scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Annotated Bibliography “Arabic Papyrology and Documentary Studies on the Mediterranean and the Islamicate World”: New Publications 2019 and Addenda 2018

07 Oct 2020-Der Islam (De Gruyter)-Vol. 97, Iss: 2, pp 533-565
About: This article is published in Der Islam.The article was published on 2020-10-07 and is currently open access. It has received 12 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Papyrology.
Citations
More filters
Book ChapterDOI
11 Apr 2019
TL;DR: Faghihi and Poulton as mentioned in this paper used new papyrological data to reexamine these competing interpretations and conclude that the reading sanat qaʾ al-muʾminīn, used in several seventh-century Arabic papyri, has been subject to varying interpretations for several years.
Abstract: The phrase s.n.t. qaḍāʾ al-muʾminīn, used in several seventh-century Arabic papyri, has been subject to varying interpretations for several years. Yūsuf Rāġib considers it as an “era (sanat) of the believers’ jurisdiction,” while Jelle Bruning interprets it as a “legal sunna.” This chapter uses new papyrological data to reexamine these competing explanations. This expression appears so far only in documents relating to debts, some of which were subject to institutional registration in Fusṭāṭ. The new documents we are editing here, as well as minor paleographic evidence, suggest that the reading sanat qaḍāʾ al-muʾminīn initially proposed by Rāġib is the most convincing, and that it refers to a calendar. Among several hypotheses, we argue that the term qaḍāʾ should be understood as a “decree” and refers to the sovereignty of the “believers,” semantically associated with God’s decree. This specification might have been particularly important for acknowledgment of debts in order to comply with the Qurʾanic injunction (2:282) to record the debts in writing by precisely defining their deadline. We hypothesize that this was a name of the official imperial calendar, which originally may not have referred to the Muḥammad’s exodus to Medina, but rather to the affirmation of his sovereignty following the treaty of alḤudaybiyya. INTRODUCTION The Arabic documents that have come down to us from the first 60 years after the conquest are still not widely known. Few in number, they come mostly from the old city of Fusṭāṭ, where they were discovered by illegal diggers in the early twentieth century in circumstances that have been well documented by Adolf Grohmann. These papyri, which for the most part are held by the Oriental Institute in Chicago, the Austrian National Library, the Egyptian National Library (Dār al-Kutub), Cambridge University Library and the Louvre Museum, were written in a very characteristic script * The authors thank Yasmine Faghihi, Curator of Oriental Manuscripts at Cambridge University Library; Bernhard Palme, Director of the Papyrology Collection in Vienna; and Luise Poulton, Director of Special Collections at the J. Willards Marriott Library, University of Utah for allowing them to publish the documents used in this chapter. The published papyri are cited according to the rules given in the Checklist of Arabic Papyrology (http://www.naher-osten.lmu.de/isapchecklist). The authors are also grateful to Luke Yarbrough for his comments on a previous draft of this chapter. 1 On the documents from the first century of the Hijra, cf. Y. Rāġib, “Les plus anciens papyrus arabes,” AnIsl 30 (1996), 1-19 and Y. Ragheb, “Les premiers documents arabes de l’ère musulmane,” in Constructing the Seventh Century, C. Zuckerman, ed. (Paris, 2013), 679-729. The two oldest documents on this list come from Egypt and date to the 22nd year of the Hijra. The first, dated 25 April 643, and which is complete, is the bilingual Greek-Arabic P. Vindob. Inv. G 39726 (= SB VI 9576), a receipt written by a certain ʿAbd Allāh b. Jābir after receiving sheep to feed his troops stationed in the Heracleopolite. The second, the Arabic papyrus P. Berol. Inv. 15002 (= P. Ragheb An 22), which is quite fragmentary, is probably an acknowledgment of debt, where only the date by which the debt had to be repaid has been preserved (see below). However, these articles only consider to a lesser extent the documents of the first 30 years of the Hijra, as most of them remain unpublished. 2 A. Grohmann, Einführung und Chrestomathie zur arabischen Papyruskunde. I. Einführung (Prague: Státní Pedagogické Nakladatelství, 1954), 28, notes that a large number of documents exhumed at the medieval site of Fusṭāṭ began arriving on the Cairo antiquities market in 1929. Mathieu Tillier et Naïm Vanthieghem, « Recording Debts in Sufyānid Fusṭāṭ: A Reexamination of the Procedures and Calendar in Use in the First/Seventh Century », in John Tolan (ed.), Geneses: A Comparative Study of the Historiographies of the Rise of Christianity, Rabbinic Judaism and Islam, London, Routledge, 2019, p. 148-188. 