Haut de page
Baġdādī, Tārīḫ = Baġdādī (Aḥmad b. Alī al-Ḫaṭīb al-), Tārīḫ Baġdād aw madīnat al-salām, Cairo, Maktabat al-ḫānǧī, 1931-1986.
Ibn al-‘Ibrī, Tārīḫ = Ibn al-‘Ibrī (Bar Hebraeus), Tārīḫ muḫtaṣar al-duwal, ed. A. Ṣālḥānī, Beirut, Imprimerie catholique, 1890.
Ibn Manẓūr, Līsān = Ibn Manẓūr, Līsān al-‘arab, Beirut, Dār Ṣādir, 1988.
Masʿūdī, Tanbīh = Masʿūdī (Abū al-Ḥasan ‘Alī b. al-Ḥusayn al-), Kitāb al-tanbīh wa-l-Išrāf, ed. M. J. de Goeje, Frankfurt, Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, 1992 [orig. publ. Leiden, 1893].
Masʿūdī, Murūǧ = Masʿūdī (Abū al-Ḥasan ‘Alī b. al-Ḥusayn al-), Murūǧ al-Ḏahab wa-maʿādin al-ǧawhar, ed. C. Pellat. Beirut, Librairie orientale, 1966-1979.
Saʿīd b. al-Biṭrīq, Tārīḫ = Saʿīd b. al-Biṭrīq (Eutychius of Alexandria), al-Tārīḫ al-maǧmūʿ ʿalā al-taḥqīq wa-l-taṣdīq, ed. L. Cheikho, Beirut, Imprimerie catholique, 1906.
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ = Ṭabarī (Muḥammad b. Ǧarīr al-), Tārīḫ al-rusul wa-l-mulūk, ed. M.A. Ibrāhīm, Cairo, Dār al- Maʿārif, 1960-1969 (Citations are given for the standard Leiden edition, ed. M. J. de Goeje and others, whose pagination is marked in the margins of the Cairo edition.)
Waqīdī, Futūḥ = Waqīdī (Muḥammad al-), Futūḥ al-Šām, ed. ʿA. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, Beirut, Dār al-kutub al-ʿilmiyya, 2005 (2nd printing).
Yāqūt, Muʿǧam = Yāqūt al-ḥamawī al-rūmī, Muʿǧam al-buldān, Beirut, Dār Ṣādir, 1955-1957.
Yaʿqūbī, Buldān = Yaʿqūbī (Aḥmad b. Abī Ya‘qūb b. Ǧa‘far al-), Kitāb al-buldān, ed. M. J. de Goeje, Frankfurt, Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, 1992 [orig. publ. Leiden, 1892].
Yaʿqūbī, Tārīḫ = Yaʿqūbī (Aḥmad b. Abī Ya‘qūb b. Ǧa‘far al-), Tārīḫ al-Ya‘qūbī, Beirut, Dār Ṣādir, 1960.
Akbar, Jamel, 1989: « Ḫaṭṭa and the Territorial Structure of Early Muslim Towns », Muqarnas 6, p. 22-32.
Bosworth, Clifferd E., 2000: « Al-Ṭabarī », in Encyclopedia of Islam (2nd ed.), Leiden, Brill, vol. 10, p. 11-15.
Canard, Marius, 1956: « Quelques ‘à-côté’ de l’histoire des relations entre Byzance et les Arabes », in Studi Orientalistici in onore di Giorgio Levi della Vida, Rome, Instituto per l’Oriente, vol. 1, p. 98-119.
Canard, Marius, 1964: « Les relations politiques et sociales entre Byzance et les Arabes », Dumbarton Oaks Papers 18, p. 33-56.
Crone, Patricia, 2004: God’s Rule: Government and Islam, New York, Columbia University Press.
Duri, Abdul Aziz, 1960: « Baghdād », in Encyclopedia of Islam (2nd ed.), Leiden, Brill, vol. 1, p. 894-908.
El Cheikh, Nadia Maria, 2004: Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press.
Fowden, Garth, 2004: Quṣayr ʿAmra: Art and the Umayyad Elite in Late Antique Syria, Berkeley, University of California Press.
