Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T07:19:50.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Arab Ethnonyms (‘Ajam, ‘Arab, Badū and Turk): The Kurdish Case as a Paradigm for Thinking about Differences in the Middle Ages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Boris James
Boris James*
Affiliation:
Nanterre University in Paris, INALCO, Paris
*
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In general terms, the history of the Kurds in the medieval period—or at least those described as being Kurdish in our sources—has attracted relatively little attention within western academia. Moreover, those scholars who have thought to comment on the subject have in general relied on the work of the eminent Russian orientalist Vladimir Minorsky. Hence there has been very little re-examination of the Arabic sources which Minorsky consulted. This article constitutes a first attempt to re-examine some of the “historical orthodoxy” regarding the meaning and nature of the term Kurd in the Middle Ages. More precisely, it aims at questionning the work of those scholars who argue that, due to its ambiguous usage, the term Kurd in the medieval period did not denote an ethnic people. This paper argues that in fact the very ambiguity surrounding the term is indicative of its ethnonymic value and through an examination of the meaning of the term Kurd in this era we can gain a greater understanding of conceptions of ethnic difference in Arabo-Muslim sources.

Type
Articles
Information
Iranian Studies , Volume 47 , Issue 5: Special Issue: The Kurds and their History: New Perspectives , September 2014 , pp. 683 - 712
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 The International Society for Iranian Studies

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.)

Footnotes

The author gratefully acknowledges the immense contribution of Djene Bajalan, who translated this article previously written in French.

References

1 Conermann, Stephan, Volk Ethnie oder Stamm Die Kurden aus Mamlūkischer Sicht, Asien und Afrika VII (2004): 29–39Google Scholar.

2 For example, “immigrant” or “Muslim” from a strictly linguistic point of view can be defined as an individual “who has moved to a place” or “adheres to Islam.” Although a demonym, which is a term for the inhabitants of a place or region (with a slightly different connotation from the term ethnonym in English), it is also a type of non-autonomous category, the criteria found within the etymology of the term determine the designation of individuals as part of said group. For example, un Français is a resident of France, an individual who has been granted French citizenship due to the fact that he was born in France. In general the link between the etymon (France) and the term (French) is still alive without constant reminders. In the Arabic sources of the Middle Ages, the term ‘Arab, Kurd and Turk (among others) do not belong to such category. These are ethnonyms.

3 It should be noted here that the term ‘Ajam is special because the autonomy of this term is constrained. Indeed it has a meaning in itself which determines its usage. ‘Ajam means “individuals, peoples and languages that are non-Arab.” Thus the link to the original meaning is strong. This is not a pure ethnonym even though it tends to become one.

4 The fact that a conceptual category (a word) might define another is not a specific trait of ethnonyms. It is specific to all linguistic systems. But the ethnonym enjoys a total freedom (arbitrary) in such an interactional system.

5 Among the authors of the classical period, only al-Mas‘ūdī alludes to an etymology of the word (Kurdī-Akrād). He mentions one of the legends relating to the origin of the Kurds in which they were the children of the concubines of Solomon made pregnant by the demon Jasad. The biblical king reportedly said, “Drive them (ukrudūhunna) in the mountains and valleys.” It would be wrong to consider this mythical etymology as mere fanciful storytelling on the part of the author. Sylvie Denoix showed that in the case the mythical etymology of the cities of Fustat and Cairo, it is irrelevant to think in binary terms on the way medieval Muslim societes relate this kind of story. It does not matter whether or not one believed in these myths; rather it is important to know what they meant. The mythical etymology of the term “Kurd” makes sense and gives meaning. In this way the author and those who have transmitted this myth to him permanently attach to the term “Kurd” (and therefore a set of individuals) a negative connotation. The Kurds are the eternal “thrown aways,” as their name, which derives from their origin, suggests. This is the meaning of the Arabic root karada. However, this connotation was most likely already present and so the mythical etymology merely confirms and justifies an actual state of representation by relating it to a putative origin. Moreover, this mythical etymology does not limit the autonomy of the term “Kurd.” Individuals and populations, whether military, civilian, nomadic, sedentary, rural, urban, rich, poor, Muslim orthodox, heterodox or even Arabized continue to be described as Kurds throughout the Middle Ages. al-Mas‘ūdī, Murūj al-dhahab wa ma‘ādin al-jawhar (Beirut, 1966), II: 249. Denoix, Sylvie, “Rationnel ou irrationnel: un choix impossible? récits et merveilles dans deux œuvres d'historiens arabes du domaine mamelouk,” in Ecrire l'histoire de son temps (Europe et monde arabe), ed. Jacquemond, Richard (Paris, 2005), 83–94Google Scholar.

