingly called in Western scholarship, is a treaty or collection of treaties between different groups in Yathrib at the time of the Prophet’s arrival there. It is a practical, political affair, worded in conformity with seventh century local tribal customs (ma“rEf ),58 and according to the SCra, written by the Prophet himself.59 Preserved in two recensions, the earlier and fuller one belonging to the SCra, it is almost universally accepted as authentic in both Muslim and Western scholarship.60 But dating it, deciding upon its composition, defining its key terms, and understanding how and to which groups in Yathrib it refers, all remain debated issues.61 The following analysis does not attempt to address these issues, but deals with what is unambiguously stated in the SCra’s recension and to what may reasonably be inferred from it. In the endnotes, the citations refer first to Serjeant’s bilingual edition of the SCra’s recension,62 then to Montgomery Watt’s more commonly available translation.63 According to its wording and location in the SCra, the Constitution of Medina is a unitary document, composed before the institution of fraternity between Emigrants and AnUAr and after the foundation of the Prophet’s house-cum-mosque.64 In conjunction with information from other sources, this dates it to approximately the fifth or eighth month of 622,65 making it part of the Prophet’s foundational activity in Yathrib.66 As will be seen, in defining Yathrib as an inviolable enclave and helping to establish the concept of an exclusively Muslim umma, the Constitution of Medina is the equal or greater of the other foundational events that year. 65

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

In the Qur’an, use of the term umma to refer solely to the Muslims is limited to three chronologically late occasions (2:128, 2:143, and 3:104). In the Constitution of Medina, the term umma occurs twice,67 and although no complete agreement exists regarding its exact meaning there, both R.B. Serjeant and Frederick Denny consider it a closed concept: something never shared, but exclusive to a theocratic confederation or religious group; a usage consonant with its late Qur’anic occurrences.68 Both scholars also find in it a territorial quality, especially Serjeant.69 In the clause that renders Yathrib inviolable, SarAm,70 Serjeant sees the culmination of a process that began with the naming of the different Muslim groups in Yathrib as an umma, the Constitution’s first paragraph and clause.71 According to Serjeant, this umma was a theocratic confederation of tribes presided over by the Prophet as arbiter.72 When the latter was sufficiently consolidated in Yathrib, his prophetic credentials and “honourable, arms-bearing” lineage recognized, he designated the oasis SarAm; a designation that for Serjeant represents “[an] Arabian solution [ . . . ] for centralizing the power and control over tribes which will not yield their own sovereignty and independent management of their own affairs.”73 Forming an inviolable core around which an indefinite number of tribes could be gathered,74 SarAm Yathrib became the nucleus of the Prophet’s “theocratic state”;75 a development that according to Serjeant took a number of years, but which the SCra’s recension presents as completed by the time the document was drafted. If Serjeant’s thesis is correct, as represented by the SCra, with the Constitution of Medina the Prophet completed a foundation process that began with his and the Quba’ mosques.76 Inaugural of Islam as a spiritual and temporal power, this process was itself inaugurated by the monk Bascra, with his scriptural authentication of the Prophet’s divinely commanded authority. From these two inaugurations emerged Islamic Medina and the Muslim religious polity, or umma; in these two inaugurations lie the origins of the topoi common to the foundation legends. In the figure of Bascra lie the elements of the monk and his scriptural prophecy; in the figure of the Prophet and Bascra’s discovery of the Seal of Prophecy lies the founder’s elevated then glorified status; in the foundation process begun at Quba’ and finished with the separation of Yathrib from the surrounding territory as SarAm lies the demarcation of a field of power, with even a corresponding name change to boot: Yathrib to Medina.77 And finally, in the hijra that preceded this foundation process lies the reversal of a prior state; for although the hijra was not discussed in terms of reversal, but separation, implicit to its Islamic meaning is relinquishment of an iniquitous situation and attachment to a praiseworthy one.78 In this intentional severance-andturn movement lies the reversal. For the Prophet, it formed the bedrock of the events that followed his arrival in Yathrib. In conclusion, lying at the heart of a number of Islamic city foundation legends is a Prophetic foundation paradigm. In ritually re-enacting this 66

ZEF/FEZ

mythic paradigm, these early and medieval legends testified to one aspect of the alleged miracle of Islam: the repeated establishment of inviolable enclaves of guidance and truth. For an age and culture partly suspicious of urban life,79 they thereby simultaneously identified the founders, their medinas, and by extension their inhabitants as cast of Prophetic mold: virtuous, like the first generations of that originary medina, Medina. In turn, lying at the heart of the foundation paradigm itself is a process of separation and reversal, the book’s interpretation of what is effected by a wall. This find is significant, for it emphasizes the extent of “wall thought” in medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture. Of greater significance is what it reveals of premodern Fez’s own, ideologically construed nature. Likening the medina to Medina, the Marinid historiography deploys the paradigm to present Fez as an inviolable enclave, or Saram: a space politically, religiously, and communally elevated from the region around it, over which it seeks dominion. In drawing this parallel, the historiography ideologically verifies Fez to be a space of separation and reversal, for the logic of Saram is also that of the city’s basic architectural unit, the dAr, or walled enclosure: in the absence of walls, or limits, there could be no inside, separate and inviolable from outside, and nothing to reverse the worlds that inside and outside represent.

67

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

CONCLUSION

In a series of reflections upon space, the architect Bernard Tschumi asks: “If space is neither an external object nor an internal experience (made of impressions, sensations and feelings), are space and ourselves inseparable? Are objective social space and subjective inner space then inextricably bound together?”1 It would be an improbable book that attempted to answer these questions in its closing pages; they are cited to complicate the commonly held belief that space lies outside of us and our subjectivity and is quantifiable.2 Discussing representations of cities in One Thousand and One Nights, Richard Van Leeuwen expresses well this lack of a clear divide between subjective and objective space: Space is not only part of the material world, it is also part of various imaginary worlds. Perceptions of space in general, and of certain places more specifically, are not neutral and objective, but shaped by subjective experiences and psychological attitudes. Places can even be linked to very specific experiences and attitudes to such an extent that they acquire values which seem to be part of their inherent nature. These values, in turn, become part of representations of reality, of hierarchic divisions of the spatial environment and of ideological discourses. In the course of time these representations have developed into elaborate systems which are integrated into all dimensions of culture, not only to distinguish the domains of the sacred and the profane, but also to define and perpetuate social structures and social behavior, and to visualize relations to other cultures.3 In its quest to investigate the spatial nature of the labyrinthine ArabMuslim medina circa 1400–1800, specifically Fez circa 1300–1600, this book has maximized upon the apparent seamlessness of subjective and objective, representational and worldly space described by Van Leeuwen. Referring to representations of architectural space from disparate Arab-Muslim sources, the book first identified the meaning of the external and party wall structuring 68

CONCLUSION

the city’s labyrinth, and then used that meaning to access the city’s fundamental architectural space. The conclusions reached were that shame defined the wall; separation and reversal, the spatial effects of shame, defined the space; and The Book of Walls, the force of law, helped assure the longevity of both. Similar to Wittgenstein’s requirement of a religion to “move you and turn you in a new direction [and keep you] turned around,”4 it would seem that the architectural space of a premodern medina like Fez held the occupant or visitor mindful of an inner life, of which shame was the threshold and concealer, coherency the reward, and segregation the precondition. Conclusions such as these are but the start of an overdue requirement to unravel the different aspects, operations, and properties of space in the Muslim world. As Bernard Tschumi asks once more: “Is space thus one of the structures that expresses our ‘being’ in the world? [ . . . ] [Is] it a political instrument in the hands of state, a mould as well as a reflection of society?”5 The answer for urban Arab-Muslim culture is surely yes, but the details remain outstanding, including the historical development of the space from its coalescence in Mecca and Medina at the time of the Prophet, to its frequently cynical reifications today. Inasmuch as space is barely separable from place, Heidegger, for example, asserting that “spaces receive their being from locations,”6 this book has revealed as much about the place of premodern Fez as its space. The following summary of the different stages of the investigation is from this perspective of place. In Chapter One it was shown that walls were physically definitive and historically determinant of premodern Fez; in Chapter Two, that within medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, walls played significant social and religious roles, comprising the extralegal dimensions of what the investigation would call “wall thought”; and in Chapter Three, that aspects of some of these and other roles were reproduced by way of The Book of Walls, the legal embodiment of “wall thought” and proscriptive aesthetic of public and semi-private urban space. In Chapter Four it was demonstrated that this aesthetic was negotiated by custom or “urf; and in Chapter Five, argued that in the context of custom, walls were significant of a preservative notion of shame and thus sites of separation and reversal, the spatial effects of shame. With this meaning of a wall, the conclusion followed that the place of premodern Fez, a city defined and determined by its walls, was physically and sociologically one of separation and reversal. In the final chapter, supposing that an account of Fez’s first walls was worthy of analysis for what it might reveal of the city’s own, ideologically construed view of itself, the book examined the foundation legend of Fez. It was argued that this legend was a ritual re-enactment of a mythic foundation paradigm recorded in the Prophet’s biography, concerning the creation of Medina as the archetypal Islamic political state. It was shown how the legend equated Idrcs II and his medina with the Prophet and his Medina, thereby likening Fez and its inhabitants to the sacred Islamic city and its 69

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

virtuous first generations. It was concluded that, ideological considerations apart, the nature accorded to Fez in the legend was consonant with the architectural observations made of Fez in Chapter One and the cultural and sociological observations made of walls in Chapters Two and Five. Equating Fez with Medina, the legend effectively characterized the city as a Saram: a space religiously, politically, and communally distinct from the region surrounding it. Dependent on limits to define and then maintain reversed the purportedly inviolable interior and alien exterior, this type of separationlogic found its ideologically neutral equivalent in the walled enclosure, or dAr, the basic unit of Fez, whose building block was the jidAr or SA”iV, the stone and brick limit, or wall. The place of premodern Fez was, therefore, not only physically and sociologically one of separation and reversal, but ideologically, too. In sum, the investigation has shown that premodern Fez was a city physically, sociologically, historically, and ideologically defined and determined by its walls. Referring to Fez as a dAr, a walled enclosure, usefully encapsulates this complex nature, for the reference supports not only the city’s ideological identity as an inviolable enclave and its physical identity as a contiguous cluster of walled enclosures, but also its identity as a medina sociologically determined by the functions of these enclosures. Included in these functions are the protective caul of shame that the enclosures’ external walls cast upon the neighborhoods’ private and semi-private spaces; the separation of cultural valuables that the walls facilitated, for example the storage of precious goods within the qayUariyya and the partial confinement of muSUana women within domestic houses; and the reversals of symbolic, legal, and “natural” orders across the enclosures’ thresholds. Examples of this latter function include this world and the next reversed at the mosque’s qibla wall; the domains of public and private fully reversed at domestic house doors; muSUana women’s alleged decline beyond these doors; and taxes levied on goods entering the perimeter walls. To consider premodern Fez as a walled enclosure, is not, however, to consider it closed; at least, not entirely so. It was, rather, entr”ouvert, ajar: simultaneously open and closed. Visually, for example, it consisted of a liminal realm of perforated surfaces in multiple planes; not the plunging voids of Euclidean space characteristic of modern cities.7 Shuttering and weaving the visual field, framing and reframing space, layering it into bays and arcades, the piers and arches of the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque’s interior still today provide an illustration of this phenomenon (Plate 19). The city’s neighborhoods provide a second illustration: a passage taken through them reveals to the gaze an intercalation of openings in an otherwise closed, almost telescopic mesh of walls (Plates 2–18). A third, related illustration explains the effect of such an ambiguous visual realm. To a complete outsider, the medina was closed in its entirety except for the major thoroughfares, principally pal‘a Kabira that connected Bab Bou 70

CONCLUSION

Jeloud to the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque and qayUariyya. Not belonging to the life of the side streets, alleys, and houses, to this visitor the medina must have seemed forbidding and obscure.8 Although physically within the city, he, or less likely she yet remained without all but the most public of spaces; a double position that would likely have been disorienting. To one more acquainted with Fez, however, and perhaps a part of its community, the doors of the houses that otherwise blended into the walls to form a blind whole were in principle traversable; the side streets were frequently known, and thus appeared to open off the main thoroughfares, as opposed to more menacingly withdrawing. But even for this more familiar visitor or inhabitant, a play between open and closed operated to seemingly deliberate effect. For although they might have traversed increasing degrees of interiority from the city gate to the main thoroughfare, to the side street, to the deadend alley, to at last entering the house, they yet remained within and without. Opening onto the heavens, the courtyard’s well of sky returned them to the entr”ouvert. As in an ever-receding desert, arrival was deferred.

71

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

Appendix A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF CASES AND CASE TITLES FROM THE BOOK OF WALLS

Case titles A) Ibn al-Im!m (d. 991 or 997), Kit1b al-Qa¡19 wa nafy al-¡arar 0an al-afniya wa al-£uruq wa al-judur wa al-mab1n2 wa al-sa61t wa al-shajar wa al-j1mi0: The judgement on the house or the well belonging to two men that collapses and one of them refuses to rebuild it; The judgement on the house whose lower story belongs to one man and upper story to another, and the basement collapses; The judgement on overhead architectural projections (rufEf ) which stick out into the public thoroughfares, and the building of roofs over them; The judgement on the building of house stairs; The judgement on the lavatories of houses, and cleaning them; The judgement on the opening of doors and windows in houses and on the man who heightens his building, depriving his neighbor of air and sun; The judgement on the opening of doors and shops on thoroughfares and non-thoroughfares; The judgement on the construction of mosques and their minarets, and the prevention of harm of that which is overseen from them; The judgement on new ovens, ironsmiths’ shops, tanneries, and baths, and the prevention of harm by them; The judgement on walls and their partition, and the utilization of them; The case of the wall; The judgement on the perilous leaning wall and its collapse; The judgement on the man who wants to plaster his wall using his neighbor’s house to do so; 72

APPENDIX

The judgement on the man who pulls down his house, leaving the rubble on a public side street; The judgement on the man who has a path between the properties of a group of people and wants to divert it to another locality on his land; The judgement on he who illegally removes a plant from a man’s garden and plants it in his own garden; The judgement on the tree of a house that allows for the overlooking of neighbors when harvested; On the erection of pigeon and sparrow coops, the making use of bees and geese, and the safeguarding of what livestock and voracious dogs destroy.1 B) Ibn Sahl (d. 1094), from the chapter “al-Mas!jid wa al-d+r” of al-A6k1m al-kubr1: [On] opening a door in a neighborhood mosque; [On] attaching buildings to the walls of Friday mosques and neighborhood mosques; [The case of ] a contested wall visited and examined by the qadi and legal scholars; [On] he who installs a staircase in his house using his neighbor’s wall by inserting wooden beams into it, and [on he who installs] a kitchen, the smoke of which irritates his neighbor; [On] he who claims that [such-and-such] construction encroaches upon his wall; On he who expels the [drainage] water from his wall over the wall of his neighbor; Questions regarding architectural projections; [On] he who buys a house which has had added to it a door or similar, and he wants to dispute it [and thus close it]; [On] the construction of an oven near a house; On an old tree that overlooks a house; On pigeon coops and the harm caused to them by bees.2 C) Al-Marj@ al-Thaqaf @ (d. circa 1200), Kit1b al-32£1n: If two men contest a party wall; On the wall between two neighbors and neither one has roofing, and one of them permits the other to place a roof over the wall. Then he appears to him and says: “Remove your roof!”; If two [men who share a wall] have support beams ( judhE“) [inserted in it], and one of them produces legal proof that the wall belongs to him, the other man’s beams are removed; 73

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

If a man buys a house, under which is a cellar and drainage well from an adjacent house; On the wall between the two houses of two men, neither man having used it for load-bearing purposes, and one of them wants to bear upon it one or two wooden beams; If a man buys a wall and no mention is made of its land, the sale occurs on the wall (binA”) without the land.3 Then it is said to the purchaser: “Remove your wall!”; If a man buys half a wall; If a man establishes a wall [next] to another, and does no more than that, the wall belongs to the place by its land; If a woman divorces her husband over a wall [using the wall as ransom], and no mention is made of its land, the sale occurs on the wall (binA”) without the land; If the bottom of a wall belongs to one man and the top of it to another; On the house between two men that collapses; If there is a door in the wall belonging to one person, that leads to the house of another person, and the first person claims that the right of passage belongs to him, but the other denies it; On the collapsed wall: if one of two owners wants to rebuild it but the other refuses, can the latter be forced to rebuild it?4 D) Ibn al-R!m@ (d. after 1333), Kit1b al-I0l1n bi-a6k1m al-buny1n: The dispute (kalAm) regarding the wall between two houses of two men; The dispute regarding the wall owned by one man that provides a screen against another man, and either it collapses or the owner wants to raze it completely. Can he be forced to repair or rebuild it?; The dispute regarding the wall that is shared between two men, both of whom acknowledge this [situation], and one of them wants to make use of it without the consent of his neighbor; On dividing a wall, on drawing lots with regard to a wall, and on preemption rights with walls; The dispute regarding the person who permits his neighbor to insert wooden beams into his wall; The dispute regarding the harm of smoke and the ruling about it; The dispute regarding the harm of odor and the ruling about it; The dispute regarding the harm of cloth makers and mills; The dispute regarding the person who builds a stable to fasten animals; The dispute regarding the harm of overlooking from windows and doors; The dispute regarding the person who builds a window and from it sees the courtyard of his neighbor’s house; 74

APPENDIX

The dispute regarding the person who builds a minaret and thereby exposes [to view] the interiors of the neighbors’ houses; The dispute regarding the person who wants to open a door on a thoroughfare; The dispute regarding the leasing of open spaces about houses; The dispute regarding the person who wants to expel water from his house; The dispute regarding the person who wants to build a room such that water will be sent from his roof over his neighbor’s property; The dispute regarding the open canal and the effect upon the buildings in a covered alley; The dispute regarding the sticking out of overhead rooms (“asAkir) and architectural projections onto the street; The dispute regarding the garden allotment between two men and one of them requests to build on it; The dispute regarding the man who has a path between the properties of a group of people and he wants to divert it to another locality; The dispute regarding the person who builds on his wife’s land; The dispute regarding fishing in lakes and rivers and ponds: can the natives of these places prevent the populace from doing this?; The dispute regarding the right of pre-emption regarding walls: does the owner of upper stage of the house have this right?; The dispute regarding the pigeon of one neighbor that mates with another neighbor’s pigeon: can one eat the chicks?5 E) Al-Wanshar@s@ (d. 1509), from the chapter “Naw!zil min al-™arar wa al-buny!n” of al-Mi0y1r al-mu0rib wa al-j1mi0 al-mughrib 0an fat1w1 ahl Ifr2qiya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib: The ruling [regarding] the construction of a screen between two neighboring terraces; The ruling [regarding] a person who owns a wall [that forms a side of ] another person’s basement, and this wall collapses; The ruling [regarding] a palm tree leaning against the wall (sEr); [The ruling on] a wall that is opposite the door of a neighbor’s house; The ruling [concerning] the opening of windows on terraces; The ruling [concerning] the opening of a shop door opposite a house door; How far does a person who wants to operate a mill in his house have to be from his neighbor’s wall?; A question regarding a person who wants to put a door into a blind wall; A question regarding a person wanting to inspect his wall from his neighbor’s house; 75

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

[On] opening a new house door on a closed alley; A question regarding a street between two proprietors and one of them wants to build across his boundary; A question regarding a fallen wall between two gardens and one of the two proprietors is unable to rebuild it.6

Cases 1) Ibn al-Im!m, Kit1b al-Qa¡19 wa nafy al-¡arar: The judgement on the construction of mosques and their minarets, and the prevention of harm of what is built or overseen from them: Al-‘Utbc said the following case was attributed to Sasnen. A minaret was built for a mosque, and when the muezzin ascended it he could see inside the neighboring houses. The people of these houses wanted to prevent the muezzin from ascending it, even though some of the houses were a distance from the mosque, and between them and the mosque was a wide public space ( finA”) and a wide side street. Sasnen taught that the muezzin should be prevented from ascending it, because this is harmful and God’s Prophet, peace and God’s blessing be upon him, forbade harm. Ibn Sasnen said: [Ibn] mabcb asked Sasnen about a person who built a mosque on the upper part of some shops. He made a terrace for it, such that all who came onto the terrace saw what was within the house located at the side. The owner of this house came to Sasnen with the matter, and Sasnen said: The builder of the mosque is compelled to screen the roof of the mosque and prevent people from praying in the mosque until his neighbor is shielded. Al-‘Utbc said Ashhab and Ibn Nafi‘ related the following: Malik was asked about a tribe that had a mosque they prayed in and a man wanted to build [another] mosque close to it. Was this permissible? Malik taught: There is no good in harm, in particular with regard to mosques, but were the mosque to be built for benefit and probity, then no matter. Were it to be built for [deliberate] harm (RirAr), then there would be no good in it. God says in the Qur’an [9:107]: “And there are those who put up a mosque [seeking] harm.” There is no benefit in harm in anything, and God’s word is unending to the very last of the mosques.7 2) Ibn Sahl, “al-Mas!jid wa al-d+r”: Questions regarding overhead architectural projections: I wrote to our learned masters in Cordoba in Sha‘ban 456 [July-August 1064] asking them about two neighboring houses belonging to two men.

76

APPENDIX

Between the houses was a wall belonging to one of the two men, and belonging to him, too, was an overhead architectural projection upon this wall, whose supports (aklab) stuck out to the neighbor’s house. The owner of the projection wanted to build a brick wall or similar at the supports’ extremities and [then] heighten [both walls by using them to make] a chamber or room. His neighbor prevented him, saying: “The air[space required for this chamber or room] is mine, because it is in front of my house [and you may not build in it]. You can have your projection sticking out to my house, but nothing more.” How can the owner of the overhead projection remove [this projection], heighten [both walls], and return the projection upon [the original wall] to how it was before? Can he do this? Ibn ‘Attab8 replied: “The owner of the projection may not build as he wishes and should be prevented from doing so. However, he does own the air[space] of his property and so he may heighten the [original] wall and restore the projection upon it to how it was before.” Ibn al-Qavvan9 wrote: “The owner of the projection may build what he likes at the supports’ extremities and cannot be prevented from doing so, nor from heightening [both walls]. [He can do so] without harm [to his neighbor, other than the harm of ] air and light [deprivation] and the like, for that is not harm.”10 Ibn Malik11 wrote: “The owner of the projection should be prevented from doing what he proposes, unless his opponent permits him. [A similar case] occurred in Toledo between me and Mesa b. al-Saqqav [n.d.], qadi of Guadalajara, and to my mind Ibn al-Qavvan’s response was the most dubious. God alone knows the correct solution.” In Ibn Sasnen’s book, there is a question [put to] Ibn mabcb regarding an enclosed projection without a cane [roof ] (qaUab), sticking out to the neighbor [opposite]. The [owner of this projection] wants to put a cane [roof ] on it, but the neighbor prevents him. Sasnen taught: “He cannot prevent him; enclosures (SuWEr) were meant for this.”12 He also taught: “He who has an overhead projection extending towards his neighbor’s house, and this neighbor builds [a] wall opposite the projection and wants to heighten it above the projection – he may not. [He may not] build above the projection, because the owner of the projection owns the air[space].” The learned master said: “To my mind, this [teaching] supports what Ibn al-Qavvan proposed.” In a response of mabcb,13 Sasnen taught: “Whoever wishes to plaster their wall from their neighbor’s house is prohibited [from doing so].” [Regarding this teaching, mabcb] said: “He cannot be prevented from entering his [neighbor’s] house and decorating his wall. Likewise, if the wind tore the cloak off a man’s shoulders, blowing it into another man’s house, this man would not prohibit the first from entering and taking it, or he would take it out to him [himself ].”14

77

SPACE AND MUSLIM URBAN LIFE

3) Al-Marj@ al-Thaqaf@, Kit1b al-32£1n: The case of the bottom of a wall belonging to one man and the top to another. The case comprises two parts: Part One: If the bottom of the wall belongs to one man and the top to another, by consensus the owner of the bottom may not tear it down. Neither may he open in it a door or window, nor insert a support beam, without the consent of the owner of the top. This is according to the teaching of Abe mancfa, may God be pleased with him. Abe Yesuf and Musammad [al-Shaybanc], may God grant them mercy, taught otherwise: [The owner of the bottom] may do any of these things if he does not harm the top. The matter is well accepted in the books. He can sell the bottom; give it as a gift; and give it as charity. If the dispute remains unresolved, or if the owner of the top wants to establish a construction there, insert a support beam, or plan a water closet with it as [the location for] a window, according to Abe mancfa this is not allowed. According to [Abe Yesuf and Musammad al-Shaybanc], this is allowed. Qadi al-Damaghanc15 said: Abe Bakr al-Khawarazamc16 used to issue fatwas in these two situations following Abe Yesuf and al-Shaybanc’s teaching. [ . . . ] Part Two: In it are two matters that come under the teaching of Abe Yesuf and Musammad [al-Shaybanc], may God grant them mercy. The first matter: if the roof is upon a shared walled and the owner wants to build an oven (tannEr) or bench upon it, sometimes Qadi Abe ‘Abd Allah al-oaymirc17 used to issue fatwas allowing this, and at other times disallowing it. If it was a fireplace (kAnEn), removed and transplanted [from elsewhere, that the owner wanted to put there], he allowed it because it was like an everyday necessity of life. The second matter: if the wall is shared and one of the two parties wants to make a hut that is screened by it, Abe Bakr al-Khawarazamc used to issue fatwas allowing this, because no harm is involved. The other party is obliged to accept [the situation]. All of this is a deduction based upon [Abe Yesuf and Musammad al-Shaybanc’s] teaching. Something of the matter crosses into the chapter “On the wall between two men that is razed, neither man having used it for load-bearing purposes.”18 4) Ibn al-R!m@, Kit1b al-I0l1n bi-a6k1m al-buny1n: The dispute regarding the wall between two houses of two men: [Ibn al-Ramc] said the wall that is between the two houses of two men is divided into three categories. The first: the wall that is between the two houses of two men and each one claims it for himself. The second: the wall

78

APPENDIX

that belongs to [one of the men] and either it collapses or the owner wants to raze it. Does he have to restore it? The third: the wall that is between the houses of two men. Can one of them use it without the permission of the other, or is it divided between them? [ . . . ] The master mason Musammad [Ibn al-Ramc] said regarding the second permutation (UEra) of the first [category]: This is a wall between two men, both of whom claim it, neither having an identifying bond (“aqd ) within it.19 [He] said: If two men both claim a wall between them and neither has an identifying bond within it, the case is decided by way of the appurtenances (marAf Cq) of the wall. With the exception of the identifying bond, these appurtenances are five: the niche (kuwwa) [in the wall]; the door in [the wall]; the bearing of wooden beams; constructions on top of the wall; and the front (wajh) of the wall [ . . . . ] If both men claim [the wall], there is no doubt that these appurtenances will be found either to belong to one of the two claimants, either in full or in part, or to belong to both of them together. If the appurtenances are the property of one of the two, or some of them are, and the other claimant has nothing, the wall belongs to the one with these appurtenances. Such is what ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-makam taught via Ibn al-Qasim. Sasnen taught this in his son’s book, and Ibn Sha‘ban taught it [too]. Al-Shafi‘c taught that it belonged to both of them, half-andhalf. Abe mancfa taught that if the [found] appurtenances were the bearing of wooden beams or the door, then the wall was judged to belong to he who owned the door or the wooden beams; but if they were other than this, then no, except in the case of the niche. Undoubtedly, this teaching differs from the others [presented here]. Muvarrif and Ibn al-Majishen taught that the wall is not owned by virtue of its bearing wooden beams. Regarding this [latter] teaching: if the wall is between two men and one of them has the wooden beams, but the other has nothing, nor an identifying bond, in the book of Ibn ‘Abd al-makam, Ibn al-Qasim taught that the wall belongs to the owner of the wooden beams. [But] in the book of Ibn mabcb, Muvarrif and Ibn al-Majishen taught that it belongs to them both, half-andhalf. The difference between these two opinions is that the wooden beam is recognized as belonging to the owner and that it [signifies] possession. Thus, Ibn al-Qasim taught that the wall belongs to him who has the wooden beams; but Muvarrif and Ibn al-Majishen did not see this as a definitive proof, because the beams may have been inserted via gift, via illegal means (sariqa), as well as via authorization in accordance with the teaching of the Prophet, peace and God’s blessing upon him: “None of you should prevent your neighbor from inserting wooden beams in his wall.”20 In the law school of Muvarrif and Ibn al-Majishen, the words of the Prophet, upon him be peace, “none should prevent” are understood as authorization.21

79

GLOSSARY

GLOSSARY

‘Alawids Almohads Almoravids “amal “awra bAb dAr Rarar fatwa fonduk Hadith SA”iV (pl. SCVAn) Saram SarAm SayA” hijra Idrisids isti”dhAn jidAr kitAb madrasa Marinids mihrab mellah muSUana qayUariyya qibla rithA” Sa‘dids Sharia

Dynasty that has ruled Morocco since 1659 Dynasty that ruled from Morocco between 1120–1269 Dynasty that ruled from Morocco between 1069–1146 Local court practice Nakedness and vulnerability Gate or door Walled enclosure; house Harm Non-binding legal judgement issued a mufti Merchants’ warehouse or inn Written record of the Prophet’s actions and sayings External or party wall Inviolable sanctuary Forbidden; inviolable Shame Prophet’s emigration from Mecca to Medina Dynasty that ruled in Morocco between 789–949 Threshold propriety, or how to enter a private home External or party wall Book or chapter College for higher studies Dynasty that ruled from Morocco between 1269–1465 Niche in the wall of a mosque that faces Mecca Jewish enclave (of a Moroccan medina) A woman of unblemished reputation Lockable, gated market of precious goods, located at the heart of a medina Direction (of Mecca) Lamentation Dynasty that ruled Morocco between 1554–1659 God’s divine will and the source of Islamic law 80

GLOSSARY

shurafA” sCra Sunna Sunni sEr taSashshama taqlCd ulema “urf Wavvasids zAwiya

Descendants and members of the Prophet’s family Biography (of the Prophet) Record of how the Prophet lived his life One of the two main branches of Islam Wall, commonly a city’s perimeter wall, or ramparts To have shame Legal mechanism for ensuring doctrinal uniformity Religious scholars and jurists A society’s customs, or conventions Dynasty that ruled Morocco between 1472–1554 Sufi sanctuary

81

NOTES

PRELIMS 1 In this context it is relevant to note the medieval central Asian and Indian legend of a running wall, the “rider” of which outclasses a rival mounted on a wild lion or tiger and gripping a serpent. As Martin van Bruinessen explains the Sufi versions of this legend, the wall symbolizes in part the sedentary virtues of Islamic law and order. Idem, “Haji Bektash, Sultan Sahak, Shah Mina Sahib and Various Avatars of a Running Wall,” Turcica 21–3 (1991): 68–9. INTRODUCTION 1 “Li-al-amakin f c al-quleb al-lavcfa ta’thcran [ . . . . ] Fa-ka-ma tatafaralu al-manazil al-resaniyya ka-dhalika tatafaralu al-manazil al-jusmaniyya.” Musyc al-Dcn b. ‘Arabc, al-FutESAt al-Makkiyya, ed. ‘Uthman Yasya, 10 vols (Cairo: al-Hay’a al-Miuriyya al-‘fmma li-al-Kitab, 1972–92), 2: 120. 2 Jean-Claude Garcin, “Le Caire et l’évolution urbaine des pays musulmans à l’époque médiévale,” Annales Islamologiques 25 (1991): 301; idem, “Le moment islamique (VIIe–XVIIIe siècles),” in Mégapoles méditerranéennes: Géographie urbaine rétrospective. Actes du colloque organisé par l’École française de Rome et la Maison méditerranéenne des sciences de l’homme (Rome, 8–11 mai 1996), ed. Claude Nicolet, Robert Ilbert, and Jean-Charles Depaule (Paris/Rome: Maisonneuve et Larose/École française de Rome, 2000), 97–9; Sylvie Denoix, “Unique modèle ou type divers? La structure des villes du monde arabo-musulman à l’époque médiévale,” in Mégapoles méditerranéennes, 923; André Raymond, “La structure spatiale de la ville,” in Sciences sociales et phénomènes urbains dans le monde arabe: Actes du colloque de l’Association de Liaison entre les Centres de Recherches et Documentations sur le Monde Arabe (ALMA), Casablanca, 30 novembre–2 décembre 1994, ed. Mohammed Naciri and André Raymond (Casablanca: Fondation du Roi Abdul-Aziz Al-Saoud pour les Études Islamiques et les Sciences Humaines, 1997), reprinted in André Raymond, Arab Cities in the Ottoman Period: Cairo, Syria and the Maghreb (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2002), 35 (75), including the important caveat on p. 42 (82) regarding Morocco, in which an earlier commencement date is conjectured. 3 Dale F. Eickelman, “The Comparative Studies of ‘Islamic’ City,” in Urbanism in Islam: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Urbanism in Islam (ICUIT II), November 27–29, 1990, ed. Tadeshi Yukuwa (Tokyo: Research Project “Urbanism in Islam” and the Middle East Culture Center in Japan, 1994), 313–14. Even such an incisive and forthright critic of the Islamic city

82

N O T E S (pp. 2–3)

4

5 6 7

8 9 10 11

12 13 14 15

category as Janet Abu-Lughod concedes this. Idem, “The Islamic City – Historic Myth, Islamic Essence and Contemporary Relevance,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 19 (1987): 161. See also André Raymond, another uncompromising critic, “Islamic City, Arab City: Orientalist Myths and Recent Views,” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 21 (1994): 17. Hugh Kennedy’s point that this labyrinthine form neither originates with Islam, nor is evident in the plans of settlements founded during the first centuries of Islam, for example ninth-century Samarra, should not be forgotten in any discussion of the later, so-called traditional Islamic city. As he says: “The picture which emerges [ . . . ] suggests that urban change in the Middle East took place over a number of centuries and that the development from the polis of antiquity to the [traditional] Islamic madina was a long drawn out process of evolution.” Hugh Kennedy, “From Polis to Madina: Urban Change in Late Antique and Early Islamic Syria,” Past and Present 106 (1985): 17. See also Eugen Wirth, “Villes islamiques, villes arabes, villes orientales? Une problématique face au changement,” in La ville arabe dans l’Islam: Histoire et mutations, ed. Abdelwahab Bouhdiba and Dominique Chevalier (Tunis: Imprimerie Al-Asria, 1982), 194–5. Cf. Hichem Djaït, Al-KEfa: Naissance de la ville islamique (Paris: Editions G.-P. Maisonneuve et Larose, 1986), 140, 151. For a plausible account of the gradual formation of an Arab-Muslim city labyrinth, see Quentin Wilbaux, La médina de Marrakech: Formation des espaces urbains d’une ancienne capitale du Maroc (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2001), 81–92. Ali Djerbi, “Sémiologie de la médina,” unpublished paper delivered at The American Institute for Maghrib Studies (AIMS) conference The Living Madina: The Walled Arab City in Literature, Architecture, and History, 29th May–4th June, 1996, Tangiers, Morocco, p. 10. Cited with kind permission of the author. Roger Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat: Étude économique et sociale d’une ville de l’Occident musulman (Casablanca: Société Marocaine de Librairie et d’Édition, 1949; reprint, Rabat: Éditions La Porte, 1987), 108–15. Heghnar Zeitlian Watenpaugh, The Image of an Ottoman City: Imperial Architecture and Urban Experience in Aleppo in the 16th and 17th Centuries (Leiden: Brill, 2004). See, for example, ibid., 40–1, 70, 83, 90, 104, 121, 147. John Gulick, “Images of an Arab City,” Ekistics 17, no. 101 (1964): 277. Similar findings also hold true for a methodologically related study of contemporary Sefrou, Morocco. Hildred Geertz, “The View from Within,” in Architecture as Symbol and Self-Identity: Proceedings of Seminar Four in the series Architectural Transformations of the Islamic World. Held in Fez, Morocco, October 9–12, 1979, ed. Jonathan G. Katz (Philadelphia: The Aga Khan Award for Architecture, 1980), 63–8. Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (Oxford: Blackwell, 1991), passim. Edmund Burke III, “Fez, The Setting Sun of Islam: A Study of the Politics of Colonial Ethnography,” The Maghreb Review 2 (July–Aug. 1977): 1–2; AbuLughod, “The Islamic City,” 155–60. See Chapter One. On literary celebrations only of its structure, see, inter alia, Edmondo De Amicis, Morocco: Its People and Places, trans. C. Rollin-Tilton (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, The Knickerbocker Press, 1888), 201–3; Paul Bowles, The Spider’s House (London: Random House, 1955), passim; Anaïs Nin, The Diary of Anaïs Nin 1934–1939, (New York: The Swallow Press/Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1967),

83

N O T E S (pp. 3–17)

16 17

18 19

71–81; and idem, “The Labyrinthine City of Fez,” in idem, In Favor of the Sensitive Man and Other Essays (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1966), 119–30. For a more academic description, see Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 108. For a critical reading of some of these and other descriptions of the medina, see Mohamed Alaoui Belrhiti, Fez: Lieu d’écriture (Casablanca: Afrique Orient, 1988), 29–50. Paul Bowles, “Fez” (1984). Online. Available HTTP: (accessed 11 July 2006). With thanks to www.paulbowles.org for permission to cite this work and Chloe Mulderig for bringing it to my attention. Some excellent studies of the city exist, of course, but these do not have space as their subject. In addition to Le Tourneau’s work, see especially Anton Escher and Eugen Wirth, Die Medina von Fes: Geographische Beiträge zu Persistenz und Dynamik, Verfall und Erneuerung einer traditionellen islamischen Stadt in handlungstheoretischer Sicht (Erlangen: Fränkische Geographische Gesellschaft, 1992). Other titles are cited throughout the present book. Joseph Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964), 1. Lefebvre, The Production of Space.

