qadi-s and the political use of the mazalim jurisdiction ... · qadi-s and the political use of the...

HAL Id: hal-00587370https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00587370v1

Submitted on 21 Apr 2011 (v1), last revised 8 Aug 2011 (v2)

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open accessarchive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-entific research documents, whether they are pub-lished or not. The documents may come fromteaching and research institutions in France orabroad, or from public or private research centers.

L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, estdestinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documentsscientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,émanant des établissements d’enseignement et derecherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoirespublics ou privés.

Qadi-s and the political use of the mazalim jurisdictionunder the ’Abbasids

Mathieu Tillier

To cite this version:Mathieu Tillier. Qadi-s and the political use of the mazalim jurisdiction under the ’Abbasids. ChristianLange, Maribel Fierro. Public Violence in Islamic Societies: Power, Discipline, and the Constructionof the Public Sphere, 7th–18th Centuries CE, Edinburgh University Press, pp.42-66, 2009. <hal-00587370v1>

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00587370v1

https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr

42

GRAHAMS IMAC:Users:Graham:Public:GRAHAM'S IMAC JOBS:11654 - EUP - LANGE:EB0038 - LANGE TXTGRAHAMS IMAC:Users:Graham:Public:GRAHAM'S IMAC JOBS:11654 - EUP - LANGE:EB0038 - LANGE TXT GRAHAMS IMAC:Users:Graham:Public:GRAHAM'S IMAC JOBS:11654 - EUP - LANGE:EB0038 - LANGE TXT

2

Qāḍīsandthepoliticaluseofthe maẓālim jurisdictionundertheʿAbbāsids

MathieuTillier*

The role of the maẓālim jurisdiction is generally regarded as threefoldby present-day historians. As ordinary courts – all grievances could intheorybebroughttothecaliph–themaẓālimsymbolizedthediscretion-aryauthorityvestedintherulerwhocould,atanytime,exerciseapowerthathewouldordinarilydelegatetootherjudges.Moreover,themaẓālimoffered the possibility to claim damages for unjust acts committed bypublicservants,publicofficialsorhigh-rankingdignitariesagainstwhomthe qāḍīs would find it difficult to take punitive actions. Finally, themaẓālimemergedasapossible recourseagainst the judgmentofqāḍīs,and as such, functioned as a court of appeal.1 Although the institutiongoesbacktothebeginningoftheʿAbbāsidera,itwasonlysystematicallytheorized in the 5th/11th century, in the works of al-Māwardī and Ibnal-Farrā,2whichmakesitdifficulttodetermineexactlywhenthistypeofjusticewaspracticedintheearlycenturiesofIslam.Whilethemaẓālimareoftenreferredtoasindependentinstitutions,thetextsarenotalwaysexplicit:intheopinionofL.MassignonandE.Tyan,al-Ḥallājwasoneofitsmostfamousvictims,althoughnotextclearlysaysthathisjudgesheldamaẓālimcourt.3Indeedthemaẓālimwerenotrecognizableonlybytheirnameorby the judgessitting in thecourts; theyweremainly identifiedbytheirprocedures:freefromthelimitsofordinaryjurisdictions,judgescouldtakeacasewithoutprioraccusation.4Inpractice,theexistenceofsuchcourtscouldbe recognizedwhen trials tookplacebyorderof theruler,withouthisinvolvementasalitigant.Aboveall,themaẓālimpro-videdrulerswithanumberofwaystoregaincontrolofjustice,withouttheqāḍīs’involvement.

* IwouldliketothankChristianLange,MaribelFierroandChristopherMelchertfortheircommentsandsuggestionsontheoriginalversionofthischapter.

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 42 8/6/09 17:10:19

GRAHAMS IMAC:Users:Graham:Public:GRAHAM'S IMAC JOBS:11654 - EUP - LANGE:EB0038 - LANGE TXTGRAHAMS IMAC:Users:Graham:Public:GRAHAM'S IMAC JOBS:11654 - EUP - LANGE:EB0038 - LANGE TXT

43

GRAHAMS IMAC:Users:Graham:Public:GRAHAM'S IMAC JOBS:11654 - EUP - LANGE:EB0038 - LANGE TXT

THEMAZ.ĀLIMJURISDICTIONUNDERTHEʿABBĀSIDS

Initiatedbysovereigns,themaẓālimhaveoftenbeenanalyzedexclu-sivelyinthecontextofcaliphalcourt.5Inthesameway,andinspiteofthepermeability–pointedoutbyTyan–thatexistedbetweentheordinaryjudgeship and the maẓālim,6 there has been little research done on theroleplayedbyqāḍīs in themaẓālim,perhapsbecause thedividing linebetweenthepersonoftheqāḍīandthepersonoftheṣāḥibal-maẓālimisstillconsideredasageneralandnecessaryrule.7Themaẓālim,however,werenotatallconfined to thecapitalcity; theyhadbeenestablished insmallertownsorinprovincessincetheʿ Abbāsidera.Thelinkbetweentheqāḍīsandthemaẓālim’sjurisdictionsremainsamystery.Re-exploringtheinstitution’scentralandprovincialdealingswillhelpusunderstandhowthegoverningpowermanaged to instrumentalize justiceand imposeorlegalizecertainformsofstateviolence.

Provincialmaẓālimandpoliticalstrategies

THEMAZ.ĀLIMINPROVINCIALTOWNS

In provincial towns, maẓālim courts were held in different ways. Thesovereign himself could act as a judge, but such cases occurred onlyunderspecialcircumstances.Mostofthetime,thesovereignwoulddel-egatehispowertoathirdparty,usuallyanofficerspeciallyappointedforthispurposeoraqāḍīalreadyinplace.Asweshallseefurtheron,theseoptionswereanythingbutunbiased.Themaẓālimcameacrossastheulti-mateexpressionofsovereignjustice,and,indeedtheinstitutionwasoftenamajorissueinthecompetitionbetweencontendersforlegitimacy.

To theextent that theycouldbe identified, theTable lists thenamesofjudgessittinginmaẓālimcourtsinIraqandEgyptandoccasionallyinSyriaandIran,andrevealsthedifficultyofestablishinganuninterruptedlist of incumbents. There is even some doubt that the institution wasactuallyrepresentedinprovincesonapermanentbasis.Inaddition,mostaṣḥābal-maẓālimdidnotholdmaẓālimfunctionsconcurrentlywiththeirjudicialfunctions.Someofthem(suchasal-Ḥasanb.ʿUmāra,al-Ḥasanb.ʿAbdAllāhb.al-Ḥasanal-ʿAnbarī,orʿAbdAllāhb.Muḥammadb.AbīYazīdal-Khalanjī)werealsoqāḍīsduringtheirlifetimes,butatdifferentpointsintime.Therefore,themaẓālimappear,inmostcases,asaseparatejudicialinstitution.InIraq,someqāḍīswerevestedwithmaẓālimpowers,butonlyonamissionbasisratherthanasapermanentfunction.ʿUbaydAllāhb.al-Ḥasanwasnotassignedmaẓālimdutiesthroughoutthedura-tionofhisjudicialdutiesinBaṣra:whileprayers,orkhuṭba,arementionedashisofficialdutybybiographers,8maẓālimarenot.Theonlyindication

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 43 8/6/09 17:10:20

PUBLICVIOLENCEINISLAMICSOCIETIES

44


Judgessittinginmaẓālimcourts

CITYORPROVINCE

DATES

QĀḌĪ NOTAQĀḌĪ APPOINTEDBY

BaṣraSometimebetween156/773and167/783–41

ʿUbaydAllāhb.al-Ḥasanal-ʿAnbarī2

al-Mahdī(caliph)

160–3/777–80or167–73/783–93

Fazārab.ʿImrān4

ca202–10/817–25 Isḥāqb.Ismāʿīl5

ca223–39/837–53 Aḥmadb.Riyāḥ6

IbnAbīDuʾād(chiefqāḍī)

ca256/870 IbnQutayba Ṣāʿidb.Makhlad7

Kūfaca132/750(?) IbnShubruma8 ʿĪsāb.Mūsā(governor)/

al-Manṣūr(caliph)

Underal-Manṣūr al-Ḥasanb.ʿUmāra9

FārsUnderal-Maʾmūn al-Ḥasanb.ʿAbd

Allāhb.al-Ḥasanal-ʿAnbarī10

JabalBefore228/842–3 ʿAbdAllāh

b.Muḥammadb.AbīYazīdal-Khalanjī11

MarwBefore235/849–50 Aḥmadb.ʿUmar

b.Ḥafṣal-Wakīʿī12

DamasUnderal-Muʿtaṣim AbūMuslim

al-Naṭʿī13IbnAbīDuʾād(chiefqāḍī)

Underal-Muʿtaṣim Yaḥyāb.al-Ḥasanal-Ṭabarānī14

IbnAbīDuʾād(chiefqāḍī)

273/886or275/887 ʿAbd/ʿUbaydAllāhb.al-Fatḥ15

Khumārawayh(governor)

Fusṭāṭ211–12/826–7 ʿAṭṭāfb.Ghazwān16 ʿAbdAllāh

b.Ṭāhir(governor)

215/830 Isḥāqb.Ismāʿīl17 ʿAbdawayhb.Jabala(governor)

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 44 8/6/09 17:10:20


45



Judgessittinginmaẓālimcourts(cont.)

CITYORPROVINCE

DATES

QĀḌĪ NOTAQĀḌĪ APPOINTEDBY

215–16/830–1 Muḥammadb.ʿAbbādb.Muknif18

Kaydar(governor)

235/850 ʿĪsāb.Lahīʿab.ʿĪsāal-Ḥaḍramī19

Isḥāqb.Yaḥyāb.Muʿādh(governor)

274–8/887–92 Muḥammadb.ʿAbdab.Ḥarb20


278–83/892–6 Muḥammadb.ʿAbdab.Ḥarb21


283/896 IbnṬughān22

292/905 Muḥammadb.ʿAbdab.Ḥarb23

Muḥammadb.Sulaymān(governor)

324–7/936–9 Ibnal-Ḥaddād24 Al-Ikhshīd(governor)

331/943 ʿAtīqb.al-Ḥasan(Bakrān)25

340/951– ʿAbdAllāhb.Muḥammadb.al-Khaṣīb26

Kāfūr(governor)

362/973 ʿAbdAllāhb.Muḥammadb.AbīThawbān27

Al-Muʿizz(Fāṭimidcaliph)

1. M.Tillier,“UntraitépolitiqueduIIe/VIIIesiècle.L’épîtredeʿ UbaydAllāhb.al-Ḥasanal-ʿAnbarīaucalifeal-Mahdī,”AI40(2006),141.

