Abstract
Inscriptions containing women’s titles and names on objects are relatively rare occurrences throughout the Islamic world, whether they belong to known personalities or to unknown individuals. This article examines graffiti in the names of women from the Rasulid dynasty in Yemen (626–858/1229–1454), incised on silver-inlaid brass objects mostly made in Mamluk workshops (seventh–eighth/thirteenth–fourteenth centuries) as commissions, gifts, or purchases for the Rasulid sultans of Yemen, which have hitherto been unidentified. Moreover, the titles of these princesses also are found on Ayyubid metal objects. Although of little aesthetic value, these inscriptions hold great historical and social significance by providing details on inheritance, lineage, ownership, and the object’s history.
1 Introduction: Finding Women’s Names on Objects1
Object inscriptions containing women’s names and titles are relatively rare occurrences throughout the Islamic world, whether they belong to known personalities or unidentified individuals. Even objects with a clearly feminine usage, such as jewellery and personal adornment tools, sometimes decorated with inscriptions of good wishes to their owner, rarely bear a name linking them to a specific woman, such as the woman Zubayda on a Fatimid gold ring, whose identity is not known (Cortese and Calderini, 2006: p. 154, fig. 8). However several surviving inscriptions (official and unofficial [graffiti]) provide a woman’s personal name even though it was generally considered inappropriate, as stated by al-Saḥmāwī (d. 868/1463), author of a Mamluk chancery manual, who asserted that a woman’s name is never revealed (“lā yuṣarraḥu bi-ism al-marʾa”) because it is tantamount to exposing her (“limā fīhi min al-kašf ”) when only her title should be used (Al-Saḥmāwī, 2009: p. 541).2 Considering that his remarks concern correspondence and official documents during the Mamluk period, it is evident that this principle was not rigorously applied to inscriptions on architecture, objects, and tombstones, as evidenced by surviving examples from different periods and regions.
Nevertheless, early occurrences of inscribing a high-born woman’s name on objects do exist, albeit rare, such as the name of Wallāda, daughter of the Umayyad caliph ʿAbd al-Raḥmān III, on carved ivory caskets from the Iberian Peninsula dated 355/966, gifted from her brother al-Ḥākim “lil-uḫt Wallāda” (for sister Wallāda) (Anderson and Rosser-Owen, 2015: pp. 30–4). Perhaps the object’s private nature justified the insertion of her forename. A later example is the name of the unidentified princess, Ḫawand Ḫawānrāh, engraved on a copper tray made for her by order of Badr al-Dīn Luʾluʾ, the ruler of Mosul (r. 619–57/1222–59). Since the tray carries a long inscription with his name and titles, it was assumed that she may have been his wife or daughter (Canby et al., 2016: p. 63).3 Other inscriptions list a woman’s titles and the degree of parenthood with a male relative, including those carved on the interior of a fifth/eleventh-century shallow silver bowl from Gurgan in the collections of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) (inv. no. M.73.5.149), referring to the mother of the Ziyārid ruler Šams al-Maʿālī Qābūs ibn Wušmagīr (r. 366–71/977–81 and 388–403/998–1012), with the ostentatious title of Malikat al-arḍ (queen of the earth) (Blair, 2006: p. 341). Grand titles do not necessarily secure the identification of a particular person, as demonstrated by those inscribed on a blue-glazed ceramic vase in the Nelson-Atkins Museum (inv. no. 32-1), namely “tāğ al-nisāʾ” (the crown of women) (Wiet, 1933: p. 42).4 The same can be said of those on a Mamluk steel mirror with a silver inlay in the British Museum (inv. no. OA 1960.2-15.1) dating from the eighth/fourteenth century, an object identified by Gaston Wiet as having been produced for the market and not commissioned for a specific customer, attesting to the practise of making objects specifically for women but not necessarily customized for a specific individual (Wiet 1958: p. 244).
The inclusion of the father’s name can help the identification of some women, such as the name of Fatima “mimmā ʿumila bi-rasm al-sitt Fāṭima bint al-maqarr al-ašraf Sūdūn al-Muʾayyadī” (made for the lady Fatima the daughter of Sūdūn al-Muʾayyadī), whose father (d. 865/1461) was a Mamluk governor of Ḥamā, inscribed on a copper bowl dated from the second half of the eighth/fifteenth century in the Victoria and Albert Museum (inv. no. 557-1878).5 Another example from the early-tenth/sixteenth century is a tray in the National Museum of Damascus with the name Saniyya bint Ahmad Šihāb al-Dīn b. al-ʿAṭṭār, whose father was the sultan’s master builder “muʿallim al-sulṭān bi-l-qalʿa al-manṣūra bi-l-Šām” (the sultan’s master builder at the victorious citadel of Damascus) (Juvin, 2021: pp. 290, 313, no. 43; Behrens-Abouseif, 2011: p. 378).6 The inscriptions on six metal objects (basins (two), candlesticks (two), ewer (one), and a tray (one) made for Fatima Ḫawand, Sultan Qāitbāy’s wife, present an exceptional case since they are the largest group of objects known to have been made for a specific woman. They do not mention her name but refer to her as Ḫawand al-kubrā (the great princess) and other honorific titles (Wiet, 1970: pp. 344–55).7 It is regrettable that objects inscribed with the names and titles of women rulers, such as the Ṣulayhid Queen Arwā bint Ahmad al-Ṣulayḥī in Yemen (r. 477–532/1084–1137) and Šajar al-Durr in Egypt (r. 648/1250), have not survived so there is no way of knowing their titulature.8 A further powerful woman who should be mentioned here is the Timurid princess Gowhar Šād (d. 861/1457), wife of Šahruḫ, whose name is inscribed on a jade seal identifying her as the daughter of Ġiyāṯ al-Dīn Tarḫān. It is the only surviving object made for her and known to have survived despite her preeminent role in Timurid court life and politics (Lentz and Lowry 1989: p. 225, no. 128).9
2 Rasulid Women Asserting Their Property
Graffiti found on Ayyubid and Mamluk silver-inlaid brass metal objects are modest yet important witnesses to the latter’s history since these inscriptions may indicate the names of the artisans who manufactured them and their place of manufacture, or the names and titles of subsequent owners. In this case, the graffiti’s role is strictly utilitarian since their main purpose is to register the owner’s name, thereby, helping to prevent the object’s misplacement or misattribution.10 The cursory nature of the graffiti, sometimes rendering them difficult to decipher, offers limited aesthetic appeal when compared to the elegant calligraphical bands and roundels constituting the most important decorative elements on metalwork from the seventh–ninth/thirteenth–fifteenth centuries, which often contain the name and titles of the person for whom the object was destined or blessings for the unknown owner. Several scholars have recorded these different graffiti, notably Gaston Wiet, but they could not identify their proprietors, particularly the names of women connected to Rasulid Yemen.