Chapter One PREMODERN FEZ 1 Idrcs b. ‘Abd Allah b. masan b. al-masan b. ‘Alc b. Abc palib. 2 See Mohamed Ameur, Fès ou l’obsession du foncier (Tours: Centre Études et de Recherche URBAMA, 1993), 18–19. 3 References to Marinid Fez as a golden age are numerous, and include Roger Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 61; idem, Fez in the Age of the Marinides, trans. Besse Alberta Clement (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1961), xi, 150; Henri Terrasse, “Fas (Monuments),” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1954–2002), 822–3; and Mohamed Mezzine, ed., Fès médiévale: Entre légende et histoire, un carrefour de l’Orient à l’apogée d’un rêve (Paris: Les Éditions Autrement, 1992), passim. 4 On the cult of Idrcs II, see, inter alia, Musammad b. Ja‘far al-Kattanc, al-AzhAr al-“aVira al-anfAs bi-dhikr ba“R maSAsin quVb al-Maghrib wa tAj madCnat FAs (Fez: n.a., 1889), 159–79; Edouard Michaux-Bellaire, “La légende idrissite et le chérifisme au Maroc,” Revue du Monde Musulman 35 (1917–18): 63 et seq.; Daniel Eustache, Corpus des dirhams idrCsites et contemporains: Collection de la Banque du Maroc et autres collections mondiales, publiques et privées (Rabat: Banque du Maroc, 1970–1), 30; and Maya Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide: Ibn KhaldEn et ses contemporains (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1982), 138–47. Persuasively contesting these and other accounts is Herman L. Beck, L’image d’IdrCs II, ses descendants de FAs et la politique sharCfienne des sultans marCnides (656–869/ 1258–1465) (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1989), esp. 233–51. On officially sanctioned sharifianism, see Mohamed Kably, Société, pouvoir et religion au Maroc à la fin du “Moyen-Age” (XIVe–XVe siècle) (Paris: Éditions Maisonneuve et Larose, 1986), 291–302; Abdelhad Sebti, “Au Maroc: Sharifisme citadin, charisme et historiographie,” Annales: économies – sociétés – civilisations no. 2 (mars-avril 1986): 436–7; and Beck, L’image d’IdrCs II, 130–97, 234. On the origination of madrasa-based education, see M.A. Péretié, “Les medrasas de Fès (d’après les notes de G. Salmon),” Archives marocaines 18 (1912): 257–372; Maya Shatzmiller, “Les premiers mérinides et le milieu religieux de Fès: L’introduction des médersas,” Studia Islamica 43 (1986): 109–18; and Fernando R. Mediano,

84

N O T E S (pp. 17–19)

5 6

7 8

9 10

11

12

13 14 15

16

17

Familias de Fez (ss. XV–XVII) (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1995), 33–43. Evariste Lévi-Provençal, “Wavvasids,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam: A Dictionary of the Geography, Ethnography and Biography of the Muhammadan Peoples (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1913–38), 1134–5. Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 73; Terrasse, “Fas (Monuments),” 822; Michel Terrasse, “L’Architecture hispano-maghrébine et la naissance d’un nouvel art marocain à l’âge des Mérinides,” 2 vols (Thèse de doctorat d’état, Université de Paris IV, 1979), 2: 647–56; Jacques Revault, Lucien Golvin, and Ali Amahan, Palais et demeures de Fès. Vol. 1: Époques mérinide et saadienne (XIV e–XVII e siècles) (Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1985), 79. Lefebvre, The Production of Space 220–6; Mark Wigley, The Architecture of Deconstruction: Derrida’s Haunt (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1993), 1–33, 59–95. Cf. Mercedes García-Arenal and Eduardo Manzano Moreno, “Idrcssisme et villes idrcssides,” Studia Islamica 82, no. 2 (1995): 9–10; and Ahmed Siraj, “Vie et mort d’une cité islamique: À propos du phénomène urbain dans le Maroc idrisside septentrional,” in Genèse de la ville islamique en Al-Andalus et au Maghreb occidental, ed. Patrice Cressier and Mercedes García-Arenal (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez/Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1998), 285. An authoritative account of the political and religious ideologies that first gave Fez this pre-eminence is provided in Beck, L’Image d’IdrCs II, 53–129. See also Kably, Société, pouvoir et religion au Maroc, 271–302. Michael Brett, “The Islamisation of Morocco: From the Arabs to the Almoravids,” Morocco: Journal of the Society for Moroccan Studies 2 (1992), reprinted in idem, Ibn Khaldun and the Medieval Maghrib (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1999), I: 60–1. See also Bernard Rosenberger, “Les premières villes islamiques du Maroc: Géographie et fonctions,” in Genèse de la ville islamique, 233, 235–41. Régis Blachère, “Fès chez les geógraphes arabes du Moyen-Age,” Hespéris 18 (1934): 41–3. Mitigating this impression is Ibn mawqal’s (d. after 977) description of the paved marketplaces, sluiced and cooled daily with diverted river water during the summer months. Abe Qasim b. mawqal al-Naucbc, KitAb OErat al-arR, ed. M.J. de Goeje (Beirut: Dar oadir, n.d.; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1939), 90. “Wa f c-him thiqal wa ghaba’ qalcl al-‘ulama’ kathcr al-ghawgha’.” Musammad b. Asmad al-Muqaddisc, ASsAn al-taqAsCm fC ma“rifat al-aqAlCm li-al-MuqaddisC al-ma“rEf bi-al-BashArC, ed. Musammad Makhzem (Beirut: Dar Isya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabc, 1987), 190. Al-Ya‘qebc, KitAb al-BuldAn, ed. M.J. de Goeje (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1892), 358. Today, the Jawhar river is mostly known as Oued Fez (al-WAdC FAs), and al-WAdC al-KabCr as Bou Kharareb (al-WAdC AbC KharArib). This is the ground-breaking chronology set forth by Evariste Lévi-Provençal in idem, “La fondation de Fès,” Annales de l’Institut d’Études Orientales de l’Université d’Alger IV (1938), reprinted in idem, La fondation de Fès (Paris: Larose, 1939), 16. Ibid., 11; Eustache, Corpus des dirhams idrCsites, 146–50. Eustache’s book is vital for correcting an element of Lévi-Provençal’s chronology that is based upon a misreading and misattribution of a coin. Eustache, Corpus des dirhams idrCsites, 26 n. 4; Lévi-Provençal, La foundation de Fès, 9. “[ . . . ] wa uarat madcnat an wasidat an.” ‘Alc al-Jazna’c, JanA zahrat al-As fC binA” madCnat FAs, 2nd ed., ed. ‘Abd al-Wahhab b. Manuer (Rabat: al-Mavba‘a

85

N O T E (p. 19)

18 19 20 21

22 23 24

25

26

27

28 29

30

al-Malikiyya, 1991), hereafter cited as Zahrat al-As only, 40. A French translation of this work is available as idem, Zahrat el-âs (La fleur du myrte): Traitant de la ville de Fès par Abou-l-Hasan “Ali El-Djaznâi, trans. Alfred Bel (Algiers: Jules Carbonel, 1923), hereafter cited as Zahrat el-âs (La fleur du myrte) only, 74. Upon uncited evidence, Lévi-Provençal states that after 817 “l’ancien nom de Madcnat Fas [ . . . ] servira désormais à désigner tout le site, y compris les deux villes qui s’y dressent.” Idem, La foundation de Fès, 17. Blachère, “Fès chez les géographes arabes,” 42 et seq. Zahrat al-As, 42, trans., 75. Blachère, “Fès chez les géographes arabes,” 44; Jacques Berque, “Ville et université: Aperçu sur l’histoire de l’École de Fès,” Revue Historique de Droit Français et Étranger 27 (1949): 66; Vincent J. Cornell, Realm of the Saint: Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1998), 23– 8. Abe ‘Ubayd al-Bakrc, al-Maghrib fC dhikr bilAd IfrCqiya wa al-Maghrib wa huwa juz” min KitAb al-MasAlik wa al-mamAlik (Cairo: Dar al-Kitab al-Islamc, n.d.), 115–16. Ibid., 115–17. This is supported by Henri Pérès’ study of literary production in Fez under the Almoravids and Almohads, in which he notes the existence of the first local poet, a greater tolerance to creativity, and some official patronage only under the latter dynasty. Idem, “La poésie à Fès sous les Almoravides et les Almohades,” Hespéris 18 (1934): 13–17, 32–3. “Wa bi-ha f c kull makan min-ha ‘uyen nabi‘a wa miyah jariya wa ‘alay-ha qibab mabniyya wa dawamcs masniyya wa nuqesh wa rureb min al-zcna.” Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad al-Idrcsc, Description de l’Afrique et de l’Espagne. Texte arabe, publié pour la première fois d’aprés les manuscrits de Paris et d’Oxford avec une traduction, des notes et un glossaire par Reinhart P.A. Dozy et Michaël J. de Goeje (Amsterdam: Oriental Press, 1969), 76 (Arabic pagination; my translation). Ibn ‘Abd Allah al-mamawc Yaqet, Mu“jam al-buldAn, ed. Farcd ‘Abd al-‘Azcz al-Jundc, 7 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1990), 4: 261. The translation of SARira as “mighty dwelling” follows the definition in LisAn al-“arab, namely, “al-sayy al-‘awcm.” Musammad b. Mukarrim b. Manwer, LisAn al-“arab, 15 vols (Beirut: Dar oadir/Dar Bayret, 1955–6), 4: 197. On the appellation of Fez as “sarira” at this time, see Halima Ferhat, “Fès,” in Grandes villes méditerranéennes du monde musulman médiéval, ed. Jean-Claude Garcin (Rome: École française du Rome, 2000), 216. Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa and of the Notable Things Therein Contained. Written by al-Hassan ibn Mohammed al-Wezaz al-Fasi, a Moor, baptized as Giovanni Leone, but better known as Leo Africanus, trans. John Pory, ed. Robert Brown, 3 vols (London: Printed for the Hakluyt Society, 1896), 2: 474; Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 72. Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide, 136–8. That the historians succeeded is indicated by works such as Titus Burkhardt, Fez: City of Islam, trans. William Stoddart (Cambridge: The Islamic Texts Society, 1992), that reinforce the sacred image of Fez to the exclusion of almost all else. Eight is the figure given by Shatzmiller in her study of Marinid historiography, but in the preface to his edition of Zahrat al-As, Ibn Manuer lists additional lost histories not counted by Shatzmiller. Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide, 136–7; Zahrat al-As, b.

86

N O T E S (pp. 19–21)

31 ‘Alc b. Abc Zar‘ al-Fasc, al-AnCs al-muVrib bi-rawR al-qirVAs fC akhbAr mulEk alMaghrib wa tarCkh madCnat FAs, ed. ‘Abd al-Wahhab b. Manuer, 2nd ed. (Rabat: al-Mavba‘a al-Malakiyya, 1999), hereafter cited as RawR al-qirVAs only, 140. A French translation is available as Ali ibn-abi Zar’, Rawd Al-KirtAs: Histoire des Souverains du Maghreb et annales de la ville de Fès, trans. Auguste Beaumier (Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1860; reprint, Rabat: Editions La Porte, 1999 ), 99. 32 As cited above: al-Jazna’c, JanA zahrat al-As fC binA” madCnat FAs. 33 On the canonic stature of RawR al-qirVas, see Beck, L’image d’IdrCs, 54, 128–9, 136. 34 Zahrat el-âs (La fleur du myrte), 7–10; Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide, 27–9; and Beck, L’image d’IdrCs, 134–6. 35 Zahrat al-As, d. For other theories, see Zahrat el-âs (La fleur du myrte), 5–7; Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide, 30–5; and Beck, L’image d’IdrCs, 132–4. 36 For the most recent debates over the paternity of the work, see Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide, 20–5; Mezzine, “La mémoire effritée,” 45–7; and Beck, L’image d’IdrCs, 56–8. 37 Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide, 138–47. 38 Ibid., 31–5, 147. 39 For Beck’s rebuttal of Shatzmiller’s argument, see idem, L’image d’IdrCs, 87–9, 132–4. 40 Ibid., 53–154; García-Arenal and Manzano Moreno, “Idrcssisme et villes idrcssides,” 12–13; and Giovanna Calasso, “Genealogie e miti di fondazione: Note sulle origini di Fas secondo le fonti merinidi,” in La Bisaccia dello Sheikh: Omaggio ad Alessandro Bausani, Islamista nel sessantesimo compleanno. Venezia, 29 maggio, 1981 (Rome/Venice, 1981), 24. 41 Beck, L’image d’IdrCs, 126–8. 42 Ibid., 125. 43 Ibid., 127–9, 228–40. 44 See n. 15 above. 45 Roger Le Tourneau, Fez in the Age of the Marinides, 20, 72. Cf. Zahrat al-As, 45, and Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 443. Whilst suburbs beyond the walls were few, they included the leprosarium, lime kilns, bleacheries, and potteries (see fig. 1). Zahrat al-As, 24–5, 44; Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 471–3; Le Tourneau, Fez in the Age of the Marinides, 33–4. 46 Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 154–5, 159; M. Ameur, A. Baltagi, J. Barbier et al., Sauvegarde de la ville de Fez, 2 vols (Paris: Programme Des Nations Unies Pour Le Développement; Fez: Ministère de L’Intérieur, 1992), 1: 6, 14, 16. It should be added that estimating population numbers for the medieval period is an inexact and often contentious activity, and so the figures quoted must serve as a broad indication only. 47 RawR al-qirVAs, 35, 56–7, trans., 33, 47–8; Zahrat al-As, 17, 26, trans., 38, 57. Cf. Lévi-Provençal, La foundation de Fès, 15, 17, 22. 48 The zAwiya (sanctuary) and shrine of Idrcs II, built on the Qarawiyycn bank in 1719, is the second monument of contemporary Fez, if not the first. For an indication of the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque as the city’s real monument, as its official site of memory, see Abdelhadi Tazi, La mosquée Al Qaraouyyine: La mosquée-université de Fès, histoire architecturale et intellectuelle, 2 ed., 3 vols (Rabat: Dar Nachr El Maarifa, 2000). 49 Robert Hillenbrand, Islamic Architecture: Form, Function and Meaning (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1994; paperback reprint, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000), 247.

87

N O T E S (pp. 21–22)

50 Cf. the discussion of “monument” and “monumentality” in Wu Hung, Monumentality in Early Chinese Art and Architecture (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 1–15. 51 Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 220. 52 Ibid., 224. 53 Ibid., 220–1. 54 For the mosques, see Boris Maslow, Les mosquées de Fès et du nord du Maroc. Avec une introduction de Henri Terrasse et des notes sur six inscriptions de Fès et de Taza par E. Lévi-Provençal (Paris: Publications de l’Institut des Hautes Études Marocaines, 1937), 65–85, 99–121. For the baths, see Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 426–7; Henri Terrasse, “Trois bains mérinides du Maroc,” in Mélanges offerts à William Marçais par l’Institut d’études islamiques de l’Université de Paris (Paris: Éditions G.-P. Maisonneuve et Cie, 1950), 311– 20; Revault, Golvin, and Amahan, Palais et demeures de Fès, 198–9; Escher and Wirth, Die Medina von Fes, 132–8. 55 For additional functions, such as neighborhood defense, see Abdelaziz Touri, “L’oratoire de quartier,” in Fès médiévale, 100–8. 56 For example, Edmond Secret, “Les hammams de Fès,” Bulletin de l’Institut d’Hygiène du Maroc, nouv. série, II (1942): 61–77, reprinted in idem, Les sept printemps de Fès (Paris: Toursi Impression APS, 1990), 57–67; William Betsch and Carole Naggar, Le Bain; Cité du Sang (Périgueux: Pierre Fanlac, 1988); and Fatima Mernissi, The Harem Within: Tales of a Moroccan Childhood (London: Doubleday Books, 1994; reprinted London: Bantam Books, 1995), 243–54. 57 Abdelwahab Bouhdiba, Sexuality in Islam, trans. Alan Sheridan (London: Saqi Books, 1998), 169–72. 58 Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 428–30. One of the most remarkable of these fonduks would have been the fourteenth-century “Fonduk of the Tetwanis” (Funduq TeVVawniyyCn) that still stands in close vicinity to the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque. Georges Marçais, Manuel d’art musulman: L’architecture Tunisie, Algérie, Maroc, Espagne, Sicile, 2 vols (Paris: Éditions Auguste Picard, 1926–7), 2: 557; Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 72, 134. No longer standing, but also thought to have been remarkable, giving its name to one of the medina’s oldest neighborhoods, was the “Fonduk of the Jew” (Funduq al-YahEdC). Joseph Luccioni, Les fondations pieuses “habous” au Maroc depuis les origines jusqu”à 1956 (Rabat: Imprimerie Royale, n.d.), 128. 59 Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 437 (translation modified). 60 On the early renown of Sufism in Fez, see Musyc al-Dcn b. ‘Arabc, Sufis of Andalusia: The Res al-quds and al-Durrat al-fakhirah of Ibn “ArabC, trans. Ralph W.J. Austin (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1971; reprint, Sherborne: Beshara Publications, 1988), 29–32; Mohamed Faouzi Skali Lami, “Topographie spirituelle et sociale de la ville de Fès,” 4 vols (Thèse de Doctorat ès-Lettres, Université de Paris VII, 1990), 1: 68–101; and Cornell, Realm of the Saint, 6–31. On the importance of the institution to Fez’s later monumental space, see Norman Cigar, “Société et vie politique à Fes sous les premiers ‘Alawites (ca 1660/1830),” Hespéris Tamuda 18 (1978–9): 116–20; and Mohamed El Mansour, “The Sanctuary (Hurm) in Precolonial Morocco,” in In the Shadow of the Sultan: Culture, Power, and Politics in Morocco, ed. Rahma Bourqia and Susan Gilson Miller (Cambridge: Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies, 1999), 61–2. 61 The exception is the zAwiya of Idrcs II, allegedly founded in the fifteenth century, but as no contemporary sources refer to this foundation, the exception remains a possibility only. Cf. Beck, L’image d’IdrCs, 236. It would seem that for

88

N O T E S (pp. 22–23)

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

the period under review, neighborhood mosques and, especially, private houses functioned in lieu of intramural zAwiyas, the houses later developing into the monumental institution known today. Skali Lami, “Topographie spirituelle et sociale,” 1: 109; Naf csa al-Dhahabc, al-ZAwiya al-fAsiyya: al-TaVawwur wa aladwAr SattA nihAya al-“ahd al-“AlawC al-awwal (Casablanca: Mavba‘a al-Najah al-Jadcda, 2001), 119. Kably, Société, pouvoir et religion au Maroc, 289–90; Abc ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. ‘Abd al-Karcm al-Tamcmc al-Fasc, al-MustafAd fC manAqib al-“ubbAd bi-madCnat FAs wa mA yalChA min al-bilAd, ed. Mohamed Cherif, 2 vols (Tétouan: Publications de la Faculté des Lettres et Sciences Humaines, Université Abdelmalek Assa‘di, 2002), 1: 86, 152, 168–9. On the ramparts’ history, see below and Henri Bressolette and Jean Delarozière, “Fès-Jedid de sa foundation en 1276 au milieu du XXème siècle,” Hespéris Tamuda 20–1 (1982–3): 258–63. For an indication of the scale, ornamentation, and structure of many of the gates, see Henri Terrasse, “Le décor des portes anciennes du Maroc,” Hespéris 3, no. 2 (1923): 147–74. Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 445. Cf. ‘Abd al-Rasman b. Khalden, Muqaddima (Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Tijariyya al-Kubra, n.d.), 279; and Abe al-‘Abbas Asmad b. Yasya al-Wansharcsc, al-Mi“yAr al-mu“rib wa al-jAmi“ al-mughrib “an fatAwA ahl IfrCqiya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib, 13 vols (Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-al-Mamlaka alMaghribiyya, 1981–3), 9: 576. Depending on the law school (madhhab) in dominance within a medina, with regard to matters of prayer and ritual the perimeter walls are not necessarily coterminous with the limit of a medina’s jurisdiction. In the Hanafi law school, for example, there exists an early technical term, finA” al-miUr, to indicate the area beyond the medina and, where applicable, its suburbs, which counts as belonging to the medina, serving the interests of its inhabitants. The obligatory Friday prayer may, for instance, be held there. Baber Johansen, “The All-Embracing Town and its Mosques: Al-MiUr al-JAmi“,” Revue de l’Occident Musulman et de la Méditerranée 32 (1981): 139–61, reprinted in idem, Contingency in a Sacred Law: Legal and Ethical Norms in the Muslim Fiqh (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 89–97. RawR al-qirVAs, 356, trans., 224; Zahrat al-As, 43, trans., 80; Evariste LéviProvençal, “Notes de toponomastique hispano-maghribine: Les noms des portes, le Bab al-Shari“a et la Shari“a dans les villes de l’Occident musulman au Moyen Âge,” Annales de l’Institut d’Études Orientales de l’Université d’Alger 2 (1936): 210–34, reprinted in idem, Islam d’Occident: Études d’histoire médiévale (Paris: G.P. Maisonneuve, 1948), 56–7. Giovanna Calasso, “Les remparts et la loi, les talismans et les saints: La protection de la ville dans les sources musulmanes médiévales,” Bulletin D’Études Orientales 44, Special Issue: Sciences occultes et Islam (1992): 84; Doris BehrensAbouseif, “La conception de la ville dans la pensée arabe du Moyen Âge,” in Mégapoles méditerranéennes, 34. ‘Izz al-Dcn Tazc, Manzil al-yamAm (Salé: Print-Diffusion, 1995), 43. With thanks to Susan Peters for bringing this story to my attention. Peters translated Manzil al-yamAm in idem, “The Barzakh: Mohammed Azeddine At-Tazi’s Fez,” (M.A. thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1997). Ibn Farl Allah al-‘Umarc, MasAlik el abUAr fi mamAlik el amUAr. I: L’Afrique, moins l’Égypte, trans. M. Gaudefroy-Demombynes (Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1927), 155; Henri Gaillard, Une ville d’Islam: Fès. Esquisse historique et sociale (Paris: J. André, Éditeur, 1905), 38–9; Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 53.

89

N O T E S (pp. 23–25)

69 Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 443. 70 Mercedes García-Arenal, “The Revolution of Fas in 869/1465 and the Death of Sultan ‘Abd al-maqq al-Marcnc,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 41 (1978): esp. 44–5, 59; Susan Gilson Miller, Attilio Petruccioli, and Mauro Bertagnin, “Inscribing Minority Space in the Islamic City: The Jewish Quarter of Fez (1438–1912),” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 60 (2001): 313, 319, 323, 326 n. 37. 71 Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 484 (translation modified). 72 In contemporary Fez, there are still vestiges of the monumental significance of these neighborhood gates. For example, the inscribed and/or ornamented archways separating the neighborhoods ‘Aqbat Saba‘ from Sidi Muhammad Belhaj, and Sidi Muhammad Belhaj from Siaj; and the heavy wooden gate, now permanently open, dividing the neighborhoods of Siaj and Oued Rachacha. 73 Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 454–5; Cigar, “Société et vie politique à Fes,” 98–121; Jamel Akbar, “Gates as Signs of Autonomy in Muslim Towns,” Muqarnas: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture 10 (1993): 141–7; Mohamed El Mansour, “Urban Society in Fez: The Rumat during the Modern Period (17th–19th Centuries),” The Maghreb Review 22 (1997): 76–7. 74 Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 442; Alfred Bel, Inscriptions arabes de Fès (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1919), 126–39. Cf. William Betsch, “The Fountains of Fez,” Art and Archaeology Research Papers 12 (December 1977): 33–44. 75 Zahrat al-As, 52–3, trans., 94–6; Abdellatif el-Hajjami, “Au fils du temps,” in Fès médiévale, 124–33. 76 Luccioni, Les foundations pieuses, 96–7. By the time Leo Africanus was secretary there in the early sixteenth century, the hospital had become an asylum, and the adjoining mosque a place of poetry recitation for the annual celebration of the Prophet’s birthday. Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 425–6; Azzedine Kharchafi, “Sidi Frej et la fête du mouloud à Fès,” Découverte et montagne du Maroc 2 (1996): 15. 77 Le Tourneau, Fez in the Age of the Marinides, 22. 78 This translation follows Jean-Claude Garcin, “Quelques questions sur l’évolution de l’habitat médiéval dans les pays musulmans de Méditerranée,” in L’habitat traditionnel dans les pays musulmans autour de la Méditerranée. Rencontre d’Aixen-Provence (6–8 juin 1984). Vol. 2: L’histoire et le milieu (Cairo: L’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1990), 380. 79 Zahrat al-As, 44, trans., 81–2. A similar inventory is given in RawR al-qirVAs, 57–8, trans., 48–9. 80 “Wa lam yakun bi-dakhiliha riyar wa la bustan sashan Zayten b. ‘Aviya.” Zahrat al-As, 45, trans., 83; RawR al-qirVAs, 59 (with ghars instead of bustAn), trans., 49. 81 Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 154. 82 Moncef M’halla, “La médina, un art de bâtir,” Africa: Fouilles, monuments et collections archéologiques en Tunisie (Tunis) 12, Special Issue: Arts et Traditions Populaires (1998): 44, 66. 83 Shelomo Dov Goitein, A Mediterranean Society: The Jewish Communities of the Arab World as portrayed in the documents of the Cairo Geniza, 5 vols (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967–83), 4: 56, cited in Sylvie Denoix, “Note sur une des significations du terme ‘dAr’,” Annales Islamologiques 25 (1991): 285 n. 2. As Marçais indicates, the enclosure may be one of tents or buildings; not necessarily brick walls. William Marçais, “Dar,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 113.

90

N O T E S (pp. 25–26)

84 Guy T. Petherbridge, “The House and Society,” in Architecture of the Islamic World: Its History and Social Meaning, ed. George Michell (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1978), 199–201; Marçais, “Dar,” 113–15. 85 Although the Prophet’s house in Medina is widely considered to be the source of the structural genesis of the mosque, this does not mean that mosque architecture follows domestic architecture. In contemporary Fez, for example, whilst all but the smallest neighborhood mosques have courtyards, these courtyards are often relegated to one end of the building. In other words, although they are enclosed by the walls, the courtyards are not always the structures’ focal point, unlike those of domestic houses. Mosques in Fez, then, with a number of important exceptions, including the Almohad “Bou Jeloud,” the Marinid “Abu lmasan,” and the ‘Alawid “Bab Guissa,” fall somewhere between the two patterns of dAr. In all cases, they are walled structures, enclosing an orientated and liturgically pure space. Henri Terrasse, “La mosquée Almohade de Bou Jeloud à Fès,” Al-Andalus 29 (1964): 358; Maslow, Les Mosquées de Fès, 80–5, 92–8, 122–42; Michel Terrasse, “L’Architecture hispano-maghrébine,” 2: 350, 360; and Hillenbrand, Islamic Architecture, 39, 85–9, 475. 86 Ludovico Micara, “Lofty Chambers: The Interior Space in the Architecture of Islamic Countries,” in Understanding Islamic Architecture, ed. Attilio Petruccioli and Khalil K. Pirani (London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2002), 52. 87 M’halla, “La médina,” 44. 88 “Ism li-ma suwwiva bi-hi al-makan.” Al-Shaykh al-Marjc al-Thaqaf c, KitAb al-MCVAn: FSkAm al-Vuruq wa al-suVES wa al-abwAb wa masCl al-miyAh wa al-SCVAn f C al-fiqh al-islAmC, ed. Musammad Khayr Ramaran Yesuf (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr al-Mu‘auir, 1994), 109. In the legal discourse of The Book of Walls, the two terms are used interchangeably, without any obvious alteration in meaning, e.g. Ibn al-Ramc, “Kitab al-I‘lan bi-askam al-bunyan,” Majallat al-fiqh al-mAlikC al-turAth al-qaRA”i bi-al-Maghrib, nos. 2, 3, 4 (1982): 281–3. 89 “Qala Scbawayh wa huwa mimma istaghne fc-hi bi-bina’ akthar al-‘adad ‘an bina’ aqallahu fa-qale thalatha judur.” Ibn Manwer, LisAn al-“arab, 4: 121. On the concept of consensual contiguity in medina architecture and the “gift” of the party wall, see M’halla, “La médina,” 44–9. 90 Ibid., 54. Often, only one or two new walls are needed, as illustrated in Jamel Akbar, Crisis in the Built Environment: The Case of the Muslim City (Singapore: Concept Media Pte. Ltd., 1988), 81 fig. 4.5. 91 “Law takashshafat Fas ‘an scvaniha la wahara min-ha al-ser al-‘iyn wa lakin alser al-maquerat idha kharajat ‘an al-khiyam auabaha al-dhubel wa al-ibtidhal.” Cited in Musammad al-Muntauir bi-Allah b. Musammad al-Zamzamc alKattanc, FAs “AUimat al-idArisa wa rasA”il ukhrA, 2nd ed., (Casablanca: Mavba‘at al-Najas al-Jadcda, 2002), 39, with a typographical error amended in conformity with other printed versions of the proverb, e.g. ‘Abd al-Kabcr b. Hashim alKattanc, Zahrat al-As fC buyEtAt ahl FAs, 2 vols (Casablanca: Mavba‘at al-Najas al-Jadcda, 2002), 1: vi. 92 “Inna al-‘ilm yanba‘u min uuder ahliha ka-ma yanba‘u al-ma’ min scvaniha.” Cited in al-Kattanc, FAs “AUimat al-idArisa, 40. 93 Cf. Edward Westermarck, Wit and Wisdom in Morocco: A Study of Native Proverbs (London: George Routledge and Sons, Ltd., 1930), 1–2; Maurice Halbwachs, On Collective Memory, ed. and trans. Lewis A. Coser (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992), esp. 45, 173; and J.S. Madmulla, Proverbs and Sayings: Theory and practice, with examples from the Wahehe of the Southern Highlands of Tanzania (Dar es Salaam: Institute of Kiswahili Research, University of Dar es Salaam, 1995), 11.

