Votre recherche

Oman, as it has been cut off from its neighbours and from western influence unto recent years, seems the right country for studying so-called traditional Islam. But, as soon as it is approached from the ethnographic and social historical point of view, the notion of tradition appears more complex than that can be extracted from religious texts and authorities. It is replaced by that of traditions where political and religious powers interfere. Although many ethnic groups and various religious identities coexist, Oman’s religion is mainly the Ibāḍī Islam marked by an egalitarianism convenient to the “tribe” organization and by the imamate leadership. The social organization and the religious rule were, however, influenced by involvement in maritime trade and dominions in East Africa. Sociological comparisons with Morocco enlight the complex relations which exist and have existed between religion, social organization, economic and political power.

The events of the Turco-Italian War (1911–1912) presented several complex problems for Germany's diplomatic and economic policies in the Near East. First, the War served as a test of strength for the Triple Alliance, because the Wilhelmstrasse (German foreign ministry) had guaranteed to maintain Italian interests in Tripolitania, but the hostilities threatened to spread into Macedonia where the Wilhelmstrasse had guaranteed Austrian interests. If the status quo of the Balkans was disturbed by the War, then an Austro-Russian diplomatic struggle might ensue, thus requiring German support for Austria-Hungary. The Germans were forced to support Italian interests in Tripolitania, while simultaneously preserving Austrian interests in the Balkans. Under these circumstances, could Germany preserve the solidarity of the Triple Alliance against internal dissension?

The author places the text (182-186) in its religious, economic and social context. It concerns rules for more restrained marriage ceremonies. Mīzāb, situated between the oil and gas fields of Hassi R’mel and Hassi Mesaoud, has seen a spectacular economic flourishing. The influx of tourists, of workers from the North, modern communications and other modern developments have a serious impact on the relative isolation of the Mīzāb and on its traditional social structure.

Throughout the nineteenth century, the cities on the southern and eastern shores of the Mediterranean, Tunis, Alexandria, Beirut, Smyrna, and Istanbul among them, experienced an influx of foreign communities which, combined with an increase in the indigenous populations and new urban policies on the part of certain rulers, tended to disrupt customary patterns of urban relationships. Although the scholarship of recent years has provided a new awareness of the network of interrelationships which held together the segments of medieval Islamic urban society, studies on the nineteenth-century changes in those relationships as represented by the policies of Muhammad ῾Alī, Aḥmad Bey, and the Ottoman Tanzimat reformers, have tended to focus more on aspects of state and government than on cities as such. Yet cities, especially capital cities, reflect most intensely periods of social and institutional transition.

Papers from the 6th Seminar for Arabian Studies, held at the Institute of Archaeology, London, 27th-28th September 1972. Clements 1981, 64: this paper concentrates on late Sassanid rule in Oman during the 6th century A.D., when the Arabs evicted Sassanid ruling classes following the arrival of Islam and thus gained real control over the land. The writer examines the social structure during the period of Sassanid rule, and considers the hypothesis that the system of land utilization and irrigation was well established before the Arabs took over. “Maintaining their tribal organizations and bedu attitudes, there is no reason to suppose that the Arabs did anything to expand the prosperity of the land or create new establishments in pre-islamic times any more than they did when they became masters of the land".

Cuperly gives a biography of the author, a list of his works (with additions and corrections to Schacht 1956, 375-398), a general analysis of the Risāla and a description of each chapter, and a translation of extracts, with notes.

Cuperly gives a biography of the author, a list of his works (with additions and corrections to Schacht 1956, 375-398), a general analysis of the Risāla and a description of each chapter, and a translation of extracts, with notes.