2. Wakīʿ, Akhbār al-quḍāt, ed. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Muṣṭafā al-Marāghī (Cairo: Maṭbaʿat al-Saʿāda,1947–50),2:92.

3. Duringthisperiod,thegovernorofBaṣrawasMuḥammadb.Sulaymān.SeeCh.Pellat,LemilieubaṣrienetlaformationdeĞāḥiẓ(Paris:Adrien-Maisonneuve,1953),281.

4. Ibn ʿAsākir, Taʾrīkh madīnat Dimashq (Damascus: Dār al-Fikr, 2000), 53:137; al-Tawḥīdī,al-Baṣāʾir wa-l-dhakhāʾir, ed. Wadād al-Qāḍī (Beirut: Dār Ṣādir, 1988), 4:41; Ibn al-Jawzī,K. al-Ḥamqā wa-l-mughaffalīn (Beirut: Dār al-Āfāq al-Jadīd, n.d.), 77, 93. It may be Fazārab.ʿImrānb.Mālikb.Bilāl,fromBanūal-Jūnb.Anmār.SeeIbnDurayd,al-Ishtiqāq,ed.ʿAbdal-SalāmMuḥammadHārūn(Cairo:Maktabatal-Khānjī,n.d.),497.

5. Al-Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ, Tartīb al-madārik wa-taqrīb al-masālik li-maʿrifat aʿlām madhhab Mālik, ed.Aḥmad Bakīr Maḥmūd (Beirut–Tripoli: Dār Maktabat al-Ḥayāt-Dār Maktabat al-Fikr, 1967),1:558.HewasinofficeatthetimewhenYaḥyāb.AkthamwasqāḍīofBaṣra:IbnḤajarregardshimasoneofhisamīns.SeeIbnḤajar,Lisānal-mīzān(Beirut:Muʾassasatal-Aʿlāmī,1986),1:352.

6. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,2:175. 7. Al-Dhahabī,Taʾrīkhal-islām,ed.ʿ Umarʿ Abdal-SalāmTadmurī(Beirut:Dāral-Kitābal-ʿArabī,

1987),20:383.Al-Dhahabīspeaksof“al-Riyāsatayn”(nicknameofal-Faḍlb.Sahl,whodiedlong

(Notescontinuedoverleaf)

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 45 8/6/09 17:10:20


46


comesfromadialoguebetweentheqāḍīandthecaliphal-Mahdī,piecedtogetherbyWakīʿ,inwhichtheqāḍīexplained,“IreceivedaletterfromtheCommanderofBelievers,whoorderedmetoinvestigateunjustacts(maẓālim)committedagainstthepeopleofBaṣra,tolistentotheirtrustees(nuqabāʾ)andtowritehimbacktoinformhimofthefactsIestablished.That is what I did.”9 A few decades later, Aḥmad b. Riyāḥ appears tobeformallyvestedwiththerole,butonceagain,Wakīʿsaysthatitwasentrustedtohimonlyintheaftermathofhisappointmentasaqāḍī.Hisroleinthemaẓālimalsosuggeststhathewasassignedtheresponsibilityasasubsidiaryduty.10IntheIraqiamṣār,atleast,themaẓālimprobablydidnotconstituteapermanentinstitution.Theywerenot,itseems,full-timefunctions,11butrather,temporarymandates,possiblyassignedtoqāḍīsbythegoverningpower,perhapsintheeventofacrisisorparticularlydeli-catematters.Toentrustaqāḍīwiththetaskof“redressingwrongs”,wasindeedawayfor thecaliph toreinforcehisdelegate’sauthorityagainsthigh-rankingpublicfigureswhocouldnototherwise–undernormalcir-

beforeIbnQutaybawasborn),butheprobablymeans“[Dhū]l-Wizāratayn”,whichwasthenick-nameofthevizierṢāʿidb.Makhlad.Seeal-Ziriklī,al-Aʿlām(Beirut:Dāral-ʿIlmli-l-Malāyīn,1997),3:187.SeealsoEI2,s.v.IbnḲutayba,3:844–5(G.Lecomte).

8. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,3:124. 9. al-Mizzī,Tahdhībal-kamāl,ed.BashshārʿAwwādMaʿrūf(Beirut:Muʾassasatal-Risāla,1980),

6:275.10. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,2:173–4.11. Ibid.,3:290;al-Khaṭīb,TaʾrīkhBaghdād,ed.MuṣṭafāʿAbdal-QādirʿAṭā(Beirut:Dāral-Kutub

al-ʿIlmiyya,1997),10:74;IbnʿAsākir,TaʾrīkhmadīnatDimashq,32:379.12. Al-Khaṭīb,TaʾrīkhBaghdād,4:284.13. IbnʿAsākir,TaʾrīkhmadīnatDimashq,67:224.14. Ibid.,64:11715. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣrʿanquḍātMiṣr,ed.ʿAlīMuḥammadʿUmar(Cairo:Maktabatal-Khānjī,

1998),388(tr.M.Tillier,ViesdescadisdeMiṣr(Cairo:IFAO,2002),79).16. Al-Kindī, Akhbār quḍāt Miṣr, in K. al-Wulāt wa-kitāb al-quḍāt, ed. R. Guest (Leiden: Brill,

1912),432–3;IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,267.17. Al-Kindī, Akhbār quḍāt Miṣr, 189; Wakīʿ, Akhbār al-quḍāt, 3:280; al-Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ, Tartīb

al-madārik,2:558;Tillier,Viesdescadis,39.18. Al-Kindī,AkhbārquḍātMiṣr,441;IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,299,360.19. Al-Kindī,AkhbārquḍātMiṣr,198.20. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,383(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,72).21. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,384(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,74).22. IbnBurd,inal-Kindī,AkhbārquḍātMiṣr,480.23. Ibid.,480–1.24. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,326(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,133).25. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,56(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,158).Heclaimedthetitleofqāḍī–officially

assignedtoal-Kishshī–butmajorwitnessesrefusedtocallhimso.26. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,198(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,165).27. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,199,329(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,179).

Judgessittinginmaẓālimcourts(cont.)

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 46 8/6/09 17:10:20


47



cumstances–besummonedtohearings.12Butifaqāḍīcouldtakerespon-sibilityformaẓālimjusticeinadditiontohisregularduties,whywerethetwo institutionssooftenseparated?Callingonaṣāḥibal-maẓālimwhodidnotholdqāḍīfunctionsatthesametimeusuallysignaledastrategytoassertonepowerattheexpenseoftheother.

ANINSTRUMENTOFCENTRALAUTHORITY

IntheearlyʿAbbāsidera,theinstitutionofmaẓālimwasregularlyusedbythecaliphateasameanstoaffirm(orreaffirm)authority.IntheIraqiamṣār,aṣḥābal-maẓālimwereappointedmainlyintimesofcrisis.Initially,themaẓālimmayhavehelpedlegitimizenewpowers.InsouthernIraq,landedpropertyseemedtobedeeplyaffectedbytherevolution:thelandoftheMarwānids, inparticular,wasconfiscatedand redistributed to ʿAbbāsidfamilymembers.13Landclaimswerecountlessinthefollowingyears–assometriedtotakepossessionoflandwhileothersprotestedagainstexpro-priationsthattheyconsideredtobeunfair–andtheestablishmentoflocalmaẓālim courts therefore likely gave the dynasty the means to controldiscontentandtensionswhichmightfuelrebellion.AccordingtoWakīʿ,thegovernorofKūfa,ʿĪsāb.Mūsā,appointedʿAbdAllāhb.Shubrumatothetownmaẓālimcourt,whileheassignedjudicialresponsibilitiestoIbnAbīLaylā.14AccordingtoIbnQutayba,however,IbnShubruma’sjuris-dictionextendedprimarilytothesawādofthismiṣr(i.e.thesurroundingcountryside),andheactedinal-Manṣūr’sname.15Yet,IbnSaʿdconsidersthatthegovernorentrustedhimwithqaḍāʾarḍal-kharāj.16SuchastrangejurisdictionappearstobeuniqueinthehistoryofIraq;itimpliesthatIbnShubruma was in charge of dealing with specific rural conflicts at thattime.Alittlelater,inBaṣra,thecaliphal-MahdīassignedmaẓālimdutiestotheqāḍīʿUbaydAllāhb.al-Ḥasanal-ʿAnbarī(inofficefrom156/773toca166/782–317).Thisroleisalsomentionedinaruralcontext:underthecaliph’smandate,theqāḍīmayhaverenderedseveraldecisionsonthestatusofnearbylandparcels.18

Whatismore,theappointmentofaṣāḥibal-maẓālimmadeitpossiblefor thecaliphate toreinstate itsauthoritywhenconfrontedwithaqāḍī’sexcessive autonomy or noncompliance with the official ideology of theruling power. After defying al-Mahdī’s instructions, ʿUbayd Allāh b.al-Ḥasan was himself subjected to maẓālim procedures. Summoned onappealbyaplaintiff,al-Mahdīorderedtheʿ āmilofBaṣratocallameetingofthelocalfuqahāʾtolookintooneofhisdecisions.19Theqāḍī’sexcessiveindependence and charismatic personality left their mark on Baṣra’smemory,20anditisnocoincidencethataṣāḥibal-maẓālimwasappointed

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 47 8/6/09 17:10:20


48


attheendofhisofficeorearlyduringthenextone.Itwastoreplacetheimageofanuncooperativejusticesystemwithonethatwasmoredepend-entoncentralpower.Hissuccessor,Fazārab.ʿImrān,isrememberedasanidiot,21whichmayreflectthefactthatpublicopinionunderstoodthepoliti-calstakesofsucharearrangementandproceededtodiscredithim.

