Witness and Historian: The Chronicles of Ibn al-athir

Transcription

1 Skibinski 1 Nick Skibinski Islamic Civilization Ibn al-athir Paper Witness and Historian: The Chronicles of Ibn al-athir Izz al-din Abu l-hasan Ali ibn Muhammad al-jazari, known and hereby referred to as Ibn al-athir, was a Muslim historian who lived during the 12th century. Born in 1160 CE, Ibn al-athir s most well known work is a history of the Islamic world. He conducted research of many texts, although he did not cite his sources and thus we may never know which historians he studied, but he didn t write exclusively about ancient history. He also wrote about events within his lifetime by conducting interviews. This text offers insight into the Islamic world during the 1 Crusades, and what those were like from a non-european perspective. Ibn al-athir chronicled the early days of Islam, but he also believes he is recording the end of Islam. Or as he puts it, his task is to write the obituary of Islam and the Muslims? 2 Threats from within, the Khwarizmshahs, and from outside, the Mongols on one side and the Crusaders and Byzantines on the other, are killing and conquering on an unprecedented scale. Ibn al-athir calls it the 3 calamity whose sparks flew far and wide and whose damage was all-embracing. Khwarazm Shah Muhammad was a Shah of the Khwarezmian Empire and is singled out by Ibn al-athir for the Islamic world s inability to fight off the invaders. al-athir writes 1 Thanks to the translator D. S. Richards, this primary source is now available in English for a modern audience. 2 Ibn al-athir. The Chronicle of Ibn al-athir for the Crusading Period from al-kamil fi l-ta rikh. Part 3. (Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2008), al-athir, pp. 202.

2 Skibinski 2 Khwarazm Shah Muhammad had taken power over the lands and killed and eliminated their 4 princes When he was defeated by the Tatars, nobody was left in the lands who could resist 5 them or defend the lands. The earliest point in the book we see a conquest by Khwarazm Shah Muhammad is when he captured Rayy and the castle of Tabarak from Qutlugh Inanj in the year CE. Other conquests included capturing Marv from Muhammad ibn Kharnak in 1203 CE, 8 the city of Tirmidh from Bahram Shah in 1206 CE, and aided the Mongolian ruler Kuchlug 9 Khan in annihilating the Qarakhitay in 1207 CE. This alliance with the Mongols did not last long, though, and soon enough Khwarazm Shah was wiped out by the Mongols. Khwarazm Shah was defeated in combat, chased through a number of cities, and eventually died in the castle of 10 Hamadhan in the year While Ibn al-athir blamed Khwarazm Shah for the success of the Mongolian conquest, the obituary he wrote was very respectful. His realm was extensive and his prestige high Since the Saljuqs, no one had ruled a kingdom such as his He was an educated man, knowledgeable in law, the fundamentals of religious and other subjects. 11 al-athir praises Khwarazm Shah as a leader, but condemns the in-fighting that weakened his own empire and 4 Ibn al-athir referred to the Mongols as Tatars. 5 al-athir, pp al-athir, pp al-athir, pp al-athir, pp In this instance, Khwarazm Shah tricked Bahram Shah into surrendering the city to him, and subsequently gave the city to the Qarakhitay as part of another trick. 9 al-athir, pp Before this battle, both the Qarakhitay leader and Kuchlug Khan had requested Khwarazm Shah s aid in defeating the other. When all three armies lined up for battle, Khwarazm Shah lined his army up so that neither side would suspect he was working with the other, and swept in to kill all the surviving Qarakhitay forces he could once he was certain Kuchlug Khan had won the battle. 10 al-athir, pp al-athir, pp. 212.

3 Skibinski 3 that of his neighbors, leaving them vulnerable to the Mongolian invasion. Likely, Khwarazm Shah was merely the figure that al-athir pointed to as an example of the in-fighting, rather than being solely responsible for the destruction wrought by the Mongols. The Mongols under Kuchlug Khan that defeated the Qarakhitay were not the force that Ibn al-athir feared. Instead, it was the overwhelming power of Chingiz Khan. The danger from the Mongols was two-fold in al-athir s view: the Mongols were conquering huge, unprecedented swathes of territory; and they would commit horrific crimes to the people they conquered. When they conquered Bukhara, The infideles entered the city, plundered it and killed anyone they found there It was a dreadful day from the amount of weeping by the men, women and 12 children They committed horrid acts with women, while people looked on and wept,. When they conquered the city of Samarqand soon after, they treated the people of Samarqand as they had treated the people of Bukhara, despoiling, killing, enslaving them and committing outrages. Ibn al-athir viewed the Mongols as a terrible evil, stating As for the Antichrist, he will spare those who follow him and destroy those who oppose him, but they did not spare anyone... they slew women, men and children. They split open the bellies of pregnant women and killed the foetuses. 15 This rhetoric by al-athir paints the Mongols as the greatest evil the Islamic world has ever faced, and also associates them with the end of the world. 12 al-athir, pp al-athir, pp The Antichrist is an evil figure from the Bible, a false prophet that will claim to be Jesus, and that will fight a great final battle with Jesus upon his Second Coming. 15 al-athir, pp. 202.

4 Skibinski 4 The final threat to the Islamic world that Ibn al-athir feared was the West, both the Crusaders and the Byzantines. The most notable conflict between the Crusaders 16 and the Islamic world occurred at Damietta in Egypt. In 1218 CE, the Crusader forces laid siege to the city of Damietta. The siege lasted months, but due to internal conflict on the side of the Muslims, the Franks were able to finally capture the city of Damietta. for long. A coalition force However, they were not able to hold it was able to overwhelm them and force them to accept unconditional surrender. However, the Franks did enjoy some successful conquests, even if it was against their own allies. In 1203 CE, the Franks managed to conquer the city of Constantinople from the Byzantines. 21 While the Crusaders were fighting the Islamic world at this time, they were not nearly the threat that the Mongols were. And this concludes an analysis of the major forces attacking the Islamic world during the lifetime of Ibn al-athir. This first-hand account of this conflict serves as an interesting primary source to the era. al-athir s skills as a historian have provided us with an invaluable account of this time period, one that covers a great deal more than could be covered in this paper. After almost a millennium, this text still holds up as a valuable piece of history. 16 Although it was largely a force of Franks 17 al-athir, pp Al- Adil Abu Bakr ibn Ayyub was the ruler of Damascus and Egypt passed away and the Egyptian emir Imad al-din Ahmad ibn Ali sought to take power. 19 al-athir, pp This coalition force was composed of Al-Kamil ibn al- Adil, the deputy ruler of Egypt; Al-Malik al-mu azzam, the lord of Damascus; and al-ashraf Musa ibn al- Adil, the lord of Mesopotamia. 21 al-athir, pp. 76.

5 Skibinski 5 Appendix: Picture of Madrasa al-'adiliyya, the tomb of al- Adil Abu Bakr ibn Ayyub, whose death in 1219 CE allowed the Franks to capture Damietta for a time. After his passing, al-adil 22 was returned to and entombed in Damascus. 22 al-athir, pp. 196