2 that has been classified as ḥijāzī. The documents from this era include incipits, usually introduced by the demonstrative hādhā, which have nothing in common with what we know of Arabic documentary styles attested in later periods: for instance, we find papyri that begin with the words hādhā kitāb madad (This is a document of the auxiliary troops) or even hādhihi ʿiddat ʿiyāl (Here is the number of families). Among these documents are a large number of letters, as well as a still larger number of lists recording the names of people attached to military units, and the names of Arabic families living in Fusṭāṭ. Aside from these epistolary documents and documents relating to population surveys or accounts, there are also a few documents of a legal nature: these are registers of receipts (barāʾāt), perhaps issued for debts paid by debtors, registers listing the names of those who had been paid their pensions (ʿaṭāʾ) and lastly acknowledgments or registers of debts. These different documentary styles are evidence that, very early on in the neighborhoods of Fusṭāṭ, there was a developed and organized military-tribal administration that kept detailed records about everyday life. In this chapter, we will focus on acknowledgments of debt from this period. The documents that allude to debt records or payments can be divided into three distinct categories: 1. The first group includes acknowledgments of individual debts, in which a person recognizes that he owes a sum of money that will be paid on a specific date. Three documents fall into this category: P. Louvre Inv. E 7106 = P. Bruning Sunna (44/664) as well as probably P. Berol. Inv. 15002 = P. Ragib An 22 (22/642-643) and P. Utah 520 = 4 (47/667). 3 On this type of script, see, among others, F. Déroche, “The Codex Parisino-petropolitanus and the Hijazi Scripts,” in The Development of Arabic Script as a Written Language, M.C.A. Macdonald, ed. (Oxford, 2010), 113-20 and F. Déroche, “A Qur’anic Script from Umayyad Times. Around Marcel 13,” in Power, Patronage, and Memory in Early Islam: Perspectives on Umayyad Elites, A. George and A. Marsham, eds. (Oxford, 2017), 69-80. 4 P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11160 reads bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-raḥīm | hādhā kitāb madad al-ʾaʿbūr ʿarīfu-hum Shuraḥbil b. Yaʿf[ūr]/Yaʿq[ūb] | fa-jamīʿ amdādi-him thamāniya wa-thalāthūn rajulan (In the name of God, the Clement, the Merciful. This is the list of auxiliaries of ... whose chief is Shuraḥbil b. Yaʿfūr /Yaʿqūb. The number of their reinforcements is thirtyeight men). 5 This is the incipit of P. Louvre Inv. JDW 42 recto, which will be published by Y. Rāġib in the near future. 6 A series of these letters was recently edited by Kh. Younes in his as-yet-unpublished thesis, Joy and Sorrow in Early Muslim Egypt. Arabic Papyrus Letters. Text and Content (doctoral thesis; Leiden: University of Leiden, 2013); https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/21541. 7 Thus, the names of people who belong to two ʿashīras, one called the ʿashīra of a certain ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, the other of a certain ʿAlī, are found in P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11011. 8 Cf., for example, P. Worp 65, which includes a list of Companions and their addresses, as well as the unedited P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11169: wa-bayt Muḥammad b. Kumays min al-ʿarab arbaʿa : | imraʾatu-hu Buwayla bint Buwayt ... wa-Ḥajar b. Muḥammad | nasl wa-ʾAws b. Muḥammad nasl wa-Qunayla bint | Muḥammad nasl (“... and the house of Muḥammad b. Kumays of the Arabs, four: his wife Buwayla bint Buwayt ..., Ḥajar b. Muḥammad [his son], ʾAws b. Muḥammad [his son] and Qunayla bint Muḥammad [his daughter]”). 9 P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11154 reads [bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-ra]ḥīm hādhā barāʾa | [li-fulān b. fulān mi]mmā yasʾalu-hu ʿUmayr b. Shurayḥ | [... ʿAb]d al-Raḥmān b. Zurʿa | (vacat) | [bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-raḥīm] hādhā barāʾa li-Ḥajar b. ʿAsar | [... mimm]ā yasʾalu-hu ... (In the name of God, the Clement, the Merciful. This is a receipt for So-and-so, son of So-and-so ... for that which is claimed by ʿUmayr b. Shurayḥ ... Witnessed by ... ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Zurʿa. In the name of God, the Clement, the Merciful. This is a receipt for Ḥajar b. ʿAsar ... for that which is claimed by ...). A similar register fragment is preserved in the Bibliothèque nationale de France (Inv. ms arabe 7075 [53]). 10 P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11154 reads bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-ra[ḥīm] | dafaʿa ʿAbd Allāh b. .[...] | dafaʿa ilayyā kulla-hu a .