The Book of Imamate and Politics

The publication of the Persian translation of the book of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah called for a look at this book, the news of whose translation had been in the air for the past two decades. The Persian translation, by Sayyid N?êir £ab?ïab?’?, is based on the Cairo edition of Muêïaf? al-B?n? al-Œalab?. The present article will include a brief account of Ibn Qutaybah’s life and will discuss the issue of the attribution of the book of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah to him. The article is, in effect, a summary account of the various views on Ibn Qutaybah, from ancient times to the present. The present article, being the last published view on the authorship of the book of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah, calls for a knowledge of the history of this issue on the part of the reader.

The book of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah is attributed to the renowned `Abbasid scholar, Ab? MuEammad `Abd All?h b. Muslim D?nawar?, know as Ibn Qutaybah (213/828 – 276/889). Among the ancient sources, mention is made of his life and works by Ibn Nad?m in his al-Fihrist. Numerous modern works are, also, devoted to him, including the two extensive articles by Brockelmann and ƒdharn?sh. There are reports of Ab? Bakr b. Anb?r? (d. 304/916) having written a book in refutation of the views of Ibn Qutaybah and Ab? Œ?tam Sajast?n?.

Ibn Qutaybah’s was distinguished by his vast knowledge of Arabic literature, Œad?th, the Quran, Kal?m, fiqh, and history, in all of which he has left behind a number of works. He is also noted for his antagonistic stance toward the Jahmiyyah and Mu`tazilah and advocacy of Œad?th and biblicism; and his collaboration with the `Abbasid regime, so much so that he was appointed as the chief justice of D?nawar, by the caliph Mutawakkil’s vizier. His anti-Shu`?b? tendency may also be attributed to his close ties with the caliphate. In spite of his Iranian origin, in a number of his works, he attempts to establish the superiority of Arabs over Iranians.

Al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah (Imamate and Politics), also known as T?r?kh al-khulaf?’, is a political history of Islam from the caliphate of Ab? Bakr to the reign of H?r?n al-Rash?d and death of Am?n. The original book is in Arabic and has appeared in several editions. The first seems to have been in Cairo in 1332 AH. Another edition, by Khal?l al-Manê?r, came out in Beirut in 1997. The edition by `Al? Sh?r? has gone through several reprints, including one in 1413 AH (Iran: Shar?f Ra»? Press).

Al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah, regardless of its authorship, is of considerable historical importance and is among the primary sources for the events of the first three centuries of Islam. This has made the book the focus of numerous scholarly efforts. The scholarly consensus, especially in modern times, is that the book is not authored by Ibn Qutaybah. But three questions still await definitive answers: Who is the real author?, Why should Ibn Qutaybah’s authorship be questioned?, and Who is responsible for the book’s attribution to Ibn qutaybah?

£ab?ïab?’? devotes, only, two pages to the discussion of Ibn Qutaybah and his works, and when, in the course of listing his works, he comes across al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah, he suffices by noting that the book is, “attributed to him.” It would have been more appropriate if £ab?ïab?’? had provided his Iranian readership with a discussion of the aforementioned questions. The book’s cover and its title page, also, fail to contain any indication concerning the book’s “attribution” to Ibn Qutaybah. The same goes for Khal?l Manê?r’s introduction to his edition of the work. He merely notes the following: “kit?b al-im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah lil-`?lim al-f?»il al-muwarrikh al-`a»?m `Abd All?h b. Muslim b. Qutaybah D?nawar?.” This imparts the impression that the book has definitely originated from the pen of D?nawar?.

