Ibn 'Asakir of Damascus

Champion of Sunni Islam in the Time of the Crusades

Suleiman A. Mourad

• Publisher: Oneworld Academic
• Year: 2021
• eBook ISBN: 9780861540464
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Historical Biographies
• Index: History

‘Ali ibn ‘Asakir (1105–1176) was one of the most renowned experts on Hadith and Islamic history in the medieval era. His was a tumultuous time: centuries of Shi‘i rule had not long ended in central Syria, rival warlords sought control of the capital, and Crusaders had captured Jerusalem.

Seeking the unification of Syria and Egypt, and the revival of Sunnism in both, Ibn ‘Asakir served successive Muslim rulers, including Nur al-Din and Saladin, and produced propaganda against both the Christian invaders and the Shi‘is. This, together with his influential writings and his advocacy of major texts, helped to lay the foundations for the eventual Sunni domination of the Levant – a domination which continues to this day.

THE WORLD OF IBN ‘ASAKIR

‘Ali Ibn ‘Asakir was a towering figure in medieval Islamic scholarship. Due mostly to his influence and aura, the family became a prominent Sunni^* household in medieval Damascus, producing a large number of notable Shafi‘i^* scholars, both men and women, who occupied prestigious scholarly, judicial, and administrative positions in Syria and Egypt, and who helped shape the intellectual and religious life there, especially between the fifth/eleventh and eighth/fourteenth centuries. Even though each member of the family was known as Ibn ‘Asakir along with a peculiar honorific, the reference on its own in medieval literature invariably refers to him and thus signifies his eminence within the family.

Ibn ‘Asakir’s impact can be measured along three aspects. First, his writings – on Islamic religious history, on Hadith^*, and on religious merits of several towns and locales in and around Damascus – had a tremendous influence on later scholars. Second, his advocacy and teaching of major books – e.g., Sahih of al-Bukhari, Sahih of Muslim, al-Tabaqat al-kubra of Ibn Sa‘d, Kitab al-Jihad of Ibn al-Mubarak – played a fundamental role in the dissemination of these books and the revival of Sunnism, more accurately a particular form of Sunnism in Syria and Egypt that became dominant among the scholarly elites. Third, his political advocacy and religious propaganda against Shi‘is^* and Franks (Crusaders) were part of a broader current that helped some Muslim rulers – especially Nur al-Din (d. 569/1174) and Saladin (d. 589/1193) – secure the allegiance of a large sector of the Sunni scholarly establishment in Syria and Egypt, and launch the revivification of Sunnism there. Each of these aspects was a key building block in the gradual transformation of the Levant into a majority Sunni region and the maintenance of Sunnism’s dominance there to the present day.

DAMASCUS IN THE FIFTH/ELEVENTH CENTURY

It is very important to know the world into which Ibn ‘Asakir was born. It does not only help us understand the necessary context, but more importantly it is essential for grasping the specific trajectory of Ibn ‘Asakir’s life and career, and his subsequent legacy in Islamic scholarship. For what unfolded in the fifth/eleventh century created the kind of conditions that allowed scholars like Ibn ‘Asakir to emerge and play a unique role in the history of Damascus and Syria, and by extension in Islamic religious thought.

The conditions of the time also gave rise to an aspiration among the Sunni scholarly community in Syria, and among some of the Sunni masses as well, for a political patron to sponsor a Sunni revival and put an end to what is known as the “Shi‘i Century.” During the fourth/tenth and fifth/eleventh centuries, Syria was ruled by Shi‘i dynasties. The Fatimids^* (296/909–566/1171), who were based in Egypt starting in 358/969, controlled central and southern Syria, especially Palestine, the region of Damascus, and the coast. The Hamdanids (332/944–394/1004), who at one point ruled Aleppo and Mosul and the regions between them as well as parts of Upper Mesopotamia (al-Jazira^*), were replaced at the beginning of the fifth/eleventh century in Aleppo with another Shi‘i dynasty called the Mirdasids (415/1025–472/1080).

