The 13th Warrior (was: The Turkic Languages in a Nutshell)
Yusuf B Gursey
Darkstar wrote:
> I'm not sure if you're interested, but I should leave these links
> anyway:
>
> A general ethnological and historical description of the Turkic
> languages and peoples with many illustrations:
> http://turkic-languages.scienceontheweb.net/
concerning Volga Bulgaria the website writes:
<<
It was visited in 922 by an Arab writer and diplomat Ibn-Fadlan whose
famous account, btw, inspired a plot for the "The 13th Warrior" movie
starring Antonio Banderas.
>>
actually the film based on the novel "Eaters of the Dead" (the title
of the book may also have been changed in its second edition) by Michael
Crichton. This in turn is inspired by Ibn Fadlan's account and Beowulf.
The first part of the book is pure Ibn Fadlan with only a few
embellishments and abridgements. but unlike what actually happened the
book and movie have Ibn Fadlan wisked away by the Volga Rus and he
never reaches Volga Bulgaria. the second half of the book and movie
is a take on Beowulf, with a monstrous being common to both. the
movie has very little from the Ibn Fadlan account, except for the
first encounter with the Rus, which is rendered accurately. the movie
has anochronisms like an encounter with Tatars. unlike the expert
on languages that Ibn Fadlan is depicted inthe movie, in reality he
seems to have relied on translators.
the connection between Beowulf and Ibn Fadlan's account seems to have
been inspired by the article "Ibn Fadlan's Account of the Rus with
Some Commentary and Some Allusions to BEowulf" by H. M. Smyser
(Connecticut College); published in the book "Franciplecus - Medieval and
Linguistic Studies in Honor of Francis Peabody Magoun, Jr."
Darkstar
There are some allusions in the real account to magic events, such as
strange clouds in the sky that the real Ibn-Fadlan believed to be
something supernatural or the "giant man" that lived with the
Bulgarians... But Hollywood is Hollywood, there's nothing to discuss
or take seriously.
Yusuf B Gursey
aurora borealis, of course.
> something supernatural or the "giant man" that lived with the
the "giant man" in Ibn Fadlan is tied to the monster in Beowulf,
which Chrichton believes, or presents as, a Neandertal survival.
a scholarly commentary on Ibn Fadlan puts the "giant man" in the
context of coaxing by the Bulghars of Ibn Fadlan to authorise
the granting of funds from the Caliph for release to the Bulghars
for military purposes, i.e. to convince him that the Bulghar muslims
were at risk and needed the money to defend themsleves.
> Bulgarians... But Hollywood is Hollywood, there's nothing to discuss
you mean the Bulghars.
> or take seriously
and BTW it's "a plot" but "the plot"
Yusuf B Gursey
: On Sep 21, 11:00 am, Darkstar <darkstar...@front.ru> wrote:
: aurora borealis, of course.
: you mean the Bulghars.
:> or take seriously
it's *NOT* "a plot but "the plot".
Yusuf B Gursey
On Oct 10, 11:06 pm, Darkstar <darkstar...@front.ru> wrote:
> On 29 сен, 08:35, Yusuf B Gursey <y...@theworld.com> wrote:
>
> On 29 сен, 08:35, Yusuf B Gursey <y...@theworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > (repost in this thread)
> There are no aurora borealis in Tatarstan. Normally, it's only seen
> north of the Polar Circle (without consulting wiki).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_Borealis
<<
Auroras seen near the magnetic pole may be high overhead, but
from further away, they illuminate the northern horizon as a
greenish glow or sometimes a faint red, as if the sun were rising
from an unusual direction. ... Auroras can be spotted throughout
the world. It is most visible closer to the poles due to the
longer periods of darkness and the magnetic field.
>>
Ibn Fadlan says that he "saw the horizon turn intensely red".
also see:
Middle Eastern Literatures, Vol. 7, No. 1, January 2004
Travelling Autopsies: Ibn Fadla:n and the Bulgha:r
JAMES E. MONTGOMERY
<<
...
Ibn Fadla:n and the Spectral Armies
Does Ibn Fadla:n say that he actually saw these armies? His
language is ambiguous. He uses the roots m-th-l (amtha:l) and
sh-b-h (ashba:h, tushbihu l-na:s) to describe the demon soldiers,
and refers to his own process of perception in terms of tabayyana
(to discern something clearly) and takhayyala (to process
information in an act of takhyi:l). The cumulative effect of
such language is to draw attention to the cerebral mechanisms
of perception. He then proceeds to employ the roots r-'-y (ar)
and n-Z-r (nanZur), standard terms for sight. Thus, by highlighting
the very process of perception, Ibn Fadla:n may here anticipate
Ibn Si:na:’s poetics of amazement in his endeavour to question
(certainly at least to analyse) the verity of what he saw rather
than the veracity of his experience.65
{ m-th-l and sh-b-h refer to resembling; Montgomery then goes on
an analysis to see if and how much Ibn Fadlan's description was
influenced by earlier texts he may have had access to}
...
There are, then, no textual antecedents which would have
covered all the aspects of the phenomenon which Ibn Fadla:n
observed. It is generally thought, and rightly so in my opinion,
that Ibn Fadla:n describes a display of the Northern Lights.80
The Aurora Borealis is caused by interaction between the earth’s
magnetic field and the solar wind, composed of solar particles
blown away from the sun. The resultant electrical energy sends
charged particles into the earth’s atmosphere. During periods of
intense activity, the Aurora assumes a dark-red colour (Aristotle’s
haimato:de: khro:mata?) and can be seen well below the auroral
oval. It is theoretically possible, for example, to see the
Northern Lights for an average of 10 days during the year in London,
New York and Boston, although the light pollution of these cities
generally makes observation impossible: there is approximately
a 20–40% chance of witnessing this phenomenon in Bulgha:r territory,
except during that period of auroral quiescence known as the Maunder
minimum.81 Auroral activity is constant throughout the year, although
more intense at some times of the year rather than others (especially
during the equinox in March and late September–October), and as such
it may corroborate the proposed restoration of Ibn Fadla:n’s text,
according to which the Bulgha:r had witnessed such a sight for as
long as they could remember (although I suspect the King to be
guilty of exaggeration).82
82. Both Hunayn and Ibn al-Bitri:q’s texts are accurate in
connecting celestial redness with clear skies, as the Aurora
Borealis cannot be observed if the sky is overcast. The best
hour of the day to observe the Lights is local, or astronomical,
and not horological midnight. That Ibn Fadla:n says he saw the
display ‘an hour before sunset’ is unusual, and would argue
against the phenomenon being auroral: the redness of the sky
is a common accompaniment in northern climes to the sunset,
of course.
