Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-lvtdw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T09:20:27.878Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Definitions of Poverty and the Rise of the Muslim Urban Poor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2009

Michael Bonner
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Poverty in medieval Islam is an enormous topic. It is worth considering from a historian's point of view, especially in the light of what has been accomplished by historians of Rome, Byzantium, and the medieval and modern West who have dealt with poverty and the poor. But as always, the sources for Islamic history, especially for the formative early centuries, present difficulties. Here I wish to make a preliminary attempt at dealing with part of this problem. I shall begin by considering an event which represents a turning point in the history of the Muslim poor, or more accurately, in the way poverty and the poor have been represented in modern historical scholarship on medieval Islam. Then I shall suggest a way in which this event may be set in context, and a possible strategy for handling some of the relevant sources. This strategy involves the identification of different, competing ways in which the poor were defined in the first centuries of Islam.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , November 1996 , pp. 335 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This can also mean “the unarmed,” see Dozy, R., Supplément aux dictionnaires arabes (Leiden, 1881), ii, p. 123.Google Scholar There seems to be confusion in some places between al-'urāt, “the naked,” and al-ghuzāt, “the warriors for the faith.” The difference is only of two diacritical points.

2 Mas'ūdī, , Murūj al-dhahab (Paris, 1861–1877), vi, pp. 452–3.Google Scholar More generally, see Gabrieli, F., “La successione di Hārūn al-Rašīd e la guerra fra al-Amīn e al-Ma'mūn,” Rivista degli studi orientali XI (1926–1928), pp. 383–4;Google Scholar Kennedy, H., The Early Abbasid Caliphate (London, 1981), pp. 145–6;Google Scholar Fishbein, M., tr. and ed., The History of al-Tabari. Vol. xxxi, The War between Brothers (Albany, 1992), pp. 139–77;Google Scholar Hoffman, G., “Al-Amīn, al-Ma'mūn und der ‘Pöbel’ von Baġdād in den Jahren 812/13,” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschafi, CXLIII (1993), pp. 27–44.Google Scholar

3 Hoffman, , art. cit., p. 35.Google Scholar

4 Ṭabarī, , Ta'rīkh (Leiden, 1879–1901), ser. III, p. 900.Google Scholar

5 Cahen, C., Mouvements populaires et autonomisme urbain dans l'Asie musulmane du moyen âge (Leiden, 1959).Google Scholar See also Sabari, S., Mouvements populaires à Bagdad à l'époque 'abbāside, IXe–XIe siècles (Paris, 1981);Google Scholar and the article by Hoffman cited above. From a more literary point of view, Bosworth's, C. E. The Mediaeval Islamic Underworld: The Banū Sāsān in Arabic Society and Literature (Leiden, 1979)Google Scholar is invaluable. For charitable institutions and the treatment of the poor, see Stillman, N., “Charity and social service in medieval Islam,” Societas, V (1975), pp. 105–15;Google Scholar and Dols, M. W., Majnūn: The Madman in Medieval Islamic Society (Oxford, 1992), esp. pp. 546–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Hoffman, , art. cit., p. 44.Google Scholar

7 Distinctions between these two terms became an element in the legal literature relating to alms. An early example is the discussion by al-Shāfi'ī, , Kitāb al-umm (Beirut, n.d.), ii, pp. 71f., 81f.,Google Scholar built on a distinction between the faqīr (poor man) and the miskīn (poor man, wretch). At the same time Shāfi'ī acknowledges (at ii, p. 80) that everyday Arabic speech treats these two as synonyms; Shāfi‘ī’s technical distinction derives from the fact that in the relevant passage from the Qur'ān (9:60), the word faqīr appears first. In most of the early legal and ḥadīth texts used for this paper, the distinction between faqr and maskana is not applied in any systematic way.

8 Bravmann, M. M., “‘The surplus of property’: an early Arab social concept,” Der Islam, XXXVIII (1962), pp. 28–50,Google Scholar repr. in The Spiritual Background of Early Islam (Leiden, 1972), pp. 229–53.Google Scholar

9 Bravmann, , Spiritual Background, pp. 241–2.Google Scholar

10 See Bonner, M., Aristocratic Violence and Holy War: Studies in the Jihad and the Arab-Byzantine Frontier (New Haven, 1995), pp. 5–7;Google Scholar “God's camel: competitive gift-giving in ancient Arabia and early Islam,” forthcoming.

11 Calder, N., Sudies in Early Muslim Jurisprudence (Oxford, 1994).Google Scholar

12 Goldziher, I., Muhammedanische Studien (Halle, 1889–1890);Google Scholar tr. tr.Stern, S. M. and Barber, C. R. (London, 1967–1971), as Muslim Studies, vol. ii.Google Scholar

13 Wansbrough, J., The Sectarian Milieu (Oxford, 1978).Google Scholar

14 Noth, A., Heiliger Krieg und heiliger Kampf in Islam und Christentum (Bonn, 1966);Google Scholar Quellenkritische Studien zu Themen, Formen und Tendenzen frühislamischer Geschichtsüberlieferung (Bonn, 1973).Google Scholar See now the revised edition of the latter, prepared in collaboration with L. Conrad, on the basis of a translation by Bonner, M., entitled The Early Arabic Conquest Tradition (Princeton, 1994).Google Scholar

15 The patterns and types relating to the poor which appear in the ḥadīth literature also appear in the historical akhbār, especially for the periods of the Raāshiūn caliphs (632–61) and the Umayyad dynasty (661–750). The following section is based on legal and ḥadīth texts, where the concepts are discussed more deliberately. But even when the akhbār are also taken fully into account, there can never be anything like a neat division of the literary sources into “descriptive” and “prescriptive” elements.