6 This linguistic process is capable of binding to an aspect which is more ethnologic. One might wonder whether the indeterminacy of the category's criteria does or does not allow the flexibility to facilitate the social integration of individuals and groups from outside.

7 We know from the work of Ian Hacking that the idea of “social construction” takes on different meanings depending on the nature of the work concerned. For our purposes, it implies that the term “Kurd” is constantly renewed and determined by historical and social conditions, which themselves are in flux. It is undetermined both synchronically and diachronically. Using the idea of construction here tends to counteract the desire of nationalism to exploit historical realities and transform them into immutable essences. This transformation is primarily a historical and analytical error and can be a source of political intransigence against people who are perceived as a threat to this “essence” both from within and without the group. At the same time, it should be emphasized that the construction of the category “Kurd” is a historical and social reality as the idea of social and historical constructs, as indicated by Hacking, can involve the denial of such a reality or the desire for it to disappear. The trend that presents Kurdishness as a social construct and not as an unchanging essence can therefore be the tool of political groups (nationalists, centralists etc.) to demonstrate that Kurdish nationalism is somehow “false” (a composite and unstable formation) when compared to other national formations (proven historically and socially) or that it is “an ideology, built by the actions of minority mired in pre-modernity,” as noted by Danielle Juteau. I will not develop on the question of nationalism and its influence on historiography here, as it would overshadow the crucial task of dealing with the word “Kurd” during the medieval period. Ian Hacking, The Social Construction of What? (Cambridge, 1999); Danielle Juteau, L'ethnicité et ses frontières, (Montréal, 1999), 22; Marie Leray and Clémence Scalbert-Yucel, “Knowledge, Ideology and Power: Deconstructing Kurdish Studies,” European Journal of Turkish Studies, no. 5, (2006), http://www.ejts.org/document777.html.

8 Retsö, Jan, “The Earliest Arabs,” Orientalia Suecana XXXVIII–XXXIX (1989–90): 132–33Google Scholar.

9 Minorsky, Vladimir, “Guran,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 11, no. 1 (1945/1946): 75CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 Nikitin, Basil, Les Kurdes, étude sociologique et historique (Paris, 1956/1975), 9Google Scholar.

11 Jwaideh, Wadie, The Kurdish Nationalist Movement: Its Origin and Development (New York, 2006), 11Google Scholar.

12 This is certainly the belief of some authors, and the point they are attempting to prove by claiming that the category “Kurd” in the Middle Ages was determined by something else (lifestyle) than what determines them today (nationalist ideology and language). In line with this perspective, the anthropologist Martin van Bruinessen wrote: “The medieval Arab geographers used the term ‘Kurd’ (in its Arabic plural form Akrad) to denote all nomadic or semi-nomadic tribes that were neither Arab nor Turkish.” After the reduction of an ethnonym to a synonym, this is the second failing of a superficial approach: tautology. Could we not say that the term “Turk” meant in the Middle Ages all nomads or semi-nomads who are neither Kurds nor Arabs? This said, what does it really mean? Martin van Bruinessen, Agha, Sheikh and State: The Social and Political Structures of Kurdistan (London & New Jersey, 1999), 111.