The Rasulid dynasty ruled over large parts of Yemen for over two hundred years (626–858/1229–1454), a period considered to have been the most prosperous in its history, largely as the result of controlling the Indian Ocean trade through the port city of Aden, which brought considerable wealth (Vallet, 2010). The Rasulid sultans were greatly interested in precious objects, and according to Ibn Faḍl Allah al-ʿUmarī (d. 749/1349), these were made for them by skilled artisans or were acquired in different regions, namely, Egypt, Iraq, and Syria (1985: pp. 161–2). Thus, over forty brass objects inlaid with silver and red brass made in Mamluk workshops as gifts, special commissions, or as recycled purchases for five Rasulid sultans, reigning consecutively from 647–778/1249–1376, have survived.11 Several of these objects were inscribed with graffiti, and despite the absence of the dots distinguishing letters with the same shape and undated, they can be identified as the titles of Rasulid women.12
Among the earliest objects is a tray dating from the second half of the seventh/thirteenth century in the Musée du Louvre (inv. no. OA 7081) made for Sultan al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf (Fig. 1). The tray is decorated with a central medallion containing a seated sovereign flanked by two winged genies holding a diadem above his head. A large inscription containing the Rasulid sultan’s name and titles surrounds the figure, while the graffito (Fig. 2) incised on the reverse contains the phrase: “al-ḫizāna Ğihat Iqbāl al-Ğuzarī” (the treasury [of] Ğihat Iqbāl al-Ğuzarī).13 The term ğiha (direction or area) was the feminine equivalent of honorific masculine titles with architectural connotations, also known as alqāb al-kināya al-makānīya, such as al-maqām (the seat), al-maqarr (the place), al-ğanāb (the sanctuary), al-mağlis (the reception hall), and al-bāb (the gate) (al- Qalqašandī, 1918–22: pp. 493–502; al-Bāšā, 1989: pp. 80–7). Notably, another tray made for Sultan al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf, currently in the Sabah Collection, Kuwait (inv. no. LNS 43 M), has similar graffiti on its underside (Behrens-Abouseif, 2021: pp. 113–4, cat. no. 34).14
A tray in the name of Sultan al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf. Musée du Louvre, Paris (inv. no. OA 7081)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© 2004 RMN-Grand Palais (Musée du Louvre) and Jean-Gilles BerizziA tray in the name of Sultan al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf, graffito in the name of Ğihat Iqbāl al-Juzarī. Musée du Louvre, Paris (inv. no. OA 7081)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Musée du Louvre and Carine JuvinĞiha was used as a title for royal women during the ʿAbbasid period, as evidenced by textual sources, such as Ibn al-Sāʿī’s biographies of the caliphs’ consorts Nisāʾ al-ḫulafāʿ al-musammā Ğihāt al-aʾimma al-ḫulafāʿ min al-ḥarāʾir wa-l-imāʿ (Consorts of the Caliphs, Both Free and Slave) (1968),15 as well as some surviving inscriptions, including a basalt slab in the Mosque of al-Kawṯar, Mecca, where an engraving mentions the mosque’s endowment act by the concubine of caliph al-Mustaẓhir Billāh (r. 487–512/1094–1118) whose personal name was equally inscribed: “al-Ğiha al-Karīma Ruzayn ibnat ʿAbd Allah Umm walad al-Imam al-Mustaẓhir Billāh” (the distinguished lady Ruzayn, “daughter” of ʿAbd ʿAbd Allah, the mother of Imam al-Mustaẓhir Billāh’s son).16 While the Fatimids seem to have associated the consort’s title al-ğiha with her spouse’s name without revealing her personal name, as observed on a portable wooden portable mihrab made for the Mausoleum of Sayyida Ruqayya, Cairo, (527/1133), inscribed with the patron’s titles “al-ğiha al-ğalīla al-maḥrūsa al-kubrā al-Āmirīya” (the honourable, the protected, the lofty lady al-Āmirīya) after the caliph al-Āmir’s name (al-Bāšā, 1989: p. 248).17 The survival of several inscriptions with the title al-ğiha connecting women to their husbands’ names confirms that the practice continued into the late Mamluk period (al-Bāšā, 1989: pp. 249–50). Moreover, the different attributes associated with al-ğiha seem to have been hierarchised during the Mamluk period, such as al-šarīfa (the noble). According to al-Qalqašandī, it was the highest bestowed upon Mamluk women, followed in rank by al-ğiha al-karīma (the distinguished), but the latter was used in conjunction with the name of a brother rather than a husband (Al-Qalqašandī, 1918–22: vol. 6, pp. 78, 182, 171–2; vol. 7, p. 166; Wiet, 1930: p. 201; ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, 1973: pp. 113–4.18
In Rasulid Yemen, sources (administrative registers, chronicles, and waqf (endowment deeds) attest to the use of the title ğiha in association with the name of the ṭawāšī, a eunuch who oversaw a woman’s household and maintenance, rather than the name of her husband or another male relative, also confirmed by the graffiti examined here. The practise of a woman known by reference to one of her servants-eunuchs occurred in earlier periods, but surviving examples demonstrate that it was not as common as in Rasulid Yemen (Ibn al-Sāʿī, 1968: p. 124).19 Many of the royal eunuchs at the Rasulid court, mostly of Abyssinian origin, were high-ranking members of the administration holding important posts, e.g., governors of fortresses, a function coherent with their proximity to the sultan’s intimate household whom they served and protected (Ayalon, 1999: p. 174). Nevertheless, the status of the ṭawāšī in the Rasulid court remains a subject that has been overlooked.20 It has not been possible to identify the lady to whom the Louvre and the al-Sabah trays once belonged or her eunuch Iqbāl al-Ğuzarī, despite the presence of their names in a royal register from the period of Sultan al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf, published under the title of Nūr al-maʿārif, where she appears in a good position on beneficiary lists for produce and foodstuffs distributed to royal court members (Ğāzim, 2003–5: vol. 1, p. 580; vol. 2, pp. 124, 138, 140).21 She equally figures in the register of revenues, Irtifāʿ al-dawla al-Mu’ayyadīya, attributed to the reign of Sultan al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd, as the recipient of important stipends, aside from a reference to an endowment for her madrasa (Ğāzim, 2008: pp. 32, 35, 178–9, 188, 257, 282). Although neither the patron nor the building’s name and its location are mentioned in other sources, there is no doubt that the lady was very closely related to both sultans, and perhaps she was Sultan al-Muẓaffar’s wife.
An eighth/fourteenth-century brass candlestick also in the Louvre Collection (inv. no. MAO 2285) (Fig. 3) with a large official inscription in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAli on the base, but whose socket is a later Mamluk addition, has two graffiti in different hands on the inner side of the base in the name of Ğihat Fahīm, another high-ranking Rasulid woman equally unidentified. One graffito indicates that it was for or belonged to Ğihat Fahīm, “bi-rasm Ğihat Fahīm,” while the second graffito informs us that the candlestick was endowed for this lady’s tomb at al-Muʾayyadīya “Wuqifa ʿalā turbat mawālīnā Ğihat Fahīm bi-l-Muʾayyadīya” (endowed to the tomb of our mistress Ğihat Fahīm in al-Muʾayyadīya [madrasa]) (Figs. 4–5).