>>
{Hunayn and Ibn al-Bitri:q are translators of Aristotle into
arabic}
Montgomery notes similar beliefs among northern peoples
in associating auroras with battles among spectral
armies.
an abridged version of that paper is found in:
Spectral Armies, Snakes, and Giants from Gog and Magog:
Ibn Fadlan as Eyewitness among the Volga Bulgars
JAMES MONTGOMERY
The Medieval History Journal, Vol. 9, No. 1, 63-87 (2006)
> Actually, I've already met an American who thought that the aurora
> borealis is seen at the latitude of Moscow.
>
> Apparently, it was a thunderstorm with peculiar cumulonimbuses.
scholarly criticism accepts it as aurora borealis. it even occurs
in the latitude of New York City (I saw it in nearby Long Island,
away from the city lights) if there is enough solar activity.
so at a time of high solar activity, and good visibility it is
not impossible. see above. the problem of "an hour before sunset"
is solved by the interpretation "before the sunset prayer, before
the light has completley disapeared" (J. McKeithen). or maybe, as I
guess, he was combining two different phenomena. thunderstorms
are mentioned seperately:
from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation, a doctoral
thesis)
<<
I have never encountered more thunderbolts than in their country.
... When a thunderbolt falls on a house, ... they do not go near it,
saying: "This house is the object [divine] wrath. 323
323 ... A similar atitude with respect to lightning is described as
prevelant among the Mongols by medieval travelers to these regions
see Togan ...
>>
>
> > > something supernatural or the "giant man" that lived with the
>
> > the "giant man" in Ibn Fadlan is tied to the monster in Beowulf,
> > which Chrichton believes, or presents as, a Neandertal survival.
>
> Probably, just a tall strongman...
yes. Ibn Fadlan is told he is from the men of "Gog and Magog."
>
> > a scholarly commentary on Ibn Fadlan puts the "giant man" in the
> > context of coaxing by the Bulghars of Ibn Fadlan to authorise
> > the granting of funds from the Caliph for release to the Bulghars
> > for military purposes, i.e. to convince him that the Bulghar muslims
> > were at risk and needed the money to defend themsleves.
I was refering to Montgomerry.
<<
The other two marvels are, I believe, instances of psychological
warfare, intended to coerce information about the whereabouts of
the funds designated for the construction of the fortress, a
matter of no little concern to the Bulgha:r King. The giant’s
tale is designed to inspire fear of the apocalypse in the minds of
Ibn Fadla:n and the other Muslims (the King has already shown
himself in a contretemps with our author to be an opponent skilled
in Islamic jurisprudence), whereas I see in the strangled Sindi: a
warning to Ibn Fadla:n and the Embassy of their likely fate,
should they refuse to comply with the King.
>>
>
> What surprised me most that nowhere in the story he makes any
> references that he's among the Volga Bulgars, neither are there any
he calls them the Saqa:liba(t) , applied at that time not just to
slavs but the people of present day Russia in general
al-S.AK.A:LIBA, sing. s.ak.labi:, s.ik.labi:, the designation
in mediaeval Islamic sources for the Slavs and other fair-haired,
ruddy-complexioned peoples of Northern Europe (see A.Z. Velidi
Togan, Die Schwerter der Germanen, 19-38).
Extract from the Encyclopaedia of Islam CD-ROM Edition v. 1.0
© 1999
Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
{Enc. of Islam II al-Sakaliba by P. Guichard, Mohamed Meouak}
that they were among the Bulghars (in contrat to the more
general term Saqa:liba(t) ) is evident in the passage where
the King adopts a muslim name (that of the first name of
the Caliph, Ja`far), the vague patronymic Abdullah
("servant of God"), and the title of Ami:r:
{*kh*utba(t) means the Muslim Friday Sermon, in the begining
of which the name of the ruler is mentioned}
from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
<<
The khuTbah used to be read prior to my arrival in the
following manner: "O God, prosper King YilTawa:r, King
of the Bulghars." I said to him him: Verily God is the
King, and no one but He -- Majesty and Might be His --
should be called by this name from the pulpit (minbar).
Behold your master, the Commander of the Faithful. He has
been content to have himself refered from the pulpits in
the East and the West in the following manner: "O God,
prosper your servant and your vicar (khali:fataka).
Ja`far the Ima:m, al-Muqtadir bi Alla:h, the Commander
of the Faithful" ... He then said to me: "How should
the khuTbah be read for me?" I replied: "In your name
and the name of your father." He said "My father was
an unbeliever, and I do not like to mention his name
his name on the pulpit (minbar). And I too do not like
to have my name mentioned, because he who gave me my
name was an unbeliever. ... He said then I have decided
that my name is to be Ja`far, and that of my father
`Abd Alla:h. ...
From then on the khuTbah was read to him "O God,
peosper your servant Ja`far ibn `Abd Alla:h, Ami:r
of the Bulghars, the Client of the Commander of the
Faithful."
>>
so the Bulghars are mentioned by their own name in the
text. there is also corroboration of the name of the Bulghar
King by another source.
> descriptions of cities that were a must for the Bulgar civilization.
The Volga Bulghars had just embraced Islam, and were just in
the proccess of throwing off the Khazar yoke. it would take them
some time to reach the peak of their civilization. they still
made use of tents and the retinue was housed intents. Ibn Fadlan
uses the word qiba:b for "tents" which is the plural of qubba(t)
"dome" (I checked the original and indeed the word translated as
"tent" is qubba(t)), so I guess they were yurts. They didn't
have a fort, and had asked the Caliph through Ibn FAdlan's embassy
to build one. neither does it seem they had a decent mosque, as
is apparent from the text of Ibn Fadlan which I will quote
later. the state was not very centralized either, as other
subordinate kings are mentioned by Ibn Fadlan.
from Enc. of Islam II "Bulghar":
<<
At the time of his visit Ibn FaDla:n did not notice any towns
or villages, as the Bulgha:rs led a nomadic life. It seems that
the building of the fortress, which was one of the principal
tasks of the Baghda:di: embassy, laid the foundation of the
future town of Bulgha:r. The non-existence of towns in Bulgha:r
prior to the embassy is confirmed on the one hand by the silence
of the Ibn Rusta group of sources about these, and on the other
hand by the use of the name Bulgha:r: this name signifies to
Ibn Rusta and Ibn FaDla:n always the country or the people,
never the town. Al-ISTakhri: is the first author who mentions
the existence of the towns Bulgha:r and Suwa:r, with wooden
buildings and mosques and 10,000 inhabitants.
...
Economy and trade:
Until the first half of the 10th century the Bulgha:rs
led a nomadic life, like other Turkic peoples in the
Russian steppe, and cattle-breeding was their chief
occupation and the foundation of their economy. This is
clearly shown in the earlier sources, for according to
Ibn Rusta the taxes were paid in horses. Ibn FaDla:n
already found the society in a state of change from
nomadism to settled life. Many customs of the former
way of life were then still surviving, i.e., no permanent
capital served as the seat of the ruler, who wandered from
one place to another and lived in a large tent. Al-ISTakhri:
mentions that the inhabitants spent the winter in wooden
houses and the summer in tents. In the latter part of this
same century Bulgha:r was already a flourishing agricultural
and trading centre.