This interpretation is confirmed by several events during the miḥna.Theperiodof inquisitionwasparticularlycriticalforqāḍīs,whohad toadheretotheofficialdogmaofthecreationoftheQurʾān.Thecaliph,inan effort to restore his authority, weakened by the traditionalist move-ment,wasdetermined toaffirmhiscontrolover the judicialsystemandthroughit,overthewholeofsociety22.Themaẓālimplayedanimportantrole in thestruggle forauthority.The judicialsystem inDamascuswasat one time neglected, to the benefit of the maẓālim institution. Underal-Muʿtaṣim(r.218–27/833–42),theqāḍīMuḥammadb.Yaḥyāb.Ḥamzawasdismissed,buthewasnotreplacedbyanotherqāḍīuntilthearrivalofal-Mutawakkil.Instead,thechiefqāḍī,Aḥmadb.AbīDuʾād–headofthemiḥna–appointed twoṣāḥibal-maẓālimsuccessively,AbūMuslimal-NaṭʿīandYaḥyāb.al-Ḥasanal-Ṭabarānī.23According toal-Dhahabī,al-MaʾmūnhadorderedthegovernorofDamascustoimposethemiḥnaontheqāḍīMuḥammadb.Yaḥyā;thelatterhadacknowledgedthedogmaofthecreatedQurʾānandagreedtoputhisshuhūdtothetest.Buthewasalso actively involved in tribal rivalries between Yamanīs and Qaysīsin Damascus and surrounding areas, and was biased in his handling ofjustice.24On theotherhand,despitehisacknowledgmentof thecreatedQurʾān,theremaybereasontobelievethathewasclosertotraditional-istcircles than it seemed.Hewas indeedknownasa traditionist25andhisfather,whohadlongheldjudicialfunctionsinDamascusbeforehim,wasalsoawell-knownmuḥaddith,adiscipleofal-AwzāʿīandMakḥūl.26Indeed,themiḥnaaffectedmostlyscholarswhowerepartofthismove-ment.Hemayhaveacknowledgedthedoctrineinordertoretainhisdomi-nantpoliticalposition; since thecivilwar, theashrāf inDamascushadreachedahighleveloflocalautonomyand,from213/828,al-Muʿtaṣim(heirapparentand latercaliph)strove to restorecentralauthority in theterritory.27Replacingaqāḍīsuspectedofdisloyaltybyaṣāḥibal-maẓālimunderthedirectcontrolofthecaliphatewasaconvenienttooltoimple-menthispolicy.

Themaẓālim institutionalsocontributed to the restorationofcentralauthorityinFusṭāṭ.Itbegantodevelopafterthefourthfitna,whenEgyptacquired de facto autonomy. In 211/826, the judicial system was firstsuspendedfortwoyears.TheqāḍīIbrāhīmb.al-Jarrāḥ,appointedinthemidstofthecivilwar,arousedthewrathoftheamīrʿAbdAllāhb.Ṭāhir,

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 48 8/6/09 17:10:20


49



whohadcometobringpeacetoEgyptonbehalfofthecaliph.Theletterofsurrenderhehadwrittenonbehalf the rebelgovernor ʿUbaydAllāhb.al-SarīwastooforcefulfortheṬāhiridamīr,whomtheletterbadetoswearthathewoulddivorcehiswifeandfreehisslavesifhebrokethesafeconducthehadgrantedʿUbaydAllāh.Ibrāhīmb.al-Jarrāḥwasdis-missed,butnotreplaced:insteadʿAbdAllāhb.ṬāhirappointedamaẓālimjudgeinthepersonofʿAṭṭāfb.Ghazwān.28AsithaddoneinDamascus,theqāḍīs’justicesystemvanished,justbeforethebeginningofthemiḥna,in215/830.Onceagain,thejudicialsystemwasadangerforthecaliphate.TheqāḍīIbnal-Munkadir,whowasclosetotheaṣḥābal-ḥadīthandearlypietists,wasindeedinfluencedbyagroupof“ṣūfiyya”who“commandedrightandforbadewrong”,tothepointthathedaredtowriteal-MaʾmūntoprotestagainsttheappointmentofAbūIsḥāqal-MuʿtaṣimasgovernorofEgypt.29Itwasmorethantherulingpowerwaswillingtobear:Ibnal-Munkadirwasdismissed,imprisonedandexiledtoIraq,andthejudicialsystem–whoseunreliabilitywasgraduallyconfirmed–wassuspended,tobereplacedby thesolemaẓālim–heldonbehalfof thegovernorbyMuḥammad b. ʿAbbād. Evidently, such ‘political’ justice, symbolicallyorchestratedbythesovereign,wasneitherpopular,noruniversallyconsid-eredaslegitimate:whenhetookofficein217/832,Hārūnb.ʿAbdAllāhal-ZuhrīrevokedmanyofthejudgmentsthatIbnʿAbbādhadrendered.30

THEMAZ.ĀLIMANDPROVINCIALAUTONOMY

Thepowersthatemergedfollowingal-Mutawakkil’scaliphatealsousedthemaẓālimtoimposetheirauthority.Atthecentrallevel,al-Muwaffaqforeshadowed a transfer of power to the amīr al-umarāʾ, and then totheSultans.In thewakeofaseriouscrisis inSāmarrāʾ,he tookcontrolof his brother, the caliph al-Muʿtamid (r. 256–79/870–92). For severaldecades, the appointment of the empire’s qāḍīs clearly depended uponthe caliphate. But the dangerous Zanj revolt, which ravaged the southof Iraq from 255/869, prompted the regent to intervene directly in thejudicial system.31 Shortly before the takeover of the city by the rebelsin257/871,32therenownedpolygraphIbnQutaybawasappointedṣāḥibal-maẓāliminBaṣra.Hewasnotselectedbythecaliphaladministrationbutbytheofficeofal-Muwaffaq,whohadhisownsecretaries–includingṢāʿid b. Makhlad, who almost certainly encouraged the appointment.33Theobjectivewastostrengthenthecentralauthority–representedbyal-Muwaffaq–tofaceuptogrowingunrestinthecentralterritories.

The maẓālim, however, represented primarily the autonomy of pro-vincialpowers.WhenIbnṬūlūnsettledinEgypt,aqāḍīappointedbythe

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 49 8/6/09 17:10:21


50


caliphate,Bakkārb.Qutayba,wasalready inpower.Theamīr imposedhisautonomyde facto,butneverattempted todismisshim,evenat theendofhisreign,whenitbecameobviousthattheqāḍīwouldnotconferuponhimthelegitimacythatheneeded.Hehadhimimprisoned,butdidnot officially relieve him of his judicial duties; he simply ordered himtodelegatehisdutiestoavicar.34Justicewasanessentialcomponentofthe rulingpower,and IbnṬūlūndeveloped themaẓālim intoacompet-ingjudicialinstitution:hefrequentlypresidedoverhearings,tothepointwhere the people of Fusṭāṭ completely gave up on Bakkār, who, theysaid,woulddozeoffoutofboredomduringcourt sessions.35 Inearliertimes, the maẓālim alternative had been a reminder of the primacy ofthecaliph’sjustice;nowtheinstitutionsymbolizedthesupremacyoftheamīr’s justice. Under Khumārawayh, who succeeded Ibn Ṭūlūn, it wasno longer necessary for the ordinary judicial system to compete withthemaẓālim: forsevenyears,noqāḍīwasassignedby thecaliphate inEgypt;onlyaṣāḥibal-maẓālim(Muḥammadb.ʿAbda)wasappointedbyKhumārawayh.Whenthewarbetweenthelatterandal-Muwaffaqcametoanend,36ordinaryjudgeshipwasgiventoMuḥammadb.ʿAbda,whosepositionwasofficiallyrecognizedbythecaliphate.37Nowinthehandsofasingleman,theordinaryjudgeshipandthemaẓālimbecametheexpres-sionoftheautonomousṬūlūnidpower.ThemaẓālimalsocontributedtomaintainingtheirauthorityinSyria:aṣāḥibal-maẓālim,ʿ Abd(orʿ Ubayd)Allāhb.al-Fatḥ,wassenttoDamascusfollowinganepisodeofcivildis-order.38Thecity’sgovernor,Saʿdal-Aʿsar (oral-Aysar),winnerof theBattleof theMills,39hadbeenassassinated in273/886–7or275/888–9byKhumārawayh(personally,somesay)forhavingcriticizedhim.ThepopulationofDamascus,however,wereveryattached to theirgovernorand they immediately respondedby revolting.40 Itwas thought that theappointmentofaṣāḥibal-maẓālimalongsidetheqāḍīAbūZurʿa–whowas devoted to the Ṭūlūnids – would help solve the crisis. Ultimately,themaẓālimhelped theṬūlūnidsmaintainasemblanceof justicewhiletheir power was failing. After Jaysh b. Khumārawayh was deposed in283/896,41acivilwar forced the qāḍīMuḥammadb. ʿAbda togo intohidingand the judgeshipwasvacant fora fewmonths.42TheṬūlūnidsthereforetemporarilyentrustedthemaẓālimtoaTurk,IbnṬughān.

The governor, Muḥammad b. Sulaymān, reappointed Muḥammadb.ʿAbdawhentheʿAbbāsidpowerwasrestoredin292/905inEgypt,pos-siblyinanefforttofacilitatethetransitionbetweenthetworegimesandallowdefendantstobejudgedbysomeonetheyknew.43Butheresourcesceasetomentionthemaẓālim,asignthattheynolongerplayedanessentialrole.ItwasnotuntiltheIkhshīdidscametopowerthatthemaẓālimcame

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 50 8/6/09 17:10:21


51



back into the spotlight: from 324/936 to 327/939, al-Ikhshīd entrustedthemtoarenownedjurist,Ibnal-Ḥaddād,whileal-Ḥusaynb.AbīZurʿawasinchargeoftheordinaryjudgeship.Thistwofoldjusticesystemwas,inmany respects, reminiscentof IbnṬūlūn’spolicy.Theqāḍīwas for-mallyappointedbyoneoftheleadingqāḍīsinBaghdad44andhereportedto thecaliphate.By restoring themaẓālim inhisownname,al-Ikhshīdwaspreparing fornewEgyptianautonomy.The followingverse ispartof a poem distributed with the plaintiffs’ petitions at Ibn al-Ḥaddād’shearing:“Youexercisedpowerwithoutanyofficialappointment,andyourenderedyourdecisionwithoutanydeed!”45AnumberofpeopleinFusṭāṭunderstood the scheme and blamed the jurist for his contribution to anillegitimateactivity.