The political hegemony of Shi‘ism in Damascus and broadly in Syria meant that the Sunnis there not only had to put up with Shi‘i political dominance but, even worse, with what they considered Shi‘i religious heresies. Moreover, they lacked the economic resources to sponsor their own institutions as Sunnis in the eastern parts of the Muslim world were able to do at the time.

With respect to Damascus and Syria more broadly, one should be mindful of the importance of their history, or to put it more correctly, their historical memory. Damascus was once the capital of the Islamic empire under the Umayyad^* dynasty (40/661–132/750); even in years when an Umayyad Caliph moved his court to a different city (e.g., al-Rasafa to the southeast of Aleppo), Damascus remained the political capital. As such, the Damascenes always looked back to that time – and they still do – as the golden age of their city, and aspired for that golden age to return some day.

Damascus, therefore, was a very different city in the fifth/eleventh century than the sixth/twelfth century when Ibn ‘Asakir lived and became active as a scholar. Syria, too, was a very different region. As noted above, for most of the fifth/eleventh century, political power was in the hands of the Shi‘i Fatimids, whose contentious rule over central and southern Syria witnessed a great deal of resistance from other Shi‘i tribes there. The rule of the Shi‘i Mirdasids, who emerged from the ashes of the Hamdanids and controlled the city of Aleppo and its region, was equally turbulent; they often ran their affairs as vassals either for the Fatimid Caliphate or of the Byzantine Empire. The period also witnessed a revival in the military power of the Byzantines, allowing them to return to the Syrian scene, especially in the northwest. Moreover, Syria at the time had a large Christian community, which was divided into several denominations whose main concentration was in the cities and rural villages to the west and in Upper Mesopotamia. There was also a significant presence of different sects of Shi‘ism in and around the major cities. For instance, the main tribe that controlled the countryside and desert in northern Syria was the Shi‘i Banu Kilab confederation, to which the Mirdasids belonged. Central Syria, including the regions outside Damascus, was populated by the Kalb tribal confederation, who were also Shi‘is. Palestine featured the presence of a third major Shi‘i tribe called the Banu Tayy.

Damascus itself remained the largest Sunni city in Syria. But the absence of political stability created a grim reality in the town. Powerful local gangs imposed themselves on the local society, further exacerbating the fears of the Sunni scholarly elites as they watched the significance of their city deteriorate and their status wane among their Sunni counterparts in Iraq and farther east.

Then during the 1070s and 1080s, the Sunni Seljuks^* overran all of Syria and toppled the Shi‘i dynasties there. The Fatimids retrenched to Egypt (though they kept control of most of the Syrian coast), and the other dynasties folded. The Seljuk conquests marked the political downfall of Shi‘ism in Syria. It also marked the beginning of a demographic change as Sunni Turkic and Kurdish tribes started to settle in large numbers there. It did not, however, mean a swift resurgence of Sunnism. The Seljuk chiefs in Syria split the cities among themselves and competed for political dominance. Unlike Iran and Iraq, which were for the most part under the direct control of the Seljuk Sultan, Syria was only nominally so. Damascus changed hands several times, as Seljuk warlords vied with one another for control of the city, until it finally came under the rule of the Burids, who offered a modicum of stability. The first Burid ruler was Tughtakin (r. 497/1104–522/1128), followed by his son Buri (r. 522/1128–526/1132), then Buri’s three sons Isma‘il (r. 526/1132–529/1135), Mahmud (r. 529/1135–533/1139), and Muhammad (533/1139–534/1140), and finally Muhammad’s son Abaq (534/1140–549/1154).

The Burids

The Burid dynasty restored to Damascus and central Syria a degree of political stability. More importantly, they were able to offer the Sunni scholarly establishment an assurance that their long subordination to Shi‘i rule had finally come to an end. But the Burids were not always efficient in maintaining calm. For instance, in summer 523/1129, Sunni mobs massacred many local Nizari Isma‘ilis^*, which created an atmosphere of fear in the city and brought back the anxieties of the previous century. This only intensified the desire among the Sunni scholarly establishment for a strong ruler who could put an end to the mayhem and insecurity and make way for the resurgence of Sunnism.