[...] | ilay-hā ʿaṭā zawji[-hā ...] | ʿarafāt sa[b]ʿa [...] | fī sanat [a]r[ba]ʿ wa-[...] | shahida a[...]. 11 The date following the reference for each papyrus is the date that the debt was due; the papyrus was therefore written some months earlier, or even a year or two earlier. Mathieu Tillier et Naïm Vanthieghem, « Recording Debts in Sufyānid Fusṭāṭ: A Reexamination of the Procedures and Calendar in Use in the First/Seventh Century », in John Tolan (ed.), Geneses: A Comparative Study of the Historiographies of the Rise of Christianity, Rabbinic Judaism and Islam, London, Routledge, 2019, p. 148-188. 3 2. The second group includes portions of registers in which various debt acknowledgments have been recorded. The documents that fall into this category are more numerous: P. Louvre Inv. JDW 20 = P. RagibJuridiction 1 (42/662-663); P. Camb. UL Inv. Michael. Pap. 893 = 3 (47/667-668), P. Vindob A.P. 11191 = P. RagibJuridiction 2 = 2 (57/676-677) to which the unedited fragments 11153 (49/670), P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11012 (54/674), 11074 (57/676-677), 11076 (57/676-677), 11086 (47/668 or 57/677), 11078 (not specifically dated) as well as P. Paris BNF Inv. 7075 (9) (not specifically dated) can probably be added. 3. The last group consists of receipts establishing that a payment has been made. Two examples are attested so far: P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 519 = Chrest.Khoury I 48 = 1 (20/641) and P. Ness. III 56 (rajab 67/18 January 687). Whicheve

4 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The study of the interrelatedness of Islamic and Jewish intellectual history relies largely on the manuscript materials preserved in the various Geniza collections, and the Firkovitch manuscripts in particular provide ample material for an analysis of the different patterns of reception/transmission/cross-pollination between Jewish and Muslim scholars, though the bulk of the relevant material still needs to be cataloged and studied.
Abstract: The study of the interrelatedness of Islamic and Jewish intellectual history relies largely on the manuscript materials preserved in the various Geniza collections. The Firkovitch manuscripts in particular provide ample material for an analysis of the different patterns of reception/transmission/cross-pollination between Jewish and Muslim scholars, though the bulk of the relevant material still needs to be cataloged and studied. This essay discusses four cases, each exemplifying a different pattern, namely, Muʿtazilī kalām and its reception among the Karaites, the case of David ben Joshua Maimonides (d. 1415), the thirteenth-century Jewish philosopher Ibn Kammūna and his reception among Jews and Muslims, and an anonymous refutation by a Rabbanite Jew against the anti-Jewish polemical work Ifḥām al-yahūd by the twelfth-century Jewish convert to Islam Samawʾal al-Maghribī.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
02 Jan 2019-Al-masaq
TL;DR: A newly identified letter to Moses Maimonides reconstructed from three Geniza fragments was published by as discussed by the authors, which describes an inheritance dispute over real estate in the Egyptian de..., which was described in the Geniza fragment.
Abstract: This study publishes a newly identified letter to Moses Maimonides reconstructed from three Geniza fragments. The letter describes an inheritance dispute over real estate in the Egyptian de...

2 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present the edition of two legal papyri regarding repudiation, preserved in the Michaelides collection of the Cambridge University Library. And they present an unprecedented testimony to the formation of a Mālikī madhhab in Egypt and to the dialogical relationship that was established in the first half of the third/ninth century between jurists who claimed to follow the Medinese master.
Abstract: The present article offers the edition of two legal papyri regarding repudiation, preserved in the Michaelides collection of the Cambridge University Library. The first one, a title page dating to the middle of the third/ninth century, suggests that the second one, an excerpt regarding the oath of abstinence (īlāʾ), may be attributed to the Egyptian Mālikī jurist Aṣbagh b. al-Faraj (d. 225/840). This sample, that may be so far the only surviving pages of this author's Samāʿ or Nawāzil, alternates quotations from Mālik's Muwaṭṭaʾ with the argumentation of another authority, perhaps Aṣbagh himself. It also preserves traces of legal controversies both in the milieu of Medinese scholars and in that of Egyptian jurists. These two papyri thus offer an unprecedented testimony to the formation of a Mālikī madhhab in Egypt and to the dialogical relationship that was established in the first half of the third/ninth century between jurists who claimed to follow the Medinese master.