Gibb, Hamilton A. R, 1958: « Arab-Byzantine Relations under the Umayyad Caliphate », Dumbarton Oaks Papers 12, p. 219-233.
Grabar, Oleg, 1954: « The Painting of the Six Kings at Quṣayr ʿAmrah », Ars Orientalis 1, p. 185-187.
Gutas, Dimitri, 1998: Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: the Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early ʿAbbāsid Society (2nd-4th/8th-10th centuries), New York, Routledge.
Kennedy, Hugh, 1981: The Early Abbasid Caliphate: a political history, London, Groom Helm.
Kennedy, Hugh (ed. and transl.), 1990: The History of al-Ṭabarī, Volume XXIX: Al-Manṣūr and al-Mahdī, New York, State University of New York Press.
Kennedy, Hugh, 1992: « Byzantine-Arab diplomacy in the Near East from the Islamic conquests to the mid eleventh century », in Shepard, J., and S. Franklin (eds.), Byzantine Diplomacy, Brookfield, Variorum, p. 133‑143.
Lassner, Jacob, 1970: The Topography of Baghdad in the Early Middle Ages: text and studies, Detroit, Wayne State University Press.
Lassner, Jacob, 1980: The Shaping of ʿAbbāsid Rule, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Le Strange, Guy, 1924 (originally published 1900): Baghdad during the Abbasid Caliphate: from contemporary Arabic and Persian sources (2nd ed.), Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Liddell, Henry George and Scott, Robert, 1978 (9th ed.). A Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Mottahedeh, Roy P., 1980: Loyalty and Leadership in an Early Islamic Society, Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Mottahedeh, Roy P., 1989: « Consultation and the Political Process in the Islamic Middle East of the 9th, 10th and 11th Centuries », in Ibrahim, Moawiyah M. (ed.), Arabian Studies in Honor of Mahmoud Ghul: Symposium at Yarmouk University December 8-11, 1984, Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz, p. 83-88.
Robinson, Chase F., 2003: Islamic Historiography, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Rosenthal, Franz, 1975: The Classical Heritage in Islam, transl. by Emile and Jenny Marmorstein [German original published 1965], New York, Routledge.
Sayyad (al-), Nezar, 1991: Cities and Caliphs: on the Genesis of Arab Muslim Urbanism, New York, Westport CT and London, Greenwood Press.
Vasiliev, Alexander, 1952: History of the Byzantine Empire: 324-1453 (2nd English ed.), Madison, University of Wisconsin Press.
Wendell, Charles, 1971: « Baghdad: Imago mundi, and other foundation-lore », International Journal of Middle East Studies 2/2, p. 99-128.
I am grateful to Maya Maskarinec, Ryan Rittenberg and BEO’s anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments on drafts of this paper. I also profited much in the writing of this paper from the excellent Near Eastern Studies library at the Institut Français du Proche-Orient in Damascus.
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 323.
Ibn al-ʿibrī, Tārīḫ, p. 212.
Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 80.
Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 78-79. I have not encountered this episode elsewhere. It is absent from a number of early narratives (9th and 10th cc.) of al-Manṣūr’s reign (Masʿūdī, Murūǧ, vol. 4, p. 128-164; Masʿūdī, Tanbīh, p. 340-342; Yaʿqūbī, Tārīḫ, vol. 2, p. 364-380; Saʿīd b. al-Biṭrīq, Tārīḫ, p. 38-40) and from descriptions of Baghdad by al-Yaʿqūbī (9th c.) and Yāqūt (13th c.) (Yaʿqūbī, Buldān, p. 233-254; Yāqūt, Muʿǧam, vol. 1, p. 456-467). In annotating al-Ḫaṭīb’s text, Lassner (1970, p. 246, 248) refers to al-Ṭabarī’s similar account but mentions no others. Earlier secondary literature primarily relies upon al-Ṭabarī’s account (e.g., Le Strange 1924, p. 66; cited by Canard 1956, p. 103).
Kennedy 1992, p. 136.