Ibn Nad?m is the first author to give a fairly detailed account of Ibn Qutaybah’s life and works. His list, however, fails to include the book of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah. The reports of Ibn Qutaybah’s works range from thirty-four to three hundred titles. ƒdharn?sh, after Lecomte, divides Ibn Qutaybah’s works into seven categories: (1) Published works whose authorship by Ibn Qutaybah is beyond any shadow of doubt, such as `Uy?n al-akhb?r; (2) Works that are definitely authored by him, but which have not been published; (3) Works which are no longer extant, or whose attribution to Ibn Qutaybah is uncertain; (4) Works that might exist, but have not, as of yet, been discovered; (5) Works about which nothing is known apart form their titles; (6) Titles that coincide with the titles of other famous works, or are applied to a section of a particular book; (7) Works whose attribution to Ibn Qutaybah is definitely, or very likely, unfounded. ƒdharn?sh, without stating his reasons, considers al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah as belonging to the last category. He refers further discussion of the subject to Lecomte’s book.

Abdull?h Jab?r?, lists the following points as reasons put forward by those who contend that the book is definitely penned by other than Ibn Qutaybah: (1) The book contains a direct quotation by a lady who had been present at the fall of Andalus in 92 AH, some 121 years prior to Ibn Qutaybah’s birth. (2) There is another quotation by Ab? Layl?, who was a judge in K?fa in 148 AH, a date that is chronologically incompatible with the time of Ibn Qutaybah. (3) There is no mention of the book in ancient sources. (4) Ibn Qutaybah himself fails to refer to this book in the course of his other works.

Thirwat `Ak?shah, MuEammad Iskandar?n?, `Al? Sh?r?, and Ras?l Ja`fariy?n mention three other reasons, which we will add to the above list: (5) The book implies that the author had been in Damascus, while Ibn Qutaybah had gone straight form Baghdad to D?nawar. (6) The author discusses the attack on Marrakech by Mus? b. Naê?r. The city was built by Y?suf b. T?shif?n in 454 AH, some 178 after Ibn Qutaybah’s death. (7) The book’s structure and style of writing differs markedly with Ibn Qutaybah’s other works.

The same reasons concerning the book’s authorship by other than Ibn Qutaybah had been, previously, posited by other researchers and Orientalists. The first Orientalist to raise doubts about the book belonging to Ibn Qutayba was the Spanish Pascual de Gayangos, in a book on Islamic history, published some 160 years ago. One of the book’s topics was the issue of the ascription of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah to Ibn Qutaybah.

Forty years later, Dozy’s research served to reinforce the findings of Gayangos. Brockelmann was another scholar to question the book’s authorship by Ibn Qutaybah. His work in the Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden) had also benefited from the researches of DeGoeje. Here mention should also be made of Lecomte’s book (1965) on Ibn Qutaybah. IsE?q M?s? Œusayn?, in his English book on Ibn Qutaybah, asserted that the first person to question the ascription of the book to Ibn Qutaybah was a 7th-century scholar, named Ab? Bakr MuEammad Ma`?rif?.

On the other hand, they are others, such as Jibr?’?l Jab?r, who question the validity of the seven aforementioned reasons on why the book is not by Ibn Qutaybah. On refuting the first reason, Jab?r writes: “It is possible that some of the names, in the chain of transmitters, may have been omitted.” He also notes: “In a number of the book’s copies, there occurs the phrase, ‘dhakar?’ (he noted???).”

Jab?r asserts the same argument against the second reason. He claims that either the intermediaries between Ibn Qutaybah and Ibn Ab? Layl? are omitted, or that the latter has reported his material in a “mursal” fashion (without the inclusion of the chains of transmission). Jab?r adduces Ibn Qutaybah’s quotation from Ibn Ab? Layl? in his `Uy?n al-akhb?r as the proof of Ibn Qutaybah’s style of direct reporting from Ibn Ab? Layl?. Concerning the fifth reason, Jab?r notes: “I have read al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah twice, but have failed to come across any indication regarding its author’s residence in Damascus. It appears that Gayangos has erred in his understanding of the text.”