The two-party judicial scheme was subsequently repeated severaltimes. In 331/943, ʿAtīq b. al-Ḥasan was entrusted with the maẓālim,whileal-Kishshīwassupposedtopractice“ordinaryjustice”.Thoughthecircumstancesoftheirassignmentsremainratherobscure,itislikelythat,onceagain,al-IkhshīdtriedtocompetewithajusticesystemreportingtoaqāḍīinBaghdad.46UnderKāfūr,therelationshipbetweentheordinaryand maẓālim courts seemed to function as it had under Khumārawayhnearlyacenturyearlier:in340/951,thegovernorbecametheonlypersonable to appoint qāḍīs in Fusṭāṭ.47 He was therefore able to entrust thejudgeshipandthemaẓālimtoasingleman,ʿAbdAllāhb.Muḥammadb.al-Khaṣīb:fromthenon,justicecameonlyfromtheamīr.When,afewyears later, Kāfūr began to render judgments on his own – thus takingawaythemaẓālimdutiesfromhisqāḍī,AbūṬāhiral-Dhuhlī–thepowerstrugglewithBaghdadwasno longeran issue:AbūṬāhir,aprominentjuristfromBaṣra,hadbasicallybeenimposedontheamīrbythenotablesinFusṭāṭ. Justas IbnṬūlūnhaddone,Kāfūr referredmostplaintiffs tothemaẓālimandkepttheupperhandonjustice.48WhentheyarrivedinEgypt,theFāṭimidsdidnotchangethesystem.TheysensedthatitwouldbedangeroustorevokethepopularAbūṬāhiral-Dhuhlī,butontheotherhand,theIsmāʿīlīcaliphatecouldnotapplyonlySunnijustice;therefore,al-Muʿizznamedaṣāḥibal-maẓālimtopracticejusticeaccordingtotheIsmāʿīlīdoctrine.Hecompetedsowellwith theqāḍī thatmanyprofes-sionalwitnessesleftAbūṬāhirandjoinedhim,andhesoonpretendedtothetitleof“qāḍīofMiṣrandAlexandria”.49

To the population, justice was the most concrete image of a regimethat theyusuallyhad littlecontactwith.Asa resultof theirestablishedknowledgeandtheirroleinthe‘Islamic’managementinthecity,qāḍīswereapowerfulinstrumentofpoliticallegitimization,buttheyweredif-ficulttocontrol.Thefreedomofpracticeclaimedbysomewasathreatto

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 51 8/6/09 17:10:21


52


theinterestsandeventotheauthorityoftheirprincipals.Furthermore,inthesecondhalfofthe3rd/9thcentury,followingthedevelopmentofpro-vincialautonomy,thejudicaturebecamesubjecttocompetitionbetweenthecaliphateandthegovernors.Differentpowersusedthemaẓālimtogetaroundtheordinaryjudgeshipwhentheycouldnotcontrolit:sometimesentrustedtotheqāḍīaslesserduties,themaẓālimcouldbecomeimportantwhen therulerswanted toremindeveryone that justiceultimatelycamefromthem–thusproclaimingtheirsovereignty.Despitetheimportanceof the ṣāḥib al-maẓālim, sources are relatively silent on the subject:al-Kindī mentions them in his biographies of ordinary qāḍīs but neverdescribesthemindividually.Thefewparagraphsdedicatedtosomeṣāḥibsal-maẓālim by Ibn Ḥajar are insignificant compared to those he wroteaboutqāḍīs.50Theauthors’deliberateoversightmayreflectanintentiontominimizetheweightofa‘politicaljustice’thatbiographersconsideredtobeillegitimate.

Qāḍīsasinstrumentsandvictimsofstateviolence

JUDGESHIPASAPOLITICALTOOL

Major political strategies hid behind both the exercise of appointingmaẓālim to provinces and the relationship they maintained with theordinary judgeship.Thecareersof individualqāḍīsand the importancegiventotheminthesovereignjusticeofmaẓālimareproofofthestakesathand.IntheaftermathoftheʿAbbāsidrevolution,qāḍīsbecameprivi-leged instrumentsof the regime.Thepopular recognition theyenjoyedasscholarsandjudgeshelpedstrengthenthedynasty,especiallyattimeswhenpoliticalaffairshurttheidealofjusticeonwhichreliedthedynas-ty’slegitimacy.AnumberofcaliphsintheearlyʿAbbāsiderapresidedovermaẓālimcourtsthemselvesandreceivedtheirsubjects’complaints.Evenifal-RashīddelegatedmaẓālimdutiestotheBarmakidsYaḥyāandJaʿfar51 for a while, caliphal justice was generally entrusted to qāḍīs.Al-Ḥasan b. ʿUmara, qāḍī of Baghdad, also acted as a maẓālim judgefor al-Manṣūr.52 Under al-Amīn, Muḥammad b. ʿAbd Allāh al-Anṣārīwasassignedtothepositionin193/809,shortlyafterhehadpracticedasanordinaryjudgeinBaṣra.53Duringthemiḥna,thechiefqāḍī,Aḥmadb.AbīDuʾād,wasalsoentrustedwiththemaẓālim54beforehissonAbūl-Walīd55 then Yaḥyā b. Aktham succeeded him.56 In the late 3rd andearly 4th centuries, while maẓālim were more and more in the handsof the vizierate, they were still entrusted to a number of qāḍīs: Yūsufb. Yaʿqūb was appointed in 277/890–1, while practicing officially as

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 52 8/6/09 17:10:21


53



a judge in Baṣra,57 and Abū ʿUmar, qāḍī of al-Sharqiyya and ʿAskaral-Mahdī,wasappointedin306/918–19. 58

Theṣāḥibal-maẓālim’s rolewasmorebureaucratic than theqāḍī’s.Differing from the rules of ordinary hearings, the presence of bothparties was not required in the maẓālim court, and the plaintiff gener-allyhandedinawrittenpetition(ruqʿaorqiṣṣa)whichhadalreadybeenprocessedbytheadministration59.Thisexplainswhymanyoftheearlymaẓālim judgeshadnootherexperience in law.Underal-Mahdī,somewere administrators, such as the mawlā Sallām60 or ʿUmar b. Muṭraf,whowasalsoresponsibleforthedīwānal-kharāj.61Theymayevenhavewritten answers to petitions for minor cases. When cases were moreserious however, they only examined them before handing them overtothecaliphoraqāḍīforjudgment.Whenanordinaryindividualfiledacomplaintagainstoneofal-Mahdī’swakīls,Sallāmdidnomorethanbringtherequesttothecaliph,whointurnhandeditovertooneofthetwoqāḍīsofʿAskaral-Mahdī,ʿĀfiyab.YazīdandIbnʿUlātha.62Qāḍīsweretheimageofjustice,andthecaliphatethereforereliedonthemasmuchaspossible.

The mere act of assigning qāḍīs to maẓālim courts was a form ofmanipulation–showingthatthesovereign’sjusticeandGod’s“decree”(qaḍāʾ)wereoneandthesame–yetsomeqāḍīswereusedevenwithouthavingbeenofficiallyentrustedwithmaẓālimduties.Manytimes,itwasintheinterestsofthestatetoeliminateexistingorpotentialopponents.Whilemanyof themspent their lives in thecaliphs’ jails,withoutanyformoftrial,itwasimportantthatthelawappeartoberespected.Itwastherefore sometimes preferable to have opponents tried and convictedby regular qāḍīs. Al-Manṣūr arrested large numbers of ʿAlīds, whoserebellious intentions he feared,63 but things were more complicatedwhenthesuspectwasahigh-rankingofficial.In155/772,suspectingtheḥasanidgovernorofMedina,al-Ḥasanb.Zayd,ofpreparingariot, thecaliphordered ʿUbaydAllāhb.Muḥammadb.Ṣafwānal-Jumaḥī,qāḍīinBaghdad,tobringhimtotrial.Thegovernorwasaccusedofdualisticreligiousbeliefswhenaplaintiffclaimedthathebelievedin“aheavenlygod and an earthly one”, the latter of whom had vested him with thecaliphate.64Althoughitcannotbeformallyproven,theprosecutionmayhave been entirely fabricated, since political trials were such commonpractice at that time. As an example, ʿAbd Allāh b. Marwān, one ofthe lastheirs to theUmayyaddynasty,65was inhiding inYemenwhengovernorNaṣrb.Muḥammadb.al-Ashʿathhadhimcapturedandse nttoal-Manṣūr.66Al-MahdīfirstintendedtobringhimtoSyriaandforcehimtoofficiallyrelinquishhispositionofheirapparent–and thereforehis

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 53 8/6/09 17:10:21


54


claimtothecaliphate–butitwasfearedthatthelocalSyrianpopulationwouldsupporthim.67Instead,hechosetoeliminatehimundertheguiseoflegality.ThecaliphorganizedatrialpresidedoverbytheqāḍīʿĀfiyab.Yazīd.68AnindividualnamedʿAmrb.Sahlaal-AshʿarīaccusedʿAbdAllāhb.Marwānofkillinghis father.Al-Mahdīhadnodoubt that thelextalioniswouldbeappliedagainsttheculprit,inkeepingwiththelaw.But the trial tookanunexpected turnwhenanordinarycitizencameatthelastmomentbeforetheqāḍīandconfessedthemurder.69ʿAbdAllāhb. Marwān could no longer be convicted, so al-Mahdī had him boundandshackledandsenttotheMuṭbaqprison,whereheeventuallydied.70Justicewasnottheprimaryobjectiveofthistrial–themanwhoseconfes-sionshouldhaveresultedinaconvictionwasacquittedbecause,itwassaid,hehadactedbyorderofMarwānII,thelastUmayyadcaliph.Thetrialhadservedaslegalbackgroundtoapoliticalmaneuver.