2 citations

References
More filters
Book ChapterDOI
11 Apr 2019
TL;DR: Faghihi and Poulton as mentioned in this paper used new papyrological data to reexamine these competing interpretations and conclude that the reading sanat qaʾ al-muʾminīn, used in several seventh-century Arabic papyri, has been subject to varying interpretations for several years.
Abstract: The phrase s.n.t. qaḍāʾ al-muʾminīn, used in several seventh-century Arabic papyri, has been subject to varying interpretations for several years. Yūsuf Rāġib considers it as an “era (sanat) of the believers’ jurisdiction,” while Jelle Bruning interprets it as a “legal sunna.” This chapter uses new papyrological data to reexamine these competing explanations. This expression appears so far only in documents relating to debts, some of which were subject to institutional registration in Fusṭāṭ. The new documents we are editing here, as well as minor paleographic evidence, suggest that the reading sanat qaḍāʾ al-muʾminīn initially proposed by Rāġib is the most convincing, and that it refers to a calendar. Among several hypotheses, we argue that the term qaḍāʾ should be understood as a “decree” and refers to the sovereignty of the “believers,” semantically associated with God’s decree. This specification might have been particularly important for acknowledgment of debts in order to comply with the Qurʾanic injunction (2:282) to record the debts in writing by precisely defining their deadline. We hypothesize that this was a name of the official imperial calendar, which originally may not have referred to the Muḥammad’s exodus to Medina, but rather to the affirmation of his sovereignty following the treaty of alḤudaybiyya. INTRODUCTION The Arabic documents that have come down to us from the first 60 years after the conquest are still not widely known. Few in number, they come mostly from the old city of Fusṭāṭ, where they were discovered by illegal diggers in the early twentieth century in circumstances that have been well documented by Adolf Grohmann. These papyri, which for the most part are held by the Oriental Institute in Chicago, the Austrian National Library, the Egyptian National Library (Dār al-Kutub), Cambridge University Library and the Louvre Museum, were written in a very characteristic script * The authors thank Yasmine Faghihi, Curator of Oriental Manuscripts at Cambridge University Library; Bernhard Palme, Director of the Papyrology Collection in Vienna; and Luise Poulton, Director of Special Collections at the J. Willards Marriott Library, University of Utah for allowing them to publish the documents used in this chapter. The published papyri are cited according to the rules given in the Checklist of Arabic Papyrology (http://www.naher-osten.lmu.de/isapchecklist). The authors are also grateful to Luke Yarbrough for his comments on a previous draft of this chapter. 1 On the documents from the first century of the Hijra, cf. Y. Rāġib, “Les plus anciens papyrus arabes,” AnIsl 30 (1996), 1-19 and Y. Ragheb, “Les premiers documents arabes de l’ère musulmane,” in Constructing the Seventh Century, C. Zuckerman, ed. (Paris, 2013), 679-729. The two oldest documents on this list come from Egypt and date to the 22nd year of the Hijra. The first, dated 25 April 643, and which is complete, is the bilingual Greek-Arabic P. Vindob. Inv. G 39726 (= SB VI 9576), a receipt written by a certain ʿAbd Allāh b. Jābir after receiving sheep to feed his troops stationed in the Heracleopolite. The second, the Arabic papyrus P. Berol. Inv. 15002 (= P. Ragheb An 22), which is quite fragmentary, is probably an acknowledgment of debt, where only the date by which the debt had to be repaid has been preserved (see below). However, these articles only consider to a lesser extent the documents of the first 30 years of the Hijra, as most of them remain unpublished. 2 A. Grohmann, Einführung und Chrestomathie zur arabischen Papyruskunde. I. Einführung (Prague: Státní Pedagogické Nakladatelství, 1954), 28, notes that a large number of documents exhumed at the medieval site of Fusṭāṭ began arriving on the Cairo antiquities market in 1929. Mathieu Tillier et Naïm Vanthieghem, « Recording Debts in Sufyānid Fusṭāṭ: A Reexamination of the Procedures and Calendar in Use in the First/Seventh Century », in John Tolan (ed.), Geneses: A Comparative Study of the Historiographies of the Rise of Christianity, Rabbinic Judaism and Islam, London, Routledge, 2019, p. 148-188. 