13 Johnson, Mark and Lakoff, George, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago, IL, 2003)Google Scholar.

14 Tabarī, Ta'rīkh al-Rusul wa al-Mulūk (Leiden, 1879–1901), I/ 241.

15 Hawqal, Ibn, Kitāb sūrat al-ard (Leiden, 1939), I: 271Google Scholar.

16 Various Arab genealogies attributed to the Kurds include the following: Rabī‘a b. Nizār, Mudar b. Nizār, Bakr b. Wā’il, Qusayy, Hawāzin. These are the most famous Arab tribes of the north. It should not be seen as surprising that some have given their name to the regions in upper Mesopotamia also inhabited by Kurds: Diyār Rabī‘a, Diyār Mudar and Diyār Bakr. It is difficult to know the significance of the attribution of such origins. Moreover, the difficulty is enhanced due to the vagueness of both these Arab tribal designations and boundaries between Arab tribes. Al-Mas‘ūdī, Murūj al-dhahab wa ma‘ādin al-jawhar, II:249; Kindermann, Hans, “Rabī‘a & Mudar,” Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden, 1960–2005), VIII: 352–4Google Scholar; Caskel, Werner, “Bakr b. Wā’il,” Encyclopedia of Islam, I: 962–4Google Scholar; Vida, Giovanni Levi Della, “Nizār b. Ma‘add b. ‘Adnān,” Encyclopedia of Islam, VIII: 82–3Google Scholar; Vida, Giovanni Levi Della, “Kusayy,” Encyclopedia of Islam, V: 519–20Google Scholar.

17 This is an Arabic nasab. The Hawāzin tribe is well known in northern Arabia. We do not see this nasab appear anywhere else, except its first two elements which surface in Ibn Hawqal, al-Mas‘ūdī and al-Maqrīzī. It has undoubtedly been forged to support a definition of the Kurds and foremost in order to show the adaptation of the Kurds to the Arabic onomastic system. Al-Mas‘ūdī indicates that this part of the Hawāzin tribe was isolated (infaradū) because of conflicts between them and Ghassan, events which occurred long before the advent of Islam. Wensinck, A.J., “Hawāzin,” Encyclopedia of Islam, III: 285–6Google Scholar.

18 If we push this logic to its extreme, anything can be said of the following contemporary analogies: “The Egyptians are the Americans in the Arab world” or “the Belgians are akin to the Laz of Turkey.” The terms quoted here are related to each other on the basis of one or more elements that connote them. For Americans and Egyptians, it is “wealth,” “political power,” “lack of culture” and “arrogance” which is assumed. And for Laz and Belgians, their so-called “naivety” or “stupidity” or simply the fact that they are the butt of jokes is highlighted. However it would not occur to anyone to say that “American” is synonymous with “rich” or “Laz” is synonymous with “stupid,” including those who have the malice to disseminate such prejudices about these populations. Moreover, these similarities do not imply a synonymy between “Egyptian” and “American” or between “Laz” and “Belgian.” Elements that bind them do not constitute elements of a definition, but are implicit references. If it fell outside the definition by analogy, these populations, each taken separately, would be defined in a completely different manner and the elements put forward here (rich, naive, etc.) would be side-lined or even refuted by people who know and use this reference on the occasion (i.e. those who tell “Belgian jokes”).

19 On these terms see Wensinck, Jan, The Arabs in Antiquity, Their History from the Assyrians to the Umayyads (London, 2003)Google Scholar.

20 According to many authors, there exists a difference between ‘arab and a‘rāb. However, this is related to the connotation of these words rather than to a radical difference. What we notice is the almost always pejorative connotation of the term a‘rāb unlike ‘arab. Marie-Andrée Gouttenoire, whose claims are based on a partial synthesis of the issue based on the works of Retsö and Versteegh, states, “Originally Muhājirūn designates Meccans who followed the Prophet in Medina. Subsequently they received the appellation of ‘Arab and settled in the cities. The A‘rāb would be those who remained nomadic or returned to a nomadic lifestyle after the Hijra. This was regarded as a defection by the Islamic community.” However this difference in connotation tends to disappear in the following centuries and especially in regard to the language: “The ‘Arab as well as A‘rāb are depositories of a pure Arabic language and references to them are often read in expressions like: fuqahā' al-‘arab / al- a‘rāb or kalām al-'arab.” Joseph Dichy (Interview with the author, Damascus, 2007) suggests that the purely linguistic difference between the two terms is a simple distinction between a generic name: ‘arab (Bedouin Arabs), and a more specific designation: a‘rāb (Bedouin tribes). Muhājirūn and A‘rāb are therefore ‘Arab. Gouttenoire, Marie-Andrée, “Les enjeux de l’écriture biographique relative aux savants iraqiens du II/VIIIe siècle et à leur transmission du fond arabo-bédouin, le cas de Abū ‘Amr b. al-‘Alā’ (m.154/770),” Bulletin d'Etudes Orientales LVII (2008): 47–52Google Scholar.