A candlestick in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAlī, Musée du Louvre, Paris (inv. no. MAO 2285)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© 2016 Musée du Louvre and Hervé LewandowskiA candlestick in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAlī graffito in the name of Ğihat Fahīm. Musée du Louvre, Paris (inv. no. MAO 2285)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© 2016 Musée du Louvre / Hervé LewandowskiA candlestick in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAlī, graffito in the name of Ğihat Fahīm at al-Muʾayyadīya. Musée du Louvre, Paris (inv. no. MAO 2285)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© 2016 Musée du Louvre / Hervé LewandowskiThe title mawālīnā, a plural form of mawlānā (our lord or master), was used for high ranking Rasulid women in historical sources and waqf documents. Although Ğihat Fahīm does not exist in any known Rasulid sources, she must have been close to Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAli, perhaps his daughter, daughter-in-law, niece, or sister, since the candlestick entered into her possession. Moreover, her burial in al-Muʾayyadīya, the madrasa built by Sultan al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd, which also contained his royal tomb, confirms this close family connection (al-Ḫazrağī, 1983: vol. 1, pp. 285, 358–9; al-Akwaʿ, 1986: pp. 202–3, 253–6).22 It was standard Rasulid practise for each sultan to build his namesake madrasa and mausoleum in the capital Taʿizz, and he would be buried therein, even if he happened to die elsewhere (Sadek, 2021: pp. 302–3).23 Close family members, both men and women, were entitled to be buried in these royal tombs if they died in Taʿizz, but were not transported there if they died at another location, such as Ğihat Muʿtab, the wife of Sultan al-Ašraf Ismaʿil, who was buried in Zabid where she died in Ṣafar 796/December 1393. She is one of a dozen notable women whose biographies were recorded by the Rasulid court historian al-Ḫazrağī (d. 812/1410) in his work devoted to the biographies of elites in Yemen (Sadek, 1993: p. 23).24
Ğihat Muʿtab’s name appears in two graffiti engraved by different hands on a large brass tray in the name of Sultan al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (inv. no. 91.1.605), (Fig. 6) decorated with concentric bands and roundels with representations of the seven planets and the Zodiac as well as a prominent inscription band in thuluth. Both graffiti carved on the back of the tray are identical and read: “bi-rasm mawālīnā Ğihat Muʿtab” (for our mistress Ğihat Muʿtab) (Fig. 7), indicating that the object probably came into her possession though her husband, the great-grandson of the tray’s original owner. A third graffito on the same tray reads: “bi-rasm al-khizāna al-Nāṣirīya bi-Dār al-Naṣr al-saʿīd” (for the al-Nāṣirīya treasury in the auspicious [palace of] Dār al-Naṣr),25 revealing that the tray was among the possessions of her son Sultan al-Nāṣir Ahmad in the palace of Dār al-Naṣr in Zabid, perhaps because it had been transported among Ğihat Muʿtab’s baggage when she went to Zabid.26 A similar graffiti referring to al-Nāṣir Ahmad’s treasury is engraved on a tray in the Louvre Collection (inv. no. AO 6008) in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAli, but without proprietary graffiti (Van Berchem, 1904: pp. 60–4). Since Ğihat Muʿtab was survived by her husband, Sultan al-Ašraf, it is not possible to know if this object entered into al-Nāṣir’s possessions directly after her death or if it was inherited first by her husband before passing to their son.
A tray in the name of Sultan al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (inv. no. 91.1.605), Edward C. Moore Collection, Bequest of Edward C. Moore, 1891
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Metropolitan Museum of Art, New YorkA tray in the name of Sultan al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd, graffito in the name of Ğihat Muʿtab. New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art (inv. no. 91.1.605), Edward C. Moore Collection, Bequest of Edward C. Moore, 1891
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York3 The Trail of Family Relations
Other graffiti also give us glimpses of an object’s trail within the Rasulid royal family. Thus, a candlestick in Cairo’s Museum of Islamic Art (inv. no. 15050) in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAli of which only the base survives, is engraved with three graffiti bearing the names of two women related through marriage. The first of these graffiti reads “Ṭištikhānat mawālīnā Ğihat Ṣalāḥ” (the wardrobe of our mistress Ğihat Ṣalāḥ) (Fig. 8) (Wiet, G. Archives, no. 314). The lady was Sultan al-Muğāhid’s mother, who was known as Ğihat Ṣalāḥ, after her eunuch Ṣalāḥ ibn ʿAbd Allah al-Muʾayyadī, a title she kept after he died in 723/1324 even though she outlived him by some forty years (al-Ḫazrağī, 1983: vol. 1, p. 327; al-Ḫazrağī, 2009: vol. 5, pp. 2499–501).27 Following the death of her husband, Sultan al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd, in 721/1321, Ğihat Ṣalāḥ emerged as a powerful woman who played a key role in maintaining her son al-Muğāhid ʿAli on the throne shortly after he became the sultan when revolt sought to depose him in favour of his cousin. Years later, al-Muğāhid ʿAli was arrested by the Mamluks in Mecca during 749/1348–9 after a major diplomatic incident and was sent to Cairo, where he was held for a few months. Ğihat Ṣalāḥ acted as regent until her son’s return, having managed to pressure the Karimi merchants in Aden to lend the ransom of 400,000 dinars for the sultan’s conditional release. She is also known to have been the most prolific woman architectural patron within the Rasulid dynasty, constructing several mosques and madrasas in different towns and villages across Yemen (al-Ḫazrağī, 1983: vol. 2, pp. 100–1; Sadek, 1989: p. 21).
A candlestick in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAlī, graffito in the name of Ğihat Ṣalāḥ, Museum of Islamic Art, Cairo (inv. no. 15050)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Carine JuvinTwo other graffiti on the same candlestick are later additions in the name of Ğihat Ṭayy, who married al-Afḍal ʿAbbās, al-Muğāhid ʿAli’s son and successor: one reads “bi-rasm mawālīnā Ğihat Ṭayy” (for our mistress Ğihat Ṭayy), and the second “mawālīnā al-
A candlestick in the name of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAlī, graffito in the name of Ğihat Ṭayy. Cairo, Museum of Islamic Art (inv. no. 15050)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Carine JuvinMuch like her husband’s grandmother, Ğihat Ṭayy played an important role in securing the throne for her son following her husband’s death, when she summoned the army generals, state officials, and tribal chiefs, having them swear allegiance to the new sultan, al-Ašraf Ismaʿil in 778/1376. Moreover, she was the one who distributed the customary stipend given to the army at the beginning of a new reign, thereby ensuring their loyalty (al-Ḫazrağī, 2009: vol. 5, p. 2502). Ğihat Ṭayy stands out with her name engraved on two other objects. One is a brass tray in the Musée Bernard d’Agesci in Niort (inv. no. 914-1-446) inscribed with the name of her husband al-Afḍal ʿAbbās (Fig. 10), and the graffito on its back reads “bi-rasm mawālīnā Ğihat Ṭayy” (for our mistress Ğihat Ṭayy) (Fig. 11).29 The other, with an identical formula, is a brass basin in the Benaki Museum (inv. no. 13075), attributed to Sultan al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf even though the long inscription around its rim is seriously damaged and thus impossible to read, but the Rasulid five-petalled rosette – the dynastic emblem – repeated some forty-eight times all over the vessel has secured its Rasulid attribution (Ballian, 2009: pp. 123–8).30