2 that has been classified as ḥijāzī. The documents from this era include incipits, usually introduced by the demonstrative hādhā, which have nothing in common with what we know of Arabic documentary styles attested in later periods: for instance, we find papyri that begin with the words hādhā kitāb madad (This is a document of the auxiliary troops) or even hādhihi ʿiddat ʿiyāl (Here is the number of families). Among these documents are a large number of letters, as well as a still larger number of lists recording the names of people attached to military units, and the names of Arabic families living in Fusṭāṭ. Aside from these epistolary documents and documents relating to population surveys or accounts, there are also a few documents of a legal nature: these are registers of receipts (barāʾāt), perhaps issued for debts paid by debtors, registers listing the names of those who had been paid their pensions (ʿaṭāʾ) and lastly acknowledgments or registers of debts. These different documentary styles are evidence that, very early on in the neighborhoods of Fusṭāṭ, there was a developed and organized military-tribal administration that kept detailed records about everyday life. In this chapter, we will focus on acknowledgments of debt from this period. The documents that allude to debt records or payments can be divided into three distinct categories: 1. The first group includes acknowledgments of individual debts, in which a person recognizes that he owes a sum of money that will be paid on a specific date. Three documents fall into this category: P. Louvre Inv. E 7106 = P. Bruning Sunna (44/664) as well as probably P. Berol. Inv. 15002 = P. Ragib An 22 (22/642-643) and P. Utah 520 = 4 (47/667). 3 On this type of script, see, among others, F. Déroche, “The Codex Parisino-petropolitanus and the Hijazi Scripts,” in The Development of Arabic Script as a Written Language, M.C.A. Macdonald, ed. (Oxford, 2010), 113-20 and F. Déroche, “A Qur’anic Script from Umayyad Times. Around Marcel 13,” in Power, Patronage, and Memory in Early Islam: Perspectives on Umayyad Elites, A. George and A. Marsham, eds. (Oxford, 2017), 69-80. 4 P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11160 reads bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-raḥīm | hādhā kitāb madad al-ʾaʿbūr ʿarīfu-hum Shuraḥbil b. Yaʿf[ūr]/Yaʿq[ūb] | fa-jamīʿ amdādi-him thamāniya wa-thalāthūn rajulan (In the name of God, the Clement, the Merciful. This is the list of auxiliaries of ... whose chief is Shuraḥbil b. Yaʿfūr /Yaʿqūb. The number of their reinforcements is thirtyeight men). 5 This is the incipit of P. Louvre Inv. JDW 42 recto, which will be published by Y. Rāġib in the near future. 6 A series of these letters was recently edited by Kh. Younes in his as-yet-unpublished thesis, Joy and Sorrow in Early Muslim Egypt. Arabic Papyrus Letters. Text and Content (doctoral thesis; Leiden: University of Leiden, 2013); https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/handle/1887/21541. 7 Thus, the names of people who belong to two ʿashīras, one called the ʿashīra of a certain ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, the other of a certain ʿAlī, are found in P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11011. 8 Cf., for example, P. Worp 65, which includes a list of Companions and their addresses, as well as the unedited P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11169: wa-bayt Muḥammad b. Kumays min al-ʿarab arbaʿa : | imraʾatu-hu Buwayla bint Buwayt ... wa-Ḥajar b. Muḥammad | nasl wa-ʾAws b. Muḥammad nasl wa-Qunayla bint | Muḥammad nasl (“... and the house of Muḥammad b. Kumays of the Arabs, four: his wife Buwayla bint Buwayt ..., Ḥajar b. Muḥammad [his son], ʾAws b. Muḥammad [his son] and Qunayla bint Muḥammad [his daughter]”). 9 P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11154 reads [bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-ra]ḥīm hādhā barāʾa | [li-fulān b. fulān mi]mmā yasʾalu-hu ʿUmayr b. Shurayḥ | [... ʿAb]d al-Raḥmān b. Zurʿa | (vacat) | [bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-raḥīm] hādhā barāʾa li-Ḥajar b. ʿAsar | [... mimm]ā yasʾalu-hu ... (In the name of God, the Clement, the Merciful. This is a receipt for So-and-so, son of So-and-so ... for that which is claimed by ʿUmayr b. Shurayḥ ... Witnessed by ... ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Zurʿa. In the name of God, the Clement, the Merciful. This is a receipt for Ḥajar b. ʿAsar ... for that which is claimed by ...). A similar register fragment is preserved in the Bibliothèque nationale de France (Inv. ms arabe 7075 [53]). 