Jab?r also disagrees with the sixth reason, based on the fact that in the book’s 1331 (AH) edition there is no mention of “Morocco” and the only reference is to “Maghrib”. In effect, Gayangos considers the domain of M?s? b. Naê?r’s rule to be Ifr?q?yah, and not Western Africa or Maghrib. Thus in the text the term “Maghrib” is used in place of “Morocco”. He also questions the other reasons. He believes that more solid evidence can be adduced to deny the book’s ascription to Ibn Qutaybah. For instance the book contains accounts of the `Abb?sid caliphs, whereas Ibn Qutaybah’s life preceded the `Abb?sid reign. In addition, in his works, Ibn Qutaybah usually makes references to works by others, whereas al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah is bereft of such references.

Although Jab?r finds major faults with the seven-fold arguments of Gayangos and his advocates, he, nonetheless, is in agreement with them on al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah’s authorship being by other than Ibn Qutaybah.

In response to the second question, Brockelmann, following De Goeje, considers the real author to have been a contemporary of Ibn Qutaybah from Egypt or Maghrib, but he has been unable to determine his identity.

Regarding the fact that the real author has opted to conceal his identity and chosen that of Ibn Qutaybah, some have advanced the theory that he has intended to use Ibn Qutaybah’s fame in order to promote his work.

IsE?q Œusayn? has suggested that the book contains one or more chapters from Ibn Qutaybah’s pen and, over the years, his reputation has caused the entire work to be considered his.

At a time when efforts of Gayangos failed to yield any results, Jab?r claimed to have identified the real author. He gives the following account of his discovery: “Fifteen years ago, while reading a copy of Ibn Bass?m’s al-Dhakh?rah f? maE?sin ahl al-jaz?rah, I came across a list of Ibn Œazm’s works, which included one called “al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah”. This reinforced my previous hunch that the author of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah had to be an scholar of Andalusian origin. Further research convinced me, beyond any shadow of doubt, that the book stemmed form Ibn Œazm’s pen.

Jab?r’s theory is supported by a considerable body of internal evidence, the book’s harmony with other works by Ibn Œazm, and additional historical factors. A summary of his reasons is as follows:

1- The book contains negative remarks regarding the Iraqis of the `Abb?sid period. This, first, proves the author having been a non-Iraqi. Second, it indicates that the author must have been living sometime during the `Abb?sid reign.

2- Calumniation against the Companions and the previous imams is antithetical to the method of Ibn Qutaybah, but is in harmony with that of Ibn Œazm.

3- The pro-Shiite and anti-Umayyad tendency reflected in the book is in line with the views of Ibn Œazm, not with that of Ibn Qutaybah.

4- The author has presented an extensive account of the conquests in Andalus and Maghrib, but has failed to make any allusions to the military victories in Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and India. This is an indication of his interest in the latter two regions.

5- The style of Ibn `Abd Rabbih, and even a number of his notes, in his book of al-`Aqd al-far?d, bear particular resemblance to Nuê?ê al-im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah. It appears that Ibn `Abd Rabbih and Ibn Œazm have both been influenced by the work of Mad?’in?.

According to Jab?r’s conclusion, Ibn Bass?m’s assertion regarding Ibn Œazm’s authorship of al-Im?m?h wa ’l-siy?sah, and his failure to ascribe a book of the same name to Ibn Qutaybah, is a good indication that the book belongs to Ibn Œazm.

Jab?r’s theory has come under criticism in an article by MuEammad Y?suf Najm. According to Najm, Jab?r’s theory is based on a note in Ibn Bass?m’s al-Dhakh?rah, whereas the same material is contained in Mu`jam al-udab?’, whose publication precedes the former by some thirty years. Najm is baffled by the fact that in spite of being a contemporary of Ibn Œazm and having a thorough knowledge of him, Ibn `Arab? has failed to mention him as the author of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah, and has instead ascribed the work to Ibn Qutaybah. This, claims Najm, is a proof of the inaccuracy of Jab?r’s thesis.