A tray in the name of Sultan al-Afḍal ʿAbbās (inv. no. 914-1-446), Collection Musée Bernard d’Agesci, Niort
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Niort Agglo and Noha SadekA tray in the name of Sultan al-Afḍal ʿAbbās, graffito in the name of Ğihat Ṭayy (inv. no. 914-1-446), Collection Musée Bernard d’Agesci, Niort
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Niort Agglo and Noha SadekGaston Wiet, who meticulously recorded graffiti he read on metal objects in his notes, may have misread a name, which I propose to identify here as a Rasulid princess on a Mamluk copper candlestick datable to the late-seventh/thirteenth or early-eighth/fourteenth centuries in the Cairo Museum of Islamic Art (inv. no. 15078).31 Similarly to many Mamluk candlesticks, the base is decorated with three bands, a central wide one containing an inscription in thuluth, and two narrow upper and lower bands with foliated and plated Kufic inscriptions. None of these inscriptions provides names identifying the patron, and there are no five-petalled rosettes to confirm a Rasulid connection. However, two graffiti incised on the inside of the socket provide a link to Rasulid Yemen. One reads: “bi-rasm ṭištḫānat Ğihat al-ṭawāšī” (for the wardrobe of the eunuch’s lady) and the other: “bi-rasm ṭištḫānat mawālīnā Ğihat Fātin” (for the wardrobe of our mistress Ğihat Fātin) (Fig. 12). This name was read by Wiet as “Qāyit” (Wiet, G. Archives, no. 1). Since the letters qāf and fāʾ have the same form with the clumsy graffiti lacking dots to differentiate them, and the final letter nūn is close to a tāʾ, it is thus possible to read the name as “Fātin,” corresponding to the title of Ğihat Fātin (d. 768/1366–7), the daughter of Sultan al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd, who was named after her eunuch Kamāl al-Dīn Fātin (al-Akwaʿ, 1986: pp. 237–8).32 A graffito in her name, “Ğihat al-ṭawāšī Fātin al-Šamsī ” (the lady of the eunuch Fātin al-Šamsī), is incised on the underside of a Mamluk tray, dated to the late-seventh/thirteenth or the early-eighth/fourteenth centuries, in the collection of the Musée des Beaux-Arts in Lyons (inv. no. D 568), and whose official inscription consists of good wishes for an anonymous proprietor. Her name is positioned just below another graffito, “al-Šarābḫāna al-Muʾayyadīya” (the cellar of al-Muʾayyadīya), clearly a reference to her father’s madrasa.33
A candlestick, graffito in the name of Ğihat Fātin, Museum of Islamic Art, Cairo (inv. no. 15078)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Carine JuvinIt is not always possible to establish a Rasulid association for graffiti found on non-Rasulid objects, largely because some names of eunuchs and women cannot be identified with great certainty, having not been mentioned in the sources. Thus, the identity of a woman referred to as Ğihat Iqbāl al-Muğāhidī “bi-rasm mawālīnā al-dūr Ğihat Iqbāl al-Muğāhidī” (for our mistress of the [noble] abode Ğihat Iqbāl al-Muğāhidī) in a graffito incised on a Mamluk candlestick in Cairo (inv. no. 15080) (Fig. 13) is probably Rasulid. This hypothesis seems plausible since the name of Iqbāl was common among Rasulid eunuchs, while al-Muğāhidī refers to someone in the service of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAli. Although the name of the Mamluk sultan, al-Malik al-Nāṣir, appears on four roundels of the socket, and the phrase “ʿizz li-mawlānā al-sulṭān” (glory to our master the sultan) inside the three medallions decorating the body, the candlestick was attributed to an officer in the service of the Mamluk sultan al-Nāṣir Hasan (r. 748–52/1347–51 and 755–62/1354–61) (Wiet, Archives, no. 3).34 Consequently, the candlestick probably was one of many luxury objects acquired by the Rasulids on the Mamluk market.35
A candlestick attributed to a Mamluk officer, Museum of Islamic Art, Cairo (15080) (Wiet, Archives no. 3. Département des Arts de l’Islam, Musée du Louvre, Paris)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Musée du Louvre4 Identifying Rasulid Graffiti on Ayyubid Metalwork
Unsurprisingly, several Ayyubid metal objects are incised with Rasulid graffiti, as they probably arrived in Yemen with their original owners. One notable example is a brass tray in the Musée Bernard d’Agesci (inv. no. 914-1-450) (Fig. 14) with an anonymous inscription and figural representations, some identified as Christians (Baer, 1989: pp. 7, 11–2). It is unique for having graffiti in the names of three Rasulid women: Ğihat Iqbāl al-Ğuzarī, “bi-rasm al-ḫizāna Ğihat Iqbāl al-Ğuzarī” (for the treasury [of] Ğihat Iqbāl al-Ğuzarī)36 (Fig. 15), Ğihat Muʿtab, “bi-rasm mawālīnā Ğihat Muʿtab,” (for our mistress Ğihat Muʿtab), and Ğihat Muḫtār al-Muğāhidī, “bi-rasm Ğihat Muḫtār al-Muğāhidī” (for the lady Ğihat Muḫtār al-Muğāhidī) (Fig. 16). If the first two names have already been encountered on other objects, the third, that of Ğihat Muḫtār al-Muğāhidī, appears for the first time. Although it has not been possible to identify her, she can be placed within the middle or the second half of the eighth/fourteenth century since her eunuch’s nisba indicates that he was affiliated with Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAli. The presence of all three names on this tray attests to the modality of female inheritance during a period spanning over a century. A fourth graffito on the same tray, “bi-rasm ḫizānat Dār al-Naṣr” (for the treasury of Dār al-Naṣr), indicates that it entered the treasury of the aforementioned Zabid palace, corresponding to the trays in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (inv. no. 91.1.605) and the Musée du Louvre (inv. no. 6008).
An Ayyubid tray, (inv. no. 914-1-450). Collection Musée Bernard d’Agesci, Niort
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Niort Agglo and Fabienne TexierAn Ayyubid tray, graffito in the name of Ğihat Iqbāl al-Juzarī (inv. no. 914-1-450), Collection Musée Bernard d’Agesci, Niort
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Niort Agglo and Fabienne TexierAn Ayyubid tray, graffito in the name of Ğihat Muḫtār al-Muğāhidī (inv. no. 914-1-450), Collection Musée Bernard d’Agesci, Niort
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Niort Agglo and Fabienne TexierAn Ayyubid brass candlestick with silver and gold inlay in the collection of the Musée des Arts Décoratifs in Paris, on long-term loan to the Musée du Louvre (inv. no. AD 4414) (Fig. 17), also decorated with Christian scenes and an inscription of good wishes, but signed by Dāwūd ibn Salāma al-Mawṣilī, and dated 646/1248–9, presents a graffito with several mistakes and omissions: “bi-rasm mawālīnā al-dūr al-kmr (al-kirām) al-ğiha al-ṭawāšī al-Ğamā (Ğamāl) al-Dīn Fatḥ” (for our mistress [in the care] of the eunuch Ğamāl al-Dīn Fatḥ) (Fig. 18). To date, sources have not revealed a eunuch by that name so it is impossible to confirm his Yemeni affiliation with absolute certainty, and whether the lady he served belonged to the Rasulid family, but the formula’s close association with the Rasulid titles under discussion makes this hypothesis plausible.