91

N O T E S (pp. 26–29)

94 Algirdas Julien Greimas, “Les proverbes et les dictons,” in idem, Du sens: Essais sémiotiques (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1970), 309. 95 Regarding their historicity, the respected Moroccan historian ‘Abd al-Qadir alZamama has assured me of their ancient pedigree, but regarding an exact date, it was impossible to say. Idem, private communication, 19/05/03. Two other Moroccan historians concur with this view: Mohamed Mezzine and Aouini Lhaj Moussa, private communications, 22/05/03. 96 Greimas, “Les proverbes et les dictons,” 313. 97 On the notorious recalcitrance of Fassis regarding external authority, see, inter alia, Norman Cigar, “Une lettre inédite de Melay Isma‘cl aux gens de Fez,” Hespéris Tamuda 15 (1974): 106–11; idem, “Conflict and Community in an Urban Milieu: Fez under the ‘Alawis (ca. 1666–1830),” The Maghreb Review 3, no. 2 (Nov.–Dec. 1978): 3–13; García-Arenal, “The Revolution of Fas,” passim; Shatzmiller, “Les premiers mérinides et le milieu religieux de Fès,” 109–11; Mercedes García-Arenal, “Sainteté et pouvoir au Maroc: La résistance de Fès aux Sa‘diens,” Annales: économies – sociétés – civilisations no. 4 ( juillet-août 1990): esp. 1019, 1036–7; and El Mansour, “Urban Society in Fez,” esp. 81, 91–2. 98 It was not just native dynasties who sought to conquer Fez, but Christian empires, specifically, the Portuguese. Marcel Bataillon, “Le rêve de la conquête de Fès et le sentiment impérial portugais au XVIè siècle,” in Mélanges d’études luso-marocines dédiés à la mémoire de David Lopes et Pierre de Cenival (Lisbon: Instituto Para Alta Cultura, with L’Institut Des Hautes Études Marocaines de Rabat, 1945), 31–9. 99 Cf. Shatzmiller, L’historiographie mérinide, 136; Beck, L’image d’IdrCs, 124–9; García-Arenal and Manzano Moreno, “Idrcssisme et villes idrcssides,” 9; and Siraj, “Vie et mort d’une cité islamique,” 285. 100 For the Marinid and earlier periods alone, see, for example, the refusal of the medina’s inhabitants (al-nAs) to accept a particular alteration to the AlQarawiyycn mosque, ordered by one of the Marinid princes. See also the conflict between the sultan and the medina’s qadi and governor (wAlC ) regarding the restoration of a fonduk; and the conflict between the sultan and the ulema over the accuracy of the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque’s qibla. Zahrat al-As, 75, trans. 145; ibid., 79–80, trans. 157–8; ibid., 81–2, trans. 160–2. 101 Zahrat al-As, 40, trans., 73–4; cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 140, trans., 98–9. 102 Zahrat al-As, 40–1, trans., 74; cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 141, trans., 99. 103 Zahrat al-As, 42, trans., 75–8; cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 179, trans., 124. 104 Zahrat al-As, 43–5, trans., 81–3; cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 57–8, trans., 49. 105 “Inna-na la nastaju ila ser innama aswaruna asyafuna wa ‘adluna.” 106 Zahrat al-As, 42–3, trans., 78–9; cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 243, trans., 160–1. 107 Cf. Yasser Tabbaa, “Circles of Power: Palace, Citadel, and City in Ayyubid Aleppo,” Ars Orientalis 23 (1993): 181–200. 108 Berque, “Ville et université,” 71; Shatzmiller, “Les premiers mérinides,” 115–18; Mediano, Familias de Fez, 35–43. 109 Bressolette and Delarozière, “Fès-Jedid,” 269. 110 Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 419. Chapter Two SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS DIMENSIONS OF WALLS 1 See below. For present-day examples, see Tawfiq Abu-Gazzeh, “Privacy as the Basis of Architectural Planning in the Islamic Culture of Saudi Arabia: The Social and Psychological Aspects of Boundaries,” Architecture et Comportement/

92

N O T E S (pp. 29–31)

2

3 4

5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13

14

Architecture and Behaviour 11, nos. 3–4 Special Issue: Faith and the Built Environment: Architecture and Behaviour in Islamic Countries (1995): 269–87. On perimeter walls alone, see, for example, City Walls: The Urban Enceinte in Global Perspective, ed. James D. Tracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). On ritual walls with parallels to Islam and Islamic law, see Mitchell Schwarzer, “The Architecture of the Talmud,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 60, no. 4 (2001): 474–87. Cf. Michel de Certeau, The Practice of Everyday Life, trans. Steven Rendall (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 127. Although “blind” is the English adjective for a blank wall, muUmat is the Arabic: “silenced.” With regard to Fez medina, contrary to what is often supposed, the walls are almost invariably plastered and quite often lightly incised with herring-bone and other simple patterns. For a general repertory of decorative frames about windows and doors in Muslim culture, see Jean-Charles Depaule, À travers le mur (Paris: Éditions du Centre Georges-Pompidou CCI, 1985), 169–279. See also Irene A. Bierman’s treatment of inscriptions about thresholds, in idem, Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 31, 35, 73. The classic essay on the door as threshold is Georg Simmel “Bridge and Door,” trans. Mark Ritter, in Theory, Culture and Society 11 (1994): 5–10, reprinted in Rethinking Architecture: A Reader in Cultural Theory, ed. Neil Leach (London: Routledge, 1997), 66–9. More recently, Richard Lang has offered some valuable insights in his essay “The Dwelling Door: Towards a Phenomenology of Transition,” in Dwelling, Place and Environment: Towards a Phenomenology of Person and World, ed. idem and Robert Mugerauer (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1985), 201–13. Neil Leach usefully refers to the traversal function of the door as “transgression,” and in so doing he distinguishes the function of the door from that of the wall. Idem, “Introduction,” in Rethinking Architecture, xx. Qur’an 57:13–15. Hillenbrand, Islamic Architecture, 31. Dominique Clevenot, Une esthétique du voile: Essai sur l’art arabo-islamique (Paris: Éditions L’Harmattan, 1994), 55. A.J. Wensinck, “Sutra,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 902–3. Clevenot, Une esthétique du voile, 23–6. For further information on the sutra’s relation to the qibla wall, see A.J. Wensinck, “Qibla,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 83. Clevenot, Une esthétique du voile, 55. Cf. the paradisiacal vision beheld upon a wall, in Sadeq Hedayat, “The Blind Owl,” in The Blind Owl and Other Hedayat Stories, ed. Russell P. Christensen (Minneapolis: Sorayya Publishers, Inc., 1984), 41–3. With thanks to Chloe Mulderig for bringing this story to my attention. “Uriytu al-ana mundhu uallaytu la-kum al-ualat al-janna wa al-nar mumaththalatayn f c qubul hadha al-jidar fa-lam ara ka-al-yawm f c al-khayr wa alsharr fa-lam ara ka-al-yawm f c al-khayr wa al-sharr.” Abe ‘Abd Allah b. Isma‘cl al-Bukharc, OaSCS al-BukhArC, ed. ‘Abd al-‘Azcz b. ‘Abd Allah b. Baz, 5 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994), k. al-riqaq, bab 18, raqm 6468. Not cited by Clevenot. Zahrat al-As, 78, trans., 153; Henri Terrasse, La mosquée Al-Qaraouiyin à Fès. Avec une étude de Gaston Deverdun sur les inscriptions historique de la mosquée (Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1968), 21–2, 45–6; Tazi, La mosquée Al Qaraouiyyine, 74–5. Tazi suggests that originally the funeral prayers were not said in the mosque, but in the annex and street adjoining it. Terrasse, however, wonders what the three doors connecting the annex to the mosque via the qibla

93

N O T E (p. 31)

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

24

25 26 27

wall were there for, if not to be opened as and when the prayers were said in the mosque. Ibid., 74; Terrasse, La mosquée Al-Qaraouiyin, 22. Terrasse’s argument is supported by Zahrat al-As, which states that the first of the three doors in the qibla wall is where the imam stands for the funeral prayer. Zahrat al-As, 78; not included in translator’s recension. Marçais, Manuel d’art musulman, 1: 314, 2: 486. Maslow, Les Mosquées de Fès et du Nord du Maroc, 47–50. Hillenbrand, Islamic Architecture, 246, 524. Marçais, Manuel d’art musulman, 2: 486. Terrasse, La mosquée Al-Qaraouiyin, 21; Tazi, La mosquée Al Qaraouiyyine, 74. Cf. Emma David, “The Qibla Wall as Threshold for the Qarawiyyin Mosque and Medina of Fes,” (Architecture Tripos, University of Cambridge, 1999), 3– 16. My thanks to Ms. David for providing me with a copy of her thesis. Bressolette and Delarozière, “Fès-Jedid,” 264; Maslow, Les mosquées de Fès, 47; Marçais, Manuel d’art musulman, 2: 498–500. Doris Behrens-Abouseif, Islamic Architecture in Cairo: An Introduction, Paperback ed. (Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, 1989), 127. The earliest example of today’s almost ubiquitous niche mihrab (miSrAb mujawwaf ) dates to 707–9, and belongs to the rebuilt Prophet’s Mosque in Medina; prior to that, the mihrab was indicated by a “stripe of paint or by a block of stone embedded in the qibla wall.” G. Fehérvári, “Misrab,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 7–8. That the mihrab is commonly the most ornate aspect of a mosque is illustrated by an anecdote regarding the gold and jewel-encrusted mihrab of Fez’s Al-Qarawiyycn mosque during Almoravid rule. So dazzling and beautiful was this work that it allegedly distracted believers from completing their prayers. RawR al-qirVAs, 76, trans., 55–6. E.g. Estelle Whelan, “Origins of the MiSrAb Mujawwaf: A Reinterpretation,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 18 (1986): 215; Oleg Grabar, The Formation of Islamic Art, revised ed. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987), 115; and Alexandre Papadopoulo, “Introduction générale,” in Le miSrAb dans l’architecture et la religion musulmanes: Actes du colloque international tenu à Paris en mai 1980, publiés et pourvus d’une étude d’introduction générale, ed. idem (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1988), 11–12. On this signification for medieval Muslim historians, see Nuha N.N. Khoury, in idem, “Mihrab: From Text to Form,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 30 (1998): 18. Another interpretation finds the mosque mihrab reminiscent of early Arabic tombstones and burial site. In other words, more liminal locations. Fehérvári, “Misrab,” 7–8. Clevenot, Une esthétique du voile, 59–60. Examples of viewing the mihrab this way include Titus Burkhardt, Art of Islam: Language and Meaning, trans J. Peter Hobson (London: World of Islam Festival Publishing Co. Ltd, 1976), 91; and Walter B. Denny, “Reflections of Paradise in Islamic Art,” in Images of Paradise in Islamic Art, ed. Sheila S. Blair and Jonathan M. Bloom (Hanover, New Hampshire: Hood Museum of Art, Dartmouth College, 1991), 36–8. On the problems inherent to this interpretative trend, see Alexandre Papadopoulo, “Le problème du misrab,” in Le miSrAb dans l’architecture et la religion musulmanes, 46; Nuha N.N. Khoury, “The Mihrab Image: Commemorative Themes in Medieval Islamic Architecture,” Muqarnas: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture 9 (1992): 11–12, 28 n. 105; and Finbarr B. Flood, “Light in Stone: The Commemoration of the Prophet in Umayyad Architecture,” in Bayt al-Maqdis: Jerusalem and Early Islam, ed. Jeremy Johns (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 329–39.

94

N O T E S (pp. 32–33)

28 The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, trans. Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall (New Delhi: UBS Publishers’ Distributors Ltd., 1994), 24:35 (translation modified). 29 Petherbridge, “The House and Society,” 193. 30 As mentioned in Chapter One, in Fez, for example, at the end of the nineteenth century there were estimated to be about 5,200 traditional houses, a number far in excess of what are ordinarily considered the city’s monuments, viz. eight madrasas, a few fonduks, and a handful of mosques and zAwiyas. Le Tourneau, Fès avant le protectorat, 154. 31 The following discussion is indebted to the pioneering study by Juan Eduardo Campo, The Other Sides of Paradise: Explorations into the Religious Meanings of Domestic Space in Islam (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1991). It develops Campo’s study inasmuch as it refines the focus on houses to the walls of houses. 32 Campo, The Other Sides of Paradise, 8, 29, 194 n. 2; Musammad Fu’ad ‘Abd al-Baqc, al-Mu“jam al-mufahris li-al-alfAz al-Qur”An al-karCm, 4th ed. (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994), 333–4 and 178–9. 33 “Al-bayt,” e.g. 2:128. 34 “Awwal al-bayt,” 3:96. 35 “Al-bayt al-saram,” 5:97. 36 “Al-bayt al-‘atcq,” 22:29. 37 J. Lecerf, “Bayt,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 1139; Campo, The Other Sides of Paradise, 9. 38 Ignaz Goldziher, C. Van Arendonk, and A.S. Tritton, “Ahl al-Bayt,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 257–8. 39 “Al-dar,” e.g. 6:135. 40 “Dar al-muqama,” 35:35. 41 “Dar al-akhira,” e.g. 2:94. 42 “Se’ al-dar,” e.g. 13:25. 43 “Dar al-bawar,” 14:28. 44 Armand Abel, “Dar al-Islam” and idem, “Dar al-marb,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 126–7. Other “houses” include the “House of Covenant” (dAr al-“ahd ), the “House of Reconciliation” (dAr al-UulS), the “House of Pillaged Land” (dAr al-maslEba), the “House of Heresy” (dAr al-bid“a), and the “House of Unbelief ” (dAr al-kufr). 45 Campo, The Other Sides of Paradise, 65. 46 Musammad b. Issaq, SCrat RasEl AllAh, as redacted by Musammad ‘Abd al-Malik b. Hisham, in idem, al-SCra al-nabawiyya, ed. Sa‘cd Musammad al-Lassam, 2nd ed., 4 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1998), 2: 116. A translation is available as The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of IsSAq’s Scrat Rasel Allah, trans. A. Guillaume (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955), 235. 47 The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, 24:27–8 (translation modified). See also the rules for entering the Prophet’s household (buyEt al-NabC ), 33:51. 48 The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, 24:61 (translation modified). 49 Abe Zakariya Yasya b. Sharaf al-Nawawc al-Dimashqc, al-AdhkAr al-nawawiyya (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994), 22–3, hadith no. 54. Also collected by Abe Dawud, al-Tirmidhc, Ibn Majah, Ibn manbal, and al-Nisa’c. A.J. Wensinck et al., Concordance et indices de la tradition musulmane: Les six livres, le Musnad d’al-DArimC, le Muwatta” de MAlik, le Musnad de Ahmad ibn Hanbal, 8 vols (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1933–88), 2: 341. 50 Al-Nawawc, al-AdhkAr, 24, hadith no. 58. Also collected by Abe Dawud. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 7: 408. Cf. Qur’an 17:80 “And say: My Lord! Lead me in with a correct entry and lead me out with a correct exit.”

95

N O T E S (pp. 34–35)

51 Al-Nawawc, al-AdhkAr, 260, hadith no. 742. Also collected by Abe Dawud and Ibn manbal. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 7: 408. 52 Al-Bukharc, OaSCS al-BukhArC, k. al-isti’dhan, bab 17, raqm 6250. Also collected by Abe Dawud and Ibn manbal. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 2: 140. 53 See, for example, Sulaymam b. al-Ash‘ath Abc Dawud, Sunan AbC DAwud, ed. Musammad ‘Abd al-‘Azcz al-Khalidc, 3 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al‘Ilmiyya, 1996), k. al-adab, bab 137 et seq.; also al-Nawawc, al-AdhkAr, bab al-isti’dhan, pp. 259–62. For the legal development of this term and the related term isti”nAs, see Eli Alshech, “ ‘Do Not Enter Houses Other Than Your Own’: The Evolution of the Notion of a Private Domestic Sphere in Early Sunnc Islamic Thought,” Islamic Law and Society 11, no. 3 (2004): 296–7, 306–9. 54 “Innama ju‘ila al-isti’dhan min ajl al-bauar.” Al-Bukharc, OaSCS al-BukhArC, k. al-isti’dhan, bab 11, raqm 6241. Also collected by Muslim, al-Nisa’c, Ibn manbal, and al-Tirmidhc. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 185. Related hadiths include: “Whoever peers into a house without permission, [the occupants may] gouge and blind in the eye”; “If the eye (al-baUar) goes in, [then] no permission [to go in]”; “Isti”dhAn: because of the gaze.” Abe Dawud, Sunan AbC DAwud, k. aladab, bab f c al-isti’dhan 136, arqam 5172, 5173 and 5174. 55 “Al-dar saram fa-man dakhala ‘alay-ka saramaka fa-uqtulhu.” Asmad b. manbal, al-Musnad li-al-ImAm ASmad b. Manbal, ed. oidqc Musammad Jamcl al-‘Avvar, 2nd ed., 10 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994), 8: 317, hadith no. 22836. 56 For a discussion of the house as a protected domain in early and medieval Sunni Islamic law, see Alshech, “ ‘Do Not Enter Houses’,” passim. 57 Cf. Barbara Freyer Stowasser, “The Status of Women in Early Islam,” in Muslim Women, ed. Freda Hussain (London: Croom Helm, 1984), 35. On the seclusion of women before the advent of Islam, see Leila Ahmed, Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992), 11–37, 55; also Eleanor Abdella Doumato, “Seclusion,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, ed. John L. Esposito (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 19. The Qur’anic verses announcing the seclusion of the Prophet’s wives are 33:32–4. 58 E.g. “The Prophet said: ‘Do not prohibit mosques to your womenfolk, but their homes (buyEt) are better for them.’ ” Abe Dawud, Sunan AbC DAwud, k. al-ualat, bab ma ja’ f c khurej al-nisa’ ila al-masjid 52, raqm 567. See also ibid., k. alualat, bab tashdcd f c dhalika 53, raqm 570. 59 E.g. “God’s Prophet said: ‘If your womenfolk ask your permission to go the mosques, allow them.’ ” Abe al-musayn Muslim b. al-majjaj, OaSCS Muslim bisharS al-NawAwC, ed. ‘Iuuam al-oababvc et al., 11 vols (Cairo: Dar al-madcth, 1994), k. al-ualat, bab khurej al-nisa’ ila al-masajid 30, raqm 135. For early occasions of permission being refused or all but withheld, see Musammad b. Sa‘d, KitAb al-PabaqAt al-kabCr, ed. Eduard Sachau, 9 vols (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1904–40), 8: 195; and Nabia Abbott, Aishah: The Beloved of Mohammed (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942; reprinted, London: Saqi Books, 1998), 88. 60 Cf. Stowasser, “The Status of Women,” 34–6; and Ahmed, Women and Gender in Islam, 60–1. 61 Campo, The Other Sides of Paradise, 22. 62 Ibid., 99; Fadwa El Guindi, Veil: Modesty, Privacy and Resistance (Oxford: Berg, 1999), 85; A. De Biberstein Kazimirski, Dictionnaire Arabe-Français, 4 vols (Paris: Masionneuve et Cie, Éditeurs, 1860; reprint, Beirut: Librairie du Liban, n.d.), 1: 414. 63 A. Kevin Reinhart, “maram,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, 101; Ibn Manwer, LisAn al-“arab, 12: 121–5; Reinhart Pieter

96

N O T E S (pp. 35–36)

64

65

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

74 75

76

77 78

Anne Dozy, Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes, 2 vols (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1881; reprint, Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1981), 1: 278; Kazimirski, Dictionnaire Arabe-Français, 1: 414–15. A Dictionary of Moroccan Arabic: Moroccan-English, ed. Richard S. Harrell (Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1966), 91 (entry “mula”); and Mohamed Boughali, La représentation de l’espace chez le marocain illetré: Mythes et tradition orale (Paris: Éditions Anthropos, 1974), 136. The dictionary entry gives only the plural of “mulat dar,” namely, “mwalin dar,” possibly because when the dictionary was researched and first published, polygamous marriages were still quite common in Morocco. Pierre Bourdieu, “The Kabyle House or The World Reversed,” in idem, Algeria 1960, trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 151. Bourdieu’s study focuses upon the main threshold of the Kabyle house, namely, the threshold where the front door hangs, known locally as “the wall of darkness, or the wall of sleep, the maiden, or the tomb.” Ibid., 135. Bourdieu, “The Kabyle House,” 146, 148. See also ibid., 147 and 149; and idem, “The Sense of Honour,” in idem, Algeria 1960, 122 n. 25. Some Moroccan equivalents are cited in Boughali, La représentation de l’espace, 19–20. Edward Westermarck, Ritual and Belief in Morocco, 2 vols (London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1926), 1: 316. Ibid., 1: 317. Ibid., 1: 315. See also the discussion of the social practices involving the Syrian “ ‘atabe” (“ataba), a distinctively paved interior threshold located just before main rooms, in Depaule, À travers le mur, 69–70, 285. RawR al-qirVAs, 72, trans., 56; Zahrat al-As, 54, trans., 97. RawR al-qirVAs, 72, trans., 56; Zahrat al-As, 54–5, trans., 97–8. On the “anaza of the Al-Qarawiyycn, see Zahrat al-As, 73, trans., 141–2; Terrasse, La mosquée Al-Qaraouiyin, 65; and Tazi, La mosquée Al Qaraouyyine, 1: 73. RawR al-qirVAs, 74, trans., 58; Zahrat al-As, 65–6, trans., 121–2. Although the Prophet’s house in Medina is widely considered to be the source of the structural genesis of the mosque, doubts about this orthodoxy have recently been raised. In view of them, it is wiser to assert that the Prophet’s house-cum-mosque represents an ideological source of the mosque and possibly a structural one, too. See Jeremy Johns, “The ‘House of the Prophet’ and the Concept of the Mosque,” in Bayt al-Maqdis, 69–80, 103–12. Tazi, La mosquée Al Qaraouyyine, 1: 98–9. Regarding the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque’s mihrab-type threshold marked by the talismans, this, too, should be considered an external threshold between the worlds of action and prayer; not a qibla-type threshold symbolizing the reversal of this world and the next. The reason for this is that the talismans face away from the mosque, prohibiting the entrance into the mosque of rats, scorpions, and snakes respectively. RawR al-qirVAs, 72, trans., 56; Zahrat al-As, 54–5, trans., 97–8. This is still a widely held belief in present-day Morocco, pertaining not just to the Al-Qarawiyycn mosque, but to all hypostyle mosques. It finds early expression in Ibn ‘fshir’s (d. 1363) al-Murshid al-mu“ayyan “alA al-RarErC min “ulEm al-dCn, as commented on by another Fez-based scholar, Miyara (Musammad b. Asmad b. Musammad al-Fasc, d. 1662), in idem, MukhtaUar al-durr althamCn wa al-mawrid al-mu“ayyan (Casablanca: Dar al-Ma‘rifa, 2001), 171–2 (k. al-ualat, verse 167). Qur’an 18:77. Qur’an 18:82.

97

N O T E S (pp. 36–37)

79 On the theoretical ideal of the seclusion of women in early and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture, see Huda Lutfi, “Manners and Customs of Fourteenth-Century Cairene Women: Female Anarchy versus Male Shar‘i Order in Muslim Prescriptive Treatises,” in Women in Middle Eastern History: Shifting Boundaries in Sex and Gender, ed. Nikki R. Keddie and Beth Baron (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991), passim; Mounira Chapoutot-Remadi, “Femmes dans la ville Mamleke,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 38, no. 2 (1995): 145–62; and Cristina de la Puente, “Juridical Sources for the Study of Women: Limitations of the Female’s Capacity to Act According to Malikc Law,” in Writing the Feminine: Women in Arab Sources, ed. Manuela Marín and Randi Deguilhem (London: I.B. Tauris Publishers, 2002), esp. 98–106. On the practical impossibility of achieving this ideal, see Lutfi, “Manners and Customs of Fourteenth-Century Cairene Women,” passim; Chapoutot-Remadi, “Femmes dans la ville Mamleke,” passim; Victoria Aguilar and Manuela Marín, “Las mujeres en el espacio urbano de Al-Andalus,” in Casas y palacios de Al-Andalus, ed. Julio Navarro Palazón (Barcelona: Lunwerg Editores S.A., 1995), 39; and María Luisa Ávila, “Women in Andalusi Biographical Sources,” in Writing the Feminine, 155–9. On the related issue of family wealth and social status as factors influencing the degree or absence of seclusion, see Judith E. Tucker, “The Arab Family in History: ‘Otherness’ and the Study of the Family,” in Arab Women: Old Boundaries, New Frontiers, ed. idem (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993), 199–205; Aguilar and Marín, “Las mujeres en el espacio urbano de Al-Andalus,” 39–40; and D. Fairchild Ruggles, “Vision and Power: An Introduction,” in Women, Patronage, and Self-Representation in Islamic Societies, ed. idem (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000), 8. 80 The inside/outside binarism of the wall with respect to the seclusion of women should not be translated into the related binarism of private/public space. As a number of studies have shown, this binarism does not hold true for traditional urban Arab-Muslim culture; rather, a third, intermediate space exists, namely, the semi-private, communal space of the neighborhood, wherein women may circulate relatively freely. See Suad Joseph, “Women and the Neighborhood Street in Borj Hammoud, Lebanon,” in Women in the Muslim World, ed. Lois Beck and Nikki Keddie (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978), 544–51; Nawal al-Messiri Nadim, “The Concept of the mara: A Historical and Sociological Study of Al-Sukkariyya,” Annales Islamologiques 15 (1979): 342; Abu-Lughod, “The Islamic City,” 168–9; André Raymond, “Espaces publics et espaces privés dans les villes arabes traditionnelles,” Maghreb-Machrek 123 (1989): 194–201; and Dina Rizk Khoury, “Slippers at the Entrance or Behind Closed Doors: Domestic and Public Spaces for Mosuli Women,” in Women in the Ottoman Empire: Middle Eastern Women in the Early Modern Era, ed. Madeline C. Zilfi (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 114–17. 81 The word used in the citation is shAri“, a main thoroughfare, as distinct from zaqAq or darb, a neighborhood passage or alley. In other words, what the qadi wished absolutely to prevent was women leaving their neighborhoods, not their houses. 82 Cited in al-Wansharcsc, al-Mi“yAr al-mu“rib, 2: 499; trans. Vincent Lagardère, Histoire et société en occident musulman au Moyen Âge: Analyse du Mi‘yar d’Al-WansharCsC (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez en collaboration avec le Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1995), 46. 83 Unless stated otherwise, in this book my use of the term SijAb refers to its literal, etymological meaning, namely, screen, partition, or curtain, and thence,

98

N O T E (p. 37)

84

85

86 87 88 89

90 91 92 93 94

“veil”; not to its institutional connotations, including women’s seclusion, selfeffacement and modest comportment. On this literal meaning and those connotations, see Gertrude H. Stern, Marriage in Early Islam (London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1939), 108–26; J. Chelhod, “mijab,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 359–61; Mostafa Hashem Sherif, “What is MijAb?,” The Muslim World 77, nos. 3–4 (1987), 151–63; Fadwa El Guindi, “mijab,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, 108–10; and Barbara Freyer Stowasser, “The MijAb: How a Curtain Became an Institution and a Cultural Symbol,” in Humanism, Culture, and Language in the Near East: Studies in Honor of Georg Krotkoff, ed. Asma Afsaruddin and A.H. Mathias Zahniser (Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1997), 87–104. On the veil as an extension of the house, see Hanna Papanek, “Purdah: Separate Worlds and Symbolic Shelter,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 15 (1973): 295; Sheila K. Webster, “MarCm and MijAb: Seclusive and Exclusive Aspects of Traditional Muslim Dwelling and Dress,” Women’s Studies International Forum 7, no. 4 (1984): 251–2; and Míkel de Epalza, “La mujer en el espacio urbano musulmán,” in La mujer en Al-Andalus: Reflejos históricos de su actividad y categorías sociales, ed. María J. Viguera (Madrid: Ediciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; Seville: Editoriales Andaluzas Unidas, 1989), 58. On the proxemics of veiling and how it is possible for a fully veiled woman to be recognized by her close companions and/or family, see Lila Abu-Lughod, Veiled Sentiments: Honor and Poetry in a Bedouin Society (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986), 159–65; and El Guindi, Veil, 97–115. “Zayn Fas f c ma’ha wa hawa’ha wa talscfat nisa’ha.” Cited in al-mussayn b. ‘Alc b. ‘Abd Allah, QiUAU wa amthAl min al-Maghrib, 2 vols (Casablanca: Mavba‘at al-Najas al-Jadcda, 1996–9), 2: 386, no. 1810. Both Ibn ‘Abd Allah and Dozy gloss the women’s mantle, or talSCfa as the “haik” (Sayk), the large white cotton or woollen blanket that covers all but the woman’s face. Ibid., 2: 386–7; Dozy, Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes, 2: 527. An interesting old photograph of Fez that shows women wrapped in this garment, standing next to the city walls whilst watching a royal procession, is reprinted in Secret, Les sept printemps de Fès, 124. In the photograph, the juxtaposition of the women and the walls suggests an inalienable unit. Leo Africanus, 2: 446–7 (translation modified). Ibid., 2: 414 (translation modified). Depaule, À travers le mur, 30–1. “Al-istitar bi-al-libas wa al-buyet.” Asmad b. ‘Abd al-malcm b. Taymiyya, MijAb al-mar”a wa libAsuhA f C al-UalAt, ed. Musammad al-Albani, 2nd ed. (Damascus: s.n., 1974), 32, cited in Shaun Marmon, Eunuchs and Sacred Boundaries in Islamic Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 8. 19:17. 38:32. 41:5 and 17:45. 7:46. E.g. Abe Ja‘far Musammad b. Jarcr al-pabarc, JAmi“ al-bayAn “an ta”wCl Ay alQu”rAn al-ma“rEf bi-TafsCr al-PabarC, ed. Masmed Shakir, 30 vols in 15 bindings (Beirut: Dar Isya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabc, 2001), 8: 222; ‘Imad al-Dcn Abc al-Fida’ Isma‘cl b. Kathcr, TafsCr al-Qur”An al-“aWCm wa yalChu KitAb FaRA”il al-Qur”An, 4 vols (Beirut: Dar Isya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabc, 1997), 2: 191; and Nauir al-Dcn Abc Sa‘cd ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Umar b. Musammad al-Shirazc al-Bayrawc, TafsCr al-BayRAwC al-musammA AnwAr al-tanzCl wa asrAr al-ta”wCl, 2 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1999), 1: 340.

99

N O T E S (pp. 37–40)

95 33:53. 96 42:51. 97 See, for example, Ibn Khalden, Muqaddima, 290–2; trans. Ibn Khalden, The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History, trans. Franz Rosenthal, 3 vols (New York: Pantheon Book, 1958), 2: 111–13. 98 Chelhod, “mijab,” 360. 99 Ibid., 361. 100 Al-musayn b. Manuer al-mallaj, cited in Louis Massignon, La passion d’alHosayn-Ibn-Mansour Al-Hallaj: Martyr mystique de l’Islam, exécuté à Bagdad le 26 mars 922, 2 vols (Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1922), 2: 700. 101 In the Qur’an alone, “God’s limits” are mentioned fourteen times, mostly in tandem with the injunction to preserve (aqAma, SAfaWa) and not transgress (ta“addA, i“tadA) them. ‘Abd al-Baqc, al-Mu“jam al-mufahris, 248. Chapter Three LEGAL DIMENSIONS OF WALLS: THE BOOK OF WALLS 1 Ibn Manwer, LisAn al-“arab, 14: 94. 2 For actual instances of all these and other disputes recorded in the Book of Walls, see the appendix to the present book. 3 The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary On Historical Principles, ed. Lesley Brown, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 2: 188. 4 Robert Brunschvig, “Urbanisme médiéval et droit musulman,” Revue des Études Islamiques 15 (1947): 127–55. For minorly variant titles of these Maliki texts, different editions, and manuscript locations, see Jean-Pierre Van Staëvel’s dissertation, cited below. The editions used in this book are: ‘hsa b. Mesa b. Asmad b. al-Imam, “al-Qara’ bi-al-mirfaq f c al-mabanc wa nafy al-rarar li-‘hsa b. Mesa b. Asmad b. al-Imam al-Tuvclc,” ed. Musammad al-Namcnaj, 2 vols (DiblEm al-dirAsAt al-“ulyA fC al-dirAsAt al-islamiyya degree thesis, University of Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdallah, Fez, 1992), hereafter cited as “Ibn al-Imam” only; Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Ibrahcm al-Lakhmc b. al-Ramc, “Kitab al-I‘lan bi-askam al-bunyan” (ed. ‘Abd Allah al-Dawudc), Majallat al-fiqh al-mAlikC alturAth al-qaRA”i bi-al-Maghrib, nos. 2, 3, 4 (in 1 vol.) (1982): 259–490, hereafter cited as “Ibn al-Ramc” only; and idem, al-I“lAn bi-aSkAm al-bunyAn: AbE “Abd AllAh MuSammad b. IbrAhCm al-LakhmC b. al-RAmC al-bannA”, ed. Ferid Ben Slimane (Tunis: Centre de Publication Universitaire, 1999), hereafter cited as “Ibn alRamc (2)” only. No translation exists for Ibn al-Ramc’s text, but for Ibn alImam’s, see Barbier, “Des droits et obligations entre propriétaires d’héritages voisins,” Revue Algérienne, Tunisienne et Marocaine de Législation et Jurispridence 16 (1900): 9–15, 17–23, 42–56, 93–104, 113–44; and 17 (1901): 65–84, 89–108. 5 Saleh A. al-Hathloul, “Tradition, Continuity and Change in the Physical Environment: The Arab-Muslim City” (Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1981). Additionally, in a special issue of Ekistics (vol. 47, no. 280, Jan./Feb. 1980) dedicated to “Islamic Human Settlements,” some articles abridged from The International Symposium on Islamic Architecture and Urbanism (Jan. 5– 10, 1980, King Faisal University, Damman, Saudi Arabia) had raised the subject. Finally, some court cases involving walls and their maintenance had been mentioned in Galal H. El-Nahal, The Judicial Administration of Ottoman Egypt in the Seventeenth Century (Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1979), 52–3. 6 Besim Selim Hakim, Arabic-Islamic Cities: Building and Planning Principles (London: Kegan Paul International, 1986). For the criticism of Hakim’s book, see Nezar Alsayyad, Cities and Caliphs: On the Genesis of Arab Muslim Urbanism (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991), 38.