>>
Extract from the Encyclopaedia of Islam CD-ROM Edition v. 1.0
© 1999
Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
Enc. of Islam II "Bulghar" by I. Hrbek
from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
<<
He pitched tents (qiba:b) for us and we settled in them.
...
All of them live in tents (qiba:b),[318] but the tent of the
king is extremely large, holding up to a thousand persons and
more. [319] It is spread by with Armenian carpets, and in the
center of it the king has a throne covered with Greek brocade.
318. The semi-nomadic state of the Bulghars was not, according
to Togan merely a passing stage from nomadism but a standard
and enduring way of life. ...
319. This is either a great yurt made of felt or a large tent
made of linen according to Togan (...), who cites other travelers'
description of similarly large tents among the Turks and Mongols.
> Neither does he mention any language differences between Bashkir and
he had two interpreters, ba:ris aS-Saqlabiyy (a Bulghar) and teki:n
at-turkiyy (a Turk). There was a Khazar, `abdulla:h al-xazariyy
(probably a Khazar muslim turncoat) was also an envoy, and there
was a Su:san ar-Rassi of slave origin in the retinue. They also
picked up local guides and local muslims that helped them. so there
you have a clue that the language of the Bulghars and that of the
Turks was different. The Bulghar king also had his own intepreter.
Ibn Fadlan does not talk about languages, except here and there he
gives the names of cultural items. His main mission was diplomatic
and religious, to teach them the finer points of Islamic Law and
establish an alliance with the Bulghar state and the Caliphate.
he was interested in mores and social organization, particular
that of the Bulghars, and also of others. he may also have in mind
how compatible these would be with Islam and in the case of
non-muslims, their possible islamization.
from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
<<
When the letter of Almish ibn Shilki: YilTawa:r, 4 the King of
the S.aqa:libah, reached the Commander of the Faithful, al-Muqtadir,
in which he asked him to send someone who would instruct him in
religion, acquaint him with the laws of Islam, build a mosque for
him, and raise a pulpit (minbar) for him from which he would
mention his name 5 in his city, and throughout the kingdom, and
asked him to build a fortress against those kings who are at
odds with him, his request was acceded to.
The ambassador accredited to him (lahu) was Nadhi:r al-Harami:.
9 I was charged with the task of the reading the letter to the
King, delivering that which had been sent to him as gifts, and
supervising the work of jurisconsults (fuqaha:') and the religious
instructors. ...
The envoy to al-Muqtadir from the Lord of the Saqa:libah (Sa:Hib
aS-Saqa:libah) was a man called `AbdAlla:h ibn Ba:shtu: al-Khazari:,
and the emissary on behalf of the Sovereign (sulTa:n) was Su:san
ar-Rasi:, client of Nadhi:r al-Harami:, Teki:n at-Turki:, and
Ba:ris aS-Saqlabi: accompanied him, while I too was with them,
as I have already mentioned. ...
4 ... The name of the King of the Bulghars is recorded by
Ibn Rustah as "Almush." Yilt.awa:r represents the Bulghar
pronounciation of the Turkic title elteber which indicates
a subordinate tribal ruler. The title signifies here that
the Bulghar King is a vassal of the Khazar Kha:qa:n. ...
5 ... The mention of the ruler's name in the khut.bah
(sermon or exhortation) which accompanies the Friday
congregational prayer, is tantamount to recognition
of his sovereignity. ...
9 ... This person seems to be identical to the Nadhi:r
al-H.arami: who was an eunuch and important personage
in the court of al-Muqtadir. ...
>>
su:san is restored, correctly in other places as sawsan ;
yes it means "lily" and is cognate wth the hebrew original
of the girls name "Susan"; such names were given to slaves,
so he was probably a former slave as McKeithen notes. for
Su:san, Dahha:n in the critical arabic edition says it is
ar-Ru:si: in the Mashhad manuscript, while the river ar-Ras
is identified with the Volga, so he seems to be a man
originally from the region they are going to. Dahha:n's arabic
has aS-Saqla:bi: instead of aS-Saqlabi: for ba:ris, which is
turkic for "panther", normally as bars , it may be just an
arabization, but NB the slavicized Danube Bulghar name
Boris, the well known slavic name because of the adoption
of King Boris of Christianty and slavicization.
> Chuvash apparently using the same interpreters. It made me doubt that
he had one intepreter for Turkic (teki:n at-turki:) and another for
Volga Bulghar (ba:ris aS-Saqlabi:).
> he visited them at all. I wondered if it could be a nomadic Tatar/
> Bashkir tribe that he visited.
no, it was definitley an Islamic state that had embraced Islam
recently, and one can reconstruct the location as well, because
Ibn-Fadlan tells the rivers and lands he crossed to get there.
the Tatars are placed in Ötüken (in present day Mongolia) a
century later by Mahmud al-Kashgari.
as for the Bashkirs, Ibn Fadlan visited them, and they were
pagans.
<<
Ibn Fadlan, who made a personal survey of the country, religion,
and customs of the Bashkurts in 310/922 says that he came on their
tents after crossing the rivers Kinal and Sokh, i.e., on approaching
the borders of the Bulgars. He also states that they were all pagans
(i.e., Shamanists).
>>
Extract from the Encyclopaedia of Islam CD-ROM Edition v. 1.0
© 1999
Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
{Enc. of Islam II BASHDJIRT (Bashkurt)}
also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashkirs#History
<<
The name Bashkir is recorded for the first time at the
beginning of the 10th century in the writings of the Arab
writer ibn Fadlan who, in describing his travels among the
Volga Bulgarians, mentions the Bashkirs as a warlike and
idolatrous race. According to ibn Fadlan, the Bashkirs
worshiped phallic idols. At that time, Bashkirs lived
as nomadic cattle breeders. Until the 13th century they
occupied the territories between the Volga and Kama Rivers
and the Urals.
>>
BTW he describes them as "Turks".
from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
<<
We halted in the country of a tribe if Turks called Bashkirs
(al-Ba:shghird), and we were extremely wary of them. For they
are the most wicked of the Turks, the dirtiest (aqdharuhum)
and the most audacious in the commission of murder. ...
{story about a muslim among them who ate the lice on his
clothing}
Each of them sculpts a piece of wood the size of a phallus
and hangs it on himself. If he is about to undertake a trip
or to meet an enemy, he kisses it and prostrates himself before
it saying: "O my Lord, do unto me such and such." ...
Among them are those who maintain that they have twelve lords:
a lord for Winter; a lord for Summer; a lord for the rain; a lord
for the wind; a lord for the trees; a lord for men; a lord for
horses; a lord for water; a lord for the night; a lord for the
day; a lord for death; and a lord for the earth. The lord who is
in Heaven is the greatest of them all, although he is in complete
agreement with the others. Each one approves of what his partner
does. ...
We saw among them who worship snakes, a group who worship fish
and a group who worship cranes. ...
