No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
In his fundamental study of the Dome of the Rock Professor K. A. C. Creswell discusses the date of the ceilings, and in connection with this he draws attention to some interesting facts discovered in 1873 by Dr. Thomas Chaplin: “There is a very old carved wooden cornice still running round the building in the space between the ceiling and roof of the outer corridor on the inner wall of the latter, just above the ceiling.” And further: the roof of this outer ambulatory was found to have Kufic inscriptions on one beam and on “6 or 8 more rafters” in the name of the ‘Abbāsid Khalif al-Muqtadir bi'llāh (295–320 H./908–32 a.d.).
page 83 note 1 Creswell, K. A. C., Early Muslim Architecture, Vol. I (Oxford, 1932), pp. 61–63Google Scholar. Letter of DrChaplin, Thomas and editorial note on it in Palest. Explor. Fund, Quart. Statement, 1873, pp. 155–56Google Scholar.
page 83 note 2 In 1914 Max van Berchem penetrated into the interior of the roof (Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicarum, II, Jérusalem, II, p. 260, n.l). Professor Creswell entered the same way through a trap-door in the lead covering, but he realized that van Berchem and he had been moving about in the roof of the inner ambulatory only, whereas Chaplin's discoveries were made in the outer ambulatory, where there “is not sufficient space between the ceiling . . . and roof” to pass round (Early Musi. Arch., I, p. 61, n. 3).
page 83 note 3 The unusual scale of this restoration will become clear in the final report on which the Restoration Committee is working. Since this publication will take some time to appear, it may be interesting to have a short review of the plans and preparations given by one of its members (Muḥammad, 'Abbās Badr, “Qubbat aṣ-Ṣakhra“, in Al-Mu'tamar ath-thānī lil-āthār fi'l-bilād al-'arabīya, Baghāad, 18–28 Nov. 1957, , al-Qāhira, 1958, pp. 313—19)Google Scholar: At the request of the Supreme Qāḍdī of the Hāshimite Kingdom of Jordan in 1952 an Egyptian committee—composed of Ḥusayn Shāfi'ī, Ṣalāḥ ad-Dīn al-Kaylānī and Muḥammad 'Abbās Badr—made a survey of the repairs necessary in the Dome of the Rock. It was based on reports on that subject produced by Maḥmūd Aḥmad in 1938, Megaw in 1942, Harrison in 1945 and 'Abd al-Fattāḥ Ḥilmy in 1947. The expenses were calculated as half a million Egyptian pounds. Copies of this report then were distributed in Arab Islamic countries for the purpose of raising interest and obtaining financial contribution. A sum of 150,000 LE was gathered.
By resolution of 25 April, 1956 the Egyptian Government credited 75,000 LE for five years to a committee, which was to undertake the final programme and its execution. It decided upon the following restorations: (1) Replacing the outer dome by an aluminium structure covered with sheets of gilt aluminium. (2) Replacing or consolidating columns and walls, especially those not built on the living rock. (3) Establishing protection against humidity at the base of the outer wall (pipes, isolating layer, buttressing wall of reinforced concrete in the ground). (4) Detaching and refixing the entire tile panelling, substituting the broken ones; restoration of the mosaics. (5) Replacing the ambulatory's roof by an aluminium roof. (6) Reducing the present entrances to their original form.
page 84 note 1 I offer my sincere thanks to the religious authorities and the Head of the Executive Branch of the Restoration Committee for granting me access to all parts of the building.
page 85 note 1 Palest. Explor. Fund, Q. St., 1873, p. 155.
page 85 note 2 Ibid.
page 85 note 3 Early Musi. Arch., I, pp. 54–57.
page 85 note 4 Ibid., pp. 61–63.
page 86 note 1 Ibid., p. 36.
page 86 note 2 Ibid., p. 63, n. 7, referring to Tobler's, edition, Descript. Terrae Sanctae, ex saec. VIII, IX, XII et XIV, p. 126Google Scholar and English translation by Stewart, in Palestine Pilgrims' Text Society, V, (β), p. 17Google Scholar.
page 86 note 3 Early Musi. Arch., I, p. 62.
page 86 note 4 See, e.g., Furlanetto, J. et al. , Lexicon Totius Latinitatis (Patavii, 1940)Google Scholar under “Laquearium”, and the more explicit Dictionnaire des Antiquitis grecques et romaines de Ch. Daremberg, , Saglio, E., Pottier, E., Vol. III, pt. II (Paris, 1904)Google Scholar, under “Lacunar, Lacunarium, Laquear”.