100

N O T E S (pp. 40–41)

7 Jean-Pierre Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville: Discours normatif, habitat et construction urbaine dans l’Occident musulman médiéval (Xe–XIVe siècles),” 3 vols (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Lyon II “Lumière,” 2000). An extract of this dissertation has since been published as idem, “Savoir faire et le faire savoir: L’expertise judiciaire en matière de construction, d’après un auteur tunisois du 8e/XIVe siècle,” Annales Islamologiques 35 (2001): 627–62. The other publications on the subject comprise Hisham Mortada, Traditional Islamic Principles of Built [sic] Environment (London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003); Hentati Nejmeddine, “La rue dans la ville de l’Occident musulman médiéval d’après les sources juridiques malikites,” Arabica 50, no. 3 (July 2003): 273–305; L’urbanisme dans l’Occident musulman au Moyen Âge: Aspects juridiques, ed. Patrice Cressier, Maribel Fierro and Jean-Pierre Van Staëvel (Madrid: Casa de Velázquez/Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2000); Mustapha Ben Hamouche, Fiqh al-“umrAn alislAmiyya: Min khilAl al-arshCf al-“uthmAnC al-jazA”irC (956/1549–1246/1830) (Dubai: Dar al-Buseth li-al-Dirasat al-Islamiyya wa Isya’ al-Turath, 2000); idem, “Sight Restrictions in Maghrib Muslim Architecture,” Intellectual Discourse (Malaysia) 7, no. 2 (1999): 133–54; M’halla, “La médina,” 33–98; Akel I. Kahera and Omar Benmira, “Damages in Islamic Law: Maghribc Muftcs and the Built Environment (9th–15th Centuries C.E.),” Islamic Law and Society 5, no. 2 (1998): 131–64; Akel Ismail Kahera, “Building, Dwelling and Reasoning: A Discourse on Malikc Legal Practice and the ‘Ordering’ of Habitat in the Medieval Maghrib” (Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University, 1997); Khalid Musammad Muuvafa ‘Azab, “Takhvcv wa ‘imarat al-mudun al-islamiyya,” KitAb al-Umma (Qatar) 58 (1997): 9–141; Jean-Pierre Van Staëvel, “Casa, calle y vecindad en la documentación jurídica,” in Casas y palacios de Al-Andalus, 53–61; Farid Ben Slimane, “Ibn alRamc et l’art de bâtir,” in Itinéraire du Savoir en Tunisie: Les temps forts de l’histoire tunisienne, ed. Hassen Annabi, Mounira Chapoutot-Remadi, and Samia Kamarti (Paris: CNRS Editions, 1995), 78–83; Farid Ben Slimane, “Entre Ibn Al Imam le Tudèlien (mort en 996) et Ibn Al Ramc le Tunisois (mort après 1333),” Sharq Al-Andalus 8 (1991): 109–12; Leonor Fernandes, “Habitat et prescriptions légales,” in L’habitat traditionnel, 419–26; Jamel Akbar, Crisis in the Built Environment; and André Raymond, “Espaces publics et espaces privés.” 8 Regarding publication details for these titles, the latter (K. al-JidAr) is not extant, known only through citation in other works, and because the former (K. alMCVAn) is something of a palimpsest, with four different authors/contributors, of the two versions currently in print, each is attributed differently. The version used in this book is al-Shaykh al-Marjc al-Thaqaf c, KitAb al-HCVAn: ASkAm alVuruq wa al-suVES wa al-abwAb wa masCl al-miyAh wa al-SCVAn fC al-fiqh al-islAmC, ed. Musammad Khayr Ramaran Yesuf (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr al-Mu‘auir, 1994), hereafter cited as “Kitab al-Hcvan” only. The second is ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz oadr al-Shahcd (d. 1141), KitAb al-MCVAn: DirAsa fiqhiyya li-ahkAm al-binA” wa alirtifAq, ed. ‘Abd Allah Nadhcr Asmad (Jeddah: Markaz al-Nashr al-‘Ilmc, Jami‘at al-Malik ‘Abd al-‘Azcz, 1996). 9 Ibn al-Ramc, 300. 10 Ibid., 300–1. In Ibn al-Ramc’s text, eleven Qur’anic verses are cited, only three of which have any vague urban architectural relevance, the other eight being of even broader import; for example, the influential but general “Hold to forgiveness and command what is right” (7:199). Ibid., 276. The other verses cited by Ibn al-Ramc are 50:9, 43:33, 23:18, 21:32, 9:107, 7:85, 7:58, 3:9, and 3:7. Ibn alRamc (2), 253. In Ibn al-Imam’s text, two Qur’anic verses are cited: 9:107, and 21:78. Ibn al-Imam, 2:207. In Ibn Sahl’s text, 7:85 is cited. Abe al-Aubagh ‘hsa b. Sahl al-Andalusc (d. 1094), WathA”iq fC shu”En li-“umrAn fC al-Andalus “al-MasAjid

101

N O T E S (pp. 41–42)

11

12

13 14 15 16

17 18 19

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

wa al-dEr” mustakhraja min makhVEV al-ASkAm al-kubrA, ed. Musammad ‘Abd al-Wahhab Khallaf (Cairo: al-Mavba‘a al-‘Arabiyya al-madctha, 1983), 99, 101, hereafter cited as “Ibn Sahl” only. I have found no Qur’anic verses cited in KitAb al-MCVAn. “A-tadrena ma saqq al-jar? [ . . . ] Wa la tasta‘mil ‘alay-hi bi-al-bina’ fa-tasjuba ‘an-hu al-rcs illa bi-idhnihi.” Abe Bakr Musammad b. Ja‘far b. Musammad b. Sahl al-Samarrc al-Khara’vc, MakArim al-akhlAq wa ma“AlChA wa maSmEd VarA”iqihA wa marRChA (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, n.d.), 59. “Al-jar asaqq bi-shuf‘at jarihi yantawiru bi-ha wa in kana gha’iban idha kana varcquhuma wasid.” Majd al-Dcn al-Mubarak b. Musammad b. Athcr al-Jazarc, JAmi“ al-uUEl fC aSAdCth al-RasEl, ed. ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Arna’ut, 5 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1995), 1: 582. See also the appendix “Selected Sayings of the Prophet” in Hakim, Arabic-Islamic Cities, 146–56. “La yamna‘ jar jarahu an yaghriza khashaba f c jidarihi.” Muslim, OaSCS Muslim, k. al-musaqat, bab 29, raqm 136. Cited in Ibn al-Ramc, 282 and 294; and Ibn al-Imam, 2: 1 and 2: 8. “Idha ikhtalaftum f c al-varcq ju‘ila ‘arrahu sab‘a adhru‘.” Muslim, OaSCS Muslim, k. al-musaqat, bab 31, raqm 143. Cited (with one minor variation) in Ibn al-Ramc, 430; and Ibn al-Imam, 2: 145 “Man walama qayd shibr min al-arr vuwwiqahu min sab‘a ararcn.” Muslim, OaSCS Muslim, k. al-musaqat, bab 30, raqm 142. Cited (with minor variations) in Ibn al-Ramc, 398–9; and Ibn al-Imam, 2: 125. In all of KitAb al-HCVAn, for example, I have found just one hadith: an account of the Prophet’s companion mudhayfa b. al-Yamman (d. 656) judging a quarrel concerning a hut (khuUU). KitAb al-HCVAn, 44; also cited in Ibn al-Ramc, 276–7. The hadith is collected in Abe ‘Abd Allah al-Qazwcnc b. Majah, Sunan al-SAfiW AbC “Abd AllAh MuSammad b. YazCd al-QazwCnC b. MAjah, ed. Musammad Fu’ad ‘Abd al-Baqc, 2 vols ( [Cairo]: Dar Isya’ al-Kutub al-‘Arabiyya, 1952), k. alaskam, bab 18, raqm 2365. “La rarar wa la rirar f c al-Islam.” For collection details and analysis, see Chapter Four. For the Shafi‘i school’s engagement with walls, see Otto Spies, “Islamisches Nachbarrecht nach schafäitischer Lehre,” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 42 (1927): 393–421. These orally transmitted teachings came to exert as decisive an effect on the development of law school identity and doctrine as the works traditionally attributed to the leaders themselves. See, inter alia, Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law, 57–68; N.J. Coulson, A History of Islamic Law, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1964), 51–2; and Christopher Melchert, The Formation of the Sunni Schools of Law, 9th–10th Centuries C.E. (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 23, 60. On the problematic characterization of these two disciples as the founders of the Hanafi law school, see ibid, xxi–xxiii and 1–67. E. Chaumont, “Al-Shaybanc,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 393; Melchert, The Formation of the Sunni Schools of Law, 60. Malik b. Anas, al-Mudawwana al-kubrA li-ImAm MAlik b. Anas al-AUbaSC riwAyat al-ImAm SaSnEn b. Sa“Cd al-TanEkhC “an al-ImAm “Abd al-RaSmAn b. QAsim, 6 vols. (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1998), 5: 2569. Ibid., 5: 2560. Ashhab b. ‘Abd al-‘Azcz al-Qaysc. Muvarrif b. ‘Abd Allah b. Muvarrif. Abe ‘Abd Allah Aubagh b. al-Faraj. Al-WARiSa fC al-sunna wa al-fiqh.

102

N O T E S (pp. 42–43)

28 “Hadha kitab jum‘at f c-hi masa’il al-abniya f c al-jidar wa nafy al-rirar wa alghures wa al-arsiya min ummahat dawawcn wa kutub al-muta’akhkhircn wa nawazil al-qurat wa masa’il al-muftcn.” 29 Musammad b. Ibrahcm b. ‘Abdes al-Qayrawanc (d. 874). 30 KitAb al-NawAdir wa al-ziyAdAt “alA al-Mudawwana by Ibn Abc Zayd al-Qayrawanc (d. 996). 31 The formularies would likely have been similar to the wall-related wathA”iq documents presented in Ibn al-‘Avvar, KitAb al-WathA”iq wa al-sijillAt li-al-faqCh al-muwaththiq MuSammad b. ASmad al-UmawC al-ma“rEf bi-Ibn al-“AVVAr (330– 399 AH) (Formulario notarial hispano-árabe), ed. Pedro Chalmeta and Federico Corriente (Madrid: Academia Matritense del Notariado, Instituto Hispano-Árabe de Cultura, 1983), 117–23. 32 ‘Alc b. Yahya b. Qasim al-Jazcrc (d. 1189). 33 Yenis b. Musammad b. Mughayth (d. 1037). 34 Composed by ‘Alc b. ‘Abd Allah al-Anuarc al-Mutcvc (d. 1174). 35 Ibn Abc Zamancn of Andalusia (d. 1008), attributed with the authorship of al-Muntakhab fC al-aSkAm. 36 Ibn Hisham of Cordoba (d. 1209), author of the extant MufCd al-SukkAm. 37 Ibn ‘Abd al-Raf c‘ (d. 1332), chief qadi of Tunis, author of the extant Mu“Cn al-quRAt wa al-SukkAm and Ibn al-Ramc’s teacher in legal matters. 38 Ibn al-Ramc, 274–5. 39 As cited in Nejmeddine, “La rue dans la ville de l’Occident musulman médiéval,” 282. It is not extant. 40 Abe al-Walcd Musammad b. Rushd, KitAb al-QaRA” wa al-araRCn wa al-dEr (Rabat: Bibliothèque Générale à Rabat, MS no. 424). 41 Musammad b. Ibrahcm b. ‘Abdes b. Bashcr (d. 874), KitAb al-DEr (The Book of Houses) (not extant), as cited in Qarc ‘Iyad, TartCb al-madArik wa taqrCb almasAlik li-ma“rifat a“lAm madhhab MAlik, ed. Musammad Salim Hashim, 2 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1998), 1: 434; Musammad al-Baredc (d. 1831), FatS al-RaSmAn fC mas”alat al-tanAzu“ fC al-bunyAn (The Victory of God in Building Disputes) (Tunis: Bibliothèque Nationale de Tunis, MS no. 3933), as cited in M’halla, “La médina,” 40 n. 16; and Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. masan Bayram I (d. 1900), RisAla fC al-SA”iV al-munhadim (Treatise on the Falling Wall) (Tunis: Bibliothèque Nationale de Tunis, MS no. 187), also as cited in M’halla, “La médina,” 40 n. 16. 42 M’halla, “La médina,” 38. 43 Jonathan E. Brockopp, Early MAlikC Law: Ibn “Abd al-Makam and His Major Compendium of Jurisprudence (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 62. Qarc ‘Iyad (d. 1149) lists the title as one of Ibn ‘Abd al-makam’s works, never implying it might have been just a chapter of a longer work. Qarc ‘Iyad, TartCb al-madArik, 1: 305. 44 This work is also cited by Qarc ‘Iyad. Ibid., 1: 375. 45 To the best of my knowledge, the only edited version of al-ASkAm al-kubrA was originally presented as the editor’s doctoral thesis at St. Andrew’s University: Abe al-Aubagh ‘hsa b. Sahl b. ‘Abd Allah al-Asdc al-Jiyyanc, Diwan al-ASkAm al-kubrA: al-NawAzil wa al-a“lAm li-Ibn Sahl, ed. Rashcd al-Na‘cmc, 2 vols (Riyad: R. al-Na‘cmc, 1997). 46 “Kitab al-Qara’ f c al-bunyan,” in Abe Musammad ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-Rasman b. Abc Zayd al-Qayrawanc, al-NawAdir wa al-ziyAdAt: “AlA mA fC al-Mudawwana min ghayrihA min al-ummahAt, ed. ‘Abd al-Fattas Musammad almulw et al., 15 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islamc, c. 1999), 11: 93–112. 47 “Al-ma’iv al-ma’il,” in Burhan al-Dcn Ibrahcm b. ‘Alc b. Abc al-Qasim b. Musammad b. Farsen, TabUirat al-SukkAm fC uUEl al-aqRiya wa manAhij al-aSkAm,

103

N O T E S (pp. 43–44)

48 49

50 51 52 53 54 55 56

57

58 59

60 61

62

ed. paha ‘Abd al-Ra’ef Sa‘d, 2 vols in 1 binding (Cairo: Maktabat al-Kulliyyat al-Azhariyya, 1986), 2: 339–40. “Kitab al-Da‘awa f c al-jidar,” as cited by Ben Slimane in Ibn al-Ramc (2), 20. “Al-Qisma bayna al-shuraka’ wa ijarat al-qasim wa katib al-wathcqa wa jami‘ alda‘awa f c al-judran” and “Fc bayan askam al-rarar wa sarcm al-abar wa askam al-hibat wa al-asbas wa al-uadaqat,” in Abe al-Walcd Sulayman b. Khalaf alBajc, FuUEl al-aSkAm wa bayAn mA maRA “alay-hi al-“amal “inda al-fuqahA” wa alSukkAm, ed. al-Batel b. ‘Alc (Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-al-Mamlaka al-Maghribiyya, 1990), 315–48. Abe al-Walcd Musammad b. Asmad b. Asmad b. Rushd, FatAwA Ibn Rushd, ed. al-Mukhtar b. pahir al-Talclc, 3 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islamc, 1987). Ibid., 3: 1578. Ibid., 2: 1246. Ibid., 1: 169. Al-Burzulc, JAmi“ masA”il al-aSkAm bi-mA nazala min al-qaRAyA bi-al-muftCn wa al-SukkAm (Tunis: Bibliothèque Nationale de Tunis, MS no. 4851), as cited in Nejmeddine, “La rue dans la ville,” 274 n. 2. Al-Wansharcsc, al-Mi“yAr al-mu“rib. Abe ‘hsa Scdc Musammad al-Mahdc b. Musammad b. Musammad b. al-Kharir al-Wazzanc, al-NawAzil al-UughrA al-musammA bi-al-MinS al-sAmiya fC al-nawAzil al-fiqhiyya, 4 vols (Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-alMamlaka al-Maghribiyya, c. 1993); idem, al-NawAzil al-jadCdA al-kubrA fC-mA li-ahl FAs wa ghayrihim min al-badE wa al-qurA al-musammA bi-al-Mi“yAr al-jadCd al-jAmi“ al-mughrib “an fatAwA al-muta’akhkhirCn min “ulamA” al-Maghrib, ed. ‘Umar b. ‘Abbad, 16 vols (Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-alMamlaka al-Maghribiyya, c. 1998). See, for example, the chapter “Cases of Harm, Flowing Water, and Building” (MasA”il min al-Rarar wa jary al-miyAh wa al-bunyAn) of al-Burzulc’s compilation (f° 281–313, as cited in Nejmeddine, “La rue dans la ville,” 283); the chapter “Cases of Harm and Building [Matters]” (NawAzil min al-Rarar wa al-bunyAn) of al-Wansharcsc’s collection (8: 435–87, 9: 5–73); and the chapter “Cases of Harm and Vindication” (NawAzil al-Rarar wa al-istiSqAq) of al-Wazzanc’s NawAzil al-jadCda (3: 459–520). Al-Namcnaj in Ibn al-Imam, 1: 53. Cf. a related argument in al-Hathloul, Tradition, Continuity and Change, 16, 138. Garcin, “Le Caire et l’évolution urbaine des pays musulmans,” 289–304. See also, idem, “Le moment islamique (VIIe–XVIIIe siècles),” in Mégapoles méditerranéennes, 91–103; and Albert Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples (London: Faber and Faber, 1991), 10 et seq. My thanks to Dr. Yossef Rapoport for drawing my attention to the time-frame of the Black Death. Ibn al-Ramc (2), 28–9. There are at least four extant copies of Ibn al-Imam’s work and a similar number of KitAb al-MCVAn. Ibn al-Imam, 1: 62–5; Ben Slimane, “Entre Ibn al-Imam,” 110 n. 6; KitAb al-MCVAn, 10–12. Where a place is mentioned, it is either incidental or in relation to the discourse’s application mechanism (see Chapter Four). The translation of aSkAm as “assessments” follows A. Kevin Reinhart, “Transcendence and Social Practice: MuftCs and QARCs as Religious Interpreters,” Annales Islamologiques 27 (1993): 14. For a later period of the discourse (from the end of the fifteenth century), Leonor Fernandes suggests as a cause of additional discrete works the desire of rulers to reform the often disorderly urban sites under their sovereignty. Idem, “Habitat et prescriptions légales,” 426.

104

N O T E S (pp. 45–48)

63 See, for instance, the neighborhood dispute section of KitAb NiUAb al-iStisAb, as reproduced in Mawil Izzi Dien, The Theory and Practice of Market Law in Medieval Islam: A Study of Kitab Niuab al-Istisab of “Umar b. MuSammad alSunAmC (fl. 7th–8th/13–14th Century) (Warminster: E.J.W. Gibb Memorial Trust, 1997), 82–5. 64 Cf. Abu-Lughod’s comments on the “system of property laws [ . . . ] whereby a pattern of space was continually reproduced.” Idem, “The Islamic City,” 163. 65 KitAb al-MCVAn, case titles cited in order of appearance. These titles differ little from others in the discourse, for instance those contained in Ibn al-Imam, Ibn al-Ramc, and Ibn Sahl. See the appendix of the present book for examples. 66 Helena M. Chew and William Kellaway, eds., London Assize of Nuisance 1301– 1431: A Calendar (London: London Record Society, 1973), ix–xi, passim. My thanks to Dr. Catherine Batt for alerting me to this parallel. On the Islamic discourse’s differences from Roman law and the Coutume de Paris, see Brunschvig, “Urbanisme médiéval,” 130, 140, 153 n. 1. 67 See, for example, Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge, trans. A.M. Sheridan Smith (New York: Pantheon Books, 1972), passim. 68 Cf. Alshech, “ ‘Do Not Enter Houses’,” 309–12. On the Qur’anic requirement for the covering of “awra, or nakedness and vulnerability, see, for example, Qur’an 24:58 and 33:13. 69 Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 33. 70 Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 39. 71 Ibid., 39. 72 Bachelard, The Poetics of Space, trans. Maria Jolas (New York: The Orion Press, Inc., 1964; reprint Boston: Beacon Press, 1969), 6. Cf. Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 147, 166. 73 Paul Wheatley, “Levels of Space Awareness in the Traditional Islamic City,” Ekistics 42, no. 253 (Dec. 1976): 354. Perhaps the closest that has come to Bachelard’s book is Joëlle Bahloul, The Architecture of Memory: A JewishMuslim Household in Colonial Algeria, 1937–1962, trans. Catherine du Peloux Ménagé (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996). See also, Carel Bertram, “The Turkish House: An Effort of Memory” (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California Los Angeles, 1998), esp. 1–30. 74 Mernissi, The Harem Within, esp. 3–19, 213–28. On the book’s factual reliability, see Christine Eickelman, “Fatima Mernissi, Dreams of Trespass: Tales of a Harem Girlhood (Reviewed by Christine Eickelman),” Middle East Studies Association Bulletin 28, no. 2 (1994): 251–2. 75 On this legal usage of “awra, see Alshech, “ ‘Do Not Enter Houses’,” 310–12. As indicated earlier, the word literally means what is naked or vulnerable and in need of cover. 76 For examples, see Case Titles A, B, D, and Case 1 of the present book’s appendix. 77 See in particular, Hakim, Arabic-Islamic Cities, 33–9; M’halla, “La médina,” 59–66; and Ben Hamouche, “Sight Restrictions,” passim. 78 Brunschvig, “Urbanisme médiéval,” 140; M’halla, “La médina,” 90–2; Van Staevel, “Casa, calle y vecindad,” 59; and Ben Hamouche, “Sight Restrictions,” 134. 79 See also, Van Staevel, “Casa, calle y vecindad,” 59. 80 Al-Wansharcsc, al-Mi“yAr al-mu“rib, 9: 22. 81 Zahrat al-As, 47; trans., 89. 82 “Fc gharr bauarihi sawvatan ‘ala surum al-muslimcn wa al-ivvila‘ ‘ala ‘awratihim.” Ibid., 53; not included in the translator’s recension. 83 Ibid., 54; not included in the translator’s recension.

105

N O T E S (pp. 48–50)

84 “[N]atural species are chosen [as totems] not because they are ‘good to eat’ but because they are ‘good to think’.” Claude Lévi-Strauss, Totemism, trans. Rodney Needham (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1969), 162. To avoid misunderstandings, this conclusion is not an exclusive one. In other words, saying that in medieval and premodern urban Arab-Muslim culture walls were “good to think,” is not to say the same cannot be true of other cultures, too. Chapter Four THE JURIDIC BASIS OF THE BOOK OF WALLS 1 Lefebvre, The Production of Space, 222 (emphasis as marked in the original). 2 Cf. Oleg Grabar’s suggestive comments on the architecture of Cairo, in idem, “The Meaning of History in Cairo,” in The Expanding Metropolis: Coping with the Urban Growth of Cairo, ed. Ahmet Evin (Singapore: Concept Media/The Aga Khan Award for Architecture, 1985), 1–18, reprinted in Oleg Grabar, Constructing the Study of Islamic Art. Vol. 3: Islamic Art and Beyond (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2006), 210. 3 See, for example, Oleg Grabar, “Symbols and Signs in Islamic Architecture,” in Architecture as Symbol and Self-Identity, 4, 8, 9; Nasser Rabat, “The Meaning of the Umayyad Dome of the Rock,” Muqarnas: An Annual of Islamic Art and Architecture 6 (1989): 13, 18; and Finbarr Barry Flood, The Great Mosque of Damascus: Studies on the Makings of an Umayyad Visual Culture (Leiden: Brill, 2001), 242–5. 4 Amos Rapoport, The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal Communication Approach, 2nd ed. (Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1990), 19– 21, 55–86; Jonathan Hill, ed., Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User (London: Routledge, 1998), 135–246; Bryan Lawson, The Language of Space (Oxford: Architectural Press, 2001), 86–8. 5 On enculturation limiting a building’s experiential meaning, see Rapoport, The Meaning of the Built Environment, 61, 65–70. 6 Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 311–65. 7 Besim Hakim, for example, refers to the opinions and rulings that comprise the discourse as forming “a set of building principles and guidelines” derived from the Sharia, God’s eternal will. Idem, Arabic-Islamic Cities, 137 (my emphasis). 8 Cf. Akbar, Crisis in the Built Environment, 141–200; and Besim S. Hakim, “The ‘Urf ’ and its Role in Diversifying the Architecture of Traditional Islamic Cities,” Journal of Architectural Planning and Research 11, no. 2 (1994): 114–18. See also below. 9 On Hanafi “amal, see Louis Milliot and J. Lapanne-Joinville, Recueil de jurisprudence chérifienne. Tome IV (Paris: Librarie du Recueil Sirey, 1952), xii; Henry Toledano, Judicial Practice and Family Law in Morocco: The Chapter on Marriage from SijilmAsC’s Al-‘Amal al-Muvlaq (Boulder: Social Science Monographs, Boulder, Colorado, 1981), 9 n. 2; Musammad b. ‘Abd al-Karcm al-Jayyidc, al“Urf wa al-“amal fC al-madhhab al-mAlikC wa mafhEmuhumA ladA “ulamA” al-Maghrib (Mohammedia: Mavba‘a Furala, 1984), 341; and Wael B. Hallaq, Authority, Continuity, and Change in Islamic Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 161–2. 10 Joseph Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law, 61–2; Noel James Coulson, A History of Islamic Law, 147. 11 Louis Milliot, Démembrements du habous: Menfa“â, gzâ, guelsâ, zînâ, istighrâq (Paris: Editions Ernest Leroux, 1918); idem, Recueil de jurisprudence chérifienne, 3 vols (Paris: Editions Ernest Leroux, 1920–3); idem and J. Lapanne-Joinville, Recueil de jurisprudence chérifienne. Tome IV; Jacques Berque, Essai sur la méthode

106

N O T E S (pp. 50–51)

12

13

14

15

juridique maghrébine (Rabat: n.a., 1944); idem, “‘Amal (3),” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 427–8. These French studies are listed as both Schacht’s and Coulson’s principal sources. Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law, 233; Coulson, A History of Islamic Law, 232. It informs, for example, the introductory pages of Toledano’s monograph on “amal. He writes: “The interesting and perhaps unique feature of Moroccan jurisprudence was to recognize the ‘value of “amal,’ or the fact that a certain opinion among variants was consistently applied in the practice of the courts, as a binding legal principle. This is so, even when such opinion was a weak or isolated one. Thus, the author of Al-“Amal al-FAsC states: ‘In principle the judgments of qaRCs of our time based on an isolated opinion ought to be rescinded immediately. But the “amal must prevail over the mashhEr. It cannot be neglected.’ ” Idem, Judicial Practice, 12. Basing himself on Toledano, Muhammad Masud defines “amal in a similar manner; and so the definition is propagated. Muhammad Khalid Masud, Islamic Legal Philosophy: A Study of AbE IsSAq al-ShAVibC’s Life and Thought (Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, 1977), 16, 29 n. 64. The above citation from Toledano is sourced to the studies of Milliot and “amal text of ‘Alc al-Zaqqaq (d. 1507); not Schacht or Coulson. This fact notwithstanding, Coulson’s voice is often heard in Toledano, mostly from “Muslim Custom and Case-Law,” an article that preceded A History of Islamic Law and that provided well-worked material for the latter’s treatment of “amal. Noel James Coulson, “Muslim Custom and Case-Law,” Die Welt des Islam 6 (1959): 23. More often than not, Coulson’s voice goes unattributed by Toledano. Delfina Serrano Ruano, “La práctica legal (“amal ) en al-Andalus durante los siglos X–XII, a través de los MadhAhib al-SukkAm fC nawAzil al-aSkAm de Musammad Ibn ‘Iyar,” Qurtuba: Estudios Andalusíes 1 (1996): 184, 184 n. 49. See also, Pedro Chalmeta, “Acerca del “amal en al-Andalus: Algunos casos concretos,” Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 57 (1987): 339–64; Alfonso Carmona González, “Las differencias entre la jurisprudencia andalusí y el resto de la escuela de Malik: El texto atribuido a Abe Issaq al-Garnavc,” Al-Qantara: Revista de Estudios Árabes 19, no. 1 (1998): esp. 89, 100; Serrano Ruano, “Legal Practice in an Andalusc-Maghribc source from the twelfth century C.E.: The MadhAhib alSukkAm fC nawAzil al-aSkAm,” Islamic Law and Society 7, no. 2 (2000): esp. 207– 8; and Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 348–65. The formulation from al-“Amal al-fAsC that informs the textbook definition is cited in turn by Milliot, Berque, Schacht, and Coulson. Milliot, Démembrements, 109 (also, idem and Lapanne-Joinville, Recueil de jurisprudence chérifienne. Tome IV, xvii); Berque, Essai, 46–7 n. 10, 125; Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law, 62; and Coulson, A History of Islamic Law, 147. As Berque says, upon this formula “est basée la théorie de l’“Amal.” Berque, Essai, 47 n. 10. Yet even in its own day the formula was contentious, as shown in a commentary by Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Abc Qasim al-Filalc al-Sijilamasc’s (d. 1800), translated in Milliot, Démembrements du habous, 109–14. In Arabic, the formula reads: “Ma bi-hi al-‘amal dena almashher / Muqaddam f c al-akhdh ghayr mahjer,” as cited in Musammad b. almasan al-majwc al-Tha‘alabc al-Fasc, al-Fikr al-sAmC fC tArCkh al-fiqh al-islAmC, ed. Ayman oalis Sha‘ban, 2 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1995), 2: 467. The theory versus practice dichotomy is a common topos in Western scholarship on Islamic law, in which practice is frequently denigrated. E.g. Reuben Levy, The Social Structure of Islam (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957), 256; Coulson, “Muslim Custom”, 23; and Toledano, Judicial Practice, 17. Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad al-masan al-Maghrawc al-Majjauc, al-Ajwiba, cited in Toledano, Judicial Practice, 168. See also the statement of the sixteenth-century

107

N O T E (p. 51)

16 17 18 19 20 21

22

23

24

Qarc ‘hsa: “Il n’est pas permis de statuer contrairement à [l“amal],” cited by alSijilamasc in Milliot, Démembrements du habous, 109. On the relationship between the two kinds of “amal, see al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al“amal, 341–2; and Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 352–4. Ibn al-‘Avvar, KitAb al-WathA”iq wa al-sijillAt, 35, 62, 65, 123, 126, 128, 165, 180, 190, 231, 242, 286, 287, 343, 354, 522, 523, 633, 643, 644. Cf. al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 344–6; and Chalmeta, “Acerca del “amal,” 351. Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 355 for Tunisia (specifically, Kairouan); my own research for Morocco (specifically, Fez). Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 355. Serrano Ruano, “La práctica legal (“amal ) en al-Andalus,” 172. The fact that “amal appears in these records does not mean the earliest date for it is the date of the records’ compilation, but sometime earlier. If Andalusian “amal had no authority in Morocco, why would the jurists from whom Ibn ‘Iyad’s father, Qarc ‘Iyad, sought answers (ajwiba) refer to it repeatedly? The Moroccan scholar al-majwc (d. 1957) was of the opinion that it had. Idem, al-Fikr al-sAmC, 2: 465; trans. Berque, Essai, 120. The extent of its authority is, however, another matter. On Cordoba as an intellectual, especially legal capital during this period, see Jesús Zanón, “La actividad intellectual: Las ramas del saber. Centros y métodos de conocimiento,” in Historia de España Menéndez Pidal. Vol. VIII-2: El retroceso territorial de al-Andalus. Almorávides y Almohades, siglos XI al XIII, ed. María Jesús Viguera Molíns (Madrid: Espasa Calpe, S.A., 1997), 572–3; Dominique Urvoy, “The “UlamA” of Al-Andalus,” in The Legacy of Muslim Spain, 2nd ed., ed. Salma Khadra Jayyusi (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994), 858–61, 867; and Dominique Urvoy, Pensers d’al-Andalus: La vie intellectuelle à Cordoue et Séville au temps des empires berbères fin XI e siècle-début XIIIe siécle (Paris: Editions du CNRS, 1990), 25, 41–2, 54. On Cordoba as the centre of Andalusian “amal (and subsequently as a major influence upon Moroccan “amal ), see al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 371–5; María Arcas Campoy, “Algunas consideraciones sobre los tratados de jurisprudencia Maliki de Al-Andalus,” Miscelánea de Estudios Árabes y Hebraicos 37 (1988): 20; and Alfonso Carmona González, “Acerca del influjo de la jurisprudencia andalusí en el Magrib,” Revista del Instituto Egipcio de Estudios Islámicos 26 (1993): 137–47. “Wa ‘ala hadha jarat askam ahl al-Maghrib.” Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. ‘Iyad, MadhhAhib al-SukkAm fC nawAzil al-aSkAm li-al-QARC “IyAd wa waladihi MuSammad, ed. Musammad Bencherifa (Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islamc, 1990), 201. Serrano Ruano, “Legal Practice in an Andalusc-Maghribc source,” 208. For his part, al-Jayyidc dates institutionalized “amal in Morocco to the fourteenth century. Idem, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 350–1. Cf. David S. Powers, “FatwAs as Sources for Legal and Social History: A Dispute over Endowment Revenues from Fourteenth-Century Fez,” Al-QanVara: Revista de Estudios Árabes 11, no. 2 (1990): 327–8 n. 108, in which the author conjectures a similar date. Abe al-masan ‘Alc b. Qasim b. Musammad al-Tujcbc, known as al-Zaqqaq (d. 1507), TuSfat al-SukkAm fC masA”il al-da“AwA wa al-aSkAm, ed. and trans. Merad Ben Ali Ould Abdelkader (La “Lamia” ou “Zaqqaqia” du jurisconsulte marocain Zaqqaq: Manuel marocain de jurisprudence musulmane) (Casablanca: Imp. Réunies de la “Vigie Marocaine” et du “Petit Marocain”, 1927), hereafter cited as Zaqqaq, al-LAmiyya. This text is cited by Schacht in idem, An Introduction to Islamic Law, 233. On its expression of emancipation from Cordoba, see al-Zaqqaq, al-LAmiyya, 31–3; trans. 33–5 (verses 190–204). On the gradual

108

N O T E S (pp. 52–54)

25 26 27

28 29 30 31

32 33 34 35 36

37

38 39 40 41 42 43 44

emancipation of Moroccan “amal from Andalusian “amal, see al-majwc, al-Fikr al-sAmC, 2: 464–5, trans. Berque, Essai, 120–1; and al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 350–1. Serrano Ruano, “Legal Practice in an Andalusc-Maghribc source,” 230; Milliot and Lapanne-Joinville, Recueil de jurisprudence chérifienne. Tome IV, viii–ix. Ibid., vii. Serrano Ruano, “La práctica legal (“amal) en al-Andalus,” 174–89, esp. 185–8; idem, “Legal Practice in an Andalusc-Maghribc source,” 206–8; Carmona González, “Las differencias entre la jurisprudencia andalusí,” 89, 100; Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 357–62. Serrano Ruano, “Legal Practice in an Andalusc-Maghribc source,” 229–30; Hallaq, Authority, Continuity, and Change, 160–2. Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law, 32; see also Sherman A. Jackson, Islamic Law and the State: The Constitutional Jurisprudence of ShihAb al-DCn al-QarAfC (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996), 79–80. Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law, 70–1. Maribel Fierro, “La religión,” in Historia de España Menéndez Pidal. Vol. VIII1: Los Reinos de Taïfas. Al-Andalus en el siglo XI, ed. María Jesús Viguera Molíns (Madrid: Espasa Calpe, S.A., 1994), 411; and Serrano Ruano, “Legal Practice in an Andalusc-Maghribc source,” 229. On the historical development of taqlCd within the Sunni law schools, see Hallaq, Authority, Continuity, and Change, 86–120. Although it is uncertain if this is the title chosen by al-Bajc himself, the wording of it is his and reflects his own view of the book’s contents. Al-Bajc, FuUEl al-aSkAm, 135. Ibid., 325, 333. Ibn al-‘Avvar, KitAb al-WathA”iq wa al-sijillAt, 123. E.g. Ibn al-Ramc, 278, 289, 291, 292, 303, 308, 309, 311, 313, 316, 321, 322, 328, etc. Cf. Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 355–65, esp. 355. Regarding the different level of casuistry and taqlCd between Ibn al-Imam’s and Ibn al-Ramc’s time, see Van Staëvel, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 332–48, 390–3. On casuistry as a method of organizing cases and competing opinions in Islamic law, as well as its historical development, see Baber Johansen, “Casuistry: Between Legal Concept and Social Praxis,” in Islamic Law and Society 2, no. 2 (1995): 135–56. That “amal remained the discourse’s most apparent procedure of application would appear to be proven for the seventeenth century by the “amal compilation al-“Amal al-fAsC, and for the early twentieth century by court records from Fez. For the former, see V. Loubignac, “Le chapitre de la préemption dans l’‘Amal al-Fâsî,” Hespéris 26 (1939): 233; for the latter, see Lawrence Rosen, The Anthropology of Justice: Law as Culture in Islamic Society (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 48–9. Al-MajmE“a fC al-fiqh “alA madhhab MAlik, by Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Ibrahcm b. ‘Abdes (d. 874). Abe Musammad ‘Abd Allah b. Nafi‘, known as al-oa’igh (d. 802). Al-WARiSa fC al-sunna wa al-fiqh, by Ibn mabcb, as mentioned in Chapter Three. Abe ‘Umre ‘Uthman ‘hsa b. Kinana (d. 802). Abe Musammad Yasya b. Yasya (d. 848). Ibn al-Ramc, 288–9. See, for example, al-Sijilmasc, as cited in Milliot, Démembrements du habous, 111; al-majwc, al-Fikr al-sAmC, 2: 465–6, trans. Berque, Essai, 120–1; Toledano, Judicial Practice, 12; and al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 342.