Assignments to the maẓālim were also a way of organizing politi-cal trials.Thebestexample is thecomplaint investigatedbyAḥmadb.Riyāḥ, qāḍī of Baṣra from 223/837 to 239/853, against the governor,Jaʿfarb.al-Qāsim.71ThepeopleofBaṣraobjectedtohisviolenttemperandnumerousabuses.72Theqāḍīwasentrustedwith themaẓālim73andwhentheamīrwasrelievedofhisdutieshehadtostandtrial.Theqāḍīdidnotorganizeabigtrial;hesimplyreopenedthegovernor’sfileeachtimeacomplaintwaslodgedagainsthiminordinarycourt.Thegovernorwassummonedtoappearbeforethecourtonadailybasis,toavoidthetroubleofhavingtobefetchedateachaccusation.Infact,themanendedupwaiting inacornerof themosque tobecalled to facehisaccusers.This type of trial was very humiliating. The deposed amīr was perma-nentlyexposedtothepubliceye,includingthelowestclassesofsociety.74WereJaʿfarb.al-Qāsim’scrimesagainsthisownpeopleseriousenoughto warrant such a procedure? Possibly. But other governors were justasguilty,yet theywerenot forced toendure suchdisgrace.Thecaliphal-Wāthiqactuallyhadotherreasonstodismissandhumiliatethegover-nor.Jaʿfarb.al-Qāsimwasindeedguiltyofamuchmoreseriouspoliticalcrime:hehadcomposedahijāʾaboutal-Wāthiq,inwhichhehadactuallyclaimedthecaliphateforhimself.75Al-Wāthiq,whowasperhapsthemostzealousdiscipleofthemiḥna,76couldnotletthatgounpunished.Itisnocoincidence that the maẓālim institution officially served that purpose:theqāḍīwasusedsymbolically to remindeveryoneof the limitsof thecaliph’stolerance.

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 54 8/6/09 17:10:21


55



QĀD. ĪSAPPEARINGBEFORETHEMAZ.ĀLIMCOURTS

Whileqāḍīsweretheinstrumentsofviolencejustifiedbyreasonofstate,theirreliabilityandcooperationwerebecomingincreasinglyuncertain.Atthebeginningofthe3rd/9thcentury,theintellectualandreligiousauthor-ityclaimedby theahlal-ḥadīth,aswellas thewritten lawestablishedby the emerging madhhabs, made it easier for many of them to claimmorefreedomfrom theirprincipals.During themiḥna,qāḍīswerebothpromotersoftheofficialdoctrineandprimesuspectsofinsubordination.Byestablishingthejudgeshipasthecruxofthecaliphalpolicy,govern-ingpowersrantheriskofstrengtheningtheqāḍīs’authorityattheirownexpense.Shouldtheqāḍīsbegiventoomuchfreedomwithregardtothedogma, the fragile attempt to preserve the caliphate’s authority wouldbe destroyed from within. The maẓālim were therefore positioned as acompetinginstitution,inanefforttoisolatetheqāḍīswhennecessary(seeabove).Indeed,severalpeopletriedinmaẓālimcourtswereqāḍīs.

Qāḍīs usually went through special indictment procedures callediqāmali-l-nās,whereindividualswereorderedbythesovereigntoappearbeforethecrowd,evenwhennocomplainthadbeenlodgedagainstthem.In thisway, their trialwasmadepublic– thesitting judgecouldbe thesovereign,agovernor,adelegatetothemaẓālimoraqāḍī–andanyonewhowishedtocomplainwasinvitedtocomeforwardandfilesuitagainstthe accused.77 Although sources do not always clearly associate iqāmali-l-nās with maẓālim courts, their common characteristics – ex officioactions, trials held by order of political authorities, formal accusationsofhigh-rankingofficials–clearlyrevealthatbothwereexpressionsofasinglesovereignjustice.Theprocedurewasalreadyinuseattheendofthe2nd/8thcentury,whentheqāḍīofFusṭāṭ,ʿAbdal-Malikb.Muḥammadal-Ḥazmī(170–74/786–9178),wastheobjectofadamningreportfromthelocalṣāḥibal-barīd, infuriatedat theqāḍī’srefusal to lethim intercedeonbehalfofaplaintiff.Hārūnal-Rashīd thereforeordered theEgyptiangovernortohavehimpubliclydisplayedtoavindictivecrowd(anyūqifal-Ḥazmī li-l-nās).79 Saved by the favor of a cheering crowd, the qāḍī,however, was forced to resign.80 This type of public display was alsousedduringthemiḥnaandduringthe‘purge’thatfollowed.Asearlyas214/829, the qāḍī of Fusṭāṭ, ʿĪsā b. al-Munkadir, was subjected to thistype of procedure by order of the governor, Abū Isḥāq al-Muʿtaṣim,who blamed him for his close contacts with traditionalist groups andhisopposition toal-Maʾmūn’spolicy.Peoplecame ingreatnumbers tolodgecomplaintsagainsttheqāḍī,whowasjailedandreplacedbyaṣāḥibal-maẓālim–perhapstheveryjudgewhosatathistrial.81Attheendofthe

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 55 8/6/09 17:10:21


56


miḥna,theqāḍīofal-Sharqiyya(al-KarkhdistrictcourtinBaghdad),ʿ AbdAllāhb.Muḥammadal-Khalanjī,wasalso forced to face thecrowdbyhissuccessor.AdiscipleofIbnAbīDuʾād,hehaddistinguishedhimselfbyhissteadfastnessduring themiḥna,goingas faras topronounce thedivorceofawomanwhosehusband refused thedoctrineof thecreatedQurʾān.82Thisiqāmali-l-nāsaimedtohelpcalmthecrowdsandsymboli-callymarkedtheendoftheinquisition.

Twoexamplesshowhowqāḍīs’trialsatthemaẓālimcouldappearasasimulacrumofjusticeservingthestate.Atthebeginningofal-Muʿtaṣim’sreign,an individualaccused theqāḍīofBaṣra, ʿĪsāb.Abān,ofphysi-callymistreatinghimduring thehearing, to thepointwherehe losthiseyesight.Heappealedtothecaliph,whoorderedthefaqīhʿUbaydAllāhb.Muḥammadb.ʿĀʾishatolookintothecomplaint–andholddefactoaone-timemaẓālimcourt.ThehearingtookplaceattheGreatMosque,infrontofalargecrowd,andʿĪsāb.Abānsucceededinturningthesitu-ationtohisadvantage.Hebeganbystatinghisrequirements:hewouldonlyappearinthepresenceofboththegovernorandlocalṣāḥibal-barīd.Takingadvantageofthecrowd’srushintothemosque,hemadeeveryonewaitandcameindiscreetlythroughthemuezzins’entrance,inaneffortto set himself apart from ordinary defendants. Eventually, the presid-ingfaqīhmadethemistakeofsittingonanordinaryseatinthemosque,insteadofsittingnext to thecolumn (sāriya) traditionally reserved forqāḍīs;ʿĪsāb.Abāndidnotmisstheopportunitytodeclareironicallythatheshouldchangeplacesifhehadindeedbeenappointedasajudge.Inshort,theqāḍīdemonstratedpubliclythathewastheonlyrealjudge,andtheprocedurecametoadeadend.83Wasitacoincidence?ʿĪsāb.AbānwasaḤanafite,closetotherulingpowerandMuʿtazilitecircles,84and,withthemiḥnainprogress,al-Muʿtaṣimwasnotreallyeagertoseehimconvicted. Not only did the governor of Baṣra and the ṣāḥib al-barīdcometothehearing,buttheirsecretariesrecordedallverbalexchanges:political pressure was such that the inexperienced faqīh temporarilyappointed as a ṣāḥib al-maẓālim could not examine the case properly.The trial was staged to demonstrate the piousness and justice of thecentralpower.ThesecondexampleisthatofBakkārb.Qutayba,qāḍīofFusṭāṭinthesecondhalfofthe3rd/9thcentury.Infuriatedbytheqāḍī’srefusaltolayacurseontheregental-Muwaffaqashehadrequested,IbnṬūlūn ordered him to appear before the maẓālim (aqāmahu li-l-nās),85andofferedthepeopleofFusṭāṭanopportunitytochallengesomeoftheqāḍī’sdecisions.Althoughhedefendedhimselfadmirablyandnoformalchargescouldbemadeagainsthim,hewasassignedtohousearrestuntiltheamīr’sdeath.86

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 56 8/6/09 17:10:21


57



THEQĀD. Ī’SWORD

Theiqāmali-l-nāsprocedureusedagainstdissidentqāḍīsisreminiscentofthetashhīrusedagainstpeopleconvictedofperjury.87Themainobjec-tive of these humiliating episodes of ignominious parading or publicexposure tovindictivecrowdswas toruinaperson’sreputation.88SuchproceduresmayhaveechoedthewarningattributedbyIslamictraditionto the caliph ʿUmar in his famous letter to Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī: “Hewho tries toembellishhimself in theeyesofmen, thoughAllāhknowshe is not, Allāh shall tear his veil (hataka llāh sitrahu) and reveal hisactions(abdāfiʿlahu).”Thesewordsmayhavebeensaidwithregardstoadishonestqāḍī.89Hispublicexposurewasspecificallyintendedto“tearoffhisveil”anddamagehisstatusof“mastūr”,definedasarespectablemanwhoselifeis“hidden”fromthepubliceye.90Theproceduretookonaspecialmeaningduringthemiḥna,whenqāḍīsthemselveswereusedtoharm thereputationofopponents to thedoctrineof thecreatedQurʾān,whowereexcludedfromʿadāla.Thegoalofthemiḥnawastodiscredittheir word, and consequently weaken their influence.91 A qāḍī’s wordswereverysignificant,duetotheperformativenatureofhisjudgments.Theiqāmali-l-nāsthereforepubliclydisallowedthoseqāḍīslikelytoopenlyoppose the regime. Bakkār b. Qutayba’s trial is a prime example. HisoppositiontoIbnṬūlūnandhisrefusaltolaycurseonal-Muwaffaqcouldonlybecurtailedbyanepisodeofpublichumiliationthatwouldsymboli-callydiscredithisstatements.