In addition, Najm is of the opinion that in the course of the burning of Ibn Œazm’s books (393-394 AH), which occurred in the span of two years and was confined to a limited geographical area, not all of them were destroyed. During his lifetime, Ibn Œazm enjoyed a wider popularity than Ibn Qutaybah, and after his death the Z?hirite school came to flourish. Thus, copies of his books were multiplied in considerable numbers. So, the theory that those interested in his works were exchanging them under the pretense that they belonged to Ibn Qutaybah does not hold any water.

In sum, Najm offers a detailed criticism of Jab?r’s arguments and finds them inconclusive. Najm comes to the conclusion that al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah is neither by Ibn Qutaybah, nor by Ibn Œazm.

Jibr?’il Jab?r retorted to Najm’s criticisms in a sixteen-page article, in which he reaffirmed his belief in the book’s authorship by Ibn Œazm. In his article, he also called for a scholarly edition of the book based on all the extant manuscripts, owing to the convoluted state of the existing text. This also calls for close attention to works such as Ibn `Abd Ribbah’s `Aqd al-far?d, which bear resemblance to al-Im?mah, both in terms of style and content. In al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah, there are numerous quotations from J?Ei?, Mad?’in?, Hiytham b. `Adiyy, and Ibn Qutaybah, which should come under close scientific scrutiny by any would-be editor of the work. In any event, final judgement on the book’s authorship has to wait a sound edition of the book.

Opinion also differs as to the identity of the first person who attributed the work to Ibn Qutaybah. Some consider him to have been Ab? Bakr b. al-`Arab? (d. 543 AH), in his book of al-`Aw?êim min al-qaw?êim (pp. 245-278). But, Sh?r? reckons him to have been Ab? `Abd All?h al-T?z?, known as Ibn Shabb?ï, in his book of ?alat al-samaï. Q??? Ab? Bakr b. `Arab? twice in his book has attacked al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah in the name of defending the Companions. In the first case (p. 245), he makes no mention of the book and suffices by quoting Ibn Qutaybah’s remarks. But in the second case (p. 248), he refers to al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah as belonging to Ibn Qutaybah. However, Ibn Khaï?b, the book’s editor, in his footnote, rejects the latter’s ascription.

Jibr?’?l Jab?r attributes the reason for the ascription of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah to Ibn Qutaybah to the contemporary social, economic, and cultural circumstances. This was a time where Ibn Œzm’s views had come under severe criticism by faq?hs, to the point where some of his works were thrown into fire. On the other hand, Ibn Qutaybah enjoyed widespread popularity, so it was natural for book traders to use his name as a marketing scheme, or others to use the false ascription as a means of preventing the book from falling into oblivion.

In conclusion, research into the issue of the ascription of al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah to Ibn Qutaybah yields the following possibilities:

1- It is by Ibn Qutaybah.

2- Only some parts of the book are by him.

3- It belongs to Ibn Œazm.

4- It is by a Maghrib? or Egyptian author.

5- It is not by Ibn Qutaybah, and it is impossible to determine its authorship.

Hopefully, further research would shed more light on this intractable mystery.

Al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah is an important work on Islamic historiography and political thought and its Persian translation is to be viewed as a positive development. It would have been a great service to its Persian-speaking readers, had it contained an introduction which shed light on its contents and historical background. In the present article, we confined ourselves to the issue of the book’s authorship. It would be a worthy endeavor for other scholars to deal with other aspects of the work, such as the accuracy of its Persian translation.