109

N O T E S (pp. 54–55)

45 E.g. Abdelkébir Alaoui M’daghri, Ma jara bihi-l-amal ou le droit coutumier: Une modèle typique de notre patrimoine juridique (Rabat: n.a., c. 1996), esp. 55–6; Chalmeta, “Acerca del “amal,” 339; al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 371; Toledano, Judicial Practice, 39–42 (but see also 17 n. 28); Berque, “‘Amal (3),” 428; idem, Essai, 69, in conjunction with 45 n. 1 and 47 n. 10; Abe ‘hsa “Scdc” al-Mahdc al-Wazzanc al-Fasc, TuSfat akyAs al-nAs bi-sharS “amaliyyAt FAs, ed. Hashim al-‘Alawc al-Qasimc (Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-alMamlaka al-Maghribiyya, 2001), 16; Milliot (with some reservations), Démembrements du habous, 26; al-Zaqqaq, al-LAmiyya, 33, trans. 35; Ibn Farsen, as represented by al-Sijilmasc and others in Milliot, Démembrements du habous, 114. Recently, Serrano Ruano has questioned this orthodoxy with regard to Andalusian “amal. Idem, “La práctica legal (“amal ) en al-Andalus,” 185. With regard to Ibn al-Ramc, Van Staëvel refutes entirely this orthodoxy, but upon no supporting evidence. Idem, “Les usages de la ville,” 2: 360. 46 “Fa-in qcla inna al-ba‘r mimma naqaltuhu ra‘cf na‘am lakinna ‘ala al-‘urf ‘iwalan.” Al-Zaqqaq, al-LAmiyya, 33 (verse 204). 47 For examples of this process, see Milliot, Démembrements du habous, 6–66, 83– 108; F. Guay and M. Ben Daoud, “Le mariage dans la jurisprudence des cadis de Fès,” Revue Algérienne, Tunisienne et Marocaine de Législation et Jurispridence 49 (1933): 178–207; and Jacques Berque, Ulémas, fondateurs, insurgés du Maghreb: XVIIe siècle (Paris: Sindbad, 1982), 215–17. On the jurist’s qualifications, as well as the requirement for repetition and, ideally, revocation, see al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 353–61; and Toledano, Judicial Practice, 15–16. 48 Al-Zaqqaq, al-LAmiyya, xiii–xiv; al-Wazzanc al-Fasc, TuSfat akyAs al-nAs, 13–14; Jacques Berque, “L’ambiguïté dans le fiqh,” in L’ambivalence dans la culture arabe, ed. Jean-Paul Charnay et al. (Paris: Éditions Anthropos, 1967), 246; and Berque, Ulémas, fondateurs, insurgés du Maghreb, 217. 49 RawR al-qirVAs, 51, trans., 44; Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 420; Marçais, Manuel d’art musulman, 2: 717–22. 50 RawR al-qirVAs, 51, trans., 44; al-‘Umarc, MasAlik el abUAr, 158; Leo Africanus, The History and Description of Africa, 2: 420. 51 Guy T. Petherbridge, “Vernacular Architecture in the Maghreb: Some Historical and Geographical Factors,” Maghreb Review 3 (1976): 17. 52 See below for collection details. 53 Hakim, Arabic-Islamic Cities, 22. 54 Kahera and Benmira, “Damages in Islamic Law,” 162. 55 ‘Azab, “Takhvcv wa ‘imara,” 84. See also, M’halla, “La Médina,” 63; Akbar, Crisis in the Built Environment, 93–104; al-Hathloul, “Tradition, Continuity and Change,” 75; and Brunschvig, “Urbanisme médiéval,” 133–4. 56 The next most frequently cited hadith appears twice. Ibn al-Imam, 2: 207–9. 57 Ibn al-Ramc, 288, 292, 298, 299, 335. The next most frequently cited hadith appears three times. Ibn al-Ramc (2), 254. See also Ibn Sahl, 100, 105, 112, 119, 134. 58 KitAb al-MCVAn, 80, 83, 118, 121, 123, 127, 143, 152, 153, 185. 59 Ibid., 127. 60 Malik b. Anas, al-MuwaVVa” li-imAm al-a”imma “Alim al-MadCna MAlik b. Anas, ed. Musammad b. Nauir al-‘Ajamc (Kuwait: Markaz al-Buseth wa al-Dirasat al-Kuwaytiyya, 1997), 245, 498. 61 As reported by Yasya b. Adam al-Qurayshc (d. 819) and Abe Dawud (d. 887), both cited in ‘Azab, “Takhvcv wa ‘imara,” 84 n. 1. 62 As noted, for example, in Nejmeddine, “La rue dans la ville de l’Occident musulman médiéval,” 295 n. 106; Kahera and Benmira, “Damages in Islamic Law,” 142; and Brunschvig, “Urbanisme médiéval,” 133.

110

N O T E S (pp. 56–59)

63 See, for example, immediately below; also Ibn Sahl, 119; Sulayman b. ‘Abd alQawiy b. ‘Abd al-Karcm b. Sa‘cd al-pef c, “Risalat al-pef c,” in ‘Abd al-Wahhab Khallaf, MaUARir al-tashrC“ al-islAmC fC-mA lA naUU fC-hi (Kuwait: Dar al-Qalam, 1970), 106–9; and Asmad b. al-Shaykh Musammad al-Zarqa’, SharS al-qawA“id al-fiqhiyya, ed. Muuvafa Asmad al-Zarqa’, 5th ed. (Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 1998), 165–77. 64 In Ibn al-Ramc (2), al-Khashanc is identified as Musammad b. ‘Abd Allah alSalam al-Qurvubc (d. 899). Ibid., 58 and 58 n. 2. 65 Qur’an, 9: 107. 66 Ibn al-Ramc, 299. 67 Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad al-Tawdc b. Seda, SharS al-TAwdC li-al-LAmiyya al-ZaqqAq (Egypt: 1931), 369, cited in Berque, Essai, 44 n. 1. 68 Mohamed El-Awa, “The Place of Custom (“Urf ) in Islamic Legal Theory,” Islamic Quarterly 17 (1973): 180; al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 172–5; Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence, revised ed. (Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1991), 86. On the use of custom in determining the meaning of judgements and contracts, see Ibn Farsen, TabUirat al-SukkAm, 2: 67–75; Musammad Y. Faruqi, “Consideration of “Urf in the Judgements of the KhulafA” al RAshidEn and the Early FuqahA”,” American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 9, no. 4 (1992): 493–8; and Baber Johansen, “Coutumes locales et coutumes universelles aux sources des règles juridiques en droit musulman hanéfite,” Annales Islamologiques 27 (1993): 29–30. 69 Kamali, Principles, 105. 70 Muuvafa Asmad al-Zarqa’, al-Madkhal al-fiqhC al-“Amm, 7th ed., 3 vols (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, n.d.) 2: 842. 71 Ibid., 2: 842–3. 72 Ibn al-Ramc, 299–300. 73 “Wa wujeh al-rarar kathcra tatabayyanu ‘inda nawazil al-sukm f c-ha.” Ibn al-Ramc, 300. 74 Al-Jayyidc, al-“Urf wa al-“amal, 86, 126, 149, 421; Faruqi, “Consideration of “Urf, 494. 75 Record 6 (vol. 1), Page 229, Case 418, appended in al-Hathloul, “Tradition, Continuity and Change,” 322. 76 Al-Hathloul, “Tradition, Continuity and Change,” 139. 77 Ibn Sahl, 92; translated in Case 2 of the present book’s appendix. 78 Ibn al-Ramc, 312–13. 79 See, for example, Farhat J. Ziadeh, ““Urf and Law in Islam,” in The World of Islam: Studies in Honour of Philip K. Hitti, ed. James Kritzech and R. Bayly Winder (London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd., 1959), 60–7; Abraham Udovitch, “Les échanges de marché dans l’Islam médiéval: Théorie du droit et savoir local,” Studia Islamica 65 (1987): 5–30; and Gideon Libson, “On the Development of Custom as a Source of Law in Islamic Law,” Islamic Law and Society 4, no. 2 (1997): 131–55. Chapter Five SHAME AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WALLS 1 Ziadeh, ““Urf and Law in Islam,” 60. 2 Ibid., 60; Toshihiko Izutsu, The Structure of the Ethical Terms in the Koran: A Study in Semantics (Tokyo: Keio Institute of Philological Studies, 1959), 218–22; Michael Cook, Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong in Islamic Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 567–9. 3 Agnes Heller, The Power of Shame: A Rational Perspective (London: Routledge and KeganPaul, 1985), 5–7.

111

N O T E S (pp. 59–60)

4 Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology, trans. Hazel E. Barnes (London: Methuen and Co. Ltd., 1958), 222 (emphasis as marked in the original). 5 E.g. Emmanuel Levinas, Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority, trans. Alphonso Lingis (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1969), 84; Carl D. Schneider, Shame, Exposure, and Privacy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1977), passim; Léon Wurmser, The Mask of Shame (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981), 29–59; Stanley Brandes, “Reflections on Honor and Shame in the Mediterranean,” in Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean, ed. David D. Gilmore (Washington: American Anthropological Association, 1987), 127–33; Toni M. Massaro, “Shame, Culture, and American Criminal Law,” Michigan Law Review 89 (1991): 1880–944; Michael Lewis, Shame: The Exposed Self (New York: The Free Press, 1992), 1–2; William Ian Miller, Humiliation and Other Essays on Honor, Social Discomfort, and Violence (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993), 117–24; Bernard Williams, Shame and Necessity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), 75–102; Deborah Stipek, “The Development of Pride and Shame in Toddlers,” in Self-Conscious Emotions: The Psychology of Shame, Guilt, Embarrassment, and Pride, ed. Jane Price Tangney and Kurt W. Fischer (New York: The Guilford Press, 1995), 237–52; and J.H. Neyrey, Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew (Louisville: Westminster John Know Press, 1998), 30–2. 6 In addition to the above titles, see especially, Gabriele Taylor, Pride, Shame, and Guilt: Emotions of Self-Assessment (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985), 53–84. For a succinct critique of the reduction of shame to disgrace or humiliation only, see Schneider, Shame, 18–28. 7 Léon Wurmser, “Shame: The Veiled Companion of Narcissism,” in The Many Faces of Shame, ed. Donald L. Nathanson (New York: The Guilford Press, 1987), 68. 8 “Li-kulli dcn khuluquhu wa khuluq al-Islam al-saya’.” Malik b. Anas, al-MuwaVVa’, 563; also collected by Ibn Majah. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 543. 9 “Inna f c-ka khaulatayn yusibbuhuma Allah al-silm wa al-saya’.” Ibn Majah, Sunan, k. al-zuhd, bab al-silm, raqm 4188; also collected by Ibn manbal. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 543. 10 “Inna Allah ‘azza wa jall idha arada an yuhlika abdan naza‘a min-hu al-saya’.” Ibn Majah, Sunan, k. al-fatan, bab dhahab al-amana, raqm 4054. 11 “Inna mimma adraka al-nas min kalam al-nubuwwa al-ela idha lam tastasi fa-iuna‘ ma shi’ta.” Al-Bukharc, OaSCS al-BukhArC, k. al-adab, bab 78, raqm 6120; also collected by Ibn Majah, al-Tirmidhc, and Ibn manbal. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 540. 12 “Al-saya’ la ya’tc illa bi-khayr.” Al-Bukharc, OaSCS al-BukhArC, k. al-adab, bab 77, raqm 6117; also collected by Muslim. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 542. 13 “Al-saya’ min al-cman.” Ibn Majah, Sunan, k. al-zuhd, bab al-saya’, raqm 4184; also collected by al-Bukharc, al-Tirmidhc, Malik, Ibn manbal, al-Nisa’c, and Muslim. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 542. Cf. “Faith is composed of sixty branches, and shame is one of them (Al-CmAn biR“ sittEna shu“ba wa al-SayA” shu“ba min al-CmAn).” Al-Bukharc, OaSCS al-BukhArC, k. al-cman, bab 3, raqm 9. 14 “Al-saya’ khayr kulluhu.” Muslim, OaSCS Muslim, k. al-cman, bab 12, raqm 61; also collected by Ibn manbal. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 542. 15 On the denigration of shame in modern Western culture, see Schneider, Shame, xiii-6; and idem, “A Mature Sense of Shame,” in The Many Faces of Shame, 196–9.

112

N O T E S (pp. 61–62)

16 The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, 33:53 (translation modified). Pickthall translates yastaSiyC as “to be shy”; both N.J. Dawood and Yesuf ‘Alc translate it as “to be ashamed.” The Koran, trans. N.J. Dawood, 4th ed. (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd., 1974); The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, trans. ‘Abdullah Yesuf ‘Alc, revised 7th ed. (Beltsville: Amana Publications, 1995), hereafter cited as The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An (2). 17 For full dictionary definitions of SayA” and its life-based cognates, including istaSyA, see Edward William Lane, An Arabic-English Lexicon, 4 vols. (London: Williams and Norgate, 1863–93), 1: 679–82. 18 E.g. “Lo! Pharaoh exalted himself in the earth and made its people castes. A tribe among them he oppressed, killing their sons and sparing ( yastaSiyC) their women.” The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, 28: 4. 19 Unni Wikan, “Shame and Honour: A Contestable Pair,” Man (New Series), 19 (1984): 636–7 (emphasis as marked in the original). 20 Ibid., 637. 21 Lila Abu-Lughod, Veiled Sentiments, 107–8. 22 Soumaya Naamane-Guessous, Au-delà de toute pudeur: La sexualité féminine au Maroc, 11th ed. (Casablanca: Editions Eddif, 2001), 6; Dale F. Eickelman, Moroccan Islam: Tradition and Society in a Pilgrimage Center (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1976), 138–41; Susan Schaefer Davis, Patience and Power: Women’s Lives in a Moroccan Village (Rochester: Schenkman Books, Inc., c. 1983), 23–5, and 156–9. 23 I have placed honor in scare quotes in order to indicate the difficulties of incautiously applying it cross-culturally. See, for example, Michael Herzfeld, “Honour and Shame: Problems in the Comparative Analysis of Moral Systems,” Man (New Series) 15 (1980): 339–51. Treatments of the Arabic, Urdu, and Turkish words for honor mentioned above include: T. Fahd, “Sharaf,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 313–14; Bichr Farès, “‘Irr,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 77; Michael E. Meeker, “Meaning and Society in the Near East: Examples from the Black Sea Turks and the Levantine Arabs (I),” International Journal of Middle East Studies 7 (1976): 243–70 (sharaf, namus); Papanek, “Purdah,” 318–19 (izzat); Bourdieu, “The Sense of Honour,” 117 et seq. (nif, Surma); and Frank Henderson Stewart, Honor (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994), esp. 81–5, 99–103, 132–3 (“irR, wajh, sharaf ). 24 Wikan, “Shame and Honour,” 636. This and other statements regarding the nature of honor should be read in conjunction with Stewart, Honor, esp. 9– 29. 25 On the reciprocity of shame and honor, see David D. Gilmore, “Introduction: The Shame of Dishonor,” in Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean, 3–4; also, Heller, The Power of Shame, 4; Taylor, Pride, Shame, and Guilt, 54–7, 80–1; and Miller, Humiliation, 116–19. Cf. “The capacity to feel shame has [ . . . ] been cited as a pre-condition of all the virtues, as in the Ethiopian proverb ‘Where there is no shame, there is no honour.’ ” Robert C. Solomon, “Shame,” in The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, ed. Ted Honderich (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 825. That honor and shame are reciprocal does not mean they are opposites. See Wikan, “Shame and Honour,” 636; and Stewart, Honor, 128–9. 26 See, for example, Richard Antoun’s discussion of “‘arr” (“irR ) in Kufr al-Ma, Jordan, in idem, “On the Modesty of Women in Arab Muslim Villages: A Study in the Accommodation of Traditions,” American Anthropologist 70, no. 4 (1968): 680–4. See also Bichr Farès, L’honneur chez les Arabes avant l’Islam: Étude de sociologie (Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient, Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1932),

113

N O T E S (pp. 62–63)

27 28

29

30 31 32 33

34

35 36 37

75–81; A.M. Abou-Zeid, “Honour and Shame among the Bedouins of Egypt,” in Honour and Shame: The Values of Mediterranean Society, ed. John G. Peristiany (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1965), 245–57; Papanek, “Purdah,” 316–19; Bourdieu, “The Sense of Honour,” 124–8; Abu-Lughod, Veiled Sentiments, 117; Sana Al-Khayyat, Honour and Shame: Women in Modern Iraq (London: Saqi Books, 1990), 21–6; and Stewart, Honor, 107–10. Finally, see discussions of so-called “honor killings,” in which women are murdered or urged to suicide by relatives for behavior considered dishonorable, shameless. E.g. Geraldine Brooks, Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1995; reprint, London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1996), 49–53; Lama AbuOdeh, “Crimes of Honour and the Construction of Gender in Arab Societies,” in Feminism and Islam: Legal and Literary Perspectives, ed. Mai Yamani (Reading: Ithaca Press for Centre of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1996), 141–94; Shahla Haeri, “Woman’s Body, Nation’s Honor: Rape in Pakistan,” in Hermeneutics and Honor: Negotiating Female “Public” Space in Islamic/ate Societies, ed. Asma Afsaruddin (Cambridge: Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies, 1999), 55–69; and Norma Khouri, Forbidden Love: Love and Betrayal in Modern-day Jordan (London: Doubleday, 2003), esp. 11–35. Farès, “ ‘Irr,” 77. See also Al-Khayyat, Honour and Shame, 21–2. See, for example, Farès, L’honneur chez les Arabes avant l’Islam, passim; Mohamed Abdesselem, Le thème de la mort dans la poésie arabe des origines à la fin du IIIe/ IXe siècle (Tunis: Publications de l’Université de Tunis, 1977), 36–9; Chelhod, “La place de la coutume dans le fiqh primitif,” Studia Islamica 64 (1986): 36; and Denise A. Spellberg, Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of “A”isha Bint Abi Bakr (New York: Columbia Press, 1994), 62–3, 73. E.g. Julian Pitt-Rivers, “Honor,” International Journal of the Social Sciences 6 (1968): 505, cited in Carol Delaney, “Seeds of Honor, Fields of Shame,” in Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean, 39; and Pierre Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice, trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 7. The one exception I am aware of is Eickelman, Moroccan Islam, 140. Wurmser, “Shame,” 68 (emphasis as marked in the original). For a full discussion of the nature of the audience, real or imagined, required for shame, see Taylor, Pride, Shame, and Guilt, 57–69. “Wa la kana al-saya’ f c shai’ qavvu illa zanahu.” Ibn Majah, Sunan, k. al-zuhd, bab al-saya’, raqm 4185; also collected by al-Tirmidhc and Ibn manbal. Wensinck et al., Concordance, 1: 543. The apparent contradiction between this hadith and one cited earlier, where shame is said to be within people (“Inside of you are two natural traits loved by God: reflection and shame”), is resolved by distinguishing the effects of shame from the capacity for shame. On this distinction, the two hadiths translate as: “Inside of you are two natural traits loved by God: reflection and the capacity for shame” and “The effects of shame never occur in a thing, but adorn it.” This function, without the corresponding sense of beauty attached to it, is also embedded in the English word for shame, derived from the Indo-European root *(s)kem-, to cover. Schneider, “A Mature Sense of Shame,” 199; also Wurmser, The Mask of Shame, 29. See, for example, 7:20–7; and 24:30–1. The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, 24:30–31 (translation modified in accordance with the exegesis in al-pabarc, JAmi“ al-bayAn, 18: 139–40). Al-pabarc, JAmi“ al-bayAn, 18: 139–40.

114

N O T E S (pp. 63–65)

38 Y.K. Stillman et al., “Libas,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 732. “Pudenda” is an awkward term to use for genitals as it carries a value judgement, namely, Western notions of shame. 39 The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An, 7:26 (translation modified). 40 Al-pabarc, JAmi“ al-bayAn, 8: 176. The other meanings that he mentions are faith (CmAn), good works (al-“amal al-UAliS), religious devotion (al-samt al-Sasan), fear of God (khashya AllAh), and modest behaviour (satr al-“awra). Ibid., 176–8. Shame is also given as the sole meaning of “libas al-taqwa” in Ibn Manwer, LisAn al-“arab, 16: 224. 41 See, for example, Robert F. Murphy, “Social Distance and the Veil,” American Anthropologist 66, no. 2 (1964): 1257, 1264–9; Papanek, “Purdah,” 294 et seq.; Ursula M. Sharma, “Women and Their Affines: The Veil as a Symbol of Separation,” Man (New Series) 13 (1978): 218–9, 227; and Jon W. Anderson, “Social Structure and the Veil: Comportment and the Composition of Interaction in Afghanistan,” Anthropos 77 (1982): 402–6. 42 Schneider, Shame, 26, 39, 138–9. 43 Abu-Lughod, Veiled Sentiments, 115–6. See also ibid., 156–7. 44 Murphy, “Social Distance and the Veil,” 1264. 45 Ibid., 1268. 46 In the case of a faux-pas, the emotional discomfiture experienced by the perpetrator’s audience is often more one of embarrassment: a shallower type of shame. Taylor, Pride, Shame, and Guilt, 68–76; and especially Robert C. Roberts, Emotions: An Essay in Aid of Moral Psychology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 230–3. 47 33:53. 48 On the Qur’anic status of the Prophet’s wives and the Hadith’s account of their cramped living conditions, see Qur’an 33:32, 33:59; Abbott, Aishah, 25–7; Stowasser, “The Status of Women,” 23–4; and idem, “The MijAb,” 92. 49 Issan ‘Abbas, TArCkh al-adab al-andalusC. Vol. II: “AUr al-PawA”if wa al-MurAbiVCn (Beirut: Dar al-Thaqafa, 1962), 177–93; Hassen Mustapha, “Recherche sur les poèmes inspirés par la perte ou la destruction des villes dans la littérature arabe à partir du IIIe/IXe siècle jusqu’à la prise de Grenade en 897/1492,” 2 vols (Thèse de doctorat de troisième cycle, Université de Sorbonne, 1977), 1: 44–7, 55–7; Charles Pellat, “Marthiya (1),” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 602–7; ‘Abd al-Rahman musayn Musammad, RithA” al-mudun wa mamAlik al-zA”ila fC al-shi“r al-“arabC SattA suqEV GharnAVa (Cairo: n.a., 1983), 105–223; Asmad b. Musammad al-Maqqarc al-Tlimsanc, NafS al-VCb min ghuUn al-Andalus al-raVCb, ed. Issan ‘Abbas, 8 vols (Beirut: Dar al-oadir, 1988), 4: 446–553; ‘Abd Allah Musammad al-Zayyat, RithA” al-mudun fC shi“r al-andalusC (Benghazi: Jami‘at Qar Yunis, 1990), 81–95. 50 “[ . . . ] ma sam‘at bi-al-fala: qavvu fa-‘ayanat al-fala daraha.” 51 “Wa kanat al-astar afaqaha: fa-‘adat al-afaq astaraha.” 52 “Wa lam takun talsawuha muqla: lawm kassalat bi-al-shams ashfaraha.” Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Sa‘cd b. Asmad b. Sharaf al-Qayrawanc, compiled in Mustapha, “Recherche sur les poèmes,” 2: 186. 53 “Hatake bi-khaylihim quuer sarcmiha.” 54 “Wa mauena f c khidriha masjeba: qad abrazeha ma la-ha istikhfa’.” 55 “Law-la dhuneb al-muslimcn wa anna-hum: rakibe al-kaba’ir ma la-hunna khafa’ Ma kana yunuaru li-al-nauara faris: abadan ‘alay-him [ . . . . ]” Abe Musammad ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Assal, untitled rithA”, compiled in Mustapha, “Recherche sur les poèmes,” 2: 215; also, ‘Abbas, “AUr al-PawA”if, 178 (lines 1–8 only); and al-Zayyat, RithA” al-mudun, 669–70; trans. Henri Pérès, La poésie andalouse en

115

N O T E S (pp. 65–67)

56 57

58

59

60

61

arabe classique au XIe siècle: Ses aspects généraux et sa valeur documentaire (Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1937), 99. “mavva al-qina‘ fa-lam tastar mukhaddara: wa muzziqat awjuh tamzcq abrad.” Ibn al-Labbana (Abe Bakr Musammad b. ‘hsa), untitled rithA”, compiled in Musammad, RithA” al-mudun, 164; trans. Pérès, La poésie andalouse, 103. “Fa-inna kulla badan al-surra ‘awra.” Al-Bayrawc, TafsCr al-BayRAwC, 2: 121. Cf. Ibn Taymiyya’s (d. 1328) assertion, quoted earlier in Chapter Two, that “[women must be] veiled with clothing (libAs) and houses.” Ibn Taymiyya, cited in Marmon, Eunuchs and Sacred Boundaries, 8. On popular variants of alBayrawc’s formula, the following modern examples are likely also representative of an earlier period. “A girl is an object of shame; she must be clothed; she must be protected”: the words of a twentieth-century Jordanian man, cited in Antoun, “On the Modesty of Women”, 680. “Girls are the source of disgrace and reviling. They cause the enemy to have access to one’s house”: a Lebanese proverb, cited in Petherbridge, “The House and Society,” 193. “Ghaya f c susn wajhiha [ . . . ] wa ‘afafiha wa vaharatiha wa khafariha.” Abe Musammad ‘Alc b. Asmad b. Sa‘cd b. mazm al-Andalusc, Le collier du pigeon ou de l’amour et des amants: Pawq al-SamAma fC”l-ulfa wa”l-ullAf, trans. Léon Bercher (Algiers: Editions Carbonel, 1946), 282. Nykl refers to her as a servant girl “belonging to a noble lady,” but in Bercher’s Arabic edition this is not apparent; rather, “she had grown up in our house (nasha”at fC dArinA).” Alois Richard Nykl, Hispano-Arabic Poetry and Its Relations with the Old Provencal Troubadors (Baltimore: n.a., 1946), 76. “Wa dhalika li-qillat ihtibal bi-nafsiha wa ‘adamiha al-uiyana allatc kanat ghudhdhiyat bi-ha ayyam dawlatina wa imtidad willina. Wa li-tabadhdhuliha f c khurej f c-ma la budda la-ha min-hu mimma kanat tuuanu wa turfa‘u ‘an-hu qablu. Wa innama al-nisa’ rayascn mata lam tata‘ahad naqauat wa bunya mata lam yahtabil bi-ha istahdamat.” Ibn mazm, Le collier du pigeon, 288–90. See, for example, al-Sumaysir’s (Abe al-Qasim Khalaf Faraj, d. after 1091) rithA” on Madcnat al-Zahra’, Andalusia, cited in al-Maqqarc, NafS al-VCb, 1: 527–8 (and also compiled in al-Zayyat, RithA” al-mudun, 665; trans. Pérès, La poésie andalouse, 126, and Nykl, Hispano-Arabic Poetry, 193). See, too, al-Fats b. Khaqan’s (d. 1134) description of the same dilapidated locality: “The ruins of the houses rose up before [the visitors] like bereaved mothers mourning their destruction (ka-thakAlA yanuSna “alA kharAbihA),” cited in al-Maqqarc, NafS al-VCb, 1: 624. Finally, see Musammad b. Yasya’s (n.d.) description of the breached and ruined Ka‘ba after the fighting and blaze of 683: “[The Ka‘ba] was like the bosoms of [mourning] women (ka-anna-hA juyEb al-nisA”),” cited in Abe al-Walcd Musammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. Asmad al-Azraqc, AkhbAr Makka wa mA jA” fC-hA min al-athAr, ed. Rushdc al-oalis Malsas, 2 vols in 1 binding (Mecca: Mavabi‘ Dar al-Thaqafa, 1996), 1: 199. See Chapter One for citation details. Cf. the proverb from medieval Andalusia: “A hidden prostitute is better than a well-known free woman,” cited in translation only and without collection details in Nadia Lachiri, “Andalusi Proverbs on Women,” in Writing the Feminine, 43. Chapter Six ZEF/FEZ

1 Cited in Mezzine, “La mémoire effritée,” 40. 2 See, for example, G.E. von Grunebaum, “The Sacred Character of Islamic Cities,” in Mélanges Taha Hussein: Offerts par ses amis et ses disciples à l’occasion de son 70ième anniversaire, ed. Abdurrahman Badawi (Cairo: Dar Al-Maaref,

116

N O T E S (pp. 68–71)

3

4 5 6 7 8

9 10

11 12 13 14 15

16 17 18 19 20

1962), 25–37; Heribert von Busse, “Der Islam und die biblischen Kultstätten,” Der Islam 42 (1966): 113–47; F. de Polignac, “L’imaginaire Arabe et le mythe de la foundation légitime,” Revue de l’Occident Musulman et de la Méditerranée 46 (1987): 55–63; and Franck Mermier, “Les foundations mythiques de Sanaa et d’Aden,” Revue du Monde Musulman et de la Méditerranée 67, no. 1 (1993): 131–9. Cf. Giovanna Calasso, “I nomi delle prime città di fondazione islamica nel BuldAn di Yaqet: Etimologie e racconti di origine,” in Studi in onore di Francesco Gabrieli nel suo ottantesimo compleano, ed. Renato Traini, 2 vols (Rome: Università di Roma “La Sapienza,” 1984), 1: 147. Northrop Frye, Words With Power: Being a Second Study of “The Bible and Literature” (San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990), 30. Bronislaw Malinowski, “Myth in Primitive Psychology,” in idem, Magic, Science and Religion and Other Essays by Bronislaw Malinowski (London: Souvenir Press, 1974), 106. See also Calasso, “Genealogie e miti di fondazione: Note sulle origini di Fas secondo le fonti merinidi,” 21–7; and Beck, L’image d’IdrCs II, esp. 124–9. RawR al-qirVAs, 46; trans., 40. Cf. Zahrat al-As, 23, trans., 48. “ ‘Ikhtavvaha’: to put a mark, the mark of an outline, on the site, so as to make it known that the site is claimed for building a house [ . . . . ] It is said a person has done ‘ikhtavva’ when he has taken a site and outlined it with a wall ( jıdAr).” Ibn Manwer, LisAn al-“arab, 7: 288. As Calasso says, the perimeter walls are a secondary element of ikhtaVVa; of greater significance are the internal walls, “which, one might say, circumscribe the city.” Idem, “I nomi delle prime città,” 155. Bourdieu’s treatment of “field” and “field of power” is diffuse, spread across his writings, but see, inter alia, Pierre Bourdieu, “Champ du pouvoir, champ intellectuel et habitus de classe,” Scolies 1, no. 1 (1971): 7–26; idem “The Genesis of the Concepts of Habitus and of Field,” Sociocriticism 1, no. 2 (1985): 16–24; and especially idem and Loïc J.D. Wacquant, An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992), 76–7, 76 n. 16, 99–115; and Loïc J.D. Wacquant, “From Ruling Class to Field of Power: An Interview with Pierre Bourdieu on La noblesse d’État,” Theory, Culture and Society 10, no. 3 (1993): 20–5. “Al-sunna wa al-jama‘a”: see Dozy, Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes, 1: 215. Qur’an 7:128. Zahrat al-As, 22–3, trans., 47. Cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 45; trans., 39. Zahrat al-As, 23, trans., 48–9. Cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 46; trans., 40–1. RawR al-qirVAs, 45; trans., 40. Cf. Zahrat al-As, 20, trans., 42. This hadith is discussed in Ignaz Goldziher, Muslim Studies (Muhammedanische Studien), ed. S.M. Stern, trans. C.R. Barber and S.M. Stern, 2 vols (London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1967–71), 2: 121–5. Zahrat al-As, 24, trans., 50. Cf. RawR al-qirVAs, 54; trans., 46. Ibn ‘Idharc al-Marrakushc, al-BayAn al-mughrib fC akhbAr al-Andalus wa alMaghrib, ed. G.S. Colin and Évariste Lévi-Provençal, 2 vols (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1948), 1: 20. “Fa-ikhtavva ‘Uqba awwalan dar al-imara thumma ata ila mawri‘ al-masjid ala‘wam fa-ikhtavvahu.” Ibid., 1: 20. Paul Wheatley, The Places Where Men Pray Together: Cities in Islamic Lands, Seventh through the Tenth Centuries (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2001), 228. Ibid., 54.