16 Bukhārī, , Jāmi'; (Leiden, 1862–1908), i, p. 352,Google Scholar Zakāt, 2; i, p. 369Google Scholar, Zakāt, 41; i, p. 380Google Scholar, Zakāt 63.

17 Abī Shayba, Ibn, Muṣannaf (Beirut, 1409/1989), ii, p. 353, no. 9822; iii, p. 392, no. 10284.Google Scholar Radd can often be translated simply as “give alms,” as in raddū l-sā'ila wa-law bi-ra'si l-qaṭā, ‘Return [i.e., give to] the beggar, even if it is only the head of a sandgrouse.”

18 Mālik, , Muwaṭṭa' (Cairo, 1370/1951), ii, p. 282,Google Scholar Zakāt 26, nos. 49, 50; Bukhārī, , i, p. 379Google Scholar, Zakāt 59; Ibn Ḥanbal, Aḥmad, Musnad (Bulaq, 1313, repr. Beirut, 1389/1969), i, p. 25, ii, p. 55.Google Scholar

19 Décobert, C., Le mendiant et le combattant: l'institution de l'islam (Paris, 1991), p. 238f.Google Scholar

20 Carré, O., Mystique et politique: lecture révolutionnaire du Koran par Sayyid Qutb (Paris, 1984), p. 152f.Google Scholar

21 Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 392, no. 10286,Google Scholar Ibrāhīm al-Nakha'ī declares that if a person has decided to give an object in charity, and then cannot find his intended recipient, he should give it to someone else, because he should never return to something which he has made over to God (wa-lā yarji'fi shay'in ja'alahu lillāhi).

22 Bukhārī, , i, p. 122,Google Scholar Ṣalāt, 58; i, p. 159Google Scholar, Mawāqīt 41; Aḥmad, , Musnad, i, pp. 197, 198, 199, ii, pp. 177, 222.Google Scholar

23 Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 350, no. 9803.Google Scholar

24 Aḥmad, , Musnad, i, p. 193.Google Scholar See Mauss, M., The Gift (London, 1966), p. 6f.Google Scholar

25 Dāwūd, Abū, Sunan (Cairo), ii, p. 165,Google Scholar Zakāt 573, no. 1648; note the differing views on the meaning of the “upper hand” (one who gives, or else one who refuses what is offered to him, by raising both his hands).

26 Bukhārī, , i, p. 373.Google Scholar

27 Dāwīd, Abū, ii, pp. 163–4,Google Scholar Zakāt 573, no. 1644.

28 Bukhārī, , iv, pp. 219–20,Google Scholar riqāq, 16; iii, p. 505,Google Scholar aṭ'ima 37.

29 Mālik, , Muwaṭṭa', i, p. 268,Google Scholar Zakāt 17 (mursal, Mālik-Zayd b. Aslam-Άtā' b. Yasār-Prophet); Dāwūd, Abū, ii, pp. 159–60Google Scholar, Zakāt 534, no. 1235 (same isnad); no. 1236, with Abū Sa'īd al-Khudrī added in place of the formerly missing link; no. 1237, Sufyān al-Thawrī, complete isnād.

30 According to Jesus son of Mary, at Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 353, no. 9824;Google Scholar cf. ii, p. 353, no. 9823.

31 Bukhārī, , i, p. 360Google Scholar, Zakāt 14.

32 Mālik, , Muwaṭṭa', ii, p. 268,Google Scholar Zakāt 17, no. 29.

33 Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 384Google Scholar, no. 10191 (Ibn 'Umar).

34 Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 422, no. 10646.Google Scholar 'Umar II used to take half the ṣadaqa of the Arab nomads, and “return” the rest among their poor.

35 Dāwūd, Abū, ii, p. 158,Google Scholar Zakāt 533, no. 1630; Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 422, no. 10644.Google Scholar

36 Bukhārī, , i, pp. 357–8Google Scholar, Zakāt 9; cf. Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 351, no. 9811.Google Scholar

37 Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 402, no. 10410, 10412, 10414,Google Scholar from Ibrāhīm al-Nakha'ī and al-Ḥasan.

38 Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 423.Google Scholar

39 Bukhārī, , i, pp. 375–6,Google Scholar Zakāt, 53; i, pp. 361–2,Google Scholar Zakāt 18; Abū Dāwūd, ii, 158, Zakāt 533, no. 1631; Aḥmad, , Musnad, i, p. 446.Google Scholar

40 On this see Bonner, , “Ja‘ā’il and holy war in early Islam,” Der Islam LXVIII (1991), pp. 50–3.Google Scholar

41 Ḥanbal, Aḥmad Ibn, Musnad, ii, p. 168.Google Scholar

42 Bukhārī, , i, p. 361.Google Scholar

43 Bukhārī, , i, p. 361,Google Scholar Zakāt 18, wa-huwa raddun 'alayhi laysa lahu an yutlifa amwāla l-nāsi.

44 Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 404, no. 10436.Google Scholar

45 Dāwūd, Abū, ii, p. 159,Google Scholar Zakāt 533, no. 1234; Abī Shayba, Ibn, ii, p. 424,Google Scholar nos. 10663–7; ii, pp. 403–4, no. 10431

46 Shāfi'ī, , Umm, ii, p. 79.Google Scholar

47 Bonner, M., “Work, poverty, surplus and rights,” delivered at meeting of the American Oriental Society, Salt Lake City, 03 1995.Google Scholar

48 Cf. Patlagean, É, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e–7e siècles (Paris 1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

49 On the relation between the abnā' and the poor fighters in the siege, see Hoffman, , “Al-Amīn, al-Ma'mūn und der ‘Pöbel’ von Baġdād,” pp. 32–3.Google Scholar