>>
>
>
>
> > > Bulgarians... But Hollywood is Hollywood, there's nothing to discuss
>
> > you mean the Bulghars.
>
> > > or take seriously
>
> > and BTW it's "a plot" but "the plot"
this part has been corrected. good.
on an unrelated note Wikipedia says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Fadlan
<<
The embassy's objective was to have the king of the Bolğars
pay homage to Caliph al-Muqtadir and, in return, to give the
king money to pay for the construction of a fortress. Although
they reached Bolğar, the mission failed because they were unable
to collect the money intended for the king. Annoyed at not
receiving the promised sum, the king refused to switch from the
Maliki rite to the Hanafi rite of Baghdad.
>>
I think Wikipedia got it wrong. concerning debate on the reading of
a ritual formula twice or not, which gives a clue to the sects
in question. J. McKeithen says in footenote #265
<<
His mu'adhdhin used to double the iqa:mah 265 when he performed
the call to prayer (adha:n). So I said to the King: "Your master,
the Commander of the Faithful, recites the formulas of the iqa:mah
only once in his abode." ...
265 The adha:n is the Muslim call to prayer, usually performed from
a minaret, which announces the time for the prayer, is at hand. The
iqa:mah is performed inside the mosque after the faithful have
assembled for prayer, immediately before the prayer begins. The
formuals recited in the iqa:mah are teh same as those of the adha:n
except for the phrase qad qa:mat aS-Sala:h, "the prayer has begun,"
which occurs in the iqa:mah. There is also a difference that with
the school of the Ima:m ash-Sha:fi`i:, i.e. teh legal school which
was followed by the Abbasid Caliph at the time, the formulas are
pronounced two times in the adha:n and only once in the iqa:mah.
In the school of Abu: Hani:fah, i.e. that followed by the Bulghar
King and the Samanid Ami:r, the formulas are recited the same
number of times in both the adha:n and the iqa:mah. See the
detailed study made of this question by Canard (Relation, p. 92,
n. 100) and Juynboll, "Iqama," EI.
>>
Malikis are dominant in N. Africa (excl. Egypt), most Asian
muslims are Hanafis (followers of Abu Hani:fah's school).
the Seljuks and Ottomans were Hanafi's. most Turkic muslims
are Hanafis, incl. Turks of Turkey. but Azeris are mostly
Shia, and there is a significant heterodox Shia element in
Turkey (Alevis). the EU is pressing for recognition by
the Department of Religious Affairs of Turkey to recognize
Alevis. all these Sunni schools (there is also a Hanbali
school) recognize each other as valid.
anyway the Wikipedia article should read: " ... the king
refused to switch from the Hanafi rite to the Shafi`i rite
of Baghdad {at that time}."
BTW Ibn Fadlan (ibn faDla:n) was not an arab by origin as
he declares himself a "client", arabic mawla:, of an arab:
from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
<<
This is the Book (kita:b) 1 of Ah.mad ibn Fad.la:n ibn
al-`Abba:s ibn Ra:shid ibn H.amma:d client (mawla:) of
Muh.ammad ibn Sulayma:n 2, emmissary of al-Muqtadir to
the King of the S.aqa:libah, 3
1 Under the entry "Itil" (Mu`jam I, 112), Ya:qu:t
mentions "the book (kita:b) of Ah.mad Ibn Fad.la:n."
elswhere under the entries "Bulgha:r" ..., Ya:qu:t
refers to the epistle (risa:lah) of Ibn Fad.la:n.
2 Ya:qu:t under the entry "Ba:shgird" (Mu`jam, I, 486),
has Ibn Fad.la:n as "mawla: ami:r al-mu'mini:n thumma
mawla: Muh.ammad ibn Sulayma:n." This version is
accepted by Kovalevskii (Kniga, p. 159, n. 4) as well
as the epithet, "al-Ha:shimi:," which is found among
the comments of the Mashhad ms. (1b and 175a).
Kovalevskii renders this passage: "client of the
Commander of the Faithful and also client of Muh.ammad
ibn Sulayman al-Ha:shimi:." ... {ha:*sh*imi: denotes
from the clan of the Prophet}
3 S.aqa:libah (sing. saqlab) refers here to the Volga
Bulgars ...
>>
on mawla: see:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O101-Mawla.html
<<
Mawla
The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions | 1997 | JOHN BOWKER
|
© The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions 1997,
originally published by Oxford University Press 1997.
Mawla (Arab.). In early Islam, a ‘client’ or protected person,
who was a convert to Islam and by this procedure was integrated
into the existing Arab tribal and family system. Mawla also means
‘master’, and al-Mawla is a term for God.
>>
it's the first meaning that is used here.
however, he was considered an arab in the eyes of the Bulghar
King:
from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
<<
He told the interpreter: "Tell him: 'I do not know these others,
I only know you, for these are a non-Arab people. 262
262 This does not mean that Ibn Fad.la:n was a true Arab in
the ethnic sense of the word, but merely that he conformed
sufficiently to the Bulghar notion of one so as to be
considered an Arab by the Bulghar King.
>>
On Ibn Fadlan:
<<
Ibn Fad.la:n , in full Aḥmad b. Fad.la:n b. al-`Abba:s
b. Ra:shid b. H.amma:d , Arabic writer of whose life
nothing is known and who was the author of an account
(incorrectly referred to as Risa:la in Ya:k.u:t, Kita:b
in the title of the work itself) of the embassy sent by
the caliph al-Muk.tadir to the king of the Bulgha:rs of
the Volga [see bulgha:r]. Ibn Fad.la:n was a client of
Muh.ammad b. Sulayma:n, who seems to have been the same
person as the Muh.ammad b. Sulaymān, the ka:tib al-djaysh,
who conquered Egypt from the T.u:lu:nids in 292/904.
He was probably not an Arab by birth.
The embassy in which he took part was led by the eunuch
Su:san al-Rassi:, a client of Nadhi:r al-H.arami: ... .
Ibn Fad.la:n's particular task was to read out the letter
from the caliph to the king, to present gifts to him and
to his entourage and to supervise the jurists and teachers
whom the caliph had sent at the king's request to teach the
Bulgha:rs the laws of Islam. ...
>>
{ka:tib al-jay*sh* litteraly means "secretary (or scribe)
of the army"; actually he was a type of general}
{Enc. of Islam II, "Ibn Fadlan" by M. Canard}
Yusuf B Gursey
On Nov 6, 12:31 pm, Darkstar <darkstar...@front.ru> wrote:
> The river was called the Ra, ASFAIK. Ar-Rusi is obviously the Rus
it was known as ar-Ras in arabic sources and Ros' (see a
passage quoted below) in christian sources. perhaps Russian
sources have Ra. ru:s is collective or plural in arabic,
ru:si: (masc.) singular. the ar- part is teh arabic definite
article al- with the /l/ assimilated to the following
consonant.