Emperor Leo III’s triumph over an Umayyad siege of Constantinople in 718 turned out to be decisive, and no similar attack occurred until the 780s, when, during the reign of al-Mahdī, the caliph’s son Hārūn forced the empress Irene to pay tribute (Vasiliev 1952, vol 1, p. 235-239); for Hārūn’s role in leading the expedition, Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 506 (year 166). For the two pre-Abbasid rebellions of the 740s, see Kennedy 1981, p. 40.
Kennedy 1992, p. 136.
For example, the ambassador’s brazenness is not unlikely in itself. It was a standard practice for both empires to grant diplomatic immunity to foreign ambassadors (Canard 1964, p. 37). It would not have seemed strange, then, for an ambassador to speak so openly.
Robinson 2003, p. 50-52.
The isnād: Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 322. Al-Ṭabarī used terms like ḏakara/ḏukira when he did not have a firm chain of transmission (Bosworth 2000). Two alternative explanations: Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p.324. In one of these, the reason given for a market transfer is again the security concern, but the one who gives this advice is not named: “qīla li-Abī Ǧaʿfar…”
As part of her monograph on Arab Muslim perceptions of the Byzantines, El Cheikh (2004, p. 150-152) discusses the two versions of this account given in al-Ḫaṭīb al-Baġdādī, focusing on Muslim perceptions of Byzantine technical prowess: “These stories… indicate that the Muslims were receptive to Byzantine influence in certain realms. That the Muslims are said to have implemented the advice of the Byzantine envoy on such a vital question as the Abbasid capital is testimony to the Muslim acknowledgment that the Byzantines were world experts in urban design” (p. 151-152). The present paper has a narrower focus: rather than asking what this tale says about Muslim receptivity to Byzantine technical advice, I ask what it tells us about Muslim perceptions of Byzantine involvement in the founding of the Abbasid capital and the consolidation of the dynasty.
Al-Ṭabarī: “One of the Patrikioi of the Byzantines approached (al-Manṣūr) as an envoy”; Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 323. Al-Ḫaṭīb, in his shorter account, calls the visitor the “Patrikios” of “a delegation from the Byzantine king” (Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 80), and in his longer account, “an envoy from the court of the Byzantine king” (Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 78). Equivalent to patricius (Lat.), patrikios was used as a title (Liddell & Scott 1978, s.v. πατρίκιος). On the high rank of Byzantine ambassadors to Arab courts, see Canard 1964, p. 41.
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 319: “wa-mimmā kāna fī-hā min ḏālik istitmām Abī Ǧaʿfar madīnata-hu Baġdād.”
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 319: “ṣifat bināʾi-hi iyyā-hā.”
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 379: “ḥawwala al-Manṣūr al-aswāq min Madīnat al-Salām ilā Bāb al-Karḫ wa-ġayri-hi min al-mawāḍiʿ, wa-qad maḍā ḏikru-nā sabab ḏālik qablu.” Thus, the ambassador’s visit came between 146 and 157.
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 323: “wa-lammā inṣarafa al-bitrīq amara bi-iḫrāǧ al-sūq min al-madīna.”
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 320: “Ḫālid b. Barmak ḫaṭṭa madīnat Abī Ǧaʿfar la-hu.” Ḫālid was from Balḫ (Kennedy 1981, p. 44). Al-Yaʿqūbī reports that Ḫālid and his son (presumably Yaḥyā) had their own palace in Baġdad (Yaʿqūbī, Tārīḫ, vol. 2, p. 253).
For the nuanced usage of the term ḫaṭṭa, see Akbar 1989, esp. p. 24.
Elsewhere, al-Ṭabarī reports that two men appointed by al-Manṣūr – al-Ḥaǧǧāǧ b. Arṭāt (not to be confused with al-Ḥaǧǧāǧ b. Yūsuf, the Umayyad governor of Iraq) and Abū Ḥanīfa al-Nuʿmān b. Ṯābit – “marked out” (ḫaṭṭa) Baghdad; Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 276. Similarly, he mentions under the year 145 that “qad ḫaṭṭa al-Manṣūr madīnata-hu Baġdād bi-l-qaṣab fa-sāra ilā al-Kūfa”; Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 204. It should be noted that under the year 146, al-Tabarī mentions that the same al-Ḥaǧǧāǧ “marked out” (ḫaṭṭa) the new city’s mosque; Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 322. Al-Yaʿqūbī reports that al-Manṣūr “marked out” (iḫtaṭṭa) Baghdad himself (Yaʿqūbī, Tārīḫ, vol. 2, p. 373). Note that over a century later, al-Ḫaṭīb al-Baġdādī also ascribed the “marking out” (iḫtaṭṭa) of Baghdad to al-Manṣūr (Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 67).