117

N O T E S (pp. 71–72)

21 Abe Ja‘far Musammad b. Jarcr al-pabarc, Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa al-mulEk, ed. M.J. de Goeje et al., 16 vols (incl. 2 indices) in 3 series (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1964), series III: vol. 1: p. 276; trans., idem, The History of al-PabarC (Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa”l-mulEk), ed. Ehsan Yar-Shater et al., 39 vols (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1985–98), 28: 244. 22 “Wa amara bi-khavv al-madcna wa safr al-asasat.” Al-pabarc, Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa al-mulEk, III: 1: 277; trans., 28: 245. 23 Ibid., III: 1: 277, trans., 28: 245–6. 24 See, for example, Charles Wendell, “Baghdad: Imago Mundi, and Other Foundation-Lore,” International Journal of Middle East Studies 2 (1971): 111–12; and Calasso, “Genealogie e miti di fondazione,” 20. 25 Wendell, “Baghdad,” 111–12. Cf. Al-pabarc, Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa al-mulEk, II: 2: 1126; trans., 23: 71. 26 Al-pabarc, Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa al-mulEk, III: 1: 276, trans. 28: 244–5; and III: 1: 372, trans. 29: 67–8. 27 Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. ‘Abd al-Mun‘im al-mimyarc, La péninsule ibérique au moyen-âge d”après le KitAb ar-RawR al-mi“VAr f C khabar al-aqVAr d”Ibn “Abd al-Mun“im al-MimyarC. Edited by Évariste Lévi-Provençal (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1938), 80 (Arabic), 100–1 (French). 28 According to Alistair Northedge, this was the name used for Samarra at the caliph’s court and represents an unusual wordplay. It means: “He who sees it is delighted.” Idem, “Samarra’,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 1039. 29 “Thumma khavva al-qiva‘ li-al-quwwad wa al-kuttab wa al-nas wa khavva al-masjid al-jami‘.” Ja‘far al-Khushshakc, cited in al-Ya‘qebc, KitAb al-BuldAn, 255–8. 30 To be sure, the city of the prophet Shem is not of the same pre-Islamic order as that of Zef, city of paganism. Hence, the frequent desire of Muslim authors to ascribe to their cities more than antique, but Biblical origins: prophets acknowledged by the Qur’an and their own prophet. See von Grunebaum, “The Sacred Character of Islamic Cities,” 25–6; and von Busse, “Der Islam und die biblischen Kultstätten,” esp. 137–42; de Polignac, “L’imaginaire Arabe et le mythe de la foundation légitime,” 60. 31 Cf. Calasso, “Genealogie e miti di fondazione,” 20. 32 R. Stephen Humphreys, “Qur’anic Myth and Narrative Structure in Early Islamic Historiography,” in Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity, ed. idem and F.M. Clover (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1989), 271–90. 33 Malinowski, “Myth in Primitive Psychology,” 108. Also, “Myths never explain in any sense of the word; they always state a precedent which constitutes an ideal [ . . . . ]” Ibid., 110. 34 See, for example, Edmund Leach, “Anthropological Approaches to the Bible During the Twentieth Century,” in Structuralist Interpretations of Biblical Myth, ed. idem and D. Alan Aycock (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 8. 35 Edmund Leach, “Introduction,” in M.I. Steblin-Kamenskij, Myth, trans. Mary P. Coote and Frederic Amory (Ann Arbor: Karoma, 1982), 16–18. See also ibid., 5–7, 14–16; and idem, “Anthropological Approaches to the Bible,” 9, 25. 36 Idem, “Introduction,” 6; also, idem, “Anthropological Approaches to the Bible,” 9. By way of comparison, Leach also counts as myth the oral traditions of rival football clubs. Idem, “Introduction,” 18. 37 Upon different criteria, John Wansbrough also refers to the sCra literature in terms of myth. Idem, The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978), 1–49, esp. 23, 31, 33.

118

N O T E S (pp. 72–75)

38 39 40 41

42 43 44 45

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58

59

W. Raven, “Scra,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 660. Ibid., 663. Qur’an 33:21. On the orality of the traditions and their compilations, see especially Uri Rubin, “Introduction: The Prophet Musammad and the Islamic Sources,” in The Life of MuSammad, ed. idem (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1998), xiii, xxv– ix; and M.J. Kister, “The SCrah Literature,” in Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period, ed. A.F.L. Beeston et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), 352, 366–7. On the often contradictory nature of the traditions, see Raven, “Scra,” 662; Uri Rubin, “The Life of Musammad and the Islamic SelfImage: A Comparative Analysis of an Episode in the Campaigns of Badr and almudaybiya,” in The Biography of MuSammad: The Issue of the Sources, ed. Harald Motzki (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 3–16; Uri Rubin, The Eye of the Beholder: The Life of MuSammad as Viewed by the Earliest Sources. A Textual Analysis (Princeton: The Darwin Press, Inc., 1995), passim; J.M.B. Jones, “The MaghAzC Literature,” in Arabic Literature, 349–51; and W. Montgomery Watt, “The Materials Used by Ibn Issaq,” in Historians of the Middle East, ed. Bernard Lewis and P.M. Holt (London: Oxford University Press, 1962), 30–3. Rubin, “Introduction,” xiii. Mircea Eliade, Myth and Reality, trans. Willard R. Trask (London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1964), 5–6. See also ibid., 18–20. Leach, “Introduction,” 5–6; Eliade, Myth and Reality, 18–20. On Ibn Issaq, his text’s different recensions and still incomplete reconstruction from other sources, see, inter alia, Josef Horovitz, “The Earliest Biographies of the Prophet and Their Authors,” Islamic Culture 2 (1928): 169–82; Alfred Guillaume’s “Introduction” to Ibn Hisham, The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of IsSAq’s Scrat Rasel Allah, xiii–xli; and A.A. Duri, The Rise of Historical Writing Among the Arabs, ed. and trans. Lawrence I. Conrad (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983), 33–6. Duri, The Rise of Historical Writing, 36. Raven, “Scra,” 661. W. Montgomery Watt, “Ibn Hisham,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 800. Ibn Hisham, al-SCra, 1: 149–50; trans., 80–1. Cf. al-pabarc, Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa al-mulEk, I: 3: 1123–5; trans., 6: 44–5. Armand Abel, “Bascra,” in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 922 (my emphasis). Cf. Wendell, “Baghdad,” 111. Ibn Hisham, al-SCra, 2: 105; trans., 227. Ibn Hisham, al-SCra, 2: 105–108; trans., 228–9. See, for example, al-Bukharc, OaSCS al-BukhArC, k. farl al-ualat f c masjid Makka wa Madcna, abwab 1–3, 5–6, arqam 1188–93, 1195–7. See, for example, Hillenbrand, Islamic Architecture, 40. Johns, “The ‘House of the Prophet’,” 103; his demonstration then follows, 103–7. Ibn Hisham, al-SCra, 2: 116; trans., 235. This passage was cited earlier in Chapter One. Wheatley, The Places Where Men Pray Together, 25; see also R.B. Serjeant, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah, Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the TaSrCm of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the so-called ‘Constitution of Medina’,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 4 (1978): 2. Ibn Hisham, al-SCra, 2: 111; trans., 231.

119

N O T E S (pp. 75–76)

60 R. Stephen Humphreys, Islamic History: A Framework for Inquiry, revised ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), 92; but note that Patricia Crone and Michael Cook, for example, refer to it as only “plausibly archaic,” in idem, Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 7. 61 See Humphreys’ summary of the debates, in idem, Islamic History, 93–8. 62 Serjeant, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 16–39. Page and clause references to the Arabic will come first. 63 W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad at Medina (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1956), 221–5. 64 Serjeant, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 16: 1, trans. 18: 1; 23: 3a, trans. 24: 3a; Watt, Muhammad at Medina, 221, 223: 22. For its location in the SCra, see Ibn Hisham, al-SCra, 2: 111–13; trans., 231–3. 65 ‘Alc b. ‘Abd Allah al-Samhedc, KitAb WafA” al-wafA” bi-akhbar dAr al-MuUVafA, 2 vols (Cairo: n.a., 1908), 1: 190, and musayn b. Musammad al-Diyarbakrc, Ta”rCkh al-khamCs f C aSwAl anfas naf Cs, 2 vols (Cairo: n.a., 1885), 1: 398, both cited in Moshe Gil, “The Constitution of Medina: A Reconsideration,” Israel Oriental Studies 4 (1974): 49. See also R.B. Serjeant, “The ‘Constitution of Medina’,” Islamic Quarterly 8, no. 1–2 (1964): 7. 66 On different chronologies proposed for the Constitution in Western scholarship, see especially Serjeant’s, in ibid., 8–16; and idem, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 15–39. 67 Serjeant, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 16: 2a, trans. 18: 2a; 26: 2a, trans. 27: 2a; Watt, Muhammad at Medina, 221: 1, 223: 25. 68 Serjeant, “The ‘Constitution of Medina’,” 13; idem, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 4; Frederick Mathewson Denny, “Ummah in the Constitution of Medina,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 36, no. 1 (1977): 44. 69 Serjeant, “The ‘Constitution of Medina’,” 12–13; Denny, “Ummah,” 44–5. 70 Serjeant, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 35: 1, trans. 35: 1; Watt, Muhammad at Medina, 224: 39. 71 R.B. Serjeant, “Haram and Hawtah, the Sacred Enclave in Arabia,” in Mélanges Taha Hussein, 50. 72 See Serjeant “The ‘Constitution of Medina’,” 11–13; and idem, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 4. On the clause that renders the Prophet the final arbiter, see ibid., 24: 4, trans. 24: 4; Watt, Muhammad at Medina, 223: 23; see also Serjeant, “The Sunnah JAmi“ah,” 25: 4. 73 Serjeant, “Haram and Hawtah,” 47–50. 74 Ibid., 50. 75 Idem, “The ‘Constitution of Medina’,” 15. 76 For acceptance of this thesis, see Gil, “The Constitution of Medina,” 56; and Wheatley, The Places Where Men Pray Together, 27–8. For more guarded acceptance, see Denny, “Ummah in the Constitution of Medina,” 46; and Humphreys, Islamic History, 95. 77 Cf. Calasso, “I nomi delle prime città,” 153–4. 78 This meaning is explicit in the Qur’anic usage of the verb hAjara f C, e.g. “Those who left [their homes] for [the sake of ] God (hAjarE f C AllAh) after being oppressed, We shall house well in the world.” Qur’an 16:41; see also 16:110 and 22:58. Cf. Daoud S. Casewit, “Hijra as History and Metaphor: A Survey of Qur’anic and madcth Sources,” The Muslim World 88, no. 2 (1998): 109 n. 18, 117. Struggle and effort are required to achieve this severance from the bad and attachment to the good; hence the Qur’anic association of hijra with jihad ( jihAd, striving or fighting for God), e.g. “Those who believed and left [their homes]

120

N O T E S (pp. 77–87)

and strove (hAjarE wa jAhadE) with their wealth and their lives in the way of God [ . . . . ]” Qur’an 8:72; see also 8:73–5. 79 Tarif Khalidi, “Some Classical Islamic Views of the City,” in Studia Arabica et Islamica: Festschrift for ISsAn “AbbAs on his Sixtieth Birthday, ed. Wadad al-Qarc (Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1981), passim. CONCLUSION 1 Bernard Tschumi, Architecture and Disjunction (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996), 59. 2 Cf. Victor Burgin, In/Different Spaces: Places and Memory in Visual Culture (Berkelely: University of California Press, 1996), 30–1. 3 Richard van Leeuwen, “Space as a Metaphor in Alf laylah wa-laylah: The Archetypal City,” in Myths, Historical Archetypes and Symbolic Figures in Arabic Literature: Proceedings of the International Symposium in Beirut, June 25th–June 30th, 1996, ed. Angelika Neuwirth et al. (Beirut: Franz Steiner Verlag Stuttgart, 1999), 493. 4 Ludwig Wittgenstein, Culture and Value, ed. G.H. von Wright, trans. Peter Winch (Oxford: Blackwell, 1980), 53e. 5 Tschumi, Architecture and Disjunction, 59–62. 6 Heidegger, “Building Dwelling Thinking,” in Poetry, Language, Thought, ed. and trans. Albert Hofstadter (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., 1971), 154. 7 Cf. Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Brian Massumi (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987), 494; James Dickie, “Space and Volume in Naurid Architecture,” in The Legacy of Muslim Spain, 623–4; and Bechir Kenzari and Yasser Elsheshtawy, “The Ambiguous Veil: On Transparency, the Mashrabiy’ya [sic], and Architecture,” Journal of Architectural Education 56, no. 4 (2003): 17–25. With thanks to Catherine Roberts for bringing this last text to my attention. 8 See, for example, the celebrated Moroccan scholar al-Yesc (d. 1691), effectively a rural visitor to Fez in 1675, who wrote in a letter during his stay there that “he was slowly dying in the narrow streets flanked by tall buildings which closed in upon him and obscured his line of vision.” Cited in Peters, “The Barzakh,” 7. APPENDIX A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF CASES AND CASE TITLES FROM THE BOOK OF WALLS 1 Ibn al-Imam; titles in order of appearance. 2 Ibn Sahl; titles in order of appearance. 3 As the term SA”iV can also be used to mean a walled enclosure (an orchard or garden, for example), its usage here might be to this restricted meaning. 4 KitAb al-MCVAn; titles in order of appearance. 5 Ibn al-Ramc; titles in order of appearance. 6 Al-Wansharcsc, al-Mi“yAr al-mu“rib, 8: 435–8 and 9: 5–73; titles in order of appearance. 7 Ibn al-Imam, 2: 73–4. 8 Musammad b. ‘Attab b. Mussin (d. 1070), head of the ahl al-shErA, an advisory council of senior jurists. 9 Abe ‘Umar Asmad b. Musammad b. ‘hsa b. Hilal al-Qavvan (d. 1067), a scholar from Cordoba. 10 “Wa la yumna‘u min dhalika wa la min a‘la sa’ivihi min ghayri rarar illa min al-rcs wa al-rau’ wa shibhihi fa-laysa bi-rarar.” Ibn Sahl, 92.

121

N O T E S (pp. 87–89)

11 ‘Abcd Allah b. Musammad b. Malik (d. 1067), a specialist in Hadith and legal cases. 12 Cf. the variant recording of this dispute in Ibn al-Ramc (2), 147. 13 mabcb b. Nauar b. Sahl al-Tamcmc (d. 900), author of works on Sasnen’s legal questions. 14 Ibn Sahl, 92–4. 15 Abe ‘Abd Allah al-Damaghanc al-Kabcr (d. after 1055), chief qadi of Baghdad. 16 Most probably Musammad b. Mesa b. Musammad al-Khawarazamc (d. 1012), a mufti of Baghdad. 17 Al-musayn b. ‘Alc b. Musammad Abe ‘Abd Allah al-oaymirc (d. 1044), a mufti and qadi of Baghdad. 18 KitAb al-MCVAn, 119–23. 19 On the identifying bond and other architectural terms mentioned in this citation, see Hakim, Arabic-Islamic Cities, 39–45. 20 For collection details of this hadith, see Chapter Three. For an analysis of the hadith as it pertains to the urban architectural environment, see M’halla, “La Médina,” 44–9. 21 Ibn al-Ramc, 275–82.

122

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

‘Abbas, Issan. TArCkh al-adab al-andalusC. Vol. II: “AUr al-PawA”if wa al-MurAbiVCn. Beirut: Dar al-Thaqafa, 1962. Abbott, Nabia. Aishah: The Beloved of Mohammed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942. Reprint, London: Saqi Books, 1998. ‘Abd al-Baqc, Musammad Fu’ad. Al-Mu“jam al-mufahris li-al-alfaz al-Qur’an alKarcm. 4th ed. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994. Abdesselem, Mohamed. Le thème de la mort dans la poésie arabe des origines à la fin du IIIe/IXe siècle. Tunis: Publications de l’Université de Tunis, 1977. Abel, Armand. “Dar al-Islam.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 126. ——. “Dar al-marb.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 127. ——. “Bascra.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 922–3. Abou-Zeid, A.M. “Honour and Shame among the Bedouins of Egypt.” In Honour and Shame: The Values of Mediterranean Society, edited by John G. Peristiany, 245–59. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1965. Abe Dawud, Sulayman b. al-Ash‘ath. Sunan AbC DAwud. Edited by Musammad ‘Abd al-‘Azcz al-Khalidc. 3 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1996. Abu-Gazzeh, Tawfiq. “Privacy as the Basis of Architectural Planning in the Islamic Culture of Saudi Arabia: The Social and Psychological Aspects of Boundaries.” Architecture et Comportement/Architecture and Behaviour 11, no. 3–4 Special Issue: Faith and the Built Environment: Architecture and Behaviour in Islamic Countries (1995): 93–111 (269–87). Abu-Lughod, Janet. “The Islamic City – Historic Myth, Islamic Essence and Contemporary Relevance.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 19, no. 2 (1987): 155–76. Abu-Lughod, Lila. Veiled Sentiments: Honor and Poetry in a Bedouin Society. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986. Abu-Odeh, Lama. “Crimes of Honour and the Construction of Gender in Arab Societies.” In Feminism and Islam: Legal and Literary Perspectives, edited by Mai Yamani, 141–94. Reading: Ithaca Press for Centre of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1996. Aguilar, Victoria, and Manuela Marín. “Las mujeres en el espacio urbano de Al-Andalus.” In Casas y palacios de Al-Andalus, edited by Julio Navarro Palazón, 39–43. Barcelona: Lunwerg Editores S.A., 1995. Ahmed, Leila. Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992.

123

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akbar, Jamel. Crisis in the Built Environment: The Case of the Muslim City. Singapore: Concept Media Pte. Ltd., 1988. ——. “Gates as Signs of Autonomy in Muslim Towns.” Muqarnas: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture 10 (1993): 141–7. Alsayyad, Nezar. Cities and Caliphs: On the Genesis of Arab Muslim Urbanism. New York: Greenwood Press, 1991. Alshech, Eli. “ ‘Do Not Enter Houses Other Than Your Own’: The Evolution of the Notion of a Private Domestic Sphere in Early Sunnc Islamic Thought.” Islamic Law and Society 11, no. 3 (2004): 291–332. Ameur, Mohamed, A. Baltagi, J. Barbier et al. Sauvegarde de la ville de Fes. 2 vols. Paris/Fes: Programme Des Nations Unies Pour Le Développement/Ministère de L’Intérieur, Maroc, 1992. Ameur, Mohamed. Fès ou l’obsession du foncier. Vol. 25, Fascicule de Recherches. Tours: Centre Études et de Recherche URBAMA, 1993. Amicis, Edmondo de. Morocco: Its People and Places. Translated by C. RollinTilton. New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, The Knickerbocker Press, 1888. Anderson, Jon W. “Social Structure and the Veil: Comportment and the Composition of Interaction in Afghanistan.” Anthropos 77 (1982): 397–420. Antoun, Richard T. “On the Modesty of Women in Arab Muslim Villages: A Study in the Accommodation of Traditions.” American Anthropologist 70, no. 4 (1968): 671–97. Arcas Campoy, María. “Algunas consideraciones sobre los tratados de jurisprudencia Maliki de Al-Andalus.” Miscelánea de Estudios Árabes y Hebraicos 37 (1988): 13– 21. Ávila, María Luisa. “Women in Andalusi Biographical Sources.” In Writing the Feminine: Women in Arab Sources, edited by Manuela Marín and Randi Deguilhem, 149–63. London: I.B. Tauris Publishers, 2002. el-Awa, Mohamed. “The Place of Custom (“Urf ) in Islamic Legal Theory.” Islamic Quarterly 17 (1973): 177–82. ‘Azab, Khalid Musammad Muuvafa. “Takhvcv wa ‘imarat al-mudun al-islamiyya.” KitAb al-Umma (Qatar) 58 (1997): 9–141. al-Azraqc, Abe al-Walcd Musammad b. ‘Abd Allah b. Asmad. AkhbAr Makka wa mA jA” fC-hA min al-athAr. Edited by Rushdc al-oalis Malsas. 1 binding 2 vols. Mecca: Mavabi‘ Dar al-Thaqafa, 1996. Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space. Translated by Maria Jolas. New York: The Orion Press, Inc., 1964. Reprint, Boston: Beacon Press, 1969. Bahloul, Joëlle. The Architecture of Memory: A Jewish-Muslim Household in Colonial Algeria, 1937–1962. Translated by Catherine du Peloux Ménagé, Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. al-Bajc, Abe al-Walcd Sulayman b. Khalaf. FuUEl al-aSkAm wa bayAn mA maRA “alayhi al-“amal “inda al-fuqahA” wa al-SukkAm. Edited by al-Batel b. ‘Alc. Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-al-Mamlaka al-Maghribiyya, 1990. al-Bakrc, Abe ‘Ubayd. Al-Maghrib fC dhikr bilAd IfrCqiya wa al-Maghrib wa huwa juz” min KitAb al-MasAlik wa al-mamAlik. Cairo: Dar al-Kitab al-Islamc, n.d. Barbier. “Des droits et obligations entre propriétaires d’héritages voisins.” Revue Algérienne, Tunisienne et Marocaine de Législation et Jurispridence 16 and 17 (1900 and 1901): 16: 9–15, 17–23, 42–56, 93–104, 13–44; 17: 65–84, 89–8.

124

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bataillon, Marcel. “Le rêve de la conquête de Fès et le sentiment impérial portugais au XVIè siècle.” In Mélanges d’études luso-marocines dédiés à la mémoire de David Lopes et Pierre de Cenival, 31–9. Lisbon: Instituto Para Alta Cultura, with L’Institut Des Hautes Études Marocaines de Rabat, 1945. al-Bayrawc, Nauir al-Dcn Abc Sa‘cd ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Umar b. Musammad al-Shirazc. TafsCr al-BayRAwC al-musammA AnwAr al-tanzCl wa asrAr al-ta”wCl. 2 vols Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1999. Beck, Herman L. L’image d’IdrCs II, ses descendants de FAs et la politique sharCfienne des sultans marCnides (656–869/1258–1465). Vol. 3, AsfAr: Publications of the Research Institute for the History of Muslim-Christian Relations, Leiden University. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1989. Behrens-Abouseif, Doris. Islamic Architecture in Cairo: An Introduction. Paperback ed. Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, 1989. ——. “La conception de la ville dans la pensée arabe du Moyen Âge.” In Mégapoles méditerranéennes: Géographie urbaine rétrospective. Actes du colloque organisé par l’École française de Rome et la Maison méditerranéenne des sciences de l’homme (Rome, 8–11 mai 1996), edited by Claude Nicolet, Robert Ilbert and Jean-Charles Depaule, 32–40. Paris/Rome: Maisonneuve et Larose/École française de Rome, 2000. Bel, Alfred. Inscriptions arabes de Fès. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1919. Belrhiti, Mohamed Alaoui. Fez: Lieu d’écriture. Casablanca: Afrique Orient, 1988. Ben Hamouche, Mustapha. “Sight Restrictions in Maghrib Muslim Architecture.” Intellectual Discourse (Malaysia) 7, no. 2 (1999): 133–54. ——. Fiqh al-“umrAn al-islAmiyya: Min khilAl al-arshCf al-“uthmAnC al-jazA”irC (956/ 1549–1246/1830). Dubai: Dar al-Buseth li-al-Dirasat al-Islamiyya wa Isya’ alTurath, 2000. Ben Slimane, Farid. “Entre Ibn Al Imam le Tudèlien (mort en 996) et Ibn Al Ramc le Tunisois (mort après 1333).” Sharq Al-Andalus 8 (1991): 109–12. ——. “Ibn al-Rami et l’art de bâtir.” In Itinéraire du Savoir en Tunisie: Les temps forts de l’histoire tunisienne, edited by Hassen Annabi, Mounira Chapoutot-Remadi and Samia Kamarti, 78–83. Paris: CNRS Editions, 1995. Berque, Jacques. Essai sur la méthode juridique maghrébine. Rabat, 1944. ——. “Ville et université: Aperçu sur l’histoire de l’École de Fès.” Revue Historique de Droit Français et Étranger 27 (1949): 64–117. ——. “‘Amal (3).” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 427–8. ——. “L’ambiguïté dans le fiqh.” In L’ambivalence dans la culture arabe, edited by Jean-Paul Charnay et al. Paris: Éditions Anthropos, 1967. ——. Ulémas, fondateurs, insurgés du Maghreb: XVIIe siècle. Paris: Sindbad, 1982. Bertram, Carel. “The Turkish House: An Effort of Memory.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of California Los Angeles, 1998. Betsch, William. “The Fountains of Fez.” Art and Archaeology Research Papers 12 (December 1977): 33–44. Betsch, William, and Carole Naggar. Le Bain; Cité du Sang. Périgueux: Pierre Fanlac, 1988. Bierman, Irene A. Writing Signs: The Fatimid Public Text. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. Blachère, Régis. “Fès chez les geógraphes arabes du Moyen-Age.” Hespéris 18 (1934): 41–8.

125

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boughali, Mohamed. La représentation de l’espace chez le marocain illetré: Mythes et tradition orale. Paris: Éditions Anthropos, 1974. Bouhdiba, Abdelwahab. Sexuality in Islam. Translated by Alan Sheridan. London: Saqi Books, 1998. Bourdieu, Pierre. “Champ du pouvoir, champ intellectuel et habitus de classe.” Scolies 1, no. 1 (1971): 7–26. ——. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Translated by Richard Nice. Edited by Jack Goody. Vol. 16, Cambridge Studies in Social Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. ——. “The Kabyle House or The World Reversed.” In idem, Algeria 1960. Translated by Richard Nice, 133–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. ——. “The Sense of Honour.” In ibid., 95–132. ——. “The Genesis of the Concepts of Habitus and of Field.” Sociocriticism 1, no. 2 (1985): 11–24. Bourdieu, Pierre, and Loïc J. D. Wacquant. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992. Bowles, Paul. The Spider’s House. London: Random House, 1955. ——. Fez 1984. Online. Available HTTP: (accessed 11th July 2006). Brandes, Stanley. “Reflections on Honor and Shame in the Mediterranean.” In Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean, edited by David D. Gilmore, 121–34. Washington: American Anthropological Association, 1987. Bressolette, Henri, and Jean Delarozière. “Fès-Jedid de sa foundation en 1276 au milieu du XXème siècle.” Hespéris Tamuda 20–1 (1982–3): 245–318. Brett, Michael. “The Islamisation of Morocco: From the Arabs to the Almoravids.” In idem, Ibn Khaldun and the Medieval Maghrib, Variorum Collected Studies Series, I: 57–71. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1999. Brockopp, Jonathan E. Early MAlikC Law: Ibn “Abd al-Makam and His Major Compendium of Jurisprudence. Edited by Ruud Peters and Bernard Weiss. Vol. 14, Studies in Islamic Law and Society. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Brooks, Geraldine. Nine Parts of Desire: The Hidden World of Islamic Women. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1995. Reprint, London: Penguin Books Ltd., 1996. Bruinessen, Martin van. “Haji Bektash, Sultan Sahak, Shah Mina Sahib and Various Avatars of a Running Wall.” Turcica 21–3 (1991): 55–69. Brunschvig, Robert. “Urbanisme médiéval et droit musulman.” Revue des Études Islamiques 15 (1947): 127–55. al-Bukharc, Abe ‘Abd Allah b. Isma‘cl. OaSCS al-BukhArC. Edited by ‘Abd al-‘Azcz b. ‘Abd Allah b. Baz. 5 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994. Burgin, Victor. In/Different Spaces: Places and Memory in Visual Culture. Berkelely: University of California Press, 1996. Burke III, Edmund. “Fez, The Setting Sun of Islam: A Study of the Politics of Colonial Ethnography.” The Maghreb Review 2, no. 4 (July–Aug. 1977): 1–7. Burkhardt, Titus. Art of Islam: Language and Meaning. Translated by J. Peter Hobson. London: World of Islam Festival Publishing Co. Ltd, 1976. ——. Fez: City of Islam. Translated by William Stoddart. Cambridge: The Islamic Texts Society, 1992. Busse, Heribert von. “Der Islam und die biblischen Kultstätten.” Der Islam 42 (1966): 113–47.

126

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Calasso, Giovanna. “Genealogie e miti di fondazione: Note sulle origini di Fas secondo le fonti merinidi.” In La Bisaccia dello Sheikh: Omaggio ad Alessandro Bausani, Islamista nel sessantesimo compleanno. Venezia, 29 maggio, 1981, 17–27. Rome/Venice, 1981. ——. “I nomi delle prime città di fondazione islamica nel BuldAn di Yaqet: Etimologie e racconti di origine.” In Studi in onore di Francesco Gabrieli nel suo ottantesimo compleano, edited by Renato Traini, 147–61. Rome: Università di Roma “La Sapienza,” 1984. ——. “Les remparts et la loi, les talismans et les saints: La protection de la ville dans les sources musulmanes médiévales.” Bulletin D’Études Orientales 44, Special Issue: Sciences occultes et Islam (1992): 83–104. Campo, Juan Eduardo. The Other Sides of Paradise: Explorations into the Religious Meanings of Domestic Space in Islam. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1991. Carmona González, Alfonso. “Acerca del influjo de la jurisprudencia andalusí en el Magrib.” Revista del Instituto Egipcio de Estudios Islámicos 26 (1993): 137–47. ——. “Las differencias entre la jurisprudencia andalusí y el resto de la escuela de Malik: El texto atribuido a Abe Issaq al-Garnavc.” Al-QanVara: Revista de Estudios Árabes 19, no. 1 (1998): 67–102. Casewit, Daoud S. “Hijra as History and Metaphor: A Survey of Qur’anic and madcth Sources.” The Muslim World 88, no. 2 (1998): 105–28. Certeau, Michel de. The Practice of Everyday Life. Translated by Steven Rendall. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984. Chalmeta, Pedro. “Acerca del ‘amal en al-Andalus: Algunos casos concretos.” Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 57 (1987): 339–64. Chapoutot-Remadi, Mounira. “Femmes dans la ville Mamleke.” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 38, no. 2 (1995): 145–64. Chaumont, E. “Al-Shaybanc.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 392–4. Chelhod, J. “mijab.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 359–61. ——. “La place de la coutume dans le fiqh primitif et sa permanence dans les sociétés arabes à tradition orale.” Studia Islamica 64 (1986): 19–37. Chew, Helena M., and William Kellaway, eds. London Assize of Nuisance 1301– 1431: A Calendar. Vol. 10, London Record Society Publications. London: London Record Society, 1973. Cigar, Norman. “Une lettre inédite de Melay Isma‘cl aux gens de Fes.” Hespéris Tamuda 15 (1974): 105–18. ——. “Société et vie politique à Fes sous les premiers ‘Alawites (ca 1660/1830).” Hespéris Tamuda 18, Special Issue (1978–79): 93–172. ——. “Conflict and Community in an Urban Milieu: Fez under the ‘Alawis (ca. 1666–1830).” The Maghreb Review 3, no. 2 (Nov.–Dec. 1978): 3–13. Clevenot, Dominique. Une esthétique du voile: Essai sur l’art arabo-islamique. Paris: Éditions L’Harmattan, 1994. Cook, Michael. Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong in Islamic Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Cornell, Vincent J. Realm of the Saint: Power and Authority in Moroccan Sufism. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1998. Coulson, Noel James. “Muslim Custom and Case-Law.” Die Welt des Islam 6 (1959): 13–24.

127

BIBLIOGRAPHY

——. A History of Islamic Law. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1964. Cressier, Patrice, Maribel Fierro, and Jean-Pierre Van Staëvel, eds. L’urbanisme dans l’Occident musulman au Moyen Âge: Aspects juridiques. Madrid: Casa de Velázquez/ Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2000. Crone, Patricia, and Michael Cook. Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. David, Emma. “The Qibla Wall as Threshold for the Qarawiyyin Mosque and Medina of Fes.” Architecture Tripos, University of Cambridge, 1999. Delaney, Carol. “Seeds of Honor, Fields of Shame.” In Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean, edited by David D. Gilmore, 35–48. Washington: American Anthropological Association, 1987. Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Translated by Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987. Denny, Frederick Mathewson. “Ummah in the Constitution of Medina.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 36, no. 1 (1977): 39–47. Denny, Walter B. “Reflections of Paradise in Islamic Art.” In Images of Paradise in Islamic Art, edited by Sheila S. Blair and Jonathan M. Bloom, 33–43. Hanover, New Hampshire: Hood Museum of Art, Dartmouth College, 1991. Denoix, Sylvie. “Note sur une des significations du terme ‘dAr’.” Annales Islamologiques 25 (1991): 285–8. ——. “Unique modèle ou type divers? La structure des villes du monde arabomusulman à l’époque médiévale.” In Mégapoles méditerranéennes: Géographie urbaine rétrospective. Actes du colloque organisé par l’École française de Rome et la Maison méditerranéenne des sciences de l’homme (Rome, 8–11 mai 1996), edited by Claude Nicolet, Robert Ilbert and Jean-Charles Depaule, 912–37. Paris/Rome: Maisonneuve et Larose/École française de Rome, 2000. Depaule, Jean-Charles, avec la collaboration de Jean-Luc Arnaud. À travers le mur. Paris: Éditions du Centre Georges-Pompidou CCI, 1985. al-Dhahabc, Naf csa. Al-ZAwiya al-fAsiyya: al-TaVawwur wa al-adwAr SattA nihAya al-“ahd al-“AlawC al-awwal. Casablanca: Mavba‘a al-Najah al-Jadcda, 2001. Dickie, James. “Space and Volume in Naurid Architecture.” In The Legacy of Muslim Spain, 2nd ed., edited by Salma Khadra Jayyusi, 621–5. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994. Djaït, Hichem. Al-KEfa: Naissance de la ville islamique. Paris: Editions G.-P. Maisonneuve et Larose, 1986. Djerbi, Ali. “Sémiologie de la médina.” Paper presented at the The American Institute for Maghrib Studies (AIMS) Conference. The Living Madina: The Walled Arab City in Literature, Architecture, and History, Tangiers, Morocco 29 May–4 June, 1996. Doumato, Eleanor Abdella. “Seclusion.” In The Oxford Enclyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, edited by John L. Esposito, 19–20. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. Dozy, Reinhart Pieter Anne. Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes. 2 vols. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1881. Reprint, Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1981. Duri, A.A. The Rise of Historical Writing Among the Arabs. Translated and edited by Lawrence I. Conrad. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983.

128

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Eickelman, Christine. “Fatima Mernissi, Dreams of Trespass: Tales of a Harem Girlhood (Reviewed by Christine Eickelman).” Middle East Studies Association Bulletin 28, no. 2 (1994): 251–2. Eickelman, Dale F. Moroccan Islam: Tradition and Society in a Pilgrimage Center. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1976. ——. “The Comparative Studies of ‘Islamic’ City.” In Urbanism in Islam: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Urbanism in Islam (ICUIT II), November 27–29, 1990, edited by Tadeshi Yukuwa, 309–19. Tokyo: Research Project “Urbanism in Islam” and the Middle East Culture Center in Japan, 1994. Eliade, Mircea. Myth and Reality. Translated by Willard R. Trask. Edited by Ruth Nanda Anshen. Vol. 21, World Perspectives. London: George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1964. The Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1954–2002. Epalza, Míkel de. “La mujer en el espacio urbano musulmán.” In La mujer en Al-Andalus: Reflejos históricos de su actividad y categorías sociales, edited by María J. Viguera, 53–60. Madrid and Seville: Ediciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; Editoriales Andaluzas Unidas, 1989. Escher, Anton, and Eugen Wirth. Die Medina von Fes: Geographische Beiträge zu Persistenz und Dynamik, Verfall und Erneuerung einer traditionellen islamischen Stadt in handlungstheoretischer Sicht. Vol. 39, Mitteilungen der Fränkischen Geographischen Gesellschaft. Erlangen: Fränkische Geographische Gesellschaft, 1992. Eustache, Daniel. Corpus des dirhams idrCsites et contemporains: Collection de la Banque du Maroc et autres collections mondiales, publiques et privées. Études sur la numismatique et l’histoire monétaire du Maroc, vol. 1. Rabat: Banque du Maroc, 1970–1. Fahd, T. “Sharaf.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 313–14. Fairchild Ruggles, D. “Vision and Power: An Introduction.” In Women, Patronage, and Self-Representation in Islamic Societies, edited by idem, 1–15. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2000. Farès, Bichr. L’honneur chez les Arabes avant l’Islam: Étude de sociologie. Paris: Librairie d’Amérique et d’Orient, Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1932. ——. “ ‘Irr.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 77–8. Faruqi, Musammad Y. “Consideration of “Urf in the Judgements of the KhulafA” al RAshidEn and the Early FuqahA”.” American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 9, no. 4 (1992): 482–98. Fehérvári, G. “Misrab.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 7–15. Ferhat, Halima. “Fès.” In Grandes villes méditerranéennes du monde musulman médiéval, edited by Jean-Claude Garcin, 215–33. Rome: École française de Rome, 2000. Fernandes, Leonor. “Habitat et prescriptions légales.” In L’habitat traditionnel dans les pays musulmans autour de la Méditerranée. Rencontre d’Aix-en-Provence (6–8 juin 1984), 3 vols., 419–26. Cairo: L’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1990. Fierro, Maribel. “La religión.” In Historia de España Menéndez Pidal. Vol. VIII-1: Los Reinos de Taïfas. Al-Andalus en el siglo XI, edited by María Jesús Viguera Molíns, 399–496. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, S.A., 1994.