> (either Kievan Russians or the Swedes).
a century earlier than Ibn Fadlan the Rus were Scandinavians
(Eastern Swedes). a century later they were Slavs. so the
conclusion of these articles is that they were in a process
of transition during c. 921. Russian scholars emphasize the
slavic character; Western sources, the Scandinavian one.
see:
IBN FADLAN AND THE RUSIYYAH by James E. Montgomery
in Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 3 (2000)
avialable in
http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/montgo1.pdf
and also:
http://glasscock.tamu.edu/agora/summer03/Clouser.PDF
AGORA an Online Undergraduate Journal of the Humanities
http://www.tamu.edu/chr/agora
VOLUME 4, ISSUE 1 (Summer 2003)
Volga Ethnic Relations from Ibn Fadlan's Perspective
Melanie Clouser
from Montgomery:
<<
It is a distinct possibility that the medieval Arabs
themselves were perplexed as to the exact identity
of the Ru:s, confusing, say, two different peoples.
This, indeed, is the conclusion which Mel’nikova
and Petruchkin (as reported by Dolukhanov, 190)
draw, arguing that:
Arab writers who often used the word ‘ar-rus’
never attached to it any ethnic significance.
They viewed the ‘ar-rus’ as warriors and merchants
regardless of their ethnic affiliation. The same
applies to Byzantine sources, which often mentioned
‘people calling themselves the Ross’ (Rhos), who in
reality were groups of Scandinavians accomplishing
various missions.
...
As for the identity of the people called Rus in
this account, there are a number of possibilities:
(i) they are Scandinavians, in particular the eastern
Swedish tribe known by this name: a group of elite
merchant-pirates operating out of Ladoga and Rîrik’s
Hill-Fort;
(ii) they are an autochthonous people, the ethnic
group known as the Rus’ who took their name from the
river Ros’;
(iii) the account represents a conflation of at least
two distinct ethnic groups, of eastern (Slavic) and
northern (Scandinavian) provenance known to the Arabs
indistinguishably as Ru:s and influenced by ideas about
the people known as the Maju:s and the Saqa:libah;
(iv) the people described are a people in the process
of ethnic, social and cultural adaptation and
assimilation—the process whereby the Scandinavian Ru:s
became the Slavic Rus’, having been exposed to the
influence of the Volga Bulgha:rs and the Khazars;
(v) Ibn Fadlan has mistakenly identified a group of
Kievan chieftains on an expedition to extort tribute
from the Slavs (usually in the form of marten furs)
as merchant-warriors on a trading mission, basing his
interpretation on his acquaintance with the Ru:s as
merchants;
(vi) it is erroneous to think of an ethnos with a
distinct identity, as opposed to a multi-ethnic
confederation based on common economic and political
objectives (Golden’s solution, given above), which
confederation would have been subject to a preponderant
Scandinavian influence;
(vii) the textual history of the Kitab, taken in
conjunction with the religious prejudice of the author
(as evinced in the depiction of Ru:s sexual customs and
the Islamicization of Valhalla), is too problematical
to permit any conclusions to be drawn from the work.
I hold that we are here given a picture of a people in
the process of ethnic, social and cultural adaptation,
assimilation and absorption, one typical of “the
chameleon-like character of the Viking abroad, adapting
himself to his surroundings where he saw something he
thought was good; merely imposing his economic and
administrative will on an area” (Wilson, VP, 111)
...
Ibn Fadlan’s traders are the mercantile warrior elite who
placed themselves firmly at the top of the Slavic social
scale, and his picture attests to the fluidity of the
process of cultural and racial intermingling, a fluidity
which many commentators, with an agenda very decidedly
their own, have wished to neglect, curtail or abandon:
The principal historical question is not whether the
Rus were Scandinavians or Slavs, but, rather, how quickly
these Scandinavian Rus became absorbed into Slavic life
and culture.
. . . In 839 the Rus were Swedes; in 1043 the Rus were
Slavs. Sometime between 839 and 1043 two changes took
place: one was the absorption of the Swedish Rus into
the Slavic people among whom they settled, and the
second was the extension of the term ‘Rus’ to apply
to these Slavic peoples by whom the Swedes were
absorbed. (Logan, 203)
Ibn Fadlan’s account sheds valuable light on the
celerity of this process of assimilation and absorption,
which was accomplished in the space of two centuries.
>>
>
> > so he seems to be a man
> > originally from the region they are going to. Dahha:n's arabic
> > has aS-Saqla:bi: instead of aS-Saqlabi: for ba:ris, which is
> > turkic for "panther", normally as bars , it may be just an
> > arabization, but NB the slavicized Danube Bulghar name
> > Boris, the well known slavic name because of the adoption
> > of King Boris of Christianty and slavicization.
>
> > > Chuvash apparently using the same interpreters. It made me doubt that
>
> > he had one intepreter for Turkic (teki:n at-turki:) and another for
> > Volga Bulghar (ba:ris aS-Saqlabi:).
>
> > > he visited them at all. I wondered if it could be a nomadic Tatar/
> > > Bashkir tribe that he visited.
>
> > no, it was definitley an Islamic state that had embraced Islam
> > recently, and one can reconstruct the location as well, because
> > Ibn-Fadlan tells the rivers and lands he crossed to get there.
>
> > the Tatars are placed in Ötüken (in present day Mongolia) a
> > century later by Mahmud al-Kashgari.
>
> > as for the Bashkirs, Ibn Fadlan visited them, and they were
> > pagans.
>
> > <<
>
> > Ibn Fadlan, who made a personal survey of the country, religion,
> > and customs of the Bashkurts in 310/922 says that he came on their
> > tents after crossing the rivers Kinal and Sokh, i.e., on approaching
> > the borders of the Bulgars. He also states that they were all pagans
> > (i.e., Shamanists).
>
> These rivers still exist under the same name, I found them to the
> south of modern-day Tatarstan or to the south of the Kama River. He
> apparently then moved north which must have landed him near the Kama.
> From what I see in your reply, there's (1) no evidence he ever visited
the king takes the title "Amir of the Bulghars", that's quite
specific. moreover, there was a Volga Bulghar king named (or
took the name) Ja`far, as he appears in the patronymic of a
muslim Bulghar coin (i.e. that of his son). there was also a
Volga Bulghar king named Almush, though Enc. of Islam I
suspects that that name may be a later interpolation into
the manuscript and that his original name was something else.
> Bulgars specifically. Nowhere in the story does he mention any
> specific data that point to them; (2) the name of Boris the Slav most
Boris was a slavicized Bulghar.
> likely referred to a Slavic name (since the orginal name of that king
> was "Bogoris") (the Turkic version is contorted, and "barIs" or
such forms are regareded by Menges as corrupt greek versions.
at any rate, those who regard the etymology as coming from
Bogoris, choose a Mongolian etymology, though the word does
not seem to exist in Mongolian, in addition to other difficulties,
acc. to K. Menges.
the etymology of Boris as turkic bars is due to K. Menges in
Byzantion, Revue Internationale des Etudes Byzantines, Bruxelles,
vol. 21, 1951. K. Menges "Altaic Elements in the Proto-Bulgarian
Inscriptions". the relevant pages are 114 - 116.
the Bulgarian form is <BOPHC> in Byzantine Greek script. P is
rho, H is eta (pronounced i: by that time), C is sigma.