A candlestick, Musée des Arts Décoratifs, on long-term deposit at the Musée du Louvre, Paris (inv. no. AD 4414)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© 2010 Musée du Louvre and Hughes DuboisA candlestick, graffito in the name of Ğihat Jamāl al-Dīn Fatḥ, Musée des Arts Décoratifs, Paris, on long-term deposit at the Musée du Louvre, Paris (inv. no. AD 4414)
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
© Musée du Louvre and Carine JuvinNevertheless, a graffito incised on the underside of an Ayyubid copper inlaid tray (Behrens-Abouseif, 2021: pp. 55–61, cat. 21),37 clearly read as “bi-rasm mawālīnā Ğihat Ḥāfiẓ” (for our mistress Ğihat Ḥāfiẓ),38 confirms the tray entered Rasulid possession since Ğihat Ḥāfiẓ (d. 796/1393) was the daughter of Sultan al-Muğāhid ʿAli (al-Ḫazrağī, 1983: vol. 2, p. 211).39 This tray, originally in the private collection of Werner Daum, was ascribed to the Ayyubid sultan al-Kāmil Muhammad (r. 615–35/1218–38), based on the inscription around the rim. Al-Kāmil’s son, al-Masʿūd Yūsuf, was the last Ayyubid governor of Yemen (r. 612–26/1215–29) before the Rasulids assumed power, which “explains how this vessel might have found its way there” (Daum, 1987: p. 135).40 However, the inscription on this vessel acquired by the al-Sabah Collection in Kuwait (inv. no. LNS 1599 M) was reread by Doris Behrens-Abouseif, attributing it to another son, al-ʿĀdil Abū Bakr (r. 635–7/1238–40), who succeeded his father on the throne of Egypt. Thus, it is difficult to guess how the tray arrived in Yemen since the Rasulids became independent rulers in Yemen before al-ʿĀdil’s accession to the throne.
Moreover, a Yemeni connection can be suggested for graffiti incised on two famous Ayyubid metal objects given that both were signed by the same artisan Abū Bakr ibn Ḥāğğ Ğaldak: a candlestick in Boston’s Museum of Fine Arts (inv. no. 57.148) 622/1225, and an ewer in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art (inv. no. 91.1.586) 623/1226. The absence of an official inscription has made the identification of the owner’s name, possibly the patron, more problematic. However, the presence of graffiti on both objects in the name of “Dār ʿAfīf al-Muẓaffarī” was correctly identified as a lady [under the care] of a eunuch named ʿAfīf al-Muẓaffarī (Rice, 1949: p. 339, no. 561; Rice, 1957: pp. 319–20),41 making it possible that the woman was a Rasulid lady for whom a eunuch named ʿAfīf al-Muẓaffarī, attached to Sultan al-Muẓaffar’s household, had been responsible. Given that the names of Ğihat ʿAfīf and her eunuch ʿAfīf, appear in the royal Rasulid administrative registers, Nūr al-Maʿārif and Irtifāʿ al-dawla al-Muʾayyadīya, as recipients of important stipends lend credence to this suggestion (Ğāzim, 2003–5: vol. 1, p. 121; vol. 2, pp. 137–8; Ğāzim, 2008: pp. 228, 266). The use of dār rather than ğiha in this graffito may be connected to the early Rasulid period when the titles used for proprietors’ graffiti were not yet systemised, as observed in later examples. Another clue confirming a Yemeni link is the presence of a second graffito on the Boston candlestick base, reading: “al-ṭištḫāna al-Masʿūdīya” (the wardrobe of al-Masʿūd). The name of al-Masʿūd is associated with several seventh/thirteenth-century princes, but in this case, he would have been the son of the Ayyubid sultan al-Kāmil, as Raby has suggested (2012: p. 16). Both objects would have arrived in Yemen among his possessions, where they subsequently came into Rasulid property through his widow, the daughter of an Ayyubid official, who married the first Rasulid sultan al-Manṣūr ʿUmar.
5 Mobility, Status, and Wealth
Rasulid women were great patrons of architecture, but since most Rasulid monuments have disappeared and the inscriptions on the few surviving buildings commissioned by women have not all been deciphered, it is impossible to know how female titles were deployed on architecture. Currently, only an incomplete inscription with a woman’s titles is known on the entrance of a madrasa in the village of Ḍarās in the Ḏū Sufāl region, some fifty kilometres north of Taʿizz. It mentions the patron as the mother (wālida) of Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn ibn Šaraf al-Dīn Muhammad ibn ʿAli ibn Rasūl with the date 677/1278 and the titles “al-sitr al-rafīʿ al-ʿālī al-manīʿ” (the lofty, high, and impregnable veil) (al-Akwaʿ, 1986: p. 216).42 These titles, equally popular among the Ayyubids and the Mamluks, figuratively refer to a woman’s virtue and chastity through the use of terms related to architecture, particularly those describing fortifications as “elevated, impregnable, etc.” Unfortunately, the inscription is incomplete, and it is impossible to know other titles that may have been included.
While the title of ğiha has yet to be encountered on architectural inscriptions, it appears on the tombstone of Sultan al-Ašraf ʿUmar’s daughter, with her title Ğihat al-Ṭawāšī Šihāb al-Dīn Muwaffaq (the lady of the eunuch Šihāb al-Dīn Muwaffaq), and her personal name ʿAnqā, in addition to the modest titles of al-sitt al-fāḍila al-faqīra (the virtuous and poor lady) (Ḫalīfa, 1992: p. 197).43 Although the personal names of several Rasulid princesses are mentioned in historical sources, this is the only public display of a Rasulid woman’s forename known until now.
Therefore, different inscriptions confirm the regular association of a woman with the name of a eunuch entrusted to oversee her well-being and household in Rasulid Yemen, but it seems to have vanished in subsequent centuries. Notably, a similar custom was introduced in Yemen during the nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries when the Zaydi imamate convention required women of the royal and elite households to bear male names and titles since their names were supposed to be hidden (Vom Bruck, 2009: pp. 229–34).44 In the case of Rasulid women, their status and rank were defined by their association with the names of their eunuchs who mediated between them and the outside world. The title of ğiha and its equivalent dār were used interchangeably, even though most of the graffiti examples on metal objects examined here use ğiha rather than dār, except for the plural form of the latter, al-ādur and al-dūr. In Mamluk society, few graffiti with women owning metal objects are known. A unique example is a candlestick inscribed with the titles of an anonymous official at Sultan al-Nāṣir Muhammad’s court in the Louvre (inv. no. OA 5005), with a carved graffito, “bi-rasm Fāṭima Ḫātūn bint al-sulṭān al-Kāmil” (for the lady Fatima, daughter of Sultan al-Kāmil), who was the daughter of Sultan al-Kāmil Šaʿbān ibn al-Nāṣir Muhammad, who briefly reigned in 746–7/1345–6. Significantly, the lady’s first name is not hidden behind a eunuch (Wiet, 1932: p. 199).
Given that records of elite households in the Islamic world are largely unavailable, proprietary markings on metalware constitute important elements for understanding ownership and its transmission. The graffiti prove that these highly prized utilitarian objects (brass with silver inlaid basins, candlesticks, and trays) were passed through several generations of women. Moreover, having her name inscribed along with a grandmother or a mother-in-law’s name must have been a way of affirming a woman’s rank within the Rasulid family. Some graffiti include the name of the place where the objects were destined to be kept, a treasury (ḫizāna), a wardrobe (ṭištḫāna), a cellar (šarābḫāna),45 a palace (Dār al-Naṣr), a citadel (ḥiṣn), or a tomb (turba) in a madrasa (al-Muʾayyadīya), providing an idea about object circulation within the residences of the Rasulid household. As a result, it is difficult to discuss how taste influenced object choice, and women’s role in selecting objects not made for them, but entering their possession by way of gifting, inheritance, or purchase. Several objects arrived in Yemen with the Ayyubids, who preceded the Rasulids but whose presence lasted less than sixty years in that country (569–626/1173–1229), while others were later acquired on the Mamluk market during the seventh–eighth/thirteenth–fourteenth centuries, shedding light on the existence of second-hand market for precious metalwork and an enduring appreciation. There are many unresolved questions: 1) did the name of the original owner, such as the Mamluk sultan al-Nāṣir Muhammad add to the object’s value; 2) were proprietor names incised only in the event of an inheritance dispute, to identify ownership within the same household, or perhaps during a ceremony requiring the display of these objects; and 3) why did some objects carry double graffiti for the same owner? Additionally, one can question the absence of graffiti on other Rasulid metal objects, although this issue will remain unresolved until more objects have been closely examined to verify and read any existing graffiti.