page 86 note 5 They were distributed symmetrically: one decorated beam on each side of the central rafter and a group of three towards both ends. The whole side had 23 rafters, the painted one's occupied nos. 3, 5, 7,—11, 13,—17, 19, 21.
page 87 note 1 The latter could be verified only when the beams had been dismounted.
page 87 note 2 Th. Chaplin suggests the same for the inscribed beams: “Probably this timber was sent down from the North, like that used in the first temple” (Pal. Expl. Fund, Q. St. 1873, p. 155).
page 88 note 1 e.g., in van , Berchem, Corp. Inscr. Arab., IIGoogle Scholar, Jerusalem, II the long inscription published as no. 219 is considered to be the text, which is repeated “avec des parties frustes” on all inscribed beams. It is, however, found on a single one only.
page 88 note 2 It is beam no. 19, the whole side having 23.
page 88 note 3 Th. Caplin speaks of only “6 or 8” (Pal. Expl. Fund., Q. St. 1873, p. 155).
page 88 note 4 The whole western side had 24 beams. The inscriptions were found on beams nos. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 19, 21.
page 88 note 8 Owing to this bad visibility it happened that I found them in June 1960 dismounted without being recognized and thrown together with the mass of ordinary beams. The rafters with the principal inscription and the painted decoration, however, had been sorted out in order to be exhibited later in a special museum.
page 88 note 6 “My Arab friends read the inscription from the beam [sic] differently from what I did. According to them the line would run ‘To God, El Saïdy, mother of El Muktader Billah’” (Pal. Expl. Fund, Q. St., 1873, p. 156).
page 88 note 7 Van Berchem, op. cit., pp. 259–61.
page 89 note 1 Ibid., p. 260, n. 1 and pp. 7–9.
page 89 note 2 The restoration Committee intends to publish a detailed report of their work and discoveries, and I hope that this inscription will then be fully documented by photographs taken from the dismounted beam. In the meantime this edition may suffice. My thanks to Mr. Ṣaliṥ ash-Shawaibī, who, as Chief Architect of the Executive Branch of the Restoration Committee, took an interest and helped in my search for the inscription and who has checked the text together with me.
page 89 note 3 (a) The longer invocation formula, which V. Berchem supposed by setting three dots, was not used, (b) V. Berchem gives 
according to inscr. no. 144 in CIA., II, Jérusalem, II. (c) V.B. suggest adding 
according to inscr. no. 144. (d) V.B. according to Palmer's translation “God may spare him to us” (cf. Pal. Expl. Fund, Q. St., 1873, p. 156), gives: 
(e) V.B. according to inscr. no. 144: 
(f) V.B.—not knowing the space available in the inscription—suggests: 
(g) V. B.: (?) 
(h) V.B. according to inscr. no. 144: 
(i) V.B. according to inscr. no. 144: 
(j) Palmer read “Labīd”. The last letter, however, cannot be interpreted as a dāl, since all the dāls of this inscription have their upper part ending in a short turn towards the left (see PI. V). It resembles clearly the last letter of “Rajab” (see PL VI). (k) V.B. adds as suggestion (
). (l) This formula is missing in Palmer's translation and consequently in van Berchem's reconstruction too. (m) Palmer interpreted the signs given in the copy, which was at his disposal, as “and that was in one and . . .”, therefore V. B.: 
.
page 90 note 1 Pal. Expl. Fund, Q. St., 1873, p. 156.
page 90 note 2 Ibid. See also above, n. 3 (m), p. 89.
page 90 note 3 Corp. Inscr. Arab., II, Jérusalem II. p. 261.
page 90 note 4 He died in 421 H. (a.d. 1030) at a very advanced age (cf. Amedroz, H. F., The Eclipse of the Abbasid caliphate), Preface and Index (Oxford, 1920) pp. II–IIIGoogle Scholar.
page 90 note 5 He died 630 H.(a.d. 1234).
page 91 note 1 Miskawayhi, , Tajārib al-umam, the concluding portion ed. by Amedroz, H. F., op. cit., Vol. I, p. 29Google Scholar.
page 91 note 2 Ibid., p. 28, 11, 5–6.
page 91 note 3 Al-Kāmil fi't-ta'rīkh (ed. Tornberg, , Leyden, 1862) Vol. VIII, p. 51, 11. 16–17Google Scholar.