{...} are my notes, chiefly for latin only users.
<<
... V. N. Zlatarski assumes the writer of this
ins. to have been a Bulgarian, not a Greek. With
the Greek historians, this name usually has the
declinable forms Βορίσης {Bori'si:s}, Βωρίσης
{Bo:ri'si:s}. Forms like Βώγωρις {Bo:'go:ris},
Βώγαρις {Bo:'garis}, and once Γόβαρις {Gobaris}
are corrupted and erroneous spellings. OChSl.
has Борисъ {Boris}.
If this name is of Altaic origin, it might well
be identical with the designation tiger, panther,
or leopard. Orx., Uj., Kaš. etc., bars. We find
Bars-beg as a proper name in the Orxon-Inss.,
tänrikän qutluγ Bars-Tigin (<< divine [heavenly],
Tiger-Prince >>) in the Ujγur TTIV, and aften also
later. It is known that a Tk. a of the first
syllable may be rendered in Greek and Slavic texts,
as obecause of its labialized nature (4). The Turkic
and Mongolian languages generally do not tolerate,
in either initial or final position, more than one
consonant, while, however, a liquid + stop is
possible in final position. But some Tk. languages
do not tolerate them even in final position, cf.
Qn., Qq. barys, Qb. parys << id. >>.
A question much more difficult to answer is that
of the vowel и {i} in the second syllable of the
Proto-Bulgarian form must have been, in comparision
to other Turkic languages, either y or its reduced
equivalent, ъ , for the Greek script had no symbols,
but the Slavic alphabets were able to render either
sound as ъI {sic. for y} or ъ {for schwa} respectively.
This name, however, does not occur, it seems, during
the clasical period of OChSl, but in later texts only,
so that we may suppose the form to exhibit already
the features of transition into the Middle Bulgarian
period which i.a. involves the dissapearance of the
phoneme ъI {sic. for y} and the coincidence of ъI {y}
and и {i} into one sound, i. Thus a late Old Bulgarian
Борисъ {Boris} may well stand for an older Old-Bulgarian
*Борысъ {Borys}.
It is impossible to see, in BOPHC , Βορίσης
{bori'si:s}, a Turkic böri (Orxon etc.; < bö:ri)
<< wolf >> because the form with -C is the form
of the Altaic casus indefinitus and not that of the
Greek nom. sg. masc., and there is no suffix -š, -s
in Altaic which would have any function here.
Tomaschek's idea to compare it with a Mongolian
boγori << low, small >>, P.-W., RE III, 1044,
is still, though cautiously repeated by Beševlijev,
in Byz. Zttschr. 32, p. 14, n/ 6, and by Fehér,
ibid., 36. p. 58, and by Moravccsik, op. cit., II,
93/4. A Mong. boγori, - even if it would exist -
would be just as bö:ri because of the final -C,
and moreover, there is no Mong. word boγori ; in
Lit.-Mong. boγoni, boγuni is << low >> (KOVALEVSKIJ,
II, 1160/1, Ja. SCHMIDT, p. 110, c.).
4. Cf. MENGES, Igor Tale, s. vv. Kovalije, Koganъ
Olběrgъ etc., Päčänäg names, Byzantion, XVII, 261.
>>
at any rate, the etymology of "Boris" is a side
note to the main discussion. but again, NB Chuvash
has sometimes /u/ for Turkic /a/.
> "barIs," should sound differently in Bulgaric), and there's no
this is early Bulgharic, not modern Chuvash. bars
is presumed in the names of the Huns. there is a
Hunnish King named 'Ωηβάρσιος {O:e:ba'rsios} for
*oy bars , oy meaning "dun colored" (in Kashgari
of horses), *oy bars presumeably meaning "lynx"
(Doerfer). modern Chuvash bars seems to be a
reborrowing from Russian. OTOH Chuvash, together
with Kazan Tatar(which has a Bugharic substratum)
is among the Turkic languages that avoid final
consonant clusters even with liquids, for example,
xĕrĕx for qIrq "40". in the arabic of Ibn Fadlan,
as in Dahhan's the /i/ of ba:ris is not explicitly
indicated by a diacritic, even though diacritics are
occassionally found in it. it is written <bArs> بارس which
would normally force the reading ba:ris . it might be
just an arabization, but perhaps it was written so,
instead of <brs> برس to force the reading of the
additional /i/. this has to do with the more common
voweling patterns of Arabic.
> evidence he was an interpreter for the Bulgar people; (3) there were
it's reasonable to assume that he acted as a guide
and interpreter for Bulghars (in addition to those
at the Bulghar King's court), no other function is
attributed to this Baris. since we know that the
King was a Bulghar (from the khutba he instituted)
and that he also claimed to be King of the Saqa:liba,
and that Baris has a Turkic name with the surname
("nisba") aS-Saqlabi:, it is reasonable to assume
he was a Volga Bulghar.
> some Turkic non-Bulgaric peoples al-Bashghird, since "bash" is Turkic,
the Bashgird are idetified as Turks by Ibn Fadlan
and by Mahmud al-Kashghari a century later. no need
to go into possible etymologies, which are not
certain in this case. but they are not identified as
muslim (except a few), an certaily they are not
identified as having set up a muslim state. the only
state that fits Ibn Fadlan's description is the
Volga Bulghar state, whether he uses the term
"Bulghar" or not (which he does on one occassion).
nor is your criticism that there was no descriptions
of the cities of Volga Bulghar civilization, since
Ibn Fadlan is invloved in a project to build them,
the money fo rbuilding of a fort. they can't be
Bashgirds since they are mentioned as a seperate
and pagan people.
> and "pus"/pil is Bulgaric, these were most likely the modern-day
> Tatars-Bashkirs which are very close (98% in Swadesh-200); (4) He does
> mention the Slavs, the Rus (probably the Swedes), Oghuz and Bashkirs,
Bashkir is just the modern term for Bashgird.
> though.
Yusuf B Gursey
{repost from a different thread}
On Oct 24, 12:54 pm, Yusuf B Gursey <y...@theworld.com> wrote:
> On Oct 10, 11:06 pm, Darkstar <darkstar...@front.ru> wrote:
>
> > On 29 ???, 08:35, Yusuf B Gursey <y...@theworld.com> wrote:
>
> > On 29 ???, 08:35, Yusuf B Gursey <y...@theworld.com> wrote:
>
> > > (repost in this thread)
>
> > > On Sep 21, 11:00 am, Darkstar <darkstar...@front.ru> wrote:
>
> > > > On 9 ���, 23:26, Yusuf B Gursey <y...@TheWorld.com> wrote:
>
Richard Frye has a recent translation which is more directed to the
general public, but has long background articles as well in his book "Ibn
Fadlan's Journey to Russia ...". it also has a few additional sentences
from other quotations of Ibn Fadlan's work, such as from Yaqut.