The support of the qāḍī was necessary, but it was a double-edgedsword. The authority conferred upon him by the people could under-minetherulingpower.Theintimidatingaspectofqāḍīscamefromtheperformative and binding nature of their judgments, which were verydifficult to reverse. Much diplomacy was needed to take advantage ofthe qāḍīs’ position and, at the same time, remain flexible enough toprevent the negative effects of their authority and challenge or ignoreit.Thesafestwaytodealwithqāḍīswastoaskthemforfatwās–onlyadvice–ratherthanfinalandbindingjudgments.Thepresenceofqāḍīsatmaẓālimhearingsthattheydidnotpresideovergoesbackalongtime.In the second half of the 2nd/8th century, al-Mahdī held court in thepresenceofqāḍīs, supposedlyconferringmore legitimacyonhisdeci-sions.92Al-Maʾmūnalsosatinthepresenceofhischiefqāḍī,Yaḥyāb.Aktham.93Butitwasnotuntilthebeginningofthe4th/10thcenturythatthis–merelyadvisory–methodoflegitimizingdecisionsbecamewide-spreadinmaẓālimcourts.Sincethelatterpartofthe3rd/9thcentury,themaẓālimhadbeenmoreandmoreentrustedtoviziers. 94Qāḍīs,however,

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 57 8/6/09 17:10:22


58


never ceased to play a key role, as they were the only experts in lawandjusticewhocouldconfersomelegitimacyontheviziers’decisions.A qāḍī’s words were more flexible when he acted as a muftī in trialsdirectlypresidedoverbypoliticalauthorities;whencontrarytotheinter-estsoftherulingpower,hisadvicewasrejected;whenfavorable,itwasregardedasdecisive.

Such manipulative practices existed as early as the 3rd/9th century.In 231/846, al-Wāthiq had the traditionalist al-Khuzāʿī executed, asadvised by ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Isḥāq al-Ḍabbī, qāḍī of West Baghdad,andinspiteofthechiefqāḍīAḥmadb.AbīDuʾād’sreservations.95Thebestexample,however, is thatofal-Ḥallāj.Triedonce forhis religiousviews and his involvement with various dissident groups, his case wasreopened in309/922byḤāmidb. ʿAbbās,vizierofal-Muqtadir.96Thesecondtrialappearedineverywayasapoliticaltrial.Itwastheresultofaconflict,withintheciviladministration,betweenthecurrentvizierandhispredecessor,ʿAlīb.ʿĪsā,whoopposedḤāmidb.ʿAbbās’taxpolicies,amongotherthings.Al-Ḥallāj’sconvictionwasawaytodiscreditʿAlīb.ʿĪsā,aprotectorofthewell-knownmystic.97Yet,tobeseenasfair,thejudgmenthad tobebasedon thecounselofarecognizedqāḍī.Atfirst,AbūJaʿfarAḥmadb.Isḥāqb.al-Buhlūlal-Tanūkhī(theḤanafīqāḍīofMadīnatal-Manṣūr)wasaskedtocooperate:thevizieraskedhimtoissueafatwāagainsttheaccusedbutherefusedtodoso,onthegroundsthatnolegalevidenceofhisguilthadbeenprovided.98SothevizierturnedtotheMālikīAbūʿUmar(qāḍīofal-SharqiyyaandEastBaghdad),whoagreedtospeakinfavorofal-Ḥallāj’sdeathsentence.99Byreducingtheqāḍītoamereadviser–whoseopinionwaseasilymanipulated–rulersagainusedthelegalsystemtoservetheirpolicies.

Duringthereignofal-Muqtadironemoreqāḍī,AbūʿUmar,continuedtopracticemaẓālimjusticeforawhile,in306/918–19.Hisroleintheinsti-tutionwaslimited,however,sincethatsameyeartheqahramānaThamlwasalsoappointedtothemaẓālimcourtandheldhearingsatal-Ruṣāfa.Likethevizierswhowerenowfrequentlyentrustedwithsuchduties,shesatsurroundedby fuqahāʾandqāḍīs.100Theroleofmuftīplayed in themaẓālimcourtsbysomeqāḍīsmayhaveincreasedtheirindependencebylesseningtheinfluenceoftheirdictates;sincetheirindividualoppositiontoongoingpoliticalschemeswasalwayssubjecttobeingoffsetbyanotherfatwā,theyincurredfewersanctionsthantheirpredecessors.In311/923thevizierAbūl-Ḥasanb.al-FurātsummonedtheqāḍīsAbūʿUmarandAbūJaʿfaral-Tanūkhītoattendtheprosecutionhearingagainsthisprede-cessor,ʿAlīb.ʿĪsā,whomheaccusedofconspiringwiththeCarmathians.But thevizier’sargumentswere tooweakand the twoqāḍīs refused to

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 58 8/6/09 17:10:22


59



writetherequestedfatwās.101Despitesuchoccasionalsetbacks,therulingauthoritiesneverceasedtoinstrumentalizeqāḍīs’statementsduringpoliti-cal trials. In326/938, the fatwāgivenby thechiefqāḍī,Abū l-ḤusaynʿUmarb.AbīʿUmar,madeitpossiblefortheamīral-umarāʾ,IbnRāʾiq,toeliminateIbnMuqla,thelastoftheleadingʿAbbāsidviziers:theqāḍī’slegal opinion was enough to justify punishing the vizier-calligrapher,whosehandwascutoff.102

Conclusion

As the highest body representing sovereign justice, the maẓālim wereintendedasanessentialtoolforthelegitimationoftheʿAbbāsiddynasty,whose“revolution”couldonlybejustifiedbyaconcernfortherestorationofjustice,viewedasfloutedbytheUmayyads.Itshouldnotbedoubtedthattheymostoftenaccomplishedthepurposeof“rectifyingprejudices”.The institution’s ideological façade,however,alsoserved tohidesomeformsofstateviolence.Onthesymboliclevel,theinstitutioncontributedtoanaffirmationofasovereignauthoritywithinprovincialjurisdictions.Thecaliphateusedthecourtstoresisttheaspirationtoindependenceofsomeqāḍīs,especiallyinthefirsthalfofthe3rd/9thcentury;controlledbythelocalauthorities,thecourtslatercontributedtotheenfranchisementofautonomousdynastiessuchasthoseoftheṬūlūnidsortheIkhshīdids.Theirroleintheaffirmationormaintenanceofapoliticalordermadethemaẓālimaprivilegedinstrumentofcoercionandphysicalviolenceinsofarastheyrepresentedapoliticaljusticeguidedbytheimmediateinterestsoftherulersorthestate.

Such state violence takes on its full meaning only in light of theʿAbbāsidcourtsystemasawhole,andthejusticeoftheqāḍīsinparticu-lar.Toconsidermaẓālimjusticeas‘secular’asopposedtothe‘religious’justiceoftheqāḍīs103wouldbeinconsistentwiththattime.Notonlydidthe caliph’s justice appear as religious,104 but the dialectical relation-shipbetween the regular judgeshipandmaẓālim reflectsasmuch theircomplementarities as their interchangeability. For the authorities, onlythecloseassociationoftheqāḍīswiththemaẓālimcourtscouldremovesuspicions of political bias and vest their judgments with legitimacy,whichiswhyqāḍīswererepeatedlytrustedwithtemporaryorstandingmaẓālimmandates.

Ontheotherhand,theqāḍīs’submissivenesswassometimesdisturbedbyasenseofallegiancetohighervalues.Ifqāḍīssomehowfailedtofaith-fullyexecutethesovereignwill,themaẓālimcouldturnintoaconcurrentjurisdiction capable of circumventing or temporarily superseding the

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 59 8/6/09 17:10:22


60


normaljudicialchannels.Thecrisisofauthoritywhichshookthecaliphateatthebeginningofthe3rd/9thcenturyandtheensuingmiḥnaevenover-turnedthepositionsofseveralqāḍīs,whoappearedasdefendantsbeforesuch tribunals and whose credibility was publicly denounced throughthe iqāma li-l-nāsprocedure.Theexampleof theEgyptianqāḍīIbnal-Munkadir isperhaps themostsignificant:by joiningagroupofṢūfiyyawho claimed to “command right and forbid wrong”, exercise authorityover thepublicdomainandmoralize thecaliph,heagreed tochallengethestatemonopolyoncoerciveforce.Exposureoftheqāḍītothecrowdwas not enough: a clear boundary between public and private spheresneeded to be reasserted. This was done by temporarily substituting themaẓālimforthejudiciary.Inthesecondhalfofthe3rd/9thcentury,inthecontextofasystematiccodificationofthefiqhandtheemergenceofmad-hhabs,theinstrumentalizationofqāḍīsbycentralauthoritiesbecametoorandomtoensurethattheyshouldcontinuetoadministerthesovereign’sultimatejustice.Theincreasedroleplayedbythevizierswithrespecttothemaẓālimwasthuslinkedtomorethanageneralstrengtheningofthevizierate:increasedattentionbySunnilawyerstojudicialprocedures,thestatusoftheqāḍīsandtheirrelationshiptopowerconsolidatedtheinstitu-tionfromwithinandmadetheirinstrumentalizationmuchlesspredictable.Astheqāḍīs’authoritywasnecessarytolegitimizeaviolencewhichwas,infact,nothingmorethanreasonsofstate,itwasnecessarytoincorporatetheminanotherwayinmaẓālimjustice:themuftīfunction,whichpermit-tedtherelativizationoftheirauthority,wastheonlyonewhichofferedthedegreeofflexibilitysoughtbytheʿAbbāsidrulers.Itispreciselybecausethe qāḍīs began at that time to administer justice “toward and againstall”105thatthepostofjudgeinthemaẓālimdurablyescapedthem.

Notes 1. E. Tyan, Histoire de l’organisation judiciaire en pays d’Islam (Leiden:

Brill,1960),463–4.Onmaẓālim,otherreferencesare:H.F.Amedroz,“TheMazalimJurisdiction in theAhkamSultaniyyaofMawardi,”JRAS,1911,635–74;D.Sourdel,Leviziratʿ abbāside(Damascus:IFD,1959–60),2:640–8;J.Schacht,Introductionaudroitmusulman,tr.P.KempfandAbdelMagidTurki(Paris:MaisonneuveetLarose,1983),50;J.Nielsen,SecularJusticeinanIslamicState:MaẓālimundertheBaḥrīMamlūks,662/1264–789/1387(Leiden:NederlandsHistorisch-ArchaeologischInstituutteIstanbul,1985),1–11; EI2, s.v. Maẓālim, 6:933–4 (J. Nielsen); M. Shapiro, “Islam andAppeal,” California Law Review 68 (1980), 366–8; D. S. Powers, “OnJudicialReviewinIslamicLaw,”LawandSocietyReview26(1992),316;M. H. Kamali, “Appellate Review and Judicial Independence in Islamic

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 60 8/6/09 17:10:22


61



Law,” in Islam and Public Law, ed. Ch. Mallat (London: Graham andTrotman,1993),62.