Another important contribution that the Burids made in Damascus, and which had a positive impact on the Sunni scholarly community, was the gradual increase in professorships and patronage of Sunni scholarly activities in the city. The first college (madrasa^*) of Islamic law in the city was established under the Burids’ predecessors in 491/1098. It was called the Sadiriyya College, named after the Seljuk officer Shuja‘ al-Dawla Sadir b. ‘Abd Allah. It specialized in Hanafi^* law which, ironically, while it was the school of choice among the Seljuks, did not have any significant followers in Damascus. Consequently, the Sadiriyya College had a lackluster influence on the city. But shortly thereafter in 514/1120, another college, this one for Shafi‘i law, was founded: the Aminiyya College, named after its benefactor Amin al-Dawla Kumashtakin (d. 541/1146), who was chief of the army under Tughtakin and Mahmud, and who also became governor of Busra and Sarkhad (in the Hawran region, south of Damascus). Its first professor was one of Ibn ‘Asakir’s teachers: Abu al-Hasan al-Sulami (d. 533/1139). Because it specialized in Shafi‘i law, many Damascenes referred to it as the first school in Damascus, which is only correct in the sense that, unlike the Sadiriyya College, the Aminiyya College was the first school that really resonated with the majority of the Sunnis in the city on scholarly and practical levels. Hence the popular sentiment about the importance of the Burids.

Several other colleges were built by members of the Burid administration, such as the Hanbaliyya College endowed by scholar and Burid courtier ‘Abd al-Wahhab b. ‘Abd al-Wahid al-Hanbali (d. 536/1141) as a school for Hanbali^* law, the Mujahidiyya College, built by the senior Burid army commander Mujahid al-Din Bazzan (d. 555/1160), and the Mu‘iniyya College, built in 524/1130 by the Burid general Mu‘in al-Din Unur (d. 544/1149) – who later became the vizier of Abaq and the de facto ruler of Damascus between 534/1140–544/1149.

A short explanation of the significance and transformative impact of colleges at the time is in order. Colleges were important for practical as well as scholarly reasons. They trained jurists, judges, secretaries, scribes, etc., who went on to occupy various administrative and judicial roles in their city and society. These roles included running the courts (each branch of jurisprudence had its legal theory and practical application), providing legal advice to rulers and commanders, inspecting and organizing the markets, collecting taxes, overseeing the treatment and rights of non-Muslims, attending to marriage contracts and divorces, settling inheritance cases, and so on. Colleges also produced an academic and scholarly cadre who would assure the continuation of its educational mission. Equally important is that, given the interdependence of several fields of study, they necessitated the active teaching of related fields, which were essential for the study of the main topic of teaching at a given college. Therefore, the study of Shafi‘i law at the Aminiyya College, for example, required certain expertise in a number of related areas. So even though there was one professor who occupied the chair of teaching Shafi‘i law at the Aminiyya College, the students were expected to also study Arabic language, the Qur’an and its exegesis, Hadith and its sciences, Islamic history, other branches of jurisprudence, theology, and so on. These topics were taught either at other colleges or in other religious centers around town, such as the Umayyad Mosque, where students learned subjects, especially Arabic language and Islamic history, that were not the focus of any one institution. Therefore, colleges generated a boost in scholarly and intellectual life, which led to a renaissance in learning around the city. They also created many forms of employment, such as endowment managers, and custodians.

Moreover, colleges had a very important political impact, especially in terms of fostering a symbiotic relationship between rulers and scholars in many cities across the Muslim world at the time. Endowing a college gave the rulers (and members of their household or court) the chance to demonstrate their religious bona fides and piety. The scholars received employment and expanded their influence and wealth. In return, they gave the rulers, most of the time at least, their political support and acquiescence, which enhanced the rulers’ prestige in the city.