> > Neither does he mention any language differences between Bashkir and
>
> he had two interpreters, ba:ris aS-Saqlabiyy (a Bulghar) and teki:n
> at-turkiyy (a Turk). There was a Khazar, `abdulla:h al-xazariyy
> (probably a Khazar muslim turncoat) was also an envoy, and there
he was not in the delegation, but had went as an envoy from the Bulghars
to Baghdad.
> was a Su:san ar-Rassi of slave origin in the retinue. They also
> picked up local guides and local muslims that helped them. so there
> you have a clue that the language of the Bulghars and that of the
> Turks was different. The Bulghar king also had his own intepreter.
>
> Ibn Fadlan does not talk about languages, except here and there he
> gives the names of cultural items. His main mission was diplomatic
> and religious, to teach them the finer points of Islamic Law and
> establish an alliance with the Bulghar state and the Caliphate.
> he was interested in mores and social organization, particular
> that of the Bulghars, and also of others. he may also have in mind
> how compatible these would be with Islam and in the case of
> non-muslims, their possible islamization.
there is some ambiguity as to who was the ambassador, as mentioned by
Frye. the text is ambiguous on this point.
>
> from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
it starts out with (J. McKeithen):
<<
Said Ibn Fad.la:n:
>>
>
> <<
> When the letter of Almish ibn Shilki: YilTawa:r, 4 the King of
> the S.aqa:libah, reached the Commander of the Faithful, al-Muqtadir,
> in which he asked him to send someone who would instruct him in
> religion, acquaint him with the laws of Islam, build a mosque for
> him, and raise a pulpit (minbar) for him from which he would
> mention his name 5 in his city, and throughout the kingdom, and
> asked him to build a fortress against those kings who are at
> odds with him, his request was acceded to.
> The ambassador accredited to him (lahu) was Nadhi:r al-Harami:.
safi:r (normally "ambassador") is used. Frye has "intermediary"
Frye adds the sentence:
<<
... Everything that was asked for was granted him.
>>
probably using other sources.
> 9 I was charged with the task of the reading the letter to the
> King, delivering that which had been sent to him as gifts, and
> supervising the work of jurisconsults (fuqaha:') and the religious
> instructors. ...
>
> The envoy to al-Muqtadir from the Lord of the Saqa:libah (Sa:Hib
rasu:l is the original of "envoy" Frye has "ambassador"
> aS-Saqa:libah) was a man called `AbdAlla:h ibn Ba:shtu: al-Khazari:,
> and the emissary on behalf of the Sovereign (sulTa:n) was Su:san
rasu:l is the original. Frye has "ambasssador" and has "sultan" not
capitalized.
> ar-Rasi:, client of Nadhi:r al-Harami:, Teki:n at-Turki:, and
> Ba:ris aS-Saqlabi: accompanied him, while I too was with them,
> as I have already mentioned. ...
>
> 4 ... The name of the King of the Bulghars is recorded by
> Ibn Rustah as "Almush." Yilt.awa:r represents the Bulghar
> pronounciation of the Turkic title elteber which indicates
> a subordinate tribal ruler. The title signifies here that
> the Bulghar King is a vassal of the Khazar Kha:qa:n. ...
>
> 5 ... The mention of the ruler's name in the khut.bah
> (sermon or exhortation) which accompanies the Friday
> congregational prayer, is tantamount to recognition
> of his sovereignity. ...
>
> 9 ... This person seems to be identical to the Nadhi:r
> al-H.arami: who was an eunuch and important personage
> in the court of al-Muqtadir. ...
>
> >>
>
> su:san is restored, correctly in other places as sawsan ;
Frye uses Sausan (sawsan) throughout.
> yes it means "lily" and is cognate wth the hebrew original
> of the girls name "Susan"; such names were given to slaves,
> so he was probably a former slave as McKeithen notes. for
> Su:san, Dahha:n in the critical arabic edition says it is
> ar-Ru:si: in the Mashhad manuscript, while the river ar-Ras
> is identified with the Volga, so he seems to be a man
> originally from the region they are going to. Dahha:n's arabic
> has aS-Saqla:bi: instead of aS-Saqlabi: for ba:ris, which is
> turkic for "panther", normally as bars , it may be just an
> arabization, but NB the slavicized Danube Bulghar name
> Boris, the well known slavic name because of the adoption
> of King Boris of Christianty and slavicization.
>
> > Chuvash apparently using the same interpreters. It made me doubt that
>
> he had one intepreter for Turkic (teki:n at-turki:) and another for
> Volga Bulghar (ba:ris aS-Saqlabi:).
>
> > he visited them at all. I wondered if it could be a nomadic Tatar/
> > Bashkir tribe that he visited.
>
> no, it was definitley an Islamic state that had embraced Islam
> recently, and one can reconstruct the location as well, because
> Ibn-Fadlan tells the rivers and lands he crossed to get there.
>
on p. 97 of Frye there is a summary of the modern identifications of the
river names, they are also present, although scattered, in footenotes of
J. McKeithen.
>
> on an unrelated note Wikipedia says:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Fadlan
>
> <<
> The embassy's objective was to have the king of the Bolgars
> pay homage to Caliph al-Muqtadir and, in return, to give the
> king money to pay for the construction of a fortress. Although
> they reached Bolgar, the mission failed because they were unable
this is confirmed by Frye p. 111 - 112, in his concluding remarks.
<<
Aftermath of the embassy
Was the embassy of Ibn fadlan successful in its objectives? Let us
examine the goals of the mission in order. The call to the Oghuz to accpet
Islam fell on deaf ears, for on the return trip the Oghuz did not accept
the invitation in the letter from Nadhir al-Hurami. Only later did Islam
expand among the Turkic tribes of Central Asia. The Bulghar king did not
recieve the money promised him, and the fortress he wished ot construct
was not built. ...
The members of the expedition also did not gain from their trip. On the
contrary, they remained in the bad graces of the Bulghar king, and they
may have blamed their leader Ibn Fadlan for his emnity toward them. The
latter did not succeed in converting the Bulghars from the Hanafi to the
Shafi'i school of Islamic practices and law. ...
>>
so this confirms that the Bulghars were of the Hanafi school and that at
that time the Caliph was following the Shafi`i school.
Frye continues:
<<
... In the end even the book was forgotten, although excerpts of it were
made by others writing about the north. No manuscripts of his account
survived, which is why the Meshhed manuscript was touted a unique, but it
too was part of a later compilation.
Several years after the voyage, and before the death of Caliph
al-Muqtadir in 932, an embassy from the Bulghars, headed by the son of the
Bulghar king, did arrive in Baghdad on the pilgrimage to Mecca. According
to Mas'udi, the source for this information, only the gifts--especially
the black furs from various animalsof the northlands--aroused any comment.