page 91 note 4 Ṭabarī, , Ta'rīkh (ed. de Goeje, ) 3rd series, p. 2148Google Scholar, 11. 9–11 mentions that she was formerly the servant of Umm al-Qāsim bint Muṥammad ibn 'Abd Allāh [ibn Ṭāhir], cf. also below Ibn al-Jauzī, Muntaẓam; Mas'ūdī, , Murūj adh-Dhahab (ed. and transl. de Meynard, Barbier, Paris, 1861–1877) VIII, p. 248, 1. 1Google Scholar; Mas'ūdī, , At-tanbīh wa'l-ishāra (ed. de Goeje, , Leyden, 1894) p. 376, 1. 7Google Scholar, with the only reference to her Greek origin; 'Arīb, , Ṣila ta'rīkh aṭ-Ṭabari (ed. de Goeje, , Leyden, 1898) p. 22, 1. 12Google Scholar; Ibn al-Athīr, op. cit., VII, p. 328, 11.23–4 and VIII, p. 8, 11.12–3; al-Jauzī, Ibn, Al-Muntaẓam fi ta'rikh al-mulūk wa'l-umam (Haydarābād, 1357) VI, p. 67, 11. 3–5Google Scholar; Birdī, Taghrī, An-Nujūm az-zāhira fi mulūsk Miṣrwa'l-Qāhira (Cairo, 1351 H./a.d. 1932) III, p. 239, 1. 6Google Scholar. See also Massignon, L., La passion d'al Hosayn-Ibn-Mansour al-Hallaj (Paris, 1922) Vol. I, p. 199 ff.Google Scholar; az-Zerkalī, Khayr ad-Dīn, Al-A'lām, Qāmūs tarājim li-ashhur ar-rijāl wa'n-nisā' min al-arab wa'l-musta'ribīn wa'l-mustashriqīn (2nd ed., Cairo, 1954–1959) III, pp. 245–6Google Scholar.
page 91 note 5 Corp. Inscr. Arab. II, Jérusalem, II, p. 8.
page 92 note 1 Op. cit., III, p. 239, 11. 9–10.
page 92 note 2 Mas'ūdī, , At-Tanbīh, p. 377, 11. 13–8Google Scholar; 'Arīb, op. cit., p. 24, 1. 6; Miskawayhi, op. cit., p. 90, 11. 10–11; Ibn al-Athir, op. cit., VIII, p. 180, 11. 6–9; Ibn al-Jauzī. op. cit., VI, p. 69, 11. 8–9; Taghrī Birdī, op. cit., III, p. 164, 11. 13–4.
page 92 note 3 'Arīb, op. cit., p. 24, 11. 7–9.
page 92 note 4 Ibid., 1. 7 and Ibn al-Athir, op. cit., VIII, p. 180, 1. 8.
page 92 note 5 Miskawayhi, op. cit., p. 118, 11. 3–4; Ibn al-Jauzī, op. cit., VI, p. 75, 11.17–8.
page 92 note 6 She installs female Superintendant Thumal as supervisor of social affairs at Ruṣāfa ('Arīb, op. cit., p. 71, 11. 5–12); her intervention causes a delay of the execution of al-Hallāj (Tanūkhī, Jāmi') at-tawārīkhal-musammā bi-Kitāb nishwāralmuḥāḍara wa akhbār al-mudhākara, (ed. Margoliouth, , Oriental Transl. Fund, New Series, v. XXVII, 1921, p. 83)Google Scholar; she intervenes for Ḥāmid ibn 'Abbās (Miskawayhi, op. cit., p. 97, 11. 5–6), for Naṣr (ibid., p. 117, 11. 6–12), for 'Alī b. 'Isā (ibid., p. 187,11.4–6), for al-Khaṣībī (ibid., p. 143,1.1 and 'Arīb, op. cit., p. 126,11.17–18); she orders to release Ibn Shīrzād (Miskawayhi, op. cit., p. 164,11. 5–6).
page 92 note 7 e.g., unaware of the illegality she had bought a Waqf property and wanted to destroy the waqf document; when refused she complained to the Khalif: “as if this was not allowed?” (Tanūkhī, op. cit., pp. 119–20; Ibn al-Jauzī, op. cit., VI, pp. 233–4); see also Amedroz, H. F., The Historical remains of Hilâl al-Sâbi first part of his Kitab al-Wuzara (Leyden, 1904), “Outline of Contents”, p. 24, n. 2Google Scholar.