The Seljuk domination in Syria, which many Sunnis saw as their deliverance from the yoke of Shi‘ism, was shattered when the Crusaders arrived on the scene in 490/1097 and captured cities such as Edessa, Antioch, Ma‘arrat al-Nu‘man and, ultimately, Jerusalem in July 1099. In the next twenty-five years, the Franks (as they were collectively referred to by the Muslims) were able to add to their gains and establish control of the entire coastline. One of the consequences of the Crusader invasion was the relocation of a large number of Sunni scholars, particularly from coastal towns and Palestine to Damascus. Some of them were of very good caliber and were appointed as mosque imams in several locations in and around the city. One of their major contributions was transforming their mosques into centers of education, thus enriching the teaching and scholarly output of the city, especially in Hadith.

Seljuk-Crusader relations were a mix of war and peace. The various warlords on both sides prioritized their individual interests. Thus, many Seljuk chiefs in Syria concluded truces with the Franks or oscillated between war and peace with them. The Burids oscillated between the two strategies, but gradually, and with time, they hammered out an alliance with the Kingdom of Jerusalem, which irked some of the local Damascene Sunni scholars who were of the opinion that the only way to deal with the invading Franks was through jihad. Among the confrontationists were a vocal group of the displaced scholars from Palestine and coastal Syria, some of whom Ibn ‘Asakir knew very well as a child. They advocated jihad and pushed their fellow Damascenes to pressure the Burids whenever they concluded a truce or an alliance with the Franks.

The Burids did not abandon their strategy, however. They were more concerned with the threats posed to them from powerful Muslim foes. In other words, they felt they were caught between a rock and a hard place. To the south and west were the Crusaders, and to the north were fellow Seljuk chieftains who had their own designs on Damascus. One of those warlords was the Seljuk prince ‘Imad al-Din Zangi (d. 541/1146), who in the late 1120s gained control of the city of Mosul in northern Iraq, Aleppo, and most of the area between them. In 539/1144, he captured Edessa from the Crusaders, which instantly transformed him into one of Islam’s greatest heroes; the capture of Edessa was hailed as the first major accomplishment that turned the tide in favor of the Muslims in northern Syria and Upper Mesopotamia. Upon Zangi’s death, his eldest son Sayf al-Din (d. 544/1149) inherited what everyone then thought was the more prestigious Mosul. Zangi’s other son, Nur al-Din, took over in Aleppo, a city rife with problems and a large population of Shi‘is.

Both brothers coveted Damascus yet, publicly at least, Nur al-Din supported his brother given the latter’s seniority and power. The Burids were very concerned about the brothers’ ambitions. Mu‘in al-Din Unur, who actually administered the city during the reign of the Burid ruler Abaq, was very pragmatic in his political choices: he believed that Damascus should play the Franks and the Zangids against each other. He thus forged simultaneous alliances with Nur al-Din (by marrying him to his daughter) and with the Franks.

Things were thrown into turmoil when the Crusaders attacked Damascus in the early summer of 543/1148. This undermined the Burids’ policy of peace towards the Franks and exposed them to serious criticism from the Sunni religious establishment. It did not matter that the Franks’ short siege failed utterly and the threat to the Burids had faded away. The damage was done. It pushed the Sunni scholarly elites to reassess whether their city needed a new ruler to protect it; some were open, some even very eager, for Nur al-Din to be that ruler.

Nur al-Din

The death of Unur in August 544/1149, followed shortly by that of Sayf al-Din in November, presented Nur al-Din with an extraordinary opportunity to assume leadership of the Zangid state and capture Damascus. He knew that in order to achieve the former he needed the latter, for only the city of Damascus could provide him with an effective counter to the much richer Mosul. Nur al-Din moved against and laid siege to Damascus twice, but each time the Burids were able to repel his advances. In the meantime, he dispatched to Damascus his advisor, the jurist Burhan al-...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Contents
• Notes
• Acknowledgments
• 1 The World of Ibn ‘asakir
• 2 Life and Career
• 3 Scholarship and activism
• 4 Ta’rikh dimashq
• 5 The ‘Asakir extended family
• 6 Medieval legacy
• 7 Modern legacy, syrian nationalism and islamic nationalism
• Glossary
• Bibliography
• Index
• Copyright