129

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Flood, Finbarr Barry. “Light in Stone: The Commemoration of the Prophet in Umayyad Architecture.” In Bayt al-Maqdis: Jerusalem and Early Islam, edited by Jeremy Johns, 311–59. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. ——. The Great Mosque of Damascus: Studies on the Makings of an Umayyad Visual Culture. Vol. 33, Islamic History and Civilization. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Foucault, Michel. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Translated by A.M. Sheridan Smith. New York: Pantheon Books, 1972. Frye, Northrop. Words With Power: Being a Second Study of “The Bible and Literature.” San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990. Gaillard, Henri. Une ville d’Islam: Fès. Esquisse historique et sociale. Paris: J. André, Éditeur, 1905. García-Arenal, Mercedes. “The Revolution of Fas in 869/1465 and the Death of Sultan ‘Abd al-maqq al-Marcnc.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 41, no. 1 (1978): 43–66. ——. “Sainteté et pouvoir au Maroc: La résistance de Fès aux Sa‘diens.” Annales: économies – sociétés – civilisations no. 4 ( juillet-août 1990): 1019–41. García-Arenal, Mercedes, and Eduardo Manzano Moreno. “Idrcssisme et villes idrcssides.” Studia Islamica 82, no. 2 (1995): 5–33. Garcin, Jean-Claude. “Quelques questions sur l’évolution de l’habitat médiéval dans les pays musulmans de Méditerranée.” In L’habitat traditionnel dans les pays musulmans autour de la Méditerranée. Rencontre d’Aix-en-Provence (6–8 juin 1984). Vol. 2: L’histoire et le milieu, 369–85. Cairo: L’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1990. ——. “Le Caire et l’évolution urbaine des pays musulmans à l’époque médiévale.” Annales Islamologiques 25 (1991): 289–304. ——. “Le moment islamique (VIIe–XVIIIe siècles).” In Mégapoles méditerranéennes: Géographie urbaine rétrospective. Actes du colloque organisé par l’École française de Rome et la Maison méditerranéenne des sciences de l’homme (Rome, 8–11 mai 1996), edited by Claude Nicolet, Robert Ilbert and Jean-Charles Depaule, 91–103. Paris/Rome: Maisonneuve et Larose/École française de Rome, 2000. Geertz, Hildred. “The View from Within.” In Architecture as Symbol and SelfIdentity: Proceedings of Seminar Four in the series Architectural Transformations of the Islamic World. Held in Fez, Morocco, October 9–12, 1979, edited by Jonathan G. Katz, 63–73. Philadelphia: The Aga Khan Award for Architecture, 1980. Gil, Moshe. “The Constitution of Medina: A Reconsideration.” Israel Oriental Studies 4 (1974): 44–66. Gilmore, David D. “Introduction: The Shame of Dishonor.” In Honor and Shame and the Unity of the Mediterranean, edited by idem, 2–21. Washington: American Anthropological Association, 1987. Goldziher, Ignaz. Muslim Studies (Muhammedanische Studien). Translated by C.R. Barber and S.M. Stern. Edited by S.M. Stern. 2 vols. London: George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1967–71. Goldziher, Ignaz, C. Van Arendonk, and A.S. Tritton. “Ahl al-Bayt.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 257–8. Grabar, Oleg. “Symbols and Signs in Islamic Architecture.” In Architecture as Symbol and Self-Identity: Proceedings of Seminar Four in the series Architectural Transformations of the Islamic World. Held in Fez, Morocco, October 9–12, 1979, edited

130

BIBLIOGRAPHY

by Jonathan G. Katz, 1–11. Philadelphia: The Aga Khan Award for Architecture, 1980. ——. “The Meaning of History in Cairo.” In idem, Constructing the Study of Islamic Art. Vol. 3: Islamic Art and Beyond, Variorum Collected Studies Series, 191–215. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1985. ——. The Formation of Islamic Art. Revised ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987. Greimas, Algirdas Julien. “Les proverbes et les dictons.” In idem, Du sens: Essais sémiotiques, 309–14. Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1970. Grunebaum, G.E. von. “The Sacred Character of Islamic Cities.” In Mélanges Taha Hussein: Offerts par ses amis et ses disciples à l’occasion de son 70ième anniversaire, edited by Abdurrahman Badawi, 25–37. Cairo: Dar Al-Maaref, 1962. Guay, F., and M. Ben Daoud. “Le mariage dans la jurisprudence des cadis de Fès.” Revue Algérienne, Tunisienne et Marocaine de Législation et Jurispridence 49 (1933): 178–207. Guillaume, Alfred. “Introduction.” In The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of IsSAq’s SCrat RasEl AllAh, xiii–xli. Translated by idem. London: Oxford University Press, 1955. El Guindi, Fadwa. “mijab.” In The Oxford Enclyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, edited by John L. Esposito, 108–10. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. ——. Veil: Modesty, Privacy and Resistance. Edited by Joanne B. Eicher, Dress, Body, Culture. Oxford: Berg, 1999. Gulick, John. “Images of an Arab City.” Ekistics 17, no. 101 (1964): 270–8. Haeri, Shahla. “Woman’s Body, Nation’s Honor: Rape in Pakistan.” In Hermeneutics and Honor: Negotiating Female “Public” Space in Islamic/ate Societies, edited by Asma Afsaruddin, 55–69. Cambridge: Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies, 1999. el-Hajjami, Abdellatif. “Au fils du temps.” In Fès médiévale: Entre légende et histoire, un carrefour de l’Orient à l’apogée d’un rêve, edited by Mohamed Mezzine, 124–33. Paris: Les Éditions Autrement, 1992. al-majwc al-Tha‘alabc al-Fasc, Musammad b. al-masan. Al-Fikr al-sAmC fC tArCkh al-fiqh al-islAmC. Edited by Ayman oalis Sha‘ban. 2 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1995. Hakim, Besim Selim. Arabic-Islamic Cities: Building and Planning Principles. London: Kegan Paul International, 1986. ——. “The ‘Urf’ and its Role in Diversifying the Architecture of Traditional Islamic Cities.” Journal of Architectural Planning and Research 11, no. 2 (1994): 108–27. Halbwachs, Maurice. On Collective Memory. Translated and edited by Lewis A. Coser. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1992. Hallaq, Wael B. Authority, Continuity, and Change in Islamic Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Harrell, Richard S., ed. A Dictionary of Moroccan Arabic: Moroccan-English. Edited by Richard S. Harrell, The Richard Slade Harrell Arabic Series. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1966. al-Hathloul, Saleh A. “Tradition, Continuity and Change in the Physical Environment: The Arab-Muslim City.” Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1981.

131

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hedayat, Sadeq. “The Blind Owl.” In The Blind Owl and Other Hedayat Stories, edited by Russell P. Christensen, 38–99. Minneapolis: Sorayya Publishers, Inc., 1984. Heidegger, Martin. “Building Dwelling Thinking.” In Poetry, Language, Thought, edited and translated by Albert Hofstadter, 143–61. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., 1971. Heller, Agnes. The Power of Shame: A Rational Perspective. London: Routledge and KeganPaul, 1985. Herzfeld, Michael. “Honour and Shame: Problems in the Comparative Analysis of Moral Systems.” Man (New Series) 15 (1980): 339–51. Hill, Jonathan, ed. Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User. London: Routledge, 1998. Hillenbrand, Robert. Islamic Architecture: Form, Function and Meaning. Paperback ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000. al-mimyarc, Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. ‘Abd al-Mun‘im. La péninsule ibérique au moyen-âge d’après le KitAb ar-RawR al-mi“VAr fC khabar al-aqVAr d’Ibn “Abd al-Mun“im al-MimyarC. Edited by Évariste Lévi-Provençal. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1938. Horovitz, Josef. “The Earliest Biographies of the Prophet and Their Authors.” Islamic Culture 1 and 2 (1927 and 1928): 1: 535–59; 2: 22–50, 164–82, 495–526. Hourani, Albert H. A History of the Arab Peoples. London: Faber and Faber, 1991. Humphreys, R. Stephen. “Qur’anic Myth and Narrative Structure in Early Islamic Historiography.” In Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity, edited by idem and F.M. Clover, 271–90. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1989. ——. Islamic History: A Framework for Inquiry. Revised ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991. Hung, Wu. Monumentality in Early Chinese Art and Architecture. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995. Ibn ‘Abd Allah, al-mussayn b. ‘Alc. QiUAU wa amthAl min al-Maghrib. 2 vols. Casablanca: Mavba‘at al-Najas al-Jadcda, 1996–9. Ibn Abc Zar‘ al-Fasc, ‘Alc. Al-AnCs al-muVrib bi-rawR al-qirVAs fC akhbAr mulEk al-Maghrib wa tarCkh madCnat FAs. Edited by ‘Abd al-Wahhab b. Manuer. 2 ed. Rabat: al-Mavba‘a al-Malakiyya, 1999. ——. Rawd Al-KirtAs: Histoire des Souverains du Maghreb et annales de la ville de Fès. Translated by Auguste Beaumier. Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1860. Ibn Abc Zayd al-Qayrawanc, Abe Musammad ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-Rasman. AlNawAdir wa al-ziyAdAt: “AlA mA fC al-Mudawwana min ghayrihA min al-ummahAt. Edited by ‘Abd al-Fattas Musammad al-mulw et al. 15 vols. Beirut: Dar alGharb al-Islamc, c.1999. Ibn ‘Arabc, Musyc al-Dcn. Sufis of Andalusia: The RES al-quds and al-Durrat alfAkhirah of Ibn “ArabC. Translated by Ralph W.J. Austin. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd., 1971. Reprint, Sherborne: Beshara Publications, 1988. ——. Al-FutESAt al-Makkiyya. Edited by ‘Uthman Yasya. 10 vols. Cairo: al-Hay’a al-Miuriyya al-‘fmma li-al-Kitab, 1972–92. Ibn Athcr al-Jazarc, Majd al-Dcn al-Mubarak b. Musammad. JAmi“ al-uUEl fC aSAdCth al-RasEl. Edited by ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Arna’ut. 5 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1985. Ibn al-‘Avvar. KitAb al-WathA”iq wa al-sijillAt li-al-faqCh al-muwaththiq MuSammad b. ASmad al-UmawC al-ma“rEf bi-Ibn al-“AVVAr (330–399 AH) (Formulario notarial

132

BIBLIOGRAPHY

hispano-árabe). Edited by Pedro Chalmeta and Federico Corriente. Madrid: Academia Matritense del Notariado, Instituto Hispano-Árabe de Cultura, 1983. Ibn Farsen, Burhan al-Dcn Ibrahcm b. ‘Alc b. Abc al-Qasim b. Musammad. TabUirat al-SukkAm fC uUEl al-aqRiya wa manAhij al-aSkAm. Edited by paha ‘Abd al-Ra’ef Sa‘d. 1 binding 2 vols. Cairo: Maktabat al-Kulliyyat al-Azhariyya, 1986. Ibn manbal, Asmad. Al-Musnad li-al-ImAm ASmad b. Manbal. Edited by oidqc Musammad Jamcl al-‘Avvar. 2 ed. 10 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994. Ibn mawqal al-Naucbc, Abe Qasim. KitAb OErat al-arR. Edited by M.J. de Goeje. Beirut/Leiden: Dar oadir/E.J. Brill, 1939. Ibn mazm, Abe Musammad ‘Alc b. Asmad b. Sa‘cd al-Andalusc. Le collier du pigeon ou de l’amour et des amants: Pawq al-SamAma fC”l-ulfa wa”l-ullAf. Translated by Léon Bercher. Algiers: Editions Carbonel, 1946. Ibn Hisham, Musammad ‘Abd al-Malik. Al-SCra al-nabawiyya. Edited by Sa‘cd Musammad al-Lassam. 4 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1998. ——. The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of IsSAq’s SCrat RasEl AllAh. Translated by A. Guillaume. London: Oxford University Press, 1955. Ibn ‘Idharc al-Marrakushc. Al-BayAn al-mughrib fC akhbAr al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib. Edited by G.S. Colin and É. Lévi-Provençal. 2 vols. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1948. Ibn al-Imam, ‘hsa b. Mesa b. Asmad. “Al-Qara’ bi-al-mirfaq fc al-mabanc wa nafy al-rarar li-‘hsa b. Mesa b. Asmad b. al-Imam al-Tuvclc.” Edited by Musammad al-Namcnaj, 2 vols. DiblEm al-dirAsAt al-“ulyA fC al-dirAsAt al-islamiyya degree thesis, University of Sidi Mohammed Ben Abdallah, Fez, 1992. Ibn Issaq, Musammad. SCrat rasEl AllAh. See: Ibn Hisham. Ibn ‘Iyad, Musammad. MadhhAhib al-SukkAm fC nawAzil al-aSkAm li-al-QARC “IyAd wa waladihi MuSammad. Edited by Musammad Bencherifa. Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islamc, 1990. Ibn Kathcr, ‘Imad al-Dcn Abc al-Fida’ Isma‘cl. TafsCr al-Qur”An al-“aWCm wa yalChu KitAb FaRA”il al-Qur”An. 4 vols. Beirut: Dar Isya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabc, 1997. Ibn Khalden, ‘Abd al-Rasman. Muqaddima. Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Tijariyya al-Kubra, n.d. ——. The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History. Translated by Franz Rosenthal. 3 vols, Bollingen Series XLIII. New York: Pantheon Book, 1958. Ibn Majah, Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Yazcd al-Qazwcnc. Sunan al-SAfiW AbC “Abd AllAh MuSammad b. YazCd al-QazwCnC b. MAjah. Edited by Musammad Fu’ad ‘Abd al-Baqc. 2 vols. [Cairo]: Dar Isya’ al-Kutub al-‘Arabiyya, 1952. Ibn Manwer, Musammad b. Mukarrim. LisAn al-“arab. 15 vols. Beirut: Dar oadir/ Dar Bayret, 1955–6. Ibn al-Ramc, Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Ibrahcm al-Lakhmc. “Kitab al-I‘lan biaskam al-bunyan.” Edited by ‘Abd Allah al-Dawudc. Majallat al-fiqh al-mAlikC alturAth al-qaRA”i bi-al-Maghrib, nos. 2, 3, 4 (1 vol.) (1982): 259–490. Ibn al-Ramc (2). Al-I“lAn bi-aSkAm al-bunyAn: AbE “Abd AllAh MuSammad b. IbrAhCm al-LakhmC b. al-RAmC al-bannA”. Edited by Farid Ben Slimane. Tunis: Centre de Publication Universitaire, 1999. Ibn Rushd, Abe al-Walcd Musammad b. Asmad b. Asmad. KitAb al-QaRA” wa al-araRCn wa al-dEr. Rabat: Bibliothèque Générale à Rabat, MS no. 424. ——. FatAwA Ibn Rushd. Edited by al-Mukhtar b. pahir al-Talclc. 3 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Gharb al-Islamc, 1987.

133

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ibn Sa‘d, Musammad. KitAb al-PabaqAt al-kabCr. Edited by Eduard Sachau. 9 vols. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1904–40. Ibn Sahl al-Andalusc, Abe al-Aubagh ‘hsa. WathA”iq fC shu”En li-“umrAn fC al-Andalus “al-MasAjid wa al-dEr” mustakhraja min makhVEV al-ASkAm al-kubrA. Edited by Musammad ‘Abd al-Wahhab Khallaf. Cairo: al-Mavba‘a al-‘Arabiyya al-madctha, 1983. ——. Diwan al-ASkAm al-kubrA: al-NawAzil wa al-a“lAm li-Ibn Sahl. Edited by Rashcd al-Na‘cmc. 2 vols. Riyad: R. al-Na‘cmc, 1997. al-Idrcsc, Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad. Description de l’Afrique et de l’Espagne. Texte arabe, publié pour la première fois d’aprés les manuscrits de Paris et d’Oxford avec une traduction, des notes et un glossaire par Reinhart P.A. Dozy et Michaël J. de Goeje. Amsterdam: Oriental Press, 1969. Izutsu, Toshihiko. The Structure of the Ethical Terms in the Koran: A Study in Semantics. Vol. 2, Studies in the Humanities and Social Relations. Tokyo: Keio Institute of Philological Studies, 1959. Izzi Dien, Mawil. The Theory and Practice of Market Law in Medieval Islam: A Study of KitAb NiUAb al-IStisAb of “Umar b. MuSammad al-SunAmC (fl. 7th–8th/13– 14th Century). Warminster: E.J.W. Gibb Memorial Trust, 1997. Jackson, Sherman A. Islamic Law and the State: The Constitutional Jurisprudence of ShihAb al-DCn al-QarAf C. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996. al-Jayyidc, Musammad b. ‘Abd al-Karcm. Al-“Urf wa al-“amal fC al-madhhab almAlikC wa mafhEmuhumA ladA “ulamA” al-Maghrib. Mohammedia, Morocco: Mavba‘a Furala, 1984. al-Jazna’c, ‘Alc. JanA zahrat al-As fC binA” madCnat FAs. Edited by ‘Abd al-Wahhab b. Manuer. 2nd ed. Rabat: al-Mavba‘a al-Malakiyya, 1991. al-Jazna’c, ‘Alc. Zahrat el-âs (La fleur du myrte): Traitant de la fondation de la ville de Fès par Abou-l-Hasan “Ali El-Djaznâi. Translated by Alfred Bel. Algiers: Jules Carbonel, 1923. Johansen, Baber. “The All-Embracing Town and its Mosques: Al-MiUr al-JAmi“.” In idem, Contingency in a Sacred Law: Legal and Ethical Norms in the Muslim Fiqh, 77–106. Edited by Ruud Peters and Bernard Weiss. Vol. 7, Studies in Islamic Law and Society. Leiden: Brill, 1999. ——. “Coutumes locales et coutumes universelles aux sources des règles juridiques en droit musulman hanéfite.” Annales Islamologiques 27 (1993): 29–35. ——. “Casuistry: Between Legal Concept And Social Praxis.” Islamic Law and Society 2, no. 2 (1995): 135–56. Johns, Jeremy. “The ‘House of the Prophet’ and the Concept of the Mosque.” In Bayt al-Maqdis: Jerusalem and Early Islam, edited by idem, 59–112. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Jones, J.M.B. “The Maghazc Literature.” In Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period, edited by A.F.L. Beeston et al., 344–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Joseph, Suad. “Women and the Neighborhood Street in Borj Hammoud, Lebanon.” In Women in the Muslim World, edited by Lois Beck and Nikki Keddie, 541–57. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978. Kably, Mohamed. Société, pouvoir et religion au Maroc à la fin du “Moyen-Age” (XIV e–XV e siècle). Paris: Éditions Maisonneuve et Larose, 1986.

134

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kahera, Akel Ismail. “Building, Dwelling and Reasoning: A Discourse on Malikc Legal Practice and the ‘Ordering’ of Habitat in the Medieval Maghrib.” Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton, 1997. Kahera, Akel I., and Omar Benmira. “Damages In Islamic Law: Maghribc Muftcs And The Built Environment (9th–15th Centuries C.E.).” Islamic Law and Society 5, no. 2 (1998): 131–64. Kamali, Mohammad Hashim. Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence. Revised ed. Cambridge: Islamic Texts Society, 1991. al-Kattanc, ‘Abd al-Kabcr b. Hashim. Zahrat al-As fC buyEtAt ahl FAs. 2 vols, AlMawsE“a al-kattAniyya li-tArCkh FAs 1–2. Casablanca: Mavba‘at al-Najas al-Jadcda, 2002. al-Kattanc, Musammad b. Ja‘far. Al-AzhAr al-“aVira al-anfAs bi-dhikr ba“R maSAsin quVb al-Maghrib wa tAj madCnat FAs. Fez: n.a., 1889. al-Kattanc, Musammad al-Muntauir bi-Allah b. Musammad al-Zamzamc. FAs “AUimat al-idArisa wa rasA”il ukhrA. 2 ed., al-MawsE“a al-kattAniyya li-tArCkh FAs 3. Casablanca: Mavba‘at al-Najas al-Jadcda, 2002. Kazimirski, A. De Biberstein. Dictionnaire Arabe-Français. 4 vols. Paris: Masionneuve et Cie, Éditeurs, 1860. Reprint, Beirut: Librairie du Liban, n.d. Kennedy, Hugh. “From Polis to Madina: Urban Change in Late Antique and Early Islamic Syria.” Past and Present 106 (1985): 3–27. Kenzari, Bechir, and Yasser Elsheshtawy. “The Ambiguous Veil: On Transparency, the Mashrabiy’ya [sic], and Architecture.” Journal of Architectural Education 56, no. 4 (2003): 17–25. Khalidi, Tarif. “Some Classical Islamic Views of the City.” In Studia Arabica et Islamica: Festschrift for ISsAn “AbbAs on his Sixtieth Birthday, edited by Wadad al-Qarc, 265–76. Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1981. al-Khara’vc, Abe Bakr Musammad b. Ja‘far b. Musammad b. Sahl al-Samarrc. MakArim al-akhlAq wa ma“AlChA wa maSmEd VarA”iqihA wa marRChA. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, n.d. Kharchafi, Azzedine. “Sidi Frej et la fête du mouloud à Fès.” Découverte et montagne du Maroc 2 (1996): 15–16. Al-Khayyat, Sana. Honour and Shame: Women in Modern Iraq. London: Saqi Books, 1990. Khouri, Norma. Forbidden Love: Love and Betrayal in Modern-day Jordan. London: Doubleday, 2003. Khoury, Dina Rizk. “Slippers at the Entrance or Behind Closed Doors: Domestic and Public Spaces for Mosuli Women.” In Women in the Ottoman Empire: Middle Eastern Women in the Early Modern Era, edited by Madeline C. Zilfi, 105–27. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Khoury, Nuha N.N. “The Mihrab Image: Commemorative Themes in Medieval Islamic Architecture.” Muqarnas: An Annual on Islamic Art and Architecture 9 (1992): 11–28. ——. “Mihrab: From Text to Form.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 30 (1998): 1–27. Kister, M.J. “The SCrah Literature.” In Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period, edited by A.F.L. Beeston et al., 352–67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

135

BIBLIOGRAPHY

KitAb al-HCVAn. See: al-Thaqaf c. The Koran. Translated by N.J. Dawood. 4 ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd., 1974. Lachiri, Nadia. “Andalusi Proverbs on Women.” In Writing the Feminine: Women in Arab Sources, edited by Manuela Marín and Randi Deguilhem, 41–8. London: I.B. Tauris Publishers, 2002. Lagardère, Vincent. Histoire et société en occident musulman au Moyen Âge: Analyse du Mi“yAr d’Al-WansharCsC. Vol. 53, Collection de la Casa de Velázquez. Madrid: Casa de Velázquez en collaboration avec le Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1995. Lane, Edward William. An Arabic-English Lexicon. 4 vols. London: Williams and Norgate, 1863–1893. Lang, Richard. “The Dwelling Door: Towards a Phenomenology of Transition.” In Dwelling, Place and Environment: Towards a Phenomenology of Person and World, edited by David Seamon and Robert Mugerauer, 201–13. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1985. Lawson, Bryan. The Language of Space. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2001. Le Tourneau, Roger. Fès avant le protectorat: Étude économique et sociale d’une ville de l’Occident musulman. Casablanca: Société Marocaine de Librairie et d’Édition, 1949. Reprint, Rabat: Éditions La Porte, 1987. ——. Fez in the Age of the Marinides. Translated by Besse Alberta Clement. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1961. Leach, Edmund. “Introduction.” In Myth, edited by M.I. Steblin-Kamenskij. Ann Arbor: Karoma, 1982. ——. “Anthropological Approaches to the Bible During the Twentieth Century.” In Structuralist Interpretations of Biblical Myth, edited by idem and D. Alan Aycock, 7–32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. Leach, Neil. “Introduction.” In Rethinking Architecture: A Reader in Cultural Theory, edited by idem, xiii–xxi. London: Routledge, 1997. Lecerf, J. “Bayt.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 1139. Leeuwen, Richard van. “Space as a Metaphor in Alf laylah wa-laylah: The Archetypal City.” In Myths, Historical Archetypes and Symbolic Figures in Arabic Literature: Proceedings of the International Symposium in Beirut, June 25th–June 30th, 1996, edited by Angelika Neuwirth et al., 493–505. Beirut: Franz Steiner Verlag Stuttgart, 1999. Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space. Translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991. Leo Africanus. The History and Description of Africa and of the Notable Things Therein Contained. Written by al-Hassan ibn Mohammed al-Wezaz, al-Fasi, a Moor, baptized as Giovanni Leone, but better known as Leo Africanus. Translated by John Pory. Edited by Robert Brown. 3 vols. London: Printed for the Hakluyt Society, 1896. Lévi-Provençal, Evariste. “Wavvasids.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam: A Dictionary of the Geography, Ethnography and Biography of the Muhammadan Peoples, 1134– 5. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1913–38. ——. La fondation de Fès. Paris: Larose, 1939. ——. “Notes de toponomastique hispano-maghribine: Les noms des portes, le Bab al-Shari“a et la Shari“a dans les villes de l’Occident musulman au Moyen Âge.” In

136

BIBLIOGRAPHY

idem, Islam d’Occident: Études d’histoire médiévale, 45–78. Paris: G.P. Maisonneuve, 1948. Lévi-Strauss, Claude. Totemism. Translated by Rodney Needham. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1969. Levinas, Emmanuel. Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority. Translated by Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1969. Levy, Reuben. The Social Structure of Islam. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1957. Lewis, Michael. Shame: The Exposed Self. New York: The Free Press, 1992. Libson, Gideon. “On the Development of Custom as a Source of Law in Islamic Law.” Islamic Law and Society 4, no. 2 (1997): 131–55. Loubignac, V. “Le chapitre de la préemption dans l’“Amal al-Fâsî.” Hespéris 26 (1939): 193–239. Luccioni, Joseph. Les fondations pieuses “habous” au Maroc depuis les origines jusqu’à 1956. Rabat: Imprimerie Royale, n.d. Lutfi, Huda. “Manners and Customs of Fourteenth-Century Cairene Women: Female Anarchy versus Male Shar‘i Order in Muslim Prescriptive Treatises.” In Women in Middle Eastern History: Shifting Boundaries in Sex and Gender, edited by Nikki R. Keddie and Beth Baron, 99–121. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991. Madmulla, J.S. Proverbs and Sayings: Theory and practice, with examples from the Wahehe of the Southern Highlands of Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: Institute of Kiswahili Research, University of Dar es Salaam, 1995. Makhlef, Musammad b. Musammad b. ‘Umar b. Qasim. Shajarat al-nEr al-zakiyya fC VabaqAt al-mAlikiyya. Edited by ‘Abd al-Majcd Khiyalc. 2 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2003. Malik b. Anas. Al-MuwaVVa” li-imAm al-a”imma “Alim al-MadCna MAlik b. Anas. Edited by Musammad b. Nauir al-‘Ajamc. Kuwait: Markaz al-Buseth wa alDirasat al-Kuwaytiyya, 1997. ——. Al-Mudawwana al-kubrA li-ImAm MAlik b. Anas al-AUbaSC riwAyat al-ImAm SaSnEn b. Sa“Cd al-TanEkhC “an al-ImAm “Abd al-RaSmAn b. QAsim. 6 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1998. Malinowski, Bronislaw. “Myth in Primitive Psychology.” In idem, Magic, Science and Religion and Other Essays by Bronislaw Malinowski, 93–148. London: Souvenir Press, 1974. El Mansour, Mohamed. “Urban Society in Fez: The Rumat during the Modern Period (17th–19th Centuries).” The Maghreb Review 22, nos. 1–2 (1997): 75–95. ——. “The Sanctuary (Hurm) in Precolonial Morocco.” In In the Shadow of the Sultan: Culture, Power, and Politics in Morocco, edited by Rahma Bourqia and Susan Gilson Miller, 49–73. Cambridge: Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies, 1999. al-Maqqarc al-Tlimsanc, Asmad b. Musammad. NafS al-VCb min ghuUn al-Andalus alraVCb. Edited by Issan ‘Abbas. 8 vols. Beirut: Dar al-oadir, 1988. Marçais, Georges. Manuel d’art musulman: L’architecture Tunisie, Algérie, Maroc, Espagne, Sicile. 2 vols. Paris: Éditions Auguste Picard, 1926–7. Marçais, William. “Dar.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 113–15. Marmon, Shaun. Eunuchs and Sacred Boundaries in Islamic Society. Edited by Bernard Lewis, Itamar Rabinovich and Roger Savory, Studies in Middle Eastern History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.

137

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Maslow, Boris. Les Mosquées de Fès et du Nord du Maroc. Avec une introduction de Henri Terrasse et des notes sur six inscriptions de Fès et de Taza par E. LéviProvençal. Paris: Publications de l’Institut des Hautes Études Marocaines, 1937. Massaro, Toni M. “Shame, Culture, and American Criminal Law.” Michigan Law Review 89 (1991): 1880–944. Massignon, Louis. La passion d’al-Hosayn-Ibn-Mansour Al-Hallaj: Martyr mystique de l’Islam, exécuté à Bagdad le 26 mars 922. 2 vols. Paris: Paul Geuthner, 1922. Masud, Muhammad Khalid. Islamic Legal Philosophy: A Study of AbE IsSAq alShAVibC’s Life and Thought. Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, 1977. M’daghri, Abdelkébir Alaoui. Ma jara bihi-l-amal ou le droit coutumier: Une modèle typique de notre patrimoine juridique. Rabat: n.a., c. 1996. The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An. Translated by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall. New Delhi: UBS Publishers’ Distributors Ltd., 1994. The Meaning of the Holy Qur”An (2). Translated by ‘Abdullah Yesuf ‘Alc. Revised 7th ed. Beltsville, Maryland: Amana Publications, 1995. Mediano, Fernando R. Familias de Fez (ss. XV–XVII). Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1995. Meeker, Michael E. “Meaning and Society in the Near East: Examples from the Black Sea Turks and the Levantine Arabs (I).” International Journal of Middle East Studies 7 (1976): 243–70. Melchert, Christopher. The Formation of the Sunni Schools of Law, 9th–10th Centuries C.E. Edited by Ruud Peters and Bernard Weiss, Studies in Islamic Law and Society. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Mermier, Franck. “Les foundations mythiques de Sanaa et d’Aden.” Revue du Monde Musulman et de la Méditerranée 67, no. 1 (1993): 131–9. Mernissi, Fatima. The Harem Within: Tales of a Moroccan Childhood. London: Doubleday Books, 1994. Reprint, London: Bantam Books, 1995. al-Messiri Nadim, Nawal. “The Concept of the mara: A Historical and Sociological Study of Al-Sukkariyya.” Annales Islamologiques 15 (1979): 313–48. Mezzine, Mohamed. “La mémoire effritée.” In Fès médiévale: Entre légende et histoire, un carrefour de l’Orient à l’apogée d’un rêve, edited by idem, 38–57. Paris: Les Éditions Autrement, 1992. M’halla, Moncef. “La médina, un art de bâtir.” Africa: Fouilles, monuments et collections archéologiques en Tunisie 12, Special Issue: Arts et Traditions Populaires (1998): 33–98. Micara, Ludovico. “Lofty Chambers: The Interior Space in the Architecture of Islamic Countries.” In Understanding Islamic Architecture, edited by Attilio Petruccioli and Khalil K. Pirani, 49–56. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2002. Michaux-Bellaire, Edouard. “La légende idrissite et le chérifisme au Maroc.” Revue du Monde Musulman 35 (1917–18): 57–73. Miller, Susan Gilson, Attilio Petruccioli, and Mauro Bertagnin. “Inscribing Minority Space in the Islamic City: The Jewish Quarter of Fez (1438–1912).” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 60, no. 3 (2001): 310–27. Miller, William Ian. Humiliation and Other Essays on Honor, Social Discomfort, and Violence. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993. Milliot, Louis. Démembrements du habous: Menfa“â, gzâ, guelsâ, zînâ, istighrâq. Paris: Editions Ernest Leroux, 1918.