6 Conclusion
Despite their cursory nature and low aesthetic appeal, this corpus of inscriptions incised on metal objects provides essential clues on the status and wealth of women in Rasulid Yemen, on the circulation of these highly prized luxury items in courtly life, their portability within different locations, as well as their transmission from one woman owner to another, even skipping generations. They also confirm the existence of a distinctive practise at the Rasulid court. The choice of honorific titles with architectural connotations, similar to masculine ones, further emphasised a high-born woman’s status by suggesting her as an inaccessible monument, namely, a fortress or a palace. The withdrawal or disappearance of Rasulid women behind the names of their eunuchs seems to be proof of their status and good standing, as if the eunuch’s name acted as a patronymic veil protecting the woman and signalling her rank.
Graffiti of Rasulid Women Proprietors
Citation: Journal of Material Cultures in the Muslim World 4, 1 (2023) ; 10.1163/26666286-12340041
List of the Rasulid Sultans
1/ Al-Manṣūr ʿUmar ibn ʿAli ibn Rasūl (r. 626–47/1229–49)
2/ Al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf ibn al-Manṣūr ʿUmar (r. 647–94/1249–95)
3/ Al-Ašraf ʿUmar ibn al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf (r. 694–6/1295–7)
4/ Al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd ibn al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf (r. 696–721/1297–1321)
5/ Al-Muğāhid ʿAli ibn al-Muʾayyad Dāwūd (r. 721–64/1321–62)
6/ Al-Afḍal ʿAbbās ibn al-Muğāhid ʿAli (r. 764–78/1362–76)
7/ Al-Ašraf Ismaʿil ibn al-Afḍal ʿAbbās (r. 778–803/1376–1400)
8/ Al-Nāṣir Ahmad ibn al-Ašraf Ismāʿīl (r. 803–27/1400–24)
9/ Al-Manṣūr ʿAbd Allah ibn al-Nāṣir Ahmad (r. 827–30/1424–7)
10/ Al-Ašraf Ismaʿil ibn al-Nāṣir Ahmad (r. 830/1427)
11/ Al-Ẓāhir Yaḥyā ibn al-Ašraf Ismaʿil (r. 830–42/1427–39)
Five sultans, beset with diminishing powers from political feuding, ruled during the last fifteen years (842–58/1439–54) of the Rasulid dynasty.
About the Author
Noha Sadek is a specialist in the material culture and history of Yemen, with numerous publications. Since 2015, she has been a team member of the WMF project “The Restoration of the National Museum and the Qubbat al-Husayniyya in the Historic City of Taʿizz.” She is currently a research associate at Centre Français de Recherche de la Péninsule Arabique.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Ibn al-Sāʿī, ʿA. (1968). Nisāʾ al-ḫulafāʾ al-musammā Ğihāt al-aʾimma al-ḫulafāʾ min al-ḥarāʾir wal-imāʾ. M. Ğawād, ed., Cairo: Dār al-Maʿārif.
Ibn Šāhīn al-Ẓāhirī, Ḫ. (1894). Kitāb Zubdat kašf al-mamālik wa-bayān al-ṭuruq wal-mamālik, P. Ravaisse, ed., Paris: Ernest Leroux.
Ğāzim, M. ʿA., ed. (2003–5). Nūr al-maʿārif fī nuẓum wa-qawānīn al-Yaman fī’l-ʿahd al-Muẓaffarī al-wārif. (2 vols). Sanaa: Centre français d’archéologie et de sciences sociales de Sanaa.
Ğāzim, M. ʿA., ed. (2008). Irtifāʿal-dawla al-Muʾayyadīya. Ṣanaa: Centre français d’archéologie et de sciences sociales de Sanaa, 2008.
Ibn Faḍl Allah al-ʿUmarī, Š. (1985). Masālik al-abṣār fī mamālik al-amṣār, A. F. Sayyid, ed., Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.
Al-Ḫazrağī, ʿA. (1983). al-ʿUqūd al-luʾluʾīyah fī tārīḫ al-dawla al-Rasūlīya, M. Basyūnī ʿAsal, ed., M. al-Akwaʿ, rev. (2 vols). Ṣanaa: Markaz al-Dirāsāt wal-Buḥūṯ al-Yamanī.
Al-Ḫazrağī, ʿA. (2009). Al-ʿIqd al-fāḫir al-ḥasan fī ṭabaqāt akābir ahl al-Yaman, ʿA. al-ʿAbbādī et al., eds., (5 vols). Sanaa: Maktabat al-Ğīl al-Ğadīd.
Al-Mawṣilī, M. (1990). Al-Burd al-muwaššā fī ṣināʿat al-inšā, A. S. Ṣabrah, ed., Beirut: al-Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīya.
Al-Qalqašandī, A. (1918–1922). Kitāb Ṣubḥ al-aʿšā, (14 vols). Cairo: Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyya.
Al-Saḥmāwī, Š. M. (2009). Al-Ṯaġr al-bāsim fī ṣināʿat al-kātib wal-kātim, A. M. A. Mursī, ed., Cairo: Dār al-Kutub wa-l-Waṯāʾiq al-Qawmīya.
Secondary Sources
ʿAbd Ar-Rāziq, A. (1973). La femme au temps des Mamlouks en Egypte. Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.
Al-Akwaʿ, I. (1986). Al-Madāris al-Islāmīya fīʾl-Yaman. Beirut and Sanaa: Muʾassasat al-Risāla and Maktabat al-Ğīl al-Ğadīd.
Amīn, M. M., and L. ʿA. Ibrāhīm (1990). al-Muṣṭalaḥāt al-miʿmārīya fī-l-waṯāʾiq al-Mamlūkīya (648–922/1250–1517). Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press.
Anderson, G., and M. Rosser-Owen (2015). Great Ladies and Noble Daughters: Ivories and Women in the Umayyad Court at Cordoba. In: A. S. Landau, ed., Pearls on a String: Art in the Age of Great Islamic Empires, Baltimore and Seattle: The Walters Art Museum and University of Washington Press, pp. 28–51.
Atıl, E. (1981). Renaissance of Islam: Art of the Mamluks. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Ayalon, D. (1999). Eunuchs, Caliphs, and Sultans: A Study in Power Relationships. Jerusalem: The Magness Press and the Hebrew University.
Baer, E. (1989). Ayyubid Metalwork with Christian Images. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Ballian, A. (2009). Three Medieval Islamic Brasses and the Mosul Tradition of Inlaid Metalwork. Mouseio Benaki 9, pp. 113–141.
Al-Bāšā, Ḥ. (1989). Al-Alqāb al-Islāmīya fī-l-tārīḫ wa-l-waṯāʾiq wa-l-āṯār, Cairo: al-Dār al-Fannīya.
Behrens-Abouseif, D. (2011). Craftsmen, Upstarts and Sufis in the Late Mamluk Period. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 74(3), pp. 375–395.
Behrens-Abouseif, D. (2021). Metalwork from the Arab World and the Mediterranean. London: Thames and Hudson.