P. 525: this short paper is an attempt to draw a profile, to describe some of the features of the ʿUlamā’ class of Zanzibar and East Africa, based on the biographies of seven prominent members of this class who lived in the 19th century. These men show a wide range of interests, from poetry to juridprudence, from commerce to mysticism. Two of them might be described as “radicals”; the others were fairly conventional. In passing I have made a few comments on some significant points: the history of the “old Arabs” in East Africa, the role of the ʿUlamā’ class in the Muslim society of this time and place, the relations of the “learned” to trade and government, the interconnections of the two Muslim sects, Ibāḍīs and Shāfiʿīs, the literary and educational accomplishments of the ʿUlamā’, the participation of some of the ʿUlamā’ in the Qādirī and Shādhilī revivals of the 1880s and 1890s, the extent of Pan-Islamic influence in Zanzibar and East Africa. I would like to suggest a few priorities for further research in this field. The seven scholars who are treated are the Sunnī ʿUlamā’: Muḥyī ‘l-Dīn b. ʿAbdl. al-Qaḥṭānī al-Wā’ilī (c. 1790-1869), Manṣab b. ʿAlī (1863-1927), ʿAlī b. ʿAbdl. b. Nāfiʿ al-Mazrūʿī (1825-1894), ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Amawī (1832-1896), ʿAbdl. b. Muḥ. Bā Kathīr al-Kindī (b. 1864), Aḥm. b. Sumayṭ (1861-1925), and the Ibāḍī scholar ʿAlī b. Khamīs b. Sālim al-Barwānī (1852-1886) (pp. 534-535), who became a Sunnī and was imprisoned for that by Sayyid Barghash. He had studied under the leading Ibāḍī Qāḍīs of Zanzibar in Barghash’s time and before, Yaḥyà b. Khalfān al-Kharūṣī and Muḥ. b. Sul. al-Mundhirī, and a visiting scholar from Oman, Khamīs b. Sālim al-Khaṣībī (Khuṣaybī). Martin cites frequently from Farsy 1944 and 1942. According to Kagabo 1991, 63, Barwānī was a Sunnī and was converted to Ibāḍism by the Ibāḍī sheikh Khamīs b. ʿAlī, and became a Sunnī again.

Mainly based on Jannāwunī: Kitāb al-Waḍʿ fī ‘l-Furūʿ. Pp. 285-290: translation of Jannāwunī, 222-237, chapter 3, on the Ādhān. Furthermore based on the commentary on the Kitāb al-Waḍʿ by Abū Sitta al-Qaṣbī (Abū ʿAbdl. Muḥ. b. ʿUmar b. Abī Sitta al-Qaṣbī al-Nafūsī), who used mainly the Kitāb al-Īḍāḥ of Abū Sākin ʿĀmir al-Shammākhī and Jayṭālī’s Qawāʿid and Qanāṭir.

A study with a translation of the Risāla of the Rustemid Imam Abū ‘l-Yaqẓān (Muḥ.) b. Aflaḥ b. ʿAbd al-Wahhāb in Barrādī’s K. al-Jawāhir, on the creation of the Koran.

A study, with a translation, of Abū ʿAbdl. Muḥ. b. Bakr’s rules of the Ḥalqa, from Darjīnī’s K. Ṭabaqāt al-Mashāyikh (MS in the library of the University of Cracow, f. 47r line 15-f. 51v). A comparison is made with the same text in Barrādī’s K. al-Jawāhir al-Muntaqāt (Cairo 1302/1884-5, 207-218).

La ricostituzione dell’Imamato ibāḍita nell’interno dell’ʿOmān (245); Le fonti per la storia dell’ʿOmān (247); Caratteristiche del paese (250); I principali avvenimenti anteriori alla costituzione dell’Imāmato (252); Come sorse l’Imāmato (253); L’antico Imāmato elettivo, 135-281/752-894, capitale Nezwà (256); Il periodo degli Imām sporadici (263); I Yaʿrubidi, 1034-1154/1624-1741, capitale er-Rostāq, Yabrīn, Nezwà ecc. (273); Gli Āl Bū Saʿīd o Āl Saʿīd, 1154/1741 ad oggi (278).