10 P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11154 reads bismi llāh al-raḥmān al-ra[ḥīm] | dafaʿa ʿAbd Allāh b. .[...] | dafaʿa ilayyā kulla-hu a .[...] | ilay-hā ʿaṭā zawji[-hā ...] | ʿarafāt sa[b]ʿa [...] | fī sanat [a]r[ba]ʿ wa-[...] | shahida a[...]. 11 The date following the reference for each papyrus is the date that the debt was due; the papyrus was therefore written some months earlier, or even a year or two earlier. Mathieu Tillier et Naïm Vanthieghem, « Recording Debts in Sufyānid Fusṭāṭ: A Reexamination of the Procedures and Calendar in Use in the First/Seventh Century », in John Tolan (ed.), Geneses: A Comparative Study of the Historiographies of the Rise of Christianity, Rabbinic Judaism and Islam, London, Routledge, 2019, p. 148-188. 3 2. The second group includes portions of registers in which various debt acknowledgments have been recorded. The documents that fall into this category are more numerous: P. Louvre Inv. JDW 20 = P. RagibJuridiction 1 (42/662-663); P. Camb. UL Inv. Michael. Pap. 893 = 3 (47/667-668), P. Vindob A.P. 11191 = P. RagibJuridiction 2 = 2 (57/676-677) to which the unedited fragments 11153 (49/670), P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 11012 (54/674), 11074 (57/676-677), 11076 (57/676-677), 11086 (47/668 or 57/677), 11078 (not specifically dated) as well as P. Paris BNF Inv. 7075 (9) (not specifically dated) can probably be added. 3. The last group consists of receipts establishing that a payment has been made. Two examples are attested so far: P. Vindob. Inv. A.P. 519 = Chrest.Khoury I 48 = 1 (20/641) and P. Ness. III 56 (rajab 67/18 January 687). Whicheve

4 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors show that private land ownership was normal in Egypt into the late eleventh century and later, and they discuss the evidence for this, and evidence for what changed after 1100 or so and, more tentatively, why it changed.
Abstract: Egyptian land tenure in the Fāṭimid period (969-1171) is often assumed to have been based on state ownership of agricultural land and tax-farming, as was in general the case in the Mamlūk period which followed it, and as many Islamic legal theorists rather schematically thought. This article aims to show that this was not the case; Arabic paper and parchment documents show that private landowning was normal in Egypt into the late eleventh century and later. Egypt emerges as more similar to other Mediterranean regions than is sometimes thought. The article discusses the evidence for this, and the evidence for what changed after 1100 or so, and, more tentatively, why it changed.

4 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The study of the interrelatedness of Islamic and Jewish intellectual history relies largely on the manuscript materials preserved in the various Geniza collections, and the Firkovitch manuscripts in particular provide ample material for an analysis of the different patterns of reception/transmission/cross-pollination between Jewish and Muslim scholars, though the bulk of the relevant material still needs to be cataloged and studied.
Abstract: The study of the interrelatedness of Islamic and Jewish intellectual history relies largely on the manuscript materials preserved in the various Geniza collections. The Firkovitch manuscripts in particular provide ample material for an analysis of the different patterns of reception/transmission/cross-pollination between Jewish and Muslim scholars, though the bulk of the relevant material still needs to be cataloged and studied. This essay discusses four cases, each exemplifying a different pattern, namely, Muʿtazilī kalām and its reception among the Karaites, the case of David ben Joshua Maimonides (d. 1415), the thirteenth-century Jewish philosopher Ibn Kammūna and his reception among Jews and Muslims, and an anonymous refutation by a Rabbanite Jew against the anti-Jewish polemical work Ifḥām al-yahūd by the twelfth-century Jewish convert to Islam Samawʾal al-Maghribī.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
02 Jan 2019-Al-masaq
TL;DR: A newly identified letter to Moses Maimonides reconstructed from three Geniza fragments was published by as discussed by the authors, which describes an inheritance dispute over real estate in the Egyptian de..., which was described in the Geniza fragment.
Abstract: This study publishes a newly identified letter to Moses Maimonides reconstructed from three Geniza fragments. The letter describes an inheritance dispute over real estate in the Egyptian de...

2 citations