Footnotes

Tehran: Quqn?s, 1991.
1- Brockelmann in the Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden), and ƒdhart?sh ƒdharn?sh in the Great Islamic Encyclopedia.
2- See “Dir?sah f? kutub Ibn Qutaybah”, `Abdull?h al-Jab?r?, ƒd?b al-Mustanêiriyyah, No. 2, 1977, pp. 105-132; No. 3, 1978, pp. 223-250.
3- The theological views of Ibn qutaybah is dealt with in K??im Œaï?ï’s Kit?b ma`a Ibn Qutaybah fi ’l-`aq?dat al-isl?miyyah, Beirut: al-Shirkat al-`ƒlamiyyat al-Kit?b, 1990.
4- There are several studies on Ibn Qutaybah’s views in the context of Shu`?bism and anti-Shu`?bism. For instance, see Ibn Qutaybah wa ’l-Shu`?biyyah by `Abdull?h al-Jab?r?, Baghdad, 1990.
5- See Brockelmann’s article in the Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden), and Y?suf Aly?n Sark?s’s Mu`jam al-maïb?`?t al-`arabiyyah wa ’l-mu`arrabah, Qum: 1410 AH, p. 212.
6- Al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah, Beirut: D?r al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyyah, 1997, p. 3.
7- Al-Fihrist, Ri?? Tajaddud, ed., Tehran, 1973, pp. 85-86.
8- “Kit?b al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah”, Jibr?’?l Jab?r, al-BuE?th, Year. 13th, No. 3, 1960, p. 384.
9- The Great Islamic Encyclopedia, Tehran, 1991, vol. 4, pp. 458-459.
10- “Dir?sah f? kutub Ibn Qutaybah”, `Abdull?h Jab?r?, ƒd?b al-Mustanêiriyyah, No, 3, 1978, p. 245.
11- The Introduction to Ibn Qutaybah’s `Uy?n al-akhb?r, MuEammad Iskandar?n?, ed., Beirut, 1997, vol. 1, p. 25; The Introduction to Ibn Qutaybah’s Kit?b al-Ma`?rif, Thirwat `Ak?shah, ed., p. 59; The Sources of Islamic History, Ras?l Ja`fariy?n, Qum, 1997, p. 140; The Introduction to al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah, `Al? Sh?r?, ed., p. 8. ???
12- The History of the Mohammedan Dynasties in Spain, 2 vol.s, Pascual De Gayangos, London, 1840-1843.
13- De Goeje, Riveu Studis of Oriental, vol. 1. P. 415-421.
14- Ibn Qutaybah, Gerard Locomte, Damascus, 1965, pp. 175-176.
15- See “Kit?b al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah” by Jibr?’?l Jab?r, p. 386. Œusayn?’s book has been translated into Arabic by H?shim Y?gh? and contains this note on page 78 (Ibn Qutaybah, Beirut: al-Mu’assasat al-`Arabiyyah li-l-Dir?s?t wa ’l-Nashr, 1980).
16- “Kit?b al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah”, Jibr?’?l Jab?r, pp. 388-389.
17- Ibid.
18- Ibid.
19- See the Encyclopedia of Islam, s.v. “Ibn Qutaybah”.
20- Ibn Qutaybah, IsE?q M?s? Œusayn?, p. 78.
21- Ibid., p. 79.
22- “Kit?b al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah”, Jibr?’?l Jab?r, p. 390.
23- Ibid.
24- Ibid., pp. 390-395.
25- Ibid.
26- Ibid., p. 394.
27- “Kit?b al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah”, MuEammad Y?suf Najm, al-AbE?th, Year 14, No. ???, 1961, p. 122.
28- Ibid., p. 123. “Kit?b al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah”, Jibr?’?l Jab?r, al-AbE?th, Year 14, No. 2, pp. 326-341.
29- Ibid., pp. 326-341, and 392-393.
30- Ibid.
31- “Dir?sah f? kutub Ibn Qutaybah”, `Abdull?h al-Jab?r?, p. 246; “al-Im?mah wa ’l-siy?sah”, Jibr?’?l Jab?r, p. 387.
32- Al-`Aw?êim min al-qaw?êim f? taêq?q maw?qif al-êaê?bah by al-Q??? ab? Bakr b. al-`Arab?, MuEib al-D?n al-Khaï?b, Beirut, 1986.
33- “Al-Im?mah wa’l-siy?sah”, Jibr?’?l Jab?r, pp. 392-393.
34- Ibid., p. 394.