21 This is evidenced by the strong relations between Hadhbānī Kurds and Banū Shaybān who, since the inception of Islam, had their summer and their winter quarters in the Jazira. This relationship was so close that the Buyid Sultan ‘Adud al-Dawla had to lead a punitive expedition against the Banū Shaybān in Shahrazūr in order to separate them from the Kurds to whom they were “related by marriage and common affairs.” Hawqal, Ibn, Kitāb sūrat al-ard, I: 215–16Google Scholar; al-Athīr, Ibn, Al-Kāmil fī al-ta'rīkh (Beirut, 1998), VII: 386Google Scholar.

22 Johnson and Lakoff, Metaphors We Live By, 115.

23 al-Mas'ūdī, Murūj al-dhahab wa ma‘ādin al-jawhar, II:249.

24 al-Jāhiz, Rasā’il al-Jāhiz (Cairo, 1979), III: 1, 217.

25 At this point, one should add the caveat that it is possible that both during this phase and during the preceding one, the word ‘Kurd’ underwent changes. One can dispute the validity of citing authors who were writing several centuries apart in order to characterize one of two historical phases. Therefore, rather than attempting to resolve the debate on the meaning of the term Kurd in the Middle Ages, the research presented here ought to be regarded as a first step towards constructing a more refined historicization of the subject.

26 al-Sam‘ānī, Ibn, Kitāb al-ansāb, (Beirut: Dār al-Jinān, 1988)Google Scholar: entry « al-kurdī », V/54.

27 al-‘Umarī, , Masālik al-absār fi mamālik al-amsār (Frankfurt, 1988), III: 124Google Scholar.

28 al-Mas'ūdī, Murūj al-dhahab, II: 250.

29 al-Maqrīzī, (al-Khitat) Kitāb al-mawā‘iz wa-l-i‘tibār fī al-khitat wa-l-āthār (London, 2002), III: 751.

30 Al-Maqrīzī distinguished himself by his hostility to the Ayyūbids and the Kurds whose political and military role throughout the thirteenth century he systematically obscures. At the same time, he magnifies the role of the Mamlūks. For the period of Saladin, he cites twenty Mamlūks in the entourage of various sovereigns, mainly Shīrkūh and Saladin, and reports the details of their military activity and even the number of their soldiers. However he neglects to mention the achievements of the main Kurdish emirs: Sayf al-Dīn al-Mashtūb, ‘Īsā al-Hakkārī and Husām al-Dīn Abū ’l-Hayjā’ al-Samīn. Reuven Amitai notes that so allusive is this attitude that when al-Maqrīzī cites an anecdote taken from Ibn al-Furāt, he fails to indicate, contrary to its source, that the Shahrazūriyya Kurds had joined the Egyptian army to fight the Mongols. Amitai describes this silence as “a minor but telling omission.” It is therefore not surprising that al-Maqrīzī insisted on the non-Arab nature of the Kurds, a less prestigious origin. However, one can question the fact that al-Maqrīzī sees this tale as an original attempt to raise the prestige of the Ayyūbids while this story is known and reported by al-Mas‘ūdī and other authors of the classical period well before the period in which Saladin came to power in Egypt. Amitai, Reuven, “al-Maqrīzī as a Historian of the Early Mamlūk Sultanate (or: Is al-Maqrīzī an Unrecognized Historiographical Villain?),” Mamlūk Studies Review VII, no. 2 (2003): 112Google Scholar.

31 al-Hamawī, Yaqūt, Mu‘jam al-buldān (Beirut, 1955–57), III: 375–6Google Scholar: “Shahrazūr”; Qur’ān, al-tawba sura: 97.

32 Martinez-Gros, Gabrie, Ibn Khaldûn et les sept vies de l'Islam (Arles, 2006), 56Google Scholar.

33 al-‘Umari, Masālik al-absār, III: 126.

34 Ibid., III: 131.

35 Ibid., III: 130.

36 al-Jāhiz, rasā’il al-Jahiz, ( III: 1, 170–71, 220.

37 On these issues, see Boris James, Saladin et les Kurdes; perception d ‘un groupe au temps des croisades, (Paris: L'Harmattan, 2006).

38 Barth, Fredrik (Dir.), Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. The Social Organization of Culture Difference, (Oslo: George Allen & Uwin, 1969)Google Scholar; Martiniello, Marco, L'ethnicité dans les sciences sociales contemporaines, (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1995)Google Scholar; Juteau, Danielle, L'ethnicité et ses frontières, (Montréal, 1999)Google Scholar.