138

BIBLIOGRAPHY

——. Recueil de jurisprudence chérifienne. 3 vols. Paris: Editions Ernest Leroux, 1920–3. Milliot, Louis, and J. Lapanne-Joinville. Recueil de jurisprudence chérifienne. Tome IV. Paris: Librarie du Recueil Sirey, 1952. Miyara (Musammad b. Asmad b. Musammad al-Fasc). MukhtaUar al-durr al-thamCn wa al-mawrid al-mu“ayyan. Casablanca: Dar al-Ma‘rifa, 2001. Mortada, Hisham. Traditional Islamic Principles of Built Environment. London: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003. Musammad, ‘Abd al-Rahman musayn. RithA” al-mudun wa mamAlik al-zA”ila fC al-shi“r al-“arabC SattA suqEV GharnAVa. Cairo: n.a., 1983. al-Muqaddisc, Musammad b. Asmad. ASsAn al-taqAsCm fC ma“rifat al-aqAlCm lial-MuqaddisC al-ma“rEf bi-al-BashArC. Edited by Musammad Makhzem. Beirut: Dar Isya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabc, 1987. Murphy, Robert F. “Social Distance and the Veil.” American Anthropologist 66, no. 2 (1964): 1257–76. Muslim, Abe al-musayn b. al-majjaj. OaSCS al-Muslim bi-sharS al-NawAwC. Edited by ‘Iuuam al-oababvc et al. 11 vols. Cairo: Dar al-madcth, 1994. Mustapha, Hassen. “Recherche sur les poèmes inspirés par la perte ou la destruction des villes dans la littérature arabe à partir du IIIe/IXe siècle jusqu’à la prise de Grenade en 897/1492.” 2 vols. Thèse de doctorat de troisième cycle, Université de Sorbonne, 1977. Naamane-Guessous, Soumaya. Au-delà de toute pudeur: La sexualité féminine au Maroc. 11 ed. Casablanca: Editions Eddif, 2001. El-Nahal, Galal H. The Judicial Administration of Ottoman Egypt in the Seventeenth Century. Vol. IV, Studies in Middle Eastern History. Minneapolis: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1979. al-Nawawc al-Dimashqc, Abe Zakariya Yasya b. Sharaf. Al-AdhkAr al-nawawiyya. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1994. Nejmeddine, Hentati. “La rue dans la ville de l’Occident musulman médiéval d’après les sources juridiques malikites.” Arabica 50, no. 3 (July 2003): 273–305. The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary On Historical Principles. Edited by Lesley Brown. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. Neyrey, J.H. Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew. Louisville: Westminster John Know Press, 1998. Nin, Anaïs. “The Labyrinthine City of Fez.” In idem, In Favor of the Sensitive Man and Other Essays, 119–30. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1966. ——. The Diary of Anaïs Nin 1934–1939. New York: The Swallow Press, 1967. Northedge, Alistair. “Samarra’.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 1039–41. Nykl, Alois Richard. Hispano-Arabic Poetry and Its Relations with the Old Provencal Troubadors. Baltimore: n.d., 1946. Papadopoulo, Alexandre. “Le problème du misrab.” In Le miSrAb dans l’architecture et la religion musulmanes: Actes du colloque international tenu à Paris en mai 1980, publiés et pourvus d’une étude d’introduction générale, edited idem, 43–8. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1988. ——. “Introduction générale.” In ibid., 9–19. Papanek, Hanna. “Purdah: Separate Worlds and Symbolic Shelter.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 15 (1973): 289–325. Pellat, Charles. “Marthiya (1).” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 602–8.

139

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pérès, Henri. “La poésie à Fès sous les Almoravides et les Almohades.” Hespéris 18 (1934): 9–40. ——. La poésie andalouse en arabe classique au XIe siècle: Ses aspects généraux et sa valeur documentaire. Paris: Adrien-Maisonneuve, 1937. Péretié, M.A. “Les medrasas de Fès (d’après les notes de G. Salmon).” Archives marocaines 18 (1912): 257–372. Peters, Susan M. “The Barzakh: Mohammed Azeddine At-Tazi’s Fez.” M.A. thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1997. Petherbridge, Guy T. “Vernacular Architecture in the Maghreb: Some Historical and Geographical Factors.” Maghreb Review 3 (1976): 12–17, 22. ——. “The House and Society.” In Architecture of the Islamic World: Its History and Social Meaning, edited by George Michell, 193–208. London: Thames and Hudson, Ltd., 1978. Polignac, F. de. “L’imaginaire Arabe et le mythe de la foundation légitime.” Revue de l’Occident Musulman et de la Méditerranée 46 (1987): 55–63. Powers, David S. “FatwAs as Sources for Legal and Social History: A Dispute over Endowment Revenues from Fourteenth-Century Fez.” Al-QanVara: Revista de Estudios Árabes 11, no. 2 (1990): 295–341. Puente, Cristina de la. “Juridical Sources for the Study of Women: Limitations of the Female’s Capacity to Act According to Malikc Law.” In Writing the Feminine: Women in Arab Sources, edited by Manuela Marín and Randi Deguilhem, 95– 110. London: I.B. Tauris Publishers, 2002. Qarc ‘Iyad. TartCb al-madArik wa taqrCb al-masAlik li-ma“rifat a“lAm madhhab MAlik. Edited by Musammad Salim Hashim. 2 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1998. Rabat, Nasser. “The Meaning of the Umayyad Dome of the Rock.” Muqarnas: An Annual of Islamic Art and Architecture 6 (1989): 12–21. Rapoport, Amos. The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal Communication Approach. 2nd ed. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 1990. Raven, W. “Scra.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 660–3. RawR al-qirVAs. See: Ibn Abc Zar‘ al-Fasc. Raymond, André. “Espaces publics et espaces privés dans les villes arabes traditionnelles.” Maghreb-Machrek 123 (1989): 194–201. ——. “Islamic City, Arab City: Orientalist Myths and Recent Views.” British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies 21, no. 1 (1994): 3–18. ——. “La structure spatiale de la ville.” In idem, Arab Cities in the Ottoman Period: Cairo, Syria and the Maghreb, Variorum Collected Studies Series, 35–44. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 2002. Reinhart, A. Kevin. “Transcendence and Social Practice: MuftCs and QARCs as Religious Interpreters.” Annales Islamologiques 27 (1993): 5–28. ——. “maram.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World, edited by John L. Esposito, 101. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. Revault, Jacques, Lucien Golvin, and Ali Amahan. Palais et demeures de Fès. Vol. 1: Époques mérinide et saadienne (XIV e–XVII e siècles). Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1985. Roberts, Robert C. Emotions: An Essay in Aid of Moral Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Rosen, Lawrence. The Anthropology of Justice: Law as Culture in Islamic Society, Lewis Henry Morgan Lecture Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

140

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Rosenberger, Bernard. “Les premières villes islamiques du Maroc: Géographie et fonctions.” In Genèse de la ville islamique en Al-Andalus et au Maghreb occidental, edited by Patrice Cressier and Mercedes García-Arenal, 229–55. Madrid: Casa de Velázquez/Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1998. Rubin, Uri. The Eye of the Beholder: The Life of MuSammad as Viewed by the Earliest Sources. A Textual Analysis. Vol. 5, Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam. Princeton: The Darwin Press, Inc., 1995. ——. “Introduction: The Prophet Musammad and the Islamic Sources.” In idem, The Life of MuSammad, Variorum Collected Studies Series, xiii–xlvi. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1998. ——. “The Life of Musammad and the Islamic Self-Image: A Comparative Analysis of an Episode in the Campaigns of Badr and al-mudaybiya.” In The Biography of MuSammad: The Issue of the Sources, edited by Harald Motzki, 3–17. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. Translated by Hazel E. Barnes. London: Methuen and Co. Ltd., 1958. Schacht, Joseph. An Introduction to Islamic Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1964. Schaefer Davis, Susan. Patience and Power: Women’s Lives in a Moroccan Village. Rochester: Schenkman Books, Inc., c. 1983. Schneider, Carl D. Shame, Exposure, and Privacy. Boston: Beacon Press, 1977. ——. “A Mature Sense of Shame.” In The Many Faces of Shame, edited by Donald L. Nathanson, 194–213. New York: The Guilford Press, 1987. Schwarzer, Mitchell. “The Architecture of the Talmud.” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 60, no. 4 (2001): 474–87. Sebti, Abdelhad. “Au Maroc: Sharifisme citadin, charisme et historiographie.” Annales: économies – sociétés – civilisations, no. 2 (mars-avril 1986): 433–57. Secret, Edmond. “Les hammams de Fès.” In idem, Les sept printemps de Fès, 57–68. Paris, 1990. Serjeant, R.B. “Haram and Hawtah, the Sacred Enclave in Arabia.” In Mélanges Taha Hussein: Offerts par ses amis et ses disciples à l’occasion de son 70ième anniversaire, edited by Abdurrahman Badawi, 41–58. Cairo: Dar Al-Maaref, 1962. ——. “The ‘Constitution of Medina’.” Islamic Quarterly 8, nos. 1–2 (1964): 3–16. ——. “The Sunnah JAmi“ah, Pacts with the Yathrib Jews, and the TaSrCm of Yathrib: Analysis and Translation of the Documents Comprised in the so-called ‘Constitution of Medina’.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 4 (1978): 1–42. Serrano Ruano, Delfina. “La práctica legal (“amal ) en al-Andalus durante los siglos X–XII, a través de los MadhAhib al-SukkAm fC nawAzil al-aSkAm de Musammad Ibn ‘Iyar.” Qurtuba 1 (1996): 171–92. ——. “Legal Practice in an Andalusc-Maghribc source from the twelfth century C.E.: The MadhAhib al-SukkAm fC nawAzil al-aSkAm.” Islamic Law and Society 7, no. 2 (2000): 187–234. Sharma, Ursula M. “Women and Their Affines: The Veil as a Symbol of Separation.” Man (New Series) 13 (1978): 218–33. Shatzmiller, Maya. L’historiographie mérinide: Ibn KhaldEn et ses contemporains. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1982.

141

BIBLIOGRAPHY

——. “Les premiers mérinides et le milieu religieux de Fès: L’introduction des médersas.” Studia Islamica 43 (1986): 109–18. Sherif, Mostafa Hashem. “What is MijAb?” The Muslim World 77, nos. 3–4 (1987): 151–63. Simmel, Georg. “Bridge and Door.” In Rethinking Architecture: A Reader in Cultural Theory, edited by Neil Leach, 66–9. London: Routledge, 1997. Siraj, Ahmed. “Vie et mort d’une cité islamique: À propos du phénomène urbain dans le Maroc idrisside septentrional.” In Genèse de la ville islamique en Al-Andalus et au Maghreb occidental, edited by Patrice Cressier and Mercedes García-Arenal, 285–94. Madrid: Casa de Velázquez/Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1998. Skali Lami, Mohamed Faouzi. “Topographie spirituelle et sociale de la ville de Fès.” 4 vols. Thèse de Doctorat ès-Lettres, Université de Paris VII, 1990. Solomon, Robert C. “Shame.” In The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, edited by Ted Honderich, 825. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. Spellberg, Denise A. Politics, Gender, and the Islamic Past: The Legacy of “A”isha Bint Abi Bakr. New York: Columbia Press, 1994. Spies, Otto. “Islamisches Nachbarrecht nach schafäitischer Lehre.” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 42 (1927): 393–421. Stern, Gertrude H. Marriage in Early Islam. Vol. XVIII, James G. Forlong Fund. London: The Royal Asiatic Society, 1939. Stewart, Frank Henderson. Honor. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1994. Stillman, Y.K. et al. “Libas.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 732. Stipek, Deborah. “The Development of Pride and Shame in Toddlers.” In SelfConscious Emotions: The Psychology of Shame, Guilt, Embarrassment, and Pride, edited by Jane Price Tangney and Kurt W. Fischer. New York: The Guilford Press, 1995. Stowasser, Barbara Freyer. “The Status of Women in Early Islam.” In Muslim Women, edited by Freda Hussain, 11–43. London: Croom Helm, 1984. ——. “The MijAb: How a Curtain Became an Institution and a Cultural Symbol.” In Humanism, Culture, and Language in the Near East: Studies in Honor of Georg Krotkoff, edited by Asma Afsaruddin and A.H. Mathias Zahniser, 87–104. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1997. al-pabarc, Abe Ja‘far Musammad b. Jarcr. JAmi“ al-bayAn “an ta”wCl Ay al-Qu”rAn alma“rEf bi-TafsCr al-PabarC. Edited by Masmed Shakir. 15 bindings 30 vols. Beirut: Dar Isya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabc, 2001. ——. Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa al-mulEk. Edited by M.J. de Goeje et al. 16 vols (incl. 2 indices) in 3 series. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1964. ——. The History of al-PabarC (Ta”rCkh al-rusul wa”l-mulEk). Edited by Ehsan YarShater et al. 39 vols. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1985–98. Tabbaa, Yasser. “Circles of Power: Palace, Citadel, and City in Ayyubid Aleppo.” Ars Orientalis 23 (1993): 181–200. al-Tamcmc al-Fasc, Abc ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. ‘Abd al-Karcm. Al-MustafAd fC manAqib al-“ubbAd bi-madCnat FAs wa mA yalChA min al-bilAd. Edited by Mohamed Cherif. 2 vols. Tétouan: Publications de la Faculté des Lettres et Sciences Humaines, Université Abdelmalek Assa‘di, 2002. Taylor, Gabriele. Pride, Shame, and Guilt: Emotions of Self-Assessment. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.

142

BIBLIOGRAPHY

al-Tazc, Musammad ‘Izz al-Dcn. Manzil al-yamAm. Salé: Print-Diffusion, 1995. Tazi, Abdelhadi. La mosquée Al Qaraouiyyine: La mosquée-université de Fès, histoire architecturale et intellectuelle. 2 ed. 3 vols. Rabat: Dar Nachr El Maarifa, 2000. Terrasse, Henri. “Le décor des portes anciennes du Maroc.” Hespéris 3, no. 2 (1923): 147–74. ——. “Trois bains mérinides du Maroc.” In Mélanges offerts à William Marçais par l’Institut d’études islamiques de l’Université de Paris, 311–20. Paris: Éditions G.-P. Maisonneuve et Cie, 1950. ——. “Fas (Monuments).” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 821–3. ——. “La mosquée Almohade de Bou Jeloud à Fès.” Al-Andalus 29 (1964): 355– 63. ——. La mosquée Al-Qaraouiyin à Fès. Avec une étude de Gaston Deverdun sur les inscriptions historique de la mosquée. Vol. 3, Archéologie Méditerranéenne. Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1968. Terrasse, Michel. “L’Architecture hispano-maghrébine et la naissance d’un nouvel art marocain à l’âge des Mérinides.” 2 vols. Thèse de doctorat d’état, Paris 4, 1979. al-Thaqaf c, al-Shaykh al-Marjc. KitAb al-MCVAn: ASkAm al-Vuruq wa al-suVES wa alabwAb wa masCl al-miyAh wa al-SCVAn fC al-fiqh al-islAmC. Edited by Musammad Khayr Ramaran Yesuf. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr al-Mu‘auir, 1994. Toledano, Henry. Judicial Practice and Family Law in Morocco: The Chapter on Marriage from SijilmAsC’s Al-‘Amal al-muvlaq. Boulder: Social Science Monographs, Boulder, Colorado, 1981. Touri, Abdelaziz. “L’oratoire de quartier.” In Fès médiévale: Entre légende et histoire, un carrefour de l’Orient à l’apogée d’un rêve, edited by Mohamed Mezzine, 100–8. Paris: Les Éditions Autrement, 1992. Tracy, James D., ed. City Walls: The Urban Enceinte in Global Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Tschumi, Bernard. Architecture and Disjunction. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996. Tucker, Judith E. “The Arab Family in History: ‘Otherness’ and the Study of the Family.” In Arab Women: Old Boundaries, New Frontiers, edited by idem, 195– 207. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993. al-pef c, Sulayman b. ‘Abd al-Qawiy b. ‘Abd al-Karcm b. Sa‘cd. “Risalat al-pef c.” In MaUAdir al-tashrC“ al-islAmC f C-mA lA naUU f C-hC, edited by ‘Abd al-Wahhab Khallaf, 106–44. Kuwait: Dar al-Qalam, 1970. Udovitch, Abraham L. “Les échanges de marché dans l’Islam médiéval: Théorie du droit et savoir local.” Studia Islamica 65 (1987): 5–30. al-‘Umarc, Ibn Farl Allah. MasAlik el abUAr fi mamAlik el amUAr. I: L’Afrique, moins l’Égypte. Translated by M. Gaudefroy-Demombynes. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1927. Urvoy, Dominique. Pensers d’al-Andalus: La vie intellectuelle à Cordoue et Séville au temps des empires berbères fin XIe siècle-début XIIIe siécle. Paris: Editions du CNRS, 1990. ——. “The “UlamA” of Al-Andalus.” In The Legacy of Muslim Spain, 2nd ed., edited by Salma Khadra Jayyusi, 849–77. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1994. Van Staëvel, Jean-Pierre. “Casa, calle y vecindad en la documentación jurídica.” In Casas y palacios de Al-Andalus, edited by Julio Navarro Palazón, 53–61. Barcelona: Lunwerg Editores S.A., 1995.

143

BIBLIOGRAPHY

——. “Les usages de la ville: Discours normatif, habitat et construction urbaine dans l’Occident musulman médiéval (Xe–XIVe siècles).” 3 vols. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Lyon II – Auguste et Louis Lumière, 2000. ——. “Savoir faire et le faire savoir: L’expertise judiciaire en matière de construction, d’après un auteur tunisois du 8e/XIVe siècle.” Annales Islamologiques 35 (2001): 627–62. Wacquant, Loïc J.D. “From Ruling Class to Field of Power: An Interview with Pierre Bourdieu on La noblesse d’État.” Theory, Culture and Society 10, no. 3: 19– 44. Wansbrough, John. The Sectarian Milieu: Content and Composition of Islamic Salvation History. Vol. 34, London Oriental Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978. al-Wansharcsc, Abe al-‘Abbas Asmad b. Yasya. Al-Mi“yAr al-mu“rib wa al-jAmi“ almughrib “an fatAwA ahl IfrCqiya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib. 13 vols. Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-al-Mamlaka al-Maghribiyya, 1981–3. Watenpaugh, Heghnar Zeitlian. The Image of an Ottoman City: Imperial Architecture and Urban Experience in Aleppo in the 16th and 17th Centuries. Edited by Suraiya Faroqhi and Halil Inalcik. Vol. 33, The Ottoman Empire And Its Heritage: Politics, Society and Economy. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Watt, W. Montgomery. “Ibn Hisham.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 800–1. ——. Muhammad at Medina. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1956. ——. “The Materials Used by Ibn Issaq.” In Historians of the Middle East, edited by Bernard Lewis and P.M. Holt. London: Oxford University Press, 1962. al-Wazzanc, Abe ‘hsa “Scdc” Musammad al-Mahdc b. Musammad b. Musammad b. al-Kharir. Al-NawAzil al-UughrA al-musammA bi-al-MinS al-sAmiya fC al-nawAzil alfiqhiyya. 4 vols. Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-al-Mamlaka al-Maghribiyya, 1993. ——. Al-NawAzil al-jadCdA al-kubrA fC-mA li-ahl FAs wa ghayrihim min al-badE wa al-qurA al-musammA bi-al-Mi“yAr al-jadCd al-jAmi“ al-mughrib “an fatAwA almuta”akhkhirCn min “ulamA” al-Maghrib. Edited by ‘Umar b. ‘Abbad. 16 vols. Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-al-Mamlaka al-Maghribiyya, 1998. ——. TuSfat akyAs al-nAs bi-sharS “amaliyyAt FAs. Edited by Hashim al-‘Alawc alQasimc. Rabat: Wizarat al-Awqaf wa al-Shu’en al-Islamiyya li-al-Mamlaka alMaghribiyya, 2001. Webster, Sheila K. “marcm and mijab: Seclusive and Exclusive Aspects of Traditional Muslim Dwelling and Dress.” Women’s Studies International Forum 7, no. 4 (1984): 251–7. Wendell, Charles. “Baghdad: Imago Mundi, and Other Foundation-Lore.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 2 (1971): 99–128. Wensinck, A.J., et al. Concordance et indices de la tradition musulmane: Les six livres, le Musnad d’al-DArimC, le Muwatta” de MAlik, le Musnad de Ahmad ibn Hanbal. 8 vols. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1933–88. Wensinck, A.J. “Sutra.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 902–3. ——. “Qibla.” In The Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed., 82–3. Westermarck, Edward. Ritual and Belief in Morocco. 2 vols. London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1926.

144

BIBLIOGRAPHY

——. Wit and Wisdom in Morocco: A Study of Native Proverbs. London: George Routledge and Sons, Ltd., 1930. Wheatley, Paul. “Levels of Space Awareness in the Traditional Islamic City.” Ekistics 42, no. 253 (Dec. 1976): 354–66. ——. The Places Where Men Pray Together: Cities in Islamic Lands, Seventh through the Tenth Centuries. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001. Whelan, Estelle. “Origins of the MiSrAb Mujawwaf: A Reinterpretation.” International Journal of Middle East Studies 18 (1986): 205–23. Wigley, Mark. The Architecture of Deconstruction: Derrida’s Haunt. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1993. Wikan, Unni. “Shame and Honour: A Contestable Pair.” Man (New Series) 19 (1984): 635–52. Wilbaux, Quentin. La médina de Marrakech: Formation des espaces urbains d’une ancienne capitale du Maroc. Paris: L’Harmattan, 2001. Williams, Bernard. Shame and Necessity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993. Wirth, Eugen. “Villes islamiques, villes arabes, villes orientales? Une problématique face au changement.” In La ville arabe dans l’Islam: Histoire et mutations, edited by Abdelwahab Bouhdiba and Dominique Chevalier, 193–225. Tunis: Imprimerie Al-Asria, 1982. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Culture and Value. Translated by Peter Winch. Edited by G.H. von Wright. Oxford: Blackwell, 1980. Wurmser, Léon. The Mask of Shame. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1981. ——. “Shame: The Veiled Companion of Narcissism.” In The Many Faces of Shame, edited by Donald L. Nathanson, 64–92. New York: The Guilford Press, 1987. al-Ya‘qebc. KitAb al-BuldAn. Edited by M.J. de Goeje, Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1892. Yaqet, Ibn ‘Abd Allah al-mamawc. Mu“jam al-buldAn. Edited by Farcd ‘Abd al-‘Azcz al-Jundc. 7 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1990. Zahrat al-As. See: al-Jazna’c. Zahrat el-âs (La fleur du myrte). See: al-Jazna’c. Zanón, Jesús. “La actividad intellectual: Las ramas del saber. Centros y métodos de conocimiento.” In Historia de España Menéndez Pidal. Vol. VIII-2: El retroceso territorial de al-Andalus. Almorávides y Almohades, siglos XI al XIII, edited by María Jesús Viguera Molíns, 551–602. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, S.A., 1997. al-Zaqqaq. TuSfat al-SukkAm fC masA”il al-da“AwA wa al-aSkAm (La “Lamia” ou “Zaqqaqia” du jurisconsulte marocain Zaqqaq: Manuel marocain de jurisprudence musulmane). Edited and translated by Merad Ben Ali Ould Abdelkader. Casablanca: Imp. Réunies de la “Vigie Marocaine” et du “Petit Marocain”, 1927. al-Zarqa’, Asmad b. al-Shaykh Musammad. SharS al-qawA“id al-fiqhiyya. Edited by Muuvafa Asmad al-Zarqa’. 5th ed. Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 1998. al-Zarqa’, Muuvafa Asmad. Al-Madkhal al-fiqhC al-“Amm. 7th ed. 3 vols. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, n.d. al-Zayyat, ‘Abd Allah Musammad. RithA” al-mudun fC shi“r al-andalusC. Benghazi: Jami‘at Qar Yunis, 1990. Ziadeh, Farhat J. “ “Urf and Law in Islam.” In The World of Islam: Studies in Honour of Philip K. Hitti, edited by James and R. Bayly Winder Kritzech, 59–67. London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd., 1959.

145

NAMES INDEX

‘Abd al-Malik b. mabcb 32 ‘Abd al-Memin b. ‘Alc al-Kemc al-Zanatc 18 ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abd al-makam 32, 79 ‘Abd Allah b. Wahb 32 Abel, Armand 64 Abe al-masan ‘Alc 21 Abe mancfa 78, 79 Abe ‘Inan Faris 21 Abe Issaq b. ‘Abd al-Rafc‘ 33, 46, 47 Abe Yesuf 78 Abu-Lughod, Lila 51 Agadir 25 Aleppo 3 ‘Alc al-Jazna’c 9 Ali Djerbi 2 Andalusia 11, 34, 41, 42, 60, 61 Aubagh 32 Ashhab 32, 43 Bachelard, Gaston 36 Baghdad 61 al-Bajc 33, 42, 43 al-Bakrc 9 Barbastro, Spain 55 al-Bayrawc 55 Beck, Herman 10 Benmira, Omar 45 Bouhdiba, Abdelwahab 12 Bourdieu, Pierre 25, 59, 60 Brunschvig, Robert 30 al-Burzulc 34 Cairo 21, 51 Campo, Juan 22 Clevenot, Dominique 20, 21 Cordoba 37, 41, 56

al-Damaghanc 78 Denas al-Maghrawc 17 Eickelman, Dale 52 Eliade, Mircea 63 Farès, Bichr 52 Fez: canalization of 9; conclusions about space in 69; configuration 6, 10–11; foundation legend 57–67, 69–70; French Protectorate 17; history of Marinid 7–10; infrastructure of Marinid 14–15; Leo Africanus’ description 27; map of Marinid 6; monumental composition of Marinid 10–15; original foundations 11; original mosques 11; overcrowding in 11; population 11; premodern 6–18; privacy issues 37–8; status in Islamic studies 3; topography 8–9; violence in 14 Fez Jedcd 6, 18 Greimas, Algirdas 16 Gulick, John 3 Hakim, Besim 30, 45 al-mallaj, Al-musayn b. Manuer 28 al-Hathloul 47–8 Heidegger, Martin 69 Heller, Agnes 49 Hillenbrand, Robert 11, 20 Humphreys, Stephen 62 Ibn ‘Abdes 33 Ibn Abc Zamancn 33 Ibn Abc Zayd al-Qayrawanc 33

146

NAMES INDEX

Ibn al-‘Arabc 1 Ibn al-‘Avvar 41 Ibn al-Imam 30, 33, 72, 76 Ibn al-Labbana 55 Ibn al-Majishen 32, 43, 79 Ibn al-Qasim 32, 33, 41, 43, 79 Ibn al-Qavvan 77 Ibn al-Ramc 30, 40; on “amal 42–4; cases 74–5, 78–9; extant manuscripts 34; on lA Rarar wa lA RirAr 45, 46, 47–8; and the Mudawwana 32–3; on smoke 31 Ibn ‘Assal 55 Ibn ‘Attab 77 Ibn Dcnar 33 Ibn Farsen 33 Ibn Ghalib 59 Ibn mabcb 43, 46, 79 Ibn mazm 55–6, 56 Ibn Hisham 33, 47, 63 Ibn ‘Idharc 60 Ibn ‘Iyad 41 Ibn Issaq 23, 63 Ibn Kinana 43 Ibn Malik 77 Ibn Manwer 15–16, 29 Ibn Mughayth 33 Ibn Nafi‘ 43 Ibn Rushd “al-Jadd” 33, 34, 37, 47 Ibn Sahl 33, 48, 73, 76 Ibn Sha‘ban 79 Ibn Sharaf al-Qayrawanc 55 Ibn Taymiyya 27 Idrcs I 6, 8, 10, 58 Idrcs II 7, 8, 10, 58, 59 al-Idrcsc 9 ‘hsa b. Dcnar 30 ‘Izz al-Dcn Tazc 13 Johns, Jeremy 64 Kahera, Akel I. 45 Kairouan, Tunisia 11, 55, 60 Kamali, Mohammad Hashim 46–7 al-Khashanc 46 Khirr 26 Le Tourneau, Roger 3, 14 Leach, Edmund 62 Lefebvre, Henri 4, 11–12, 13, 36, 39 Leo Africanus 12, 13, 18, 27 Lévi-Strauss, Claude 38

Madcnat al-Zahira 61 Malik b. Anas 31, 45 Malinowski, Bronislaw 58, 62, 63 al-Manuer 61 al-Marjc al-Thaqafc 30, 73, 78 al-Mazarc 41 Mecca 24, 69 Medina 24, 47, 62–3, 69; and “amal 41; the Constitution of 65–7; foundation legends 4, 62–3; the Prophet in 23, 64 –5 Meknes 27 Mernissi, Fatima 36 M’halla, Moncef 15, 16 Morocco 10, 25, 41, 42 Moses 26 Musammad al-Namcnaj 34 Musammad al-Shaybanc 32, 78 Musammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Zubayrc 33 Musammad II al-Mu‘tamid 55 Musammad b. Jarir 61 al-Muqaddisc 8 Murphy, Robert 54 Muuvafa al-Zarqa 47 Muvarrif 79 al-Mu‘tauim 62 Naamane-Guessous, Soumaya 52 Nauir al-Dcn al-masan 21 Petherbridge, Guy 22 Quba’ 64 al-Rafiqa 61 Sasnen 32, 43, 77, 79 Samarra, Iraq 61 Sartre, Jean-Paul 49 Schacht, Joseph 4 Schaefer Davis, Susan 52 Serjeant, R.B. 65 Serrano Ruano, Delfina 41 al-Shafi‘c 79 Shatzmiller, Maya 10 Shem 62 Scbawayh 16 Scdc Abc al-masan al-oaghcr 27 Sulayman b. Mujalid 61 al-pabarc 53, 61 al-Tawdc b. Seda 46

147

NAMES INDEX

al-Thaqafc, al-Shaykh al-Marjc 30 Tlemcen, Algeria 21 Tschumi, Bernard 68, 69 Tunisia 41, 42 ‘Uqba b. Nafi‘ al-Fihrc 60, 61 al-‘Utbc, Abe ‘Abd Allah Musammad b. Asmad 32

Watt, Montgomery 63 al-Wazzanc 34 Westermarck, Edward 25 Wheatley, Paul 36, 61 Wikan Unni 51 Wurmser, Léon 50, 53

Van Leeuwen, Richard 68 Van Staëvel, Jean-Pierre 30, 40

Yaqet 9 Ya‘qeb Abe Yesuf 32 Ya‘qeb al-Manuer 18 al-Ya‘qebc 62 Yathrib (Medina) 64, 65–6

al-Wansharcsc 34, 75 Wasiv 61 Watenpaugh, Heghnar 3

al-Zaqqaq 44 Zayten b. ‘Aviya 15 Zef 60

148

SUBJECT INDEX

ahl al-bayt 22 Al-Qarawiyycn mosque 21, 25–6, 37, 70 Almohad dynasty 9, 18 Almoravid dynasty 9, 17–18, 55 “amal: and the Book of Walls 42–4; dependence upon “urf 44; Ibn al-Ramc’s recordings 43–4; the meaning of 40–1; origins and justification 41; texts 41–2 Arabic-Islamic Cities: Building and Planning Principles (Hakim) 30 architectural regulations see building law architecture: buildings’ intended meanings 39; domestic 22; Islamic concept of 15; Petherbridge on monumental 22 archways and doors 14 Awlad ‘Ali tribe 51–2 Ayat al-nEr 21–2 Bascra the monk 63–4, 66 Black Death 34 The Book of Walls 2, 19; and “amal 42–4; application procedure 40–4; case titles 72–6; cases 76–9; composition 29–30; fatwa compilations 32–3; hadith material 31; Hanafi school and 31–2; history/genealogy 31–4; and lA Rarar wa lA RirAr 45–6; privacy issues in 36–8; proscriptive legal aesthetic 34–8; “urf and 44–8 building law ( fiqh al-bunyAn) 29; scholarly appraisals 30 building laws: in Book of Walls see Book of Walls; minarets in 34, 37–8,

72, 76; party walls 16, 78–9; regarding overhead projections 76–7 building media 44 canalization, of Fez 9 cities see medinas city, description of the Islamic 1–2 dAr: Fez as a 70; Qur’anic use 22; medina’s reliance on 15–16 The Encyclopaedia of Islam 53 exposure (kashf ) 37 fatwa compilations, in the Book of Walls 32–3 “field of power” 59, 60, 61 fonduks 12 foundation legends 57–67, 69–70 French Protectorate, of Fez 17 genitals 53, 55 God’s house, Qur’anic descripion 22 golden age 33, 34 hammams 12, 32 Hanafi school, and Book of Walls 31–2 Saram 24, 67, 70 Sashm 51–2 SayA” 51 SijAb 27–8, 54 Sisba discourse 35 house: psychic dimensions of Muslim 36; Qur’anic descriptions 22; women’s association with 24–5 hydraulic clock 14

149

SUBJECT INDEX

qayUariyya 12 qibla wall, purpose 20–1, 70

Islamic architecture, Petherbridge on 22 istaSyA 51 KitAb al-Abniya 33 KitAb al-MCVAn 30, 31, 33, 35, 45, 73–4, 78 KitAb al-I“lAn bi-aSkAm al-bunyAn 74–5, 78–9 KitAb al-QaRA” wa al-araRCn wa al-dEr 33, 72–3 lA Rarar wa lA RirAr: and The Book of Walls 45–6; clarification by “urf 46–8; Ibn al-Ramc on 47, 48 madrasas, Marinid construction 7, 11, 18 Maliki legal scholarship 9 maps, Marinid Fez 6 Marinid dynasty 7, 9–10, 67 markets, policing of 35 medinas: foundation legends 57–8, 60, 62–3, 66–7, 69–70; labyrinthine structure 2, 68–9; perception of enclosure 70–1 mihrab, location in qibla wall 21–2 minarets, in building law 34, 37–8, 72, 76 monumental architecture, Petherbridge’s comments 22 monumental space, Lefebvre’s definition 11–12, 13 mosques: Fez’s original 11; Maghribi architecture development 21; primary raison d’être 12 muezzins, domestic privacy issues 37 munkar 49 myth: Eliade’s definition 63; Malinowski’s definition 62, 63 neighborhoods, autonomy 14 One Thousand and One Nights, cities in 68 overcrowding, in Fez 11 overlooking (iVVilA) 37–8, 76 party walls 16, 78–9 The Poetics of Space (Bachelard) 36 population, of Fez 11 The Power of Shame (Heller) 49 privacy 36–8

RawR al-qirVAs 9–10, 17, 25, 58 rithA” al-mudun 4, 54–5, 56 royal exit, from the ‘Alawid city 13–24 Sa‘did dynasty 13, 18, 21 shame: dialect terms 51; importance to Islam 49–52; Islamic purpose 53; and the significance of walls 49–56, 69; spatial dimension of 52–4 Sharia: in the Book of Walls 45; and “urf 44 SCra (Ibn Issaq) 63; Bahira the monk 63–4; the Constitution of Medina 65–7; the Prophet’s arrival in Medina 64–5 Sufism 12 sutra 20 taqlCd 42–4 threshold propriety (isti”dhAn) 23–4, 51 Tuareg, and veiling 54 urban growth, uneven experience 34 “urf: and the Book of Walls 44–8; definition 39; dependence of “amal upon 44; etymology 49 “Les usages de la ville” (Van Staëvel) 30 valorization, of the Islamic city 1 violence, in Fez 14 walls: an interpretation of 54–6; Arab-Muslim preoccupation with 2, 38; as cover 26–8; and definition/ determination of the city 15–18; gender demarcation role 24–5; legal dimensions 29–39; party 16, 78–9; proverbs concerning 16; Qur‘anic perceptions 19–20; shame and the significance of 49–56; social and religious dimensions 19–28; as thresholds 20–6 Wavvasid dynasty 7 women: metaphorical representations 56; seclusion of 24–5, 26–7, 37, 55, 70; veiling 2, 26–8, 53 Zahrat al-As 9, 17, 25, 58

150