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 320: “li-anna-hu ʿalam min aʿlām al-islām, yastadillu bi-hi al-nāẓir ilay-hi ʿalā anna-hu lam yakun li-yuzāla miṯla aṣḥābi-hi ʿan-hu bi-amr dunyā, wa-innamā huwa ʿalā amr dīn. wa-maʿa hāḏā yā amīr al-muʾminīn, fa-inna fī-hi muṣallā ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib ṣalawāt Allāh ʿalay-hi.”
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 320: “hayhāt yā Ḫālid! abayta illā al-mayl ilā aṣḥābi-ka al-ʿaǧam!”
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 320-321: “fa-ammā iḏ faʿalta fa-innī arā anna tahdim al-ān ḥattā talḥaq bi-qawāʿidi-hi, liʾallā yuqāl inna-ka qad ʿaǧazta ʿan hadmi-hi.”
Al-Masʿūdī writes of al-Manṣūr, “it is said he was the stingiest of people (yuqāl huwa abḫal al-nās)” (Masʿūdī, Tanbīh, vol. 4, p. 342). I have borrowed the epithet “penny-pinching” to describe al-Manṣūr from Wendell 1971, p. 113.
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 321.
On the “carrying off of city gates in antiquity,” see Wendell 1971, p. 114.
As evidence of Baghdad’s decay, al-Ḫaṭīb’s section on the topography of Baghdad is particularly lengthy; it was quite necessary to describe Baghdad as it once was. Bearing witness to decay, al-Ḫaṭīb described the ruined state of several original canals in his day (Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 79). See also Le Strange 1924, p. 43-45. In Baġdādī, Solomon’s gates (vol.1, p. 75) and Khusro’s palace (vol.1, p. 130) also continued to form part of Baghdad’s lore.
Al-Ḫaṭīb notes that Baghdad’s famous green dome, whose importance he emphasizes as an emblem of the Abbasid dynasty, had fallen by his time (Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 73); when al-Ṭabarī died, this monument was still standing.
Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 78.
Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 323. ‘To keep/be silent’ is one of the meanings of aḍabba; according to Lisān al-ʿArab, “Aḍabba al-qawmu iḏā sakatū wa-amsakū ʿan al-ḥadīṯ.” (But see the following sentence: “wa-aḍabbū iḏā takallamū wa-afāḍū fī al-ḥadīṯ.”) In Hugh Kennedy’s translation, this sentence is rendered “Abū Ǧaʿfar was silent about it” (Kennedy 1990, p. 8).
The Buyids were generally indifferent to discussions concerning caliphal legitimacy, as long as these did not interfere with the authority of the Buyid sultanate; the Buyid court was tolerant of a variety of intellectual movements (Mottahedeh 1980, p. 28-29).
Additionally, in al-Ṭabarī, before the account of the critical ambassador, but in the same ḫabar, there is a tale about the caliph’s uncle not wishing to walk into the city on foot; al-Ḫaṭīb includes a similar account immediately before the ambassador account in his text as well, now as a separate ḫabar. Lassner (1970, p. 246) notes this parallel. Aḫbār were often fragmented into smaller reports in transmission (Robinson 2003, p. 36).
Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 80.
Baġdādī, vol. 1, p. 78.
Lisān al-ʿArab gives many figurative meanings of ḫaḍira (lit. ‘green’); e.g., applied to people’s skin it can mean ‘brown.’ Lassner (1970, p. 58) translates this clause as: “…indeed the eye is green and yearns for green foliage”.