39 Stephan Conermann, “Volk Ethnie oder Stamm”: 56.

40 Quiminal, Catherine, “Nouvelles mobilités et anciennes catégories,” Ville-école-intégration LXXXI (2002): 13Google Scholar.

41 For a complete presentation of Zangīds, Ayyūbids and Mamlūk regimes' history see these works: Cahen, Claude, La Syrie du Nord à l’époque des croisades et la principauté franque d'Antioche (Paris, 1940)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Elisséeff, Nikita, Nur ad-dīn, un grand prince musulman de Syrie au temps des croisades (Damas, 1966)Google Scholar; Humphreys, Stephen, From Saladin to the Mongols. The Ayyubids of Damascus, 1193–1260 (New York, 1977)Google Scholar; Eddé, Anne-Marie, La principauté Ayyoubide d'Alep (579/1189–658/1260) (Stuttgart, 1999)Google Scholar; Thorau, Peter, The Lion of Egypt, Sultan Baybars I and the Near East in the Thirteenth Century (New York, 1992Google Scholar); Ayalon, David “From Ayyūbids to Mamlūks,” Revue des Etudes Islamiques XLIV (1981): 43–57Google Scholar; Irwin, Robert, The Middle East in the Middle Ages: The Early Mamluk Sultanate 1250–1382 (London, 1986)Google Scholar.

42 See James, Saladin et les Kurdes.

43 Amitai-Preiss, Reuven, Mongols and Mamlūks. The Mamluk-Ilkhanid War (1260–1281) (Cambridge, 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 This idea originated from an exchange with Pr. Gabriel Martinez-Gros. Thus I thank him for his insight into the conceptions of Ibn Khaldūn and his suggestion, which I am only recreating and illustrating. See Martinez-Gros, Ibn Khaldûn et les sept vies de l'Islam.

45 Ibn Khaldūn (Walī al-dīn; m. 808/1405–6), Kitāb al-‘ibar wa dīwān al-mubtadā’ wa ’l-khabar fī ayyām al-‘arab wa ’l-‘ajam wa man ‘asharahum min dhāwī ‘l-sultān al-akbār (Beirut, 1959–61), I: 263.

46 Conermann, “Volk Ethnie oder Stamm,” 52.

47 Al-Khazrajī, , Ta'rīkh dawlat al-akrād wa'l-atrāk (Istanbul, Süleymaniye, n°695), 193Google Scholar.

48 Shamāh, Abū, Tarājim rijāl al-qarnayn al-sādis wa al-sābi' (Cairo, 1947), 217Google Scholar.

49 al-Jāhiz, rasā’il al-Jāhiz, I: 3, 217.

50 al-Mas'ūdī, Murūj al-dhahab, II: 243–4.

51 This has been noticed especially thanks to the work of the project Differenz und integration, under the supervision of Stefan Leder at the University of Halle. However, among other participants to the project Sara Binay shows that, between the classic period and the Seljūq's era can be noticed a depreciation of nomadism and Bedouinnness and consequently of the term ‘arab in literature. Binay, Sara, Die Figur des Beduinen in der arabischen Literatur (9.–12. Jahrhundert), Nomaden und Sesshafte 3 (Wiesbaden, 2006)Google Scholar.

52 al-Hamawī, Yāqūt, Mu'jam al-buldān (Beirut, 1955–57), III: 375–6Google Scholar: “Shahrazūr.”

53 al-Isfahānī, ‘Imād al-dīn, Conquête de la Syrie et de la Palestine par Saladin, trans. Henry Massé (Paris, 1977), 340, 301, 264Google Scholar.

54 Ibid., 192, 303.

55 al-Wahrānī, Zakī al-dīn Muhammad, Maqāmat al-Wahrānī wa rasā’iluhu (Cairo, 1968), 55Google Scholar.

56 About the Kurds, J.-M. Mouton notes for the Burid period (1104–54) that “they were in general very badly considered in Damascus. Rare are the ones that meet the favor of the chroniclers.” Mouton, Jean-Michel, Damas et sa principauté sous les Saljoukides et les Bourides 468–549/1076–1154 (Cairo, 1994), 181Google Scholar.

