Polemics On The Origin Of The Fatimi Caliphs - Pasta blanda

POLEMICS ON THE ORIGIN OF THE FATIMI CALIPHS POLEMICS ON THE ORIGIN OF THE FATIMI CALIPHS By PRINCE P. H. MAMOUR LONDON LUZAC CO. 46 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, W. C. i 1934 PREFACE SOME time ago I began collecting material for an extensive history of the Fatimi Caliphs, and had in mind devoting a chapter to the origin of the dynasty, a point which has been extensively debated by ancient and modern historians. I intended to give the two sides of the story on the one hand that the Fatimis were descended from the Prophet Mohammed and on the other, that they derived their origin from Meimun Kaddah, said to have been a Materialist, and therefore according to Moslem theology a heretic. In this case the reader, after seeing the two accounts, would have been left to draw his own conclusions. However, during my research work in tracing the origin of the two stories, I found that although almost every historian who has mentioned the name Fatimis, in connection with anything apper taining to the dynasty Caliphate, Imamate, doctrines, literature, art, sciences has expressed his opinion freely as to whether they were heretics or genuine lineal descendants of Mohammed, not one has made a critical survey of the whole question, in spite of the wealth of detail that exists concerning the matter. I have therefore made a full study of the origin of the Fatimis, discovering in the process that it is possible to give a judgment on this question. Amongst the ancient historians, the learned Makrisi attempted a survey of this kind. In his Life of Obeydallah, the member of the dynasty who established their independence in Northern Africa, he collected all the information he could concerning the two oppos ingaccounts, and gave his views on them. But 5 PREFACE although this work has never been surpassed, it is far from complete, since he was able only to consult manuscripts which he could find in Egypt, owing to lack of friendly relations and communication between the various Islamic countries of his time. Naturally there were in Egypt, since it was one of the chief centres of learning, copies of works of some foreign historians, but certainly Makrisi could not have obtained copies of all the works on the subject, especially those written in Persian, and since it was then impossible to secure genuine Ismaili works, he followed the main details as already laid down by a preceding chronicler, Ibn Khaldun. Among modern historians, no one has made a com prehensive study of the subject. Baron Silvestre de Sacy translated part of Makrisi s account in his hrestomathie Arabe, and Nuweiris in his Expose de la Religion des Druzes, himself agreeing with Makrisis decision. Etienne Quatremere began publishing Makrisis material, intending later to compare it with several other historians works, but in his Memoires Historiques sur la Dynastie des Khalifes Fatimites, he merely translated some of it, and stated his non agreement, leaving his study half completed, without the final comparison which he had at first intended to make. More recently E. Blochet, in his Le Messianisme dans l eterodoxieMusulmane, critici ed iiuinber of the historians views, basing his work mainly on Persian sources, and agreed to a certain extent with Makrisi. Except for these few works, this subject, which has played such a very important part in the history of Islam, appears to be neglected. I am of course referring to those workswhich have dealt critically and at some length with the origin of the Fatimis, and not to the many books on the doctrines and history of the dynasty when they were in power, wherein the authors have briefly spoken either against or in favour of the genuineness of the Fatimis direct descent from 6 PREFACE the Prophet, often giving merely one reason for their view, and usually relying on the authority of some preceding historian...