Lassner (1980, p. 200-201), for example, interprets the cow as an indication of security risk. This idea is supported by another of al-Ḫaṭīb’s accounts in which al-Manṣūr locates the butcher shops especially far from himself “because,” as Lassner puts it, “they reportedly bore the frightening combination of dull wits and sharp knives” (p. 200).
Instead of ḥasbu-nā, Lassner (1970, p. 58) reads ḥasab-nā, so that his translation is: “…we have calculated the amount of water necessary to moisten our lips”. Either way, the sense is in essence the same: we need only a small amount of drinking water, and so what we have is sufficient. Lassner’s reading puts more emphasis on the “calculation” involved in providing water to the city and thus on the technical expertise required to develop urban infrastructure.
For example, the Kharijites referred to all the caliphs following the first four “rightly-guided” caliphs as “kings,” as opposed to a true caliph; the ideal ruler ruled by consensus and was answerable to the judgment of the community (Crone 2004, p. 56-58). Some Muʿtazilites held that a unified Islamic caliphate had lost its value since caliphs had become kings. Kings, they said, were a universal commonplace, but the original pious rulers of Islam were not kings (ibid., p. 66-67).
For example, in a narrative of the early conquests ascribed to al-Wāqidī (9th c.) but probably compiled in the 12th or 13th century (see Robinson 2003, p. 43), Abū Bakr consults the Muslims (not simply his immediate circle of advisors) at key moments – e.g., “istašāra al-muslimīn” (Wāqidī, Futūh, vol. 1, p. 22) – and instructs a departing general, “Do not become angry with your army nor with your companions, and consult them before you command, and be just, and keep far from you tyranny and injustice (lā taġḍab ʿalā qawmi-ka wa-lā ʿalā aṣḥābi-ka wa-šāwir-hum fī ’l-amr wa-istaʿmil al-ʿadl wa-bāʿid ʿan-ka al-ẓulm wa-l-ǧawr)” (Wāqidī, Futūh, vol. 1, p. 8). In contrast, Byzantine commanders are distant: when the Muslim armies surround Damascus and the townspeople wish to consult the commander of their garrison, Thomas, he is not immediately available to them: “the people went to Thomas and found armed men guarding him (maḍā al-qawm ilā Tūmā wa-ʿalay-hi riǧāl muwakkilūn bi-l-silāḥ)”; Waq. i. 64. Thomas is the emperor’s agent, not easily accessible, under guard in his own city – an autocrat.
Kennedy 1992, p. 133-136. For several “cultural” embassies to Umayyads and other Muslim potentates, see Canard 1964, p. 36, n. 5. Visible evidence of reception of Byzantine culture under the Umayyads comes from the mosaics at the Great Mosque of Damascus and the Mosque of the Prophet in Madina, for whose assembly the Byzantine emperor is said to have sent mosaic tiles and craftsmen (Gibb 1958). Whether the masons were locals or sent by the “king of the Romans” himself, the mosaics themselves bespeak their patrons’ enthusiasm for art in the Byzantine style.
For example, the Umayyad palace Quṣayr ʿAmra was patronized between 715 and 750, most likely by Yazīd II (r. 720-724) or al-Walīd II (r. 743-744), suggesting continued Byzantine cultural influence late into this period of few embassies (Grabar 1954; Fowden 2004, p. 142-174).
Crone 2004, p. 44.
Mottahedeh 1989, p. 83.
Masʿūdī, Tanbīh, p. 342: “yasūs siyāsat al-mulūk.” Al-Manṣūr’s panegyrists, on the other hand, insist on his willingness to “consult”; one of al-Manṣūr’s uncles (who had an interest in praising his nephew) reported, “al-Manṣūr would always consult us in all his affairs, as a result of which Ibrāhīm b. Harma praised him [in a poem] (mā zāla al-Manṣūr yušāwirunā fī ǧamīʿ umūri-hi ḥattā imtadaḥa-hu Ibrāhīm b. Harma)” (Masʿūdī, Murūǧ, vol. 4, p. 137-138 (# 2387). For centuries, formal consultation endured as a way to legitimize decisions and reinforce loyalty (Mottahedeh 1989).