57 Ibn Hawqal, Kitāb sūrat al-ard, 314.

58 al-Hamawī, Mu'jam al-buldān, III: 375–6: “Shahrazūr”

59 al-Maqrīzī, Kitāb al-sulūk li-ma'rifat duwal al-Mulūk (Cairo, 1972), I: 1, 231.

60 al-‘Umarī, Masālik al-absār, III: 125.

61 al-Hamawī, Mu'jam al-buldān, III: 375–6: “Shahrazūr.”

62 Mouton, Damas et sa principauté sous les Saljoukides et les Bourides, 136–7, 157, 181.

63 This is the medieval embryo of the Yezidi religion whose members are nowadays exclusively Kurdish. Kreyenbroek, Philip G., Yezidism: its Background, Observances and Textual Tradition (Lampeter, 1995)Google Scholar. van Bruinessen, Agha, Shaykh and State, 23; Lescot, Roger, Enquête sur les Yézidis de Syrie et du Djebel Sindjar (Damascus, 1938)Google Scholar.

64 Al-Dhahabi (Shams al-din Muhammad; 748/1347–48), al-‘Ibar fi khabar man ghabar (Koweit, 1966), V: 183.

65 al-Hamawī, Mu‘jam al-buldān, I: 138: “Irbil.”

66 This is probably the enumeration of Kurdish names. These are certainly not Persian names. Some seem even followed by a Kurdish vocative “o” = ū. Of course for the author the purpose is to make fun of the tone of this language.

67 Hakan Özkan gave this interpretation of the phrase tracing it from Turkish (bu yere ki) and Arabic (tajī). However, the passage remains obscure.

68 al-Hamawī, Mu‘jam al-buldān, I: 139: “Irbil.”

69 Kemp, Percy, Territoire d'Islam: Le monde vu de Mossoul au XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1982), 108Google Scholar. I want to thank here Jean-Claude Garcin for drawing my attention to this study.

70 Al-’Umarī, Masālik al-absār, III: 129.

71 Özoglu, Hakan, Kurdish Notables and the Ottoman State, evolving identities, competing loyalties, and Shifting Boundaries (Albany, NY, 2004), 15Google Scholar.

72 For more details on the question see Boris James, “Le territoire tribal des Kurdes et l'aire iraquienne (xe- xIIIe siècles): esquisse des recompositions spatiales,” Revue d'Etudes sur les Mondes Musulmans et Méditerranéens LXVII–LXVIII (2007): 101–26.

73 Ismet Cherif Vanly, “Le déplacement du pays kurde vers l'ouest du xe au xve siècle, recherche historique et géographique,” Rivista degli studii orientali L, no. 3–4 (1976): 355; al-Ya‘qūbī, Kitāb al-buldān (Leiden, 1892), 232.

74 al-’Umarī, Masālik al-absār, III: 124.

75 Aubin, Jean, Emirs mongols et vizirs persans dans les remous de l'acculturation, Iranica, Studia, Cahier 15 (Paris, 1995), 69Google Scholar.

76 Ibid., 69.

77 Özoglu, Kurdish Notables and the Ottoman State, 27.

78 Ibn Khallikān, Kitāb wafayyāt al-a‘yān wa anbā’ abnā’ al-zamān (Beirut, 1968–72), VII: 153, 155; Abū Shamāh, Kitāb al-rawdatayn fī akhbār al-dawlatayn (Cairo, 1871–75), I: 407.

79 Ibn Shaddād, Bahā’ al-dīn, al-Nawādir al-sultāniyya, (Paris, 1884), III (historiens orientaux): 313.

80 ‘al-Isfahānī, Conquête de la Syrie et de la Palestine par Saladin 375–6.

81 Ibid., 262.

82 Moreover, Ibn al-Dawādārī claims that the ‘Azīziyya troops were present in al-Nāsir's army and responsible of his defeat because of their empathy for the new Egyptian regime. Al-Makīn Ibn al-‘Amīd, al-Majmu‘ al-mubarak (Paris, 1994), 162; Ibn Wāsil, Mufarrij al-kurūb fi akhbār Banī Ayyūb (Paris, 1703), 102 v, 105 r; Ibn al-Dawādārī, Kanz al-durar wa jamī‘ al-ghurar (Cairo, 1972), VIII: 17.

83 Eddé, La principauté Ayyoubide d'Alep, 154.

84 al-’Umarī, Masālik al-absār, III: 125.

85 Ibid., III: 131.