page 92 note 8 Ḥusayn ibn Aḥmad sends presents to Khalif and Sayyida to put them in a favourable mood towards him ('Arīb, op. cit., p. 75, 11. 2–3; Mufliḥ presses Muqtadir and Sayyida until they give way to deliver Ḥāmid ibn 'Abbās (ibid., p. 112, 11. 12–3); Naṣr approaches Sayyida for decision about a new wazīr and assists her in favouring al-Khaṣībī, who himself had already written to her (ibid., p. 126, 1. 17); the text of a letter of 'Alī ibn ‘Isā addressed to the Sayyida is preserved, in which he justifies towards her his actions on the occasion of a military riot (Hilāl aṣ-Ṣābī, Tuṥfat al-umarā' fī ta'rīkh al-wuzarā’ (ed. Amedroz, under the title The historical remains etc., cited in n. 7) p. 283, 1.19— p. 285,1. 20)Google Scholar.
page 92 note 9 Mas'ūdī, , At-Tanbīh, p. 377, 1. 16Google Scholar; 'Arīb, op. cit., p. 24,11. 9–10; Miskawayhi, op. cit., p. 241,1. 19— p. 242,1. 3 (son of al-Muqtadir is considered unsuitable for being successor because of influence of the Sayyida. The same story in al-'Ibrī, Ibn, Ta'rīkh mukhtaṣṣar ad-duwal, ed. Pococke, , Oxford, 1693, p. 293, 11. 8–10)Google Scholar; Ibn al-Athīr, op. cit., VIII, p. 180, 1. 7; Taghrī Birdī, op. cit., III, p. 234, 1. 8.
page 93 note 1 Taghri Birdī, op. cit., III, p. 239,1. 7.
page 93 note 2 A hord of 600,000 Dīāar was confiscated in her mausoleum at Ruṣāfa in 317 H. (Miskawayhi, op. cit., p. 193, 11. 20–1; Ibn al-Athīr, op. cit., VIII, p. 149, 11. 7–8, Taghrī Birdī, op. cit., III, p. 223, 1. 10). She had a yearly income of 1,000,000 Dīnār (Ibid., III, p. 239, 11. 6–7).
page 93 note 3 For alms, welfare of pilgrims, medical assistance, restoration of watertanks (Ibn al-Jauzī, op. cit., VI, p. 253,11. 2–4); for defence against Qarmatians in the emergency situation of 315 H. (Miskawayhi, op. cit., p. 181,11.2–7); when tortured by al-Qāhir in vain for extracting money she apparently spoke the truth in asseverating that she had spent all in deeds for pious foundations in Mekka and Medīna, for the defence and the poor (Ibn al-Athīr, op. cit., VIII, p. 182,11. 4–6).
page 93 note 4 Al-Qiftī, , Ikhbār al-‘ulamā' bi-akhbār al-ḥukamā’ (Cairo, 1326) p. 133, 11. 8–11Google Scholar; Uṣaybi'a, Ibn Abī, ‘Uyūn al-anbā' fī ṭabaqāt al-aṭibbā (Cairo, 1299 H./a.d. 1882) I, p. 221, 11.12–5Google Scholar; Ibn al-Jauzī, op. cit., VI, p. 146, 11.12–5 (These three authors mention also that Sinān ibn Thābit opened a Bimāristān of al-Muqtadir in the same year, which, however, must have been more modest than that of his mother, since the monthly expenses were only 200 Dīnārs as against 600 Dīnārs for the Bīmāristān as-Sayyida); Taghrī Birdī, op. cit., III, p. 193, 11. 13–4; Issa, Ahmed, Histoire des Bimaristans (hopitaux) a l'epoque islamique) (Le Caire, 1928) p. 83Google Scholar mentions the Bīmāristān as-Sayyida, but wrongly identifies her with the mother of Majd ad-Dawla.
page 93 note 5 Muqaddasī, , Aḥsan at-taqāsim fī ma'rifat al-aqālim (ed. de Goeje, , Leyden, 1906), p. 169, 11. 10–2Google Scholar; Yāqūt, , Mu'jam al-buldān (ed. Wüstenfeld, , Leipzig, 1866/1873) IV, p. 597, 11. 12–3Google Scholar.
page 93 note 6 Already in existence in 317 H., see n. 2 above.
page 93 note 7 Corp. Inscr. Arab. II, Jérusalem. II, pp. 7–9.
page 94 note 1 A. Grohmann defines it as an early stage of “floriated” Kufic, a style which first appeared and mainly developed in Egypt since the middle of the third century H. (“The origin and early development of floriated Kufic”, Ars Orientalis, II (1957), pp. 208–9 and fig. 28)Google Scholar.
page 84 note 2 Loc. cit., p. 191.