Not one word of the voyage of Ibn Fadlan, and one may wonder whether he
fell into disfavor after his return. In a sense, the trip of the new
Bulghar king was an answer from the Bulghars to the trip of Ibn Fadlan,
even though Mas'udi does not acknowledge this.
>>
I remember reading a post in sci.lang quite some years ago about a Bulghar
pilgrim making a comment that their language was intermediate between taht
of the Turks and Slavs (or was it the Khazars?). it may have been
connected with this trip. I'll re-post the archived post when I find it.
>
> BTW Ibn Fadlan (ibn faDla:n) was not an arab by origin as
> he declares himself a "client", arabic mawla:, of an arab:
Frye seems to have a different intepretation:
p. 8 - 9:
<<
We do not know the background of Ibn Fadlan except that he was
considered an Arab, learned in the laws and customs of Islam, and a
confidant of the Caliph. ...
The geographical dictionary of Yaqut--as well as a much later writer,
Amin Razi, who compiled a huge encyclopedia of earlier writers with
excerpts of their writings in 1593--give our author's full name as Ahmad
ibn Fadlan ibn al-'Abbas ibn Rashid ibn Hammad. He was the client of
Muhammad ibn Sulaiman, who was a prominent general of the Caliphal court.
In the early days od the Arab conquests, the word "client" (maula) meant
an auxillary to a Bedouin tribe, but by the tenth century it probably
meant that Ibn Fadlan was ana ssistant or chief scribe to Sulaiman, his
patron. The name "Fadlan" probably derives from the Arabic root fadl,
meaning "to excel or surpass."
The use i fthe word "sultan" in the text is puzzling, since no such
ruler existed in Ibn Fadlan's time. A later hand may have interpolated the
word into the original account, after a sultan had come into existance,
but the use of the word here could simply mean the government of the
Caliphate. Likewise it is unclear when Ibn Fadlan mentions "the ambasador"
whether he means Nadhir al-Hurami or Sausan al-Rasi, a client of Nadhir's
who was one of the members of the embassy. Nadhor may well have been
responsible for the embassy as well as foreign affairs and protocol at the
court of the Caliph. In any case, it is clear that Ibn Fadlan finally
became repsonsible for the success of the embassy, as well as being the
person who read the letter of the Caliph to the king of the Bulghars, and
who made a record of the trip.
>>
>
> from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
>
> <<
> This is the Book (kita:b) 1 of Ah.mad ibn Fad.la:n ibn
> al-`Abba:s ibn Ra:shid ibn H.amma:d client (mawla:) of
> Muh.ammad ibn Sulayma:n 2, emmissary of al-Muqtadir to
rasU:l is the original for "emmissary". it means basically "messenger"
> the King of the S.aqa:libah, 3
it countinues (J. McKeithen's critical translation):
<<
... in which he mentions that which he witnessed in the land of the Turks,
the Khazars, the Ru:s, the S.aqa:libah, the Bashkirs (al-Bashghird), and
others, concerning their diversity of beliefs, accounts of their kings,
and their conditions in many of their affairs.
>>
so it is not about language, although clues about language can be gathered
from the account.
>
> 1 Under the entry "Itil" (Mu`jam I, 112), Ya:qu:t
> mentions "the book (kita:b) of Ah.mad Ibn Fad.la:n."
> elswhere under the entries "Bulgha:r" ..., Ya:qu:t
> refers to the epistle (risa:lah) of Ibn Fad.la:n.
>
> 2 Ya:qu:t under the entry "Ba:shgird" (Mu`jam, I, 486),
> has Ibn Fad.la:n as "mawla: ami:r al-mu'mini:n thumma
> mawla: Muh.ammad ibn Sulayma:n." This version is
> accepted by Kovalevskii (Kniga, p. 159, n. 4) as well
> as the epithet, "al-Ha:shimi:," which is found among
> the comments of the Mashhad ms. (1b and 175a).
> Kovalevskii renders this passage: "client of the
> Commander of the Faithful and also client of Muh.ammad
> ibn Sulayman al-Ha:shimi:." ... {ha:*sh*imi: denotes
> from the clan of the Prophet}
>
> 3 S.aqa:libah (sing. saqlab) refers here to the Volga
> Bulgars ...
> >>
>
> on mawla: see:
>
> http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O101-Mawla.html
>
> <<
> Mawla
>
> The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions | 1997 | JOHN BOWKER
> |
> © The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions 1997,
> originally published by Oxford University Press 1997.
>
> Mawla (Arab.). In early Islam, a �client� or protected person,
> who was a convert to Islam and by this procedure was integrated
> into the existing Arab tribal and family system. Mawla also means
> �master�, and al-Mawla is a term for God.
> >>
>
> it's the first meaning that is used here.
OTOH in light of Frye's comment on the change of meaning of mawla: by the
time of Ibn Fadlan, he may have been an Arab after all. judging from his
full patronymic, his family had been a muslim for several generations.
>
> however, he was considered an arab in the eyes of the Bulghar
> King:
>
> from Ibn Fadlan: (J. McKeithen's critical translation)
>
> <<
> He told the interpreter: "Tell him: 'I do not know these others,
> I only know you, for these are a non-Arab people. 262
>
> 262 This does not mean that Ibn Fad.la:n was a true Arab in
> the ethnic sense of the word, but merely that he conformed
> sufficiently to the Bulghar notion of one so as to be
> considered an Arab by the Bulghar King.
> >>
>
> On Ibn Fadlan:
>
> <<
> Ibn Fad.la:n , in full A?mad b. Fad.la:n b. al-`Abba:s
> b. Ra:shid b. H.amma:d , Arabic writer of whose life
> nothing is known and who was the author of an account
> (incorrectly referred to as Risa:la in Ya:k.u:t, Kita:b
> in the title of the work itself) of the embassy sent by
> the caliph al-Muk.tadir to the king of the Bulgha:rs of
> the Volga [see bulgha:r]. Ibn Fad.la:n was a client of
> Muh.ammad b. Sulayma:n, who seems to have been the same
> person as the Muh.ammad b. Sulayman, the ka:tib al-djaysh,
Peter T. Daniels
> Richard Frye has a recent translation which is more directed to the
> general public, but has long background articles as well in his book "Ibn
> Fadlan's Journey to Russia ...". it also has a few additional sentences
> from other quotations of Ibn Fadlan's work, such as from Yaqut.
Richard Frye likes to get together with the other most eldest members
of the AOS to compare longevity -- wiith the passings recently of Wolf
Leslau and Murray Emineau (both past their 100th birthdays) and John
DeFrancis (only 97), he may hold that title. Denis Sinor may be older,
but he didn't join the Society until after he emigrated to the US some
time after WWII (or was it after the Hungarian uprising in '56?).
If only Frye's writing were as engaging as his lecturing and
conversational style!