2. Al-Māwardī, al-Aḥkām al-sulṭāniyya (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya,1985), 97–119; Ibn al-Farrāʾ, al-Aḥkām al-sulṭāniyya, ed. MuḥammadḤāmid al-Faqī (Beirut: Dār al-Fikr, 1986), 73–90. See Nielsen, SecularJustice,17ff.

3. L.Massignon,LaPassiondeHusaynIbnMansûrHallâj(Paris:Gallimard,1975),1:436;Tyan,Histoire,497;Sourdel,Leviziratʿabbāside,2:646.

4. Tyan,Histoire,441,443. 5. Sourdel,Leviziratʿabbāside,2:640–8;Nielsen,SecularJustice,1–11.The

mostimportantexceptionisTyan(Histoire,491ff.),whostudiedthisinstitu-tioninpre-FāṭimidEgypt.

6. Tyan,Histoire,489–90;Shapiro,“IslamandAppeal,”366. 7. Tyan,Histoire,438,464.Inthe6th/12thcentury,al-Shayzarīdidnotremem-

ber that qāḍīs in earlier times may have held high positions in maẓālimcourts.Seeal-Shayzarī,al-Minhājal-maslūkfīsiyāsatal-mulūk(al-Zarqāʾ:Maktabatal-Manār,1987),562ff.

8. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,2:91;al-Ṣafadī,al-Wāfībi-l-wafayāt,ed.Aḥmadal-ArnāʾūṭandTurkīMuṣṭafā(Beirut:DārIḥyāʾal-Turāth,2000),19:244.

9. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,2:92.10. Ibid.,2:175.11. Underal-Muqtadir,abudgetof439,000dirhamsallocatedtotheprovincial

maẓālimleadsustobelievethattheinstitutionwaswellestablishedatthattime.SeeIbnal-Jawzī,al-Muntaẓam fī tawārīkhal-mulūkwa-l-umam,ed.SuhaylZakkār(Beirut:Dāral-Fikr,1995),7:384.

12. SeeM.Tillier,“Lasociétéaumiroirdutribunal.Égalitéjuridiqueethiérar-chiesociale,”AI42(2008),forthcoming.

13. M.G.Morony,“LandholdingandSocialChange:Loweral-ʿIrâqintheEarlyIslamicPeriod,”inLandTenureandSocialTransformationintheMiddleEast,ed.T.Khalidi(Beirut:AmericanUniversityofBeirut,1984),216.

14. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,3:124.15. Ibn Qutayba, al-Maʿārif, ed. Tharwat ʿUkāsha (Cairo: Dār al-Maʿārif,

1969),470.16. IbnSaʿd,al-Ṭabaqātal-kubrā(Beirut:DārṢādir,1988),6:350.17. Tillier,“UntraitépolitiqueduIIe/VIIIesiècle,”141.18. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,2:92.19. Ibid.,2:96.Thefuqahāʾfinallysupportedtheqāḍī.Underal-Mutawakkil,a

decisionrenderedbytheEgyptianqāḍīal-Ḥārithb.Miskīnwasalsolookedintobya fuqahāʾcommissionorderedby thecaliph.See IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,124(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,50–1).

20. J.vanEss,“LalibertédujugedanslemilieubasrienduVIIIesiècle,”inLanotiondelibertéauMoyenAge:Islam,Byzance,Occident(Paris:LesBellesLettres,1985),28ff.;Tillier,“UntraitépolitiqueduIIe/VIIIesiècle,”144.

21. Ibnal-Jawzī,al-Ḥamqā,77,93.

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 61 8/6/09 17:10:22


62


22. F. Jadʿān, al-Miḥna: baḥth fī jadaliyyat al-dīnī wa-l-siyāsī fī l-islām(ʿAmmān:Dāral-Shurūq,1989),279–80.

23. IbnʿAsākir,TaʾrīkhmadīnatDimashq,67:224,64:117–18.24. Al-Dhahabī,Taʾrīkhal-islām,17:349.25. IbnḤajar,Lisānal-mīzān,5:422.26. Ibn Ṭūlūn, Quḍāt Dimashq al-Thaghr al-bassām fī dhikr man wulliya

qaḍāʾal-Shām,ed.Ṣalāḥal-Dīnal-Munjid(Damascus:al-Majmaʿal-ʿIlmīal-ʿArabī,1956),13–14.

27. P. M. Cobb, White Banners: Contention in ʿAbbasid Syria, 750–880(Albany:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress,2001),96–7.

28. Al-Kindī,Akhbār quḍāt Miṣr, 430–2. See G. Wiet, L’Égypte arabe de laconquêtearabeàlaconquêteottomane(Paris:Plon,1937),71;H.Kennedy,“EgyptasaProvinceintheIslamicCaliphate,”inTheCambridgeHistoryofEgypt,ed.C.F.Petry(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1998),1:81.

29. In another version, they encouraged him to complain about the kharājtaxcollectors.Cf.al-Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ,Tartībal-madārik,2:583.SeeM.Cook,CommandingRightandForbiddingWronginIslamicThought(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2000),384.Suchwastheattitudeoftradition-alistswhoprotestedagainststateauthorityandassertedtheirownauthorityin law enforcement. See Jadʿān, al-Miḥna, 280–1. Cf. I. Lapidus, “TheSeparation of State and Religion in the Development of Early IslamicSociety,” IJMES 6 (1975), 376ff. The ṣūfiyya mentioned here may havebeenmembersoftheṣūfiyyātal-muʿtazila,whoconsideredthatthefunctionofImamwasnotnecessary toenforce the law.On thisgroup,seeJadʿān,al-Miḥna,268–9;P.Crone,“Ninth-CenturyMuslimAnarchists,”PastandPresent167(2000),12ff.

30. Al-Kindī,AkhbārquḍātMiṣr,440–1;IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,299.31. M.Tillier,Lescadisd’Iraqàl’époqueʿabbāside:organisationadministra-

tive et rapports au pouvoir (132/750–334/945) (PhD Université Lyon 2,2004),108.

32. SeeA.Popovic,LaRévoltedesesclavesen Iraqau IIIe/IXe siècle (Paris:Geuthner,1976),99.

33. EI2,s.v.al-Muwaffaḳ,7:820(H.Kennedy).34. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,107(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,70).35. Ibn Ḥajar, Rafʿ al-iṣr, 106 (tr. Tillier, Vies des cadis, 67). Cf. Tyan,

Histoire,476.36. Wiet,L’Égyptearabe,104.37. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,383(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,72).38. Ibn Ḥajar, Rafʿ al-iṣr, 388 (tr. Tillier, Vies des cadis, 79); Ibn ʿAsākir,

TaʾrīkhmadīnatDimashq,20:408;31:399.39. Thebattle,whichtookplacein271/885betweenthearmiesofKhumārawayh

and the future al-Muʿtaḍid, made it possible for the Ṭūlūnids to recovera leading position in Syria. See Wiet, L’Égypte arabe, 103; EI2, s.v.Khumārawayh,5:49(U.Haarmann).

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 62 8/6/09 17:10:22


63



40. Ibn ʿAsākir, Taʾrīkh madīnat Dimashq, 20:407–8; al-Dhahabī, Taʾrīkhal-islām,20:354–5.

41. Z.M.Hassan,LesTulunides.Étudedel’ÉgyptemusulmaneàlafinduIXesiècle,868–905(Paris:ÉtablissementsBusson,1933),136.

42. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,385–6(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,76).43. Justicewas frequentlyaway toensureapeaceful transitionbetween two

regimes.SeeTillier,Lescadisd’Iraqàl’époqueʿabbāside,85ff.44. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,144(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,143).Cf.Tillier,Vies

descadis,24.45. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,336(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,134).46. Tillier,Viesdescadis,24.47. Ibid.,24–5.48. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,328(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,177).49. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,199.50. Ibid.,267,360.51. Sourdel,Leviziratʿabbāside,2:442.52. Al-Khaṭīb, Taʾrīkh Baghdād, 14:107; Ibn ʿAsākir, Taʾrīkh madīnat

Dimashq,64:260.53. Sourdel, Le vizirat ʿabbāside, 2:442. See Ibn Qutayba, al-Maʿārif, 384;

al-Khaṭīb,TaʾrīkhBaghdād,5:409;Ibnal-Jawzī,al-Muntaẓam,6:12.54. Ibn Khallikān, Wafayāt al-aʿyān, ed. Iḥsān ʿAbbās (Beirut: Dār Ṣādir,

1994),1:86.55. Al-Khaṭīb,TaʾrīkhBaghdād,1:314;Ibnal-Jawzī,al-Muntaẓam,6:473;Ibn

al-Athīr,al-Kāmil,7:65.56. Al-Ṭabarī,Taʾrīkhal-umamwa-l-mulūk(Beirut:Dāral-Kutubal-ʿIlmiyya,

1997),5:314;IbnKhallikān,Wafayātal-aʿyān,1:85.57. Al-Ṭabarī,Taʾrīkh,5:598;Ibnal-Jawzī,al-Muntaẓam,7:225;al-QāḍīʿIyāḍ,

Tartībal-madārik,3:184.58. Ibnal-Jawzī,al-Muntaẓam,8:12.59. Tyan,Histoire,443,470.60. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,3:255;SeeTyan,Histoire,485.61. Al-Khaṭīb, Taʾrīkh Baghdād, 1:87; al-Jahshiyārī, K. al-Wuzarāʾ wa-l-

kuttāb(Beirut:Dāral-Fikral-Ḥadīth,1988),106.Al-Mahdīalsoappointedasṣāḥibal-maẓālimʿAbdal-Raḥmānb.Ṭābitb.Thawbān,wellknownforhisascetism(seeal-Khaṭīb,TaʾrīkhBaghdād,10:223;IbnʿAsākir,TaʾrīkhmadīnatDimashq,34:250).Amongthosewhowerenotqāḍīsatthesametime, we note the following: al-Ḥusayn b. al-Ḥasan b. ʿAṭiyya al-ʿAwfī,under al-Mahdī; he was qāḍī in Baghdad but later, under al-Rashīd(al-Khaṭīb, Taʾrīkh Baghdād, 8:30); Ismāʿīl b. Ibrāhīm b. Muqsim AbūBishr al-Asadī, known as Ibn ʿAliyya, at the end of Hārūn al-Rashīd’sreign(IbnSaʿd,al-Ṭabaqātal-kubrā,7:325;IbnQutayba,al-Maʿārif,520;al-Khaṭīb,TaʾrīkhBaghdād,6:229–30);Muḥammadb.Ibrāhīmb.al-Rabīʿal-Anbārī, appointed in 237/851–2 (al-Khaṭīb, Taʾrīkh Baghdād, 1:299);Muḥammad b. ʿImrān al-Ḍabbī, under al-Muʿtazz (al-Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh,

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 63 8/6/09 17:10:22


64


5:419);Muḥammadb.YaʿqūbAbūRabīʿ,underal-Mutawakkil(al-Ṭabarī,Taʾrīkh,5:314).

