Barry THARAUD

INS 3399/5319

Class Notes

Wednesday, 11 June 2003

 

Ibn Abi-Zar al-Fāsi: Roudh Al-Qirtas

 

Class began with a preliminary discussion of 3 points which will be discussed in this session:

1) the function of the work

2) the style

3) What would Ibn Khaldun think if he were reviewing al-Fāsi’s Roudh Al-Qirtas?

 

1) The function of the work is essentially political: it describes the founding of the city of Fès in a way that combines history of place and history of power. The history begins with the founding moment (with the Idrissid dynasty and in particular Idriss II’s ‘founding’ of Fès), and it ends with the contemporary Merinid regime, which is paying al-Fāsi to write his account. Along the way, several strategies are used to legitimize the Merinids.

 

The decision to make Fès, rather than Marrakesh, the capital is a military decision that marks the Merinid power as looking north toward Spain rather than south toward the previous power base that depended upon the southern caravan routes. Since Fès was a multicultural society that included not only Berbers but Christians, Jews, Andalusians, Persians, and others, the Merinids were dependent upon political and military power alone to sustain their position. This is reflected in the structure of the city, which includes the old medina in a low-lying bowl, with the new Merinid part of the city (Fès el-Jdid), which is the seat of military power and which includes military watch towers and outposts, on higher ground that is contiguous with and overlooking the old medina. Al Fāsi’s account is a piece of propaganda that ignores the bloody uprisings of 1250 and 1270, and instead strives to consolidate power through an emphasis on cultural unity rather than on the force that was in reality the linchpin of the régime.

 

2) The style of the work includes a number of devices that make it an effective piece of persuasive literature or propaganda. For example, the structural organization emphasizes real or imagined historical parallels between the earliest Idrissid leaders and the contemporary Merinid leaders.

a) Both Idriss I and Abu Mohamed Abd al’Haq were Berber tribal leaders with religious associations: Idriss was considered a Muslim saint (his apparition reputedly appeared at his tomb in the nearby town of Moulay Idriss in 1318 and is the most important Muslim shrine outside of the Middle East), and Abd al’Haq, the first Merinid leader to make headway into the Almohad territory in the mid 13th century, is described as constantly fasting and performing Muslim religious rites. It is conveniently omitted that Idriss was a heterodox Shi’ite while Abd al’Haq is an orthodox Sunni and that the Merenids in general enforced a strict orthodoxy (particularly Malekite school of jurisprudence) and had suppressed  vaguely Shi’ite beliefs throughout the Maghrib.

 

b) Idriss II ‘founds Fès’ and fights “nonbelievers” in the Maghrib according to al-Fāsi’s account, while the Merinid Abu Youssef Yacoub fights against the “nonbeliever” Spaniards. Again, instead of mentioning Idriss II’s heterodoxy, he is described as “a good Sunni Muslim.”

 

c) The most important parallel between the Idrissids and the Merenids in al-Fāsi’s account is that both draw their legitimacy not from their lineage (Idriss was a Husseinite) but from their charisma and ability to lead. In essence, al-Fāsi’s account is a pseudo-history to ‘puff’ the current régime.

 

The link that holds these questionable parallels together is the city of Fès, and al-Fāsi’s account belongs to a growing tradition of writing about cities in the Maghreb (e.g., Marrakesh, Ceuta, Safi), and is also part of a still longer tradition of writing about important cities in the Middle East (e.g., Baghdad). Thus, al-Fāsi is grafting social history to geography.

 

Besides developing parallels between Idrissid and Merinid leaders, al-Fāsi describes the characteristics of Fès (its magical waters, location, availability of salt, its intelligent and loyal citizens) in a way that the inhabitants can collectively take pride in their city, including its able and powerful and charismatic Merinid leader. The account might be described as a ‘cheerleader’ version of history – “we’re all on the same side, and our team is the best.” Also, Al-Fāsi, like earlier historians and travel writers such as Ibn Battuta, uses poetry – good, bad, or indifferent, it doesn’t matter – as ‘authorities’ to bolster his praise of Fès.

 

3) In contrast to Ibn Khaldun’s history, which was written for other historians and is a serious intellectual exercise, al-Fāsi’s account is a popular book that uses bad logic, lacks any sort of historical or intellectual authority, and lacks the sort of social ethic that Khaldun terms “group feeling.” There are a variety of differences between the two works:

 

            a) al-Fāsi uses authorities (in this case poetry describing the splendors of Fès) uncritically – that is, ahistorically;

 

            b) in his account of the founding of Fès, al-Fāsi draws on Christian prophecy, Jewish prophecy, the idea that the people involved are special and invested by God, and other ahistorical ideas;

 

            c) in his account of the naming of the city of Fès, al-Fāsi presents several versions and concludes (pseudo-piously) that only God knows the truth of the matter – a disgusting display of political correctness that comes close to matching the sort of thing found in Bush’s America at the present time;

 

            d) al-Fāsi uses anecdotes uncritically to explain historical events, as in his account of how Abu Youssef Yacoub creates the mellah or Jewish quarter of the city while founding Fès el-Jdid.

 

We can only imagine the contempt that the formidable intellect of Ibn Khaldun would heap on al-Fāsi’s account of the founding of Fès. To be fair, however, the Merenids did promote education, supported centers of learning, and were patrons to Ibn Battuta, Ibn Khaldun, and Leo Africanus.