Blair, S. (2006). Islamic Art as a Source for the Study of Women in Premodern Societies. In: A. El-Azhary Sonbol, ed., Beyond the Exotic: Women’s Histories in Islamic Societies, Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, pp. 336–346.
Canby, S. R., D., Beyazit, M. Rugiadi, and A. C. S. Peacock (2016). Court and Cosmos: The Great Age of the Seljuqs. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Cortese, D., and S. Calderini, (2006). Women and the Fatimids in the World of Islam. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Daftary, F. (1998). Sayyida Hurra: The Ismaʿili Sulayhid Queen of Yemen. In: G. R. G. Hambly, ed., Women in the Medieval Islamic World: Power, Patronage and Piety, New York: St. Martin’s Press, pp. 117–130.
Daum, W., ed. (1987). Yemen, 3000 Years of Art and Civilisation in Arabia Felix. Innsbruck: Pinguin-Verlag.
Grabar, O. (1961). Two pieces of Metalwork at the University of Michigan. Ars Orientalis 4, pp. 360–368.
Juvin, C. (2021). Civilian Elite and Metalwork: A View from the Edge. In: B. J. Walker and A. Al-Ghouz, eds., History and Society during the Mamluk Period (1250–1517). Studies of the Annemarie Schimmel Institute for Advanced Study III. Bonn: V&R Unipress, Bonn University Press, pp. 285–317.
Kenney, E. (2021). Treasuring Yemen: Notes on Exchange and Collection in Rasūlid Material Culture. Der Islam 98(1), pp. 27–68.
Ḫalīfa, R. (1992). al-Funūn al-zuḫrufīya al-Yamanīya. Cairo: al-Dār al-Miṣrīya al-Lubnānīya.
Lentz, T. W. and Lowry, G. D. (1989). Timur and the Princely Vision: Princely Art and Culture in the Fifteenth Century. Los Angeles and Washington, DC: LACMA and the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery.
Moorthy Kloss, M. (2021). Eunuchs at the Service of Yemen’s Rasulid Dynasty (626–858/1229–1454). Der Islam 98(1), pp. 6–26.
O’Kane, B., ed. (2006). The Treasures of Islamic Art in the Museums of Cairo. Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press.
Petry, C. F. (2004). The Estate of al-Khawand Fāṭima al-Khaṣṣbakiyya: Royal Spouse, Autonomous Investor. In: M. Winter and A. Levanoni, eds., The Mamluks in Egyptian and Syrian Politics and Society, Leiden: E. J. Brill, pp. 277–294.
Porter, Y. (2014). Le mécénat architectural des princesses timourides. In: E. Malamut and A. Nicolaïdès, eds., Impératrices, princesses, aristocrates et saintes souveraines de l’Orient chrétien et musulman au Moyen Âge au début des Temps modernes, Aix-en-Provence: Presses Universitaires de Provence, pp. 273–286.
Porter, V. (1988). The Art of the Rasulids. In: Werner Daum, ed., Yemen: 3000 Years of Art and Civilisation in Arabia Felix. Innsbruck: Pinguin-Verlag, pp. 232–253.
Porter, V. (2011). Arabic and Persian Seals and Amulets in the British Museum. London: The British Museum.
Raby, J. (2012). The Principle of Parsimony and the Problem of the ‘Mosul School of Metalwork’. In: V. Porter and M. Rosser-Owen, eds., Metalwork and Material Culture in the Islamic World, London: I. B. Tauris, pp. 11–86.
Rice, D. S. (1949). The Oldest Dated ‘Mosul’ Candlestick, A.D. 1225. Burlington Magazine 91(561), pp. 336–341.
Rice, D. S. (1957). Inlaid Brasses from the Workshop of Aḥmad al-Dhakī al-Mawṣilī. Ars Orientalis 2, pp. 283–326.
Sadek, N. (1989). Rasūlid Women: Power and Patronage. Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies 19, pp. 121–136.
Sadek, N. (1993). In Queen Sheba’s Footsteps: Women Patrons in Rasulid Yemen. Asian Art 6(2), pp. 14–27.
Sadek, N. (2021). The Monuments of Rasulid Taʿizz: The Physical Construction of Power and Piety. In: F. Kümmeler, J. Majorossy, and E. Hovden, eds., Practising Community in Urban and Rural Eurasia (1000–1600), Leiden and Boston: E. J. Brill, pp. 283–305.
Thesaurus d’Epigraphie Islamique. Kalus, L. and Bauden, F., eds., Max Van Berchem Foundation, (on-line database) http://www.epigraphie-islamique.org.
Vallet, E. (2010). L’Arabie marchande. État et commerce sous les sultans rasūlides du Yémen (626–858/1229–1454). Paris: Publications de la Sorbonne.
Van Berchem, M. (1904). Notes d’archéologie arabe. Journal Asiatique III, pp. 8–90.
Vom Bruck, G. (2009). Names as Bodily Signs. In: G. Vom Bruck and B. Bodenhorn, eds., An Anthropology of Names and Naming, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 226–250.
Ward, R. (2017). Mean or Green? Mamluk Vessels Recycled for the Rasulid Sultans. In: A. Ohta, M. Rogers, and R. Wade Haddon, eds., Art, Trade, and Culture in the Islamic World and Beyond, London: The Ginkgo Library, pp. 34–44.
Wiet, G. (1930). Matériaux pour un corpus inscriptionum arabicarum. 1ère partie -Egypte. Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.
Wiet, G. (1933). L’exposition persane de 1931. Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.
Wiet, G. (1932). Catalogue général du Musée arabe du Caire. Objets en cuivre. Cairo: Institut français d’archéologie orientale.
Wiet, G. (1958). Inscriptions mobilières de l’Egypte musulmane. Journal Asiatique 246, pp. 242–281.
Wiet, G. (1970). Un chandelier en cuivre au nom de la sultane Fatima épouse du sultan Mamlouk Qaitbay. Syria 47, pp. 345–355.
Wiet, G. Archives. Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Arts de l’Islam, 2APAI.
Wolf, C. O. M. (2013). ‘The Pen Has Extolled Her Virtues’: Gender and Power Within the Visual Legacy of Shajar al-Durr. In: M. Gharipour and I. C. Schik, eds., Calligraphy and Architecture in the Muslim World, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 199–216.
Notes
I am extremely grateful to Carine Juvin for her help and insights, for facilitating my consultation of the Wiet Archives in the Musée du Louvre, and for photographing Rasulid graffiti in Cairo and Paris.
A similar view was expressed by al-Mawṣilī (1990: p. 98).
It has been suggested that the tray was made for his daughter’s dowry, see Raby (2012: p. 26).
Gaston Wiet read the inscription from photographs, and I am unsure if the inscription has been read since.
http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O295865/bowl-unknown/. As the prayer inserted after Sūdūn’s name is for a deceased person who needs God’s mercy, the bowl was probably made after he died in 865/1461.
The master builder Ahmad Šihāb al-Dīn b. al-ʿAṭṭār restored Ibn ʿArabī’s mausoleum in Damascus on the orders of Sultan Selim.
All of the inscriptions follow a similar formula. Sami di Giosa presented a paper on metal objects made for Fatima Ḫawand at the Fourth Conference of the School of Mamlūk Studies (Beirut, May 2017). For more on the lady’s wealth, see Petry (2004: pp. 277–94).