62. Al-Ṭabarī,Taʾrīkh,4:586.63. H. Kennedy, The Early Abbasid Caliphate: A Political History (London-

Sydney:CroomHelm,1981),66.64. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,3:250.SeeEI2,s.v.al-Ḥasanb.Zaydb.al-Ḥasan,

3:244(F.Buhl).65. Al-Ziriklī,al-Aʿlām,4:137.66. Al-Balādhurī,Ansābal-ashrāf,ed.SuhaylZakkārandRiyāḍZiriklī(Beirut:

Dāral-Fikr,1996),9:326;al-Ṭabarī,Taʾrīkh,4:354.67. Onthepro-UmmayadunrestinSyriaatthebeginningoftheʿAbbāsidera,

seeCobb,WhiteBanners,43ff.68. ʿĀfiya b. Yazīd al-Awdī was qāḍī of ʿAskar al-Mahdī beginning in

161/777–8.SeeWakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,3:251;al-Khaṭīb,TaʾrīkhBaghdād,12:303.

69. Al-Ṭabarī,Taʾrīkh,4:560.70. Al-Balādhurī,Ansābal-ashrāf,9:326.OntheMuṭbaq,theBaghdadprison

whereinmatesweretiedupatthebottomofwells,seeE.Tyan,Institutionsdudroitpublicmusulman(Paris:Sirey,1954),1:414.

71. Jaʿfarb.al-Qāsimb.Jaʿfarb.Sulaymānb.ʿAlīal-ʿAbbāsīwasgovernorofBaṣraunderal-Wāthiq.Seeal-Ṣafadī,al-Wāfībi-l-wafayāt,11:123.SomesayhemayhavebeenappointedearlierasgovernorofMedina,in209/824–5.Seeal-Basawī,al-Maʿrifawa-l-taʾrīkh,ed.AkramḌiyāʾal-ʿUmarī(Beirut:Muʾassasatal-Risāla,n.d.),1:197.

72. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,2:177–8.73. Ibid.,2:175.74. Ibid.,2:178,179.75. Al-Ṣafadī,al-Wāfībi-l-wafayāt,11:123.76. T.El-Hibri,“TheImageoftheCaliphal-Wāthiq:aRiddleofReligiousand

HistoricalSignificance,”QuadernidiStudiArabi19(2001),47.77. Cf.Tyan,Institutionsdudroitpublicmusulman,1:418.78. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,254.79. Theverbawqafahereisasynonymofaqāma,mentionedinthenextline.

SeealsoWakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,3:300:theauthortellshowal-Wāthiq,inthelatteryearsofhisreign,“woulddisplaytothecrowd”thedisciplesofIbnAbīDuʾād(waqafaaṣḥābahuli-l-nās).

80. Al-Kindī,AkhbārquḍātMiṣr,384;IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,255.81. Al-Kindī,AkhbārquḍātMiṣr,441;al-QāḍīʿIyāḍ,Tartībal-madārik,2:583–

4.82. Wakīʿ,Akhbāral-quḍāt,3:290–1.83. Al-Ṣaymarī, Akhbār Abī Ḥanīfa wa-aṣḥābihi (Beirut: ʿĀlam al-Kutub,

1985),150–1.84. M. Bedir, “An Early Response to Shāfiʿī: ʿĪsā b. Abān on the Prophetic

Report(khabar),”ILS9(2002),288–92.

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 64 8/6/09 17:10:22


65



85. Theuseofboth terms in thesamesentence reveals thecloseconnectionbetweentheiqāmali-l-nāsprocedureandthemaẓāliminstitution.

86. IbnḤajar,Rafʿal-iṣr,106–7(tr.Tillier,Viesdescadis,68–70);al-Balawī,Sīrat Aḥmad b. Ṭūlūn, ed. Muḥammad Kurd ʿAlī (Cairo: Maktabat al-Thaqāfa l-Dīniyya, n.d.), 316–18. On the crisis which led Ibn Ṭūlūn tolayacurseonal-Muwaffaq, inDamascus, in the springof269/883, seeZ. M. Hassan, Les Tulunides, 88; Th. Bianquis, “Derrière qui prieras-tu, vendredi?,” Bulletin d’Etudes Orientales 37–8 (1985–6), 18; idem,“AutonomousEgypt,”inTheCambridgeHistoryofEgypt,ed.C.F.Petry,1:101.

87. Ch.Lange,“LegalandCulturalAspectsofIgnominiousParading(tashhīr)inIslam,”ILS14(2007),94ff.

88. Attheendofthemiḥna,al-MutawakkilcondemnedtheqāḍīofFusṭāṭ,IbnAbī l-Layth to such ignominious parading. See al-Kindī, Akhbār quḍātMiṣr,465.

89. Al-Jāḥiẓ, al-Bayān wa-l-tabyīn, ed. ʿAbd al-Salām Hārūn (Tunis: DārSaḥnūn,1990),2:49.

90. Cf.Y.Lev,Charity,Endowments,andCharitableInstitutions(Gainesville:UniversityPressofFlorida,2005),10–11.“Tearinguptheveil”ofrespect-abilitywasaveryseriousact,asal-Sarakhsīobservedinal-Mabsūṭ(Beirut:Dāral-Maʿrifa,n.d.),9:85(IowethisreferencetoCh.Lange):thedefama-toryaccusationoffornication(qadhf)isacrime(jarīma)for“ittearsupinvain(minghayrfāʾida)theveilofvirtue(sitral-ʿiffa)”.

91. Jadʿān,al-Miḥna,279–80. 92. Sourdel,Leviziratʿabbāside,2:641;Tyan,Histoire,477. 93. Al-Bayhaqī,al-Maḥāsinwa-l-masāwī(Beirut:DārṢāḍir,1970),497ff.;Ibn

al-Jawzī,al-Muntaẓam,6:79–80. 94. Sourdel,Leviziratʿabbāside,2:643–4. 95. Al-Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh, 5:282–3; Ibn al-Jawzī, al-Muntaẓam, 6:393; Ibn

al-Athīr, al-Kāmil, 7:21–2. Cf. Ibn ʿAbd Rabbih, al-ʿIqd al-farīd, ed.AḥmadAmīn,Aḥmadal-ZīnandIbrāhīmal-Abyārī(Cairo:Maktabatal-nahdaal-miṣriyya,1953),2:465.SeeEl-Hibri,“TheImageof theCaliphal-Wāthiq,”49ff.

96. Sourdel,Leviziratʿabbāside,2:414. 97. EI2, s.v. al-Ḥallādj, 3:103 (L. Massignon/L. Gardet); D. Sourdel, L’État

impérial des califes abbassides (Paris: PUF, 1999), 195. Cf. H. Bowen,TheLifeandTimesofʿAlíibnʿÍsà‘TheGoodVizier’(London:CambridgeUniversityPress,1927),194–5.

98. Al-Hamadhānī,TakmilatTaʾrīkhal-Ṭabarī,inDhuyūlTaʾrīkhal-Ṭabarī,ed.MuḥammadAbūal-FaḍlIbrāhīm(Cairo:Dāral-Maʿārif,n.d.),219.

99. Miskawayh,Tajāribal-umam,ed.H.F.Amedroz(Oxford,1920–1),1:80–1;ʿArīb b. Saʿd al-Qurṭubī, Ṣīlat Taʾrīkh al-Ṭabarī, in Dhuyūl Taʾrīkhal-Ṭabarī,83;Ibnal-Jawzī,al-Muntaẓam,8:30.

100. Ibn al-Jawzī, al-Muntaẓam, 8:12; al-Dhahabī, Siyar aʿlām al-nubalāʾ,

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 65 8/6/09 17:10:23


66


ed. Shuʿayb al-Arnāʾūṭ and Muḥammad Nuʿaym al-ʿArqasūsī (Beirut:Muʾassasat al-Risāla, 1413/[1992–3]), 15:49. See Tyan, Histoire, 489.Whenhepresidedoverthemaẓālimcourt,thevizierʿAlīb.ʿĪsāwasalsosurrounded by qāḍīs. See Hilāl al-Ṣābiʾ, al-Wuzarāʾ tuḥfat al-umarāʾ fītārīkhal-wuzarāʾ,ed.ʿAbdal-SattārAḥmadFarāj([Cairo]:DārIḥyāʾal-Kutubal-ʿArabiyya,1958),369.

101. Hilāl al-Ṣābiʾ, al-Wuzarāʾ, 317–19. Cf. Sourdel, Le vizirat ʿabbāside,2:416–17;Bowen,TheLifeandTimesofʿAlíibnʿÍsà,210–11.

102. Al-Hamadhānī, Takmilat Taʾrīkh al-Ṭabarī, 315. Cf. Sourdel, Le viziratʿabbāside,2:556.

103. Tyan,Histoire,510;Shapiro,“IslamandAppeal,”366.104. P. Crone and M. Hinds, God’s Caliph: Religious Authority in the First

CenturiesofIslam(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1986),80ff.Cf.Powers,“OnJudicialReviewinIslamicLaw,”336.

105. Tyan,Histoire,493.

EB0038 - LANGE TXT.indd 66 8/6/09 17:10:23

qadi-s and the political use of the mazalim jurisdiction ... · qadi-s and the political use of the...

Documents