A study of the chains of transmitters of the Ibāḍī doctrine from: - ʿAbdl. b. Yaḥyà al-Bārūnī: Risālat Sullam al-ʿĀmma wa’l-Mubtadi’īn, pp. 31-41. The Risāla was printed as an appendix to Sul. b. ʿAbdl. al-Bārūnī’s al-Azhār al-Riyādiyya, Cairo 1304/1886-7 (sic); - Muḥ. b. Zakariyyā’ b. Mūsà al-Bārūnī al-Qalʿawī: Nisbat Dīn al-Muslimīn, in appendix to Shammākhī: Siyar, 578-583, lith. Cairo 1301/1883-4. The chains, through a line of North-African transmitters, go back to ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Rustam or Abū ‘l-Zājir Ism. b. Darrār al-Ghadāmasī, two of the five Ḥamalat al-ʿIlm who brought the Ibāḍī doctrine to North Africa, after having acquired it in Basra from Abū ʿUbayda Muslim b. Abī Karīma al-Tamīmī (1st half 2nd/8th c.). From Abū ʿUbayda Muslim al-Baṣrī some chains descend, through Abū ‘l-Shaʿthā’ Jābir b. Zayd al-Azdī [al-ʿUmānī al-Yaḥmadī al-Jawfī al-Baṣrī], ʿAbdl. b. ʿAbbās and ʿĀ’isha, to the Prophet. ʿAbdl. al-Bārūnī gives four chains of transmitters. The first begins at the end of the 6th/12th century with Maqrīn b. Muḥ. al-Bughṭūrī to end with Abū Hārūn Mūsà b. Yūnus al-Jalālamī. Then the chain bifurcates in one chain that goes back to ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Rustam and another that goes back to Abū ‘l-Zājir Ism. b. Darrār al-Ghadāmasī. The second chain begins in the 8th/14th century with Abū Sākin ʿĀmir b. ʿAlī al-Shammākhī going back to Abū Hārūn al-Jalālamī. Then the chain continues with the same names as the second chain mentioned above. In essence the names of the transmittters from the eighth to the sixth century A.H. are given. The third chain begins at the end of the 10th century with Muḥ. b. Zak. al-Bārūnī al-Qalʿawī and goes back to Abū Sākin ʿĀmir al-Shammākhī. So this chain adds the names of the transmitters between the eighth and the tenth century A.H. The fourth chain of transmitters begins also at the end of the 10th/16th or the beginning of the 11th/17th century, but gives a different chain of transmitters. It begins with Abū Mahdī ʿĪsà b. Ism. and goes back to the Rustamid ʿAbd al-Wahhāb, son of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. Qalʿawī gives the chains he acquired from Abū Sul. Dāwud b. Ibr. al-Tilātī al-Jarbī. These chains consist of five or six names, and they meet together at the name of ʿAbdl. b. ʿAbd al-Wāḥid al-Shammākhī, disciple of a disciple of Abū Sākin ʿĀmir al-Shammākhī. Then they follow the names in one of ʿAbdl. al-Bārūnī’s chains, especially the second one. Qalʿawī also gives his own chain of transmitters. In 961/1554 he travelled to the Jabal Banī Muṣʿab, where he learned the doctrine from Abū Mahdī ʿĪsà b. Ism. Beginning with this sheikh, the chain bifurcates from Abū ʿAbdl. Muḥ. b. Bakr onwards, to meet together, via the Rustamid ʿAbd al-Raḥmān and the transmitter Abū ‘l-Zājir al-Ghadāmasī, in the famous Abū ʿUbayda. The first part of the chain and the beginnings of the bifurcations are identical to the fourth chain of ʿAbdl. al-Bārūnī. The references added to certain names in the detailed lists of transmitters (127-139) are mainly to Shammākhī: Siyar; Basset 1899; Lewicki 1934b, 74. Also: Masqueray 1878a; Motylinski 1885a, 1899, 1908a, etc.