For the claim to restore the righteous caliphate, see, e.g., Kennedy 1981, p. 58.
For example, only reluctantly did the second caliph ʿUmar, a companion of the Prophet who was known for his asceticism, accept the practice becoming prevalent in the garrison town of Basra of using materials more permanent than mud-brick in construction. For the development of Basra, see alSayyad 1991, p. 48.
Lassner 1980, p. 200: “the development of the island [ʿAbbāsiyya] was an ambitious commercial venture that reflected opportunities for capital investment at a time of widespread expansion in the suburban districts.”
Given that water conduits existed before the walls of the city were built, Lassner (1970, p. 246) argues that this part of the narrative represents “a later invention concocted neatly to explain certain changes in architectural arrangement of the Round City…”; see also Lassner 1980, p. 198-199.
The translation movement began in the days of al-Manṣūr (Gutas 1998, p. 28ff.) and ended “around the turn of the millennium” (ibid., p. 151).
Rosenthal 1975, p. 10.
Yaʿqūbī, Buldān, p. 243 (9th c.): “al-raḥā al-ʿuẓmā yuqāl la-hā Raḥā al-Biṭrīq wa-kānat māʾat ḥaǧar taġull fī kull sana mīʾat alf alf dirham handasahā biṭrīq qadima ʿalay-hi min malik al-Rūm.” In al-Ḫaṭīb’s passage on the same complex, this Byzantine is called “a Byzantine ambassador” and identified by name; Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, p. 91-92: “wāfid li-malik al-Rūm wa-ismu-hu…” (91); “kāna abū-hu malikan min mulūk al-Rūm fī ayyām Muʿāwiya b. Abī Sufyān” (92).
Fowden 2004, p. 57-79.
So Yāqūt, writing only half a century before the ignominious end of the Abbasid caliphate, begins his entry on Baghdad in his Muʿǧam al-Buldān: “Baġdād: umm al-dunyā wa-sayyidat al-bilād.”
E.g., Ṭabarī, Tārīḫ, vol. 3, p. 272-277; Yaʿqūbī, Tārīḫ, p. 373 (practical only); later, Yāqūt, Muʿǧam, vol. 1, p. 457-459. Tales associating a monk or a monastery with the founding of Baghdad are common; the patriarch of Alexandria Saʿīd b. al-Biṭrīq (alias Eutychius; d. 328/940) wrote in his universal history that al-Manṣūr “built the city of Baghdad and called it the City of Peace; however, it was called the city of Baghdad because there was a monk who lived there in his hermitage, and the monk’s name was Baghdad (banā madīnat Baġdād wa-sammā-hā Madīnat al-Salām wa-innamā summiyat madīnat Baġdād li-annahu kāna bi-hā rāhib fī ṣawmaʿa wa-kāna ism al-rāhib Baġdād)” (Saʿīd b. al-Biṭrīq, Tārīḫ, p. 49. Al-Yaʿqūbī (d. after 292/905) confirms that Baghdad was built near a monastery (Yaʿqūbī, Buldān, p. 235). This phenomenon was not unique to Baghdad: similar accounts link monks to the founding of other cities, such as Wāsiṭ (scouted out in 83/702 by al-Ḥaǧǧāǧ, Umayyad governor of Iraq) (Wendell 1971, p. 111-113).
Tārīḫ 238: “fa-l-ḥamdu li-llāh allāḏī ḏaḫara-hā lī wa-aġfala ʿan-hā kulla man taqaddamanī… la-takūnanna aʿmar madīna fī al-arḍ.”
For examination of some of the folklore surrounding Baghdad’s origins, Wendell 1971. Horoscope: Baġdādī, Tārīḫ, vol. 1, 67 f.; cited in Wendell 1971, p. 122. For a counter to Wendell’s conjecture of “cosmological origins” of Baghdad’s shape, Lassner 1980, p. 175 ff.
Dār al-salām; Qur’ān 6.127, 10.25; cited in Duri 1960.
Found in Bar Hebraeus (d. 1286) but not found in Yāqūt (d. 1229), as mentioned above.Haut de page