Queen Arwa governed over the central and southern highlands of Yemen, first as queen consort in collaboration with her husband, then as regent for her son, and finally, as the sovereign until her death. In contemporary sources, she is usually referred to by her titles of al-ḥurra, al-sayyida, al-malika (the free, the lady, the queen). However, coins struck during her reign do not mention her name or titles, instead, only her husband. See Daftary (1998: pp. 117–30) for more on her life and for a discussion of Šajar al-Durr’s name and titles, see Wolf (2013: pp. 200–1).
The seal (SA-13650) is in the Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg and the inscription is cited in Porter (2014: p. 281); for further examples of seals with female names, see Porter (2011).
This did not prevent some inscriptions from erasure to remove an owner’s name, such as the example on an Ayyubid brass basin in the Kelsey Museum at the University of Michigan published by Grabar (1961: figs. 4c–d).
For a list of these objects in collections worldwide, see Porter (1988: pp. 249–52). The five consecutive sultans begin with the second reigning sultan, al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf, to his great-grandson al-Afḍal ʿAbbās. There are also enamelled glass objects and textile fragments. Kenney (2021: pp. 27–68) has most recently revisited the issue of gifting and recycling Mamluk-made metal objects for the Rasulid court.
Scattered in collections worldwide, many objects must be closely examined to verify the presence of graffiti, which may not have been recorded.
There are two other graffiti on the tray’s reverse: the name of a later proprietor, Šaraf al-Dīn ibn Aḥmad, and the second is poorly inscribed and difficult to read.
There is no photo of the graffito in the catalogue, but the undotted transcription recorded by Behrens-Abouseif supports my reading.
Most of the women’s personal names are mentioned by Ibn al-Sāʿī.
The original mosque and the inscription have not survived, but the text is cited in: http://www.epigraphie-islamique.uliege.be/thesaurus/User/EpigraphyDisplay.aspx?id=7653&pan=1&st=7653&sc=1. The wording of the inscription reveals that the lady in question was an enslaved concubine.
These titles are also carved in the same building on a wooden cenotaph (dated 533/1138–9). Except for Sitt al-Mulk, Caliph al-Ḥākim’s sister, women are scarcely mentioned in Fatimid chronicles.
Al-Karīma continues to be used in contemporary Yemen when referencing a man’s sister.
One consort was known as Bāb Ğawhar, by reference to her servant. However, using the title Bāb does not seem to have been widespread.
For a recent study on Rasulid eunuchs, see Moorthy Kloss (2021: pp. 6–26).
Muhammad Ğāzim, the editor of this register, was unable to identify the lady and her eunuch because they are not mentioned in the chronicles, but he chose to transcribe the name as al-Ğuzarī, whose origin is unclear. This eunuch is also referred to as Sābiq al-Dīn Iqbāl.
There was another madrasa known as al-Muʾayyadīya built in Taʿizz by Ğihat Muršid, a daughter of al-Muğāhid ʿAlī, also known as the madrasa of Salāma, presumably the patron’s forename. Unfortunately, both monuments are no longer extant, and it is impossible to ascertain the madrasa with Ğihat Fahīm’s tomb.
The exception to this rule is al-Nāṣir Aḥmad (r. 803–27/1400–24), who is buried in the madrasa al-Ašrafiyya in Taʿizz, built by his father al-Ašraf Ismaʿil (d. 803/1400). The last seven sultans, reigning during the final twenty-five years of the Rasulid dynasty, did not build individual madrasas but instead were buried in predecessor monuments.
It does not seem that Ğihat Muʿtab, who commissioned the extant madrasa in her name in Taʿizz, made provision for a tomb, see Sadek (1989: pp. 125–7). Her biographical information was recorded in al-Ḫazrağī (1983: vol. 2, pp. 209–10) and al-Ḫazrağī (2009: vol. 5, pp. 2504–7).
For photos of the graffiti, see https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/444605.
Zabīd was the administrative and religious centre of the Red Sea Tihāma coastal plain and served as the winter capital for the Rasulids. According to al-Ḫazrağī, Jihat Muʿtab was residing in the winter palace when she died and had been buried in the town’s northern cemetery, al-Ḫazrağī (1983: vol. 2, p. 209).
Ğihat Ṣalāḥ, named Āmina, was the daughter of Shaikh Ismaʿil ibn ʿAbd Allah al-Ḥalabī, a religious scholar from Aleppo who settled in Zabīd during the reign of al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf.
Ibn Šāhīn al-Ẓāhirī (1894: pp. 121–3) describes the Mamluk sultan’s private quarters in the citadel of Cairo. An example of the use of the title of al-ādur al-šarīfa on an object is found in the titles on metalware made for Fatima Ḫawand, see Wiet, 1932: p. 236 and Wiet, 1970: 346–7.
I am grateful to Mme Laurence Lamy, Director of the Musée Bernard d’Agesci in Niort and to Mme Fabienne Texier for allowing me to examine the Rasulid objects in the museum. The tray was part of the Piet-Lataudrie collection, first published by Van Berchem (1904: pp. 68–70).
The graffito was noted but not deciphered. I thank Mina Moraitou for providing a clear picture of this graffito, enabling me to identify it.
For a recent photo of the candlestick, see O’Kane (2006: p. 142, no. 126).
Ğihat Fātin constructed a madrasa in Zabid, named al-Fātiniyya, which remains today, see Sadek (1993: p. 23).
For a photo of the graffito, see https://collections.mba-lyon.fr/fr/notice/d-568-plateau-a-bord-festonne-33acf642-9bf6-45e9-9291-d8ed5c04b5fe.
Wiet read a second graffito “bi-rasm al-ḥiṣn al-(?) al-saʿīd” (for the citadel (?) the blessed). Unfortunately, it is not possible to identify the name of this citadel. For further details, see Atıl (1981: pp. 96–7), but the graffiti is not mentioned, and see O’Kane (2006: p. 152, no. 136).
Some of these Mamluk objects were recycled for the Rasulids, such as the basin in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (inv. No. 91.1.589), where the original owner’s name, Sultan al-Nāṣir Muhammad, was replaced with al-Muğāhid ʿAlī. For a discussion of this basin and the two other objects recycled for the Rasulids, see Ward (2017: pp. 34–44).
I am grateful to Mme Fabienne Texier for photographing the graffiti on this tray.
A photo of the graffito is reproduced on p. 61.
The word ğiha was read as ḥurma by Behrens-Abouseif.
According to the court historian, she died a week after the death of Ğihat Muʿtab.
Werner Daum curated the exhibition Yemen, 3000 Years of Art and Civilisation in Arabia Felix, held in Munich, 1987–8, and was a diplomat in Yemen during the 1980s, where he acquired this tray.
Rice did not identify the eunuch or the lady in question. For a different opinion and a discussion of the graffiti, see Raby (2012: pp. 15–7), who suggested a possible Yemeni connection because the name ʿAfīf is inscribed on a box made in Sanaa, although a connection between the two ʿAfīf(s) is doubtful.
The lady in question was married to Sultan al-Muẓaffar Yūsuf’s uncle.
The object is currently in the Department of Archaeology at the University of Sanaa and remains the only published tombstone of a Rasulid princess. The lady in question received important stipends and gifts, according to Ğāzim (2003–5: vol. 1, pp. 535–6, 546–7).
The real names of these women appeared in legal documents.
These composite Arabic-Persian words, the ṭištḫāna, destined for storing carpets, clothing, and cushions, and the šarābḫāna, where drinks and their respective tableware were stored, are often translated as a pantry, and a buttery, respectively; see Amīn and Ibrāhīm, 1990: pp. 70, 77.
