13. THE IDEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DAR AL-’ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT

edieval Islamic architecture The medieval structure known as the presents the scholar with a fas- Dar al-’Adl belongs to this last category. cinating set of historiographi- This unique Islamic institution, which may cal problems. Some are be best translated in today’s context as ‘pal- Mmethodological, others are related to the ace of justice’, was initially conceived for the nature of the sources, and they are shared qada’ al-mazalim service, that is, for the pub- by various other branches of research in lic hearings held once or twice each week medieval history such as urban history, and presided over by the ruler himself or his topography and the history of arts and appointed deputies to review and redress crafts whose inquiries depend on the same grievances submitted by his subjects.1 The sources. Still others are peculiar to the spe- earliest known dar al-’adl was built c. 1163 by cifi c domain of architectural history. These Nur al-Din Mahmud ibn Zanki in his capi- last are the most challenging, for they tal , and the last one was con- require particular strategies that take into structed by the al-Nasir account the disparities in our knowledge of Muhammad ibn Qalawun (1294–1340, with the two basic components needed to recon- two interruptions) at the Citadel of the struct the history of any architectural object: Mountain (Qal’at al-Jabal) in Cairo in 1315 the physical remains and the contemporary (it was rebuilt in 1334). Three more dur al- documents related to them. There are three ’adl are known to have been constructed possible kinds of disparity: in the best cases, between these two dates: one in in buildings that are still standing and in fairly 1189 by al-Zahir Ghazi, the son of Salah al- good shape can be studied in light of rele- Din, and three in or next to the Citadel in vant contemporary documents. In more dif- Cairo beginning in c. 1206 and ending when fi cult cases, the structures still exist, but the last one was erected by al-Nasir supportive documents, written or otherwise, Muhammad. After this no more dur al-’adl do not. Most diffi cult of all is when we have seem to have been built until modern times, documents describing, or referring to, a when the palace of justice was introduced. structure or a group of structures for which The period when dur al-’adl fl ourished we have no visible trace. corresponds to the age of Crusader and

–146– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT

Mongol attacks on the central Islamic lands. ture or urban projects. Scattered in the The geographic area in which they appeared texts, however, are little details about dates is also well defi ned. The three cities in of buildings, locations, patrons, the reasons which they were built had been capitals of for building, the functions and ceremonies separate realms from the late eleventh to that took place in the structures once they the mid twelfth century, but by 1171, they were built and passing remarks about specifi c had all fallen under the control of Nur al- spaces or features inside them. By collating Din, the fi rst unifi er of the Islamic front and analysing these clues, or indices, one against the Crusaders. After Nur al-Din’s can reconstruct a historical account of the death, the three cities were taken over by dur al-’adl and propose an explanation for both Salah al-Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub (1174–1193), their emergence and their disappearance. Nur al-Din’s general, his deputy in Egypt The dar al-’adl was not simply a devel- and his nemesis in his last years, and were opment of the qada’ al-mazalim institution. It integrated into his empire. They became was an original product of an extraordinary loosely united and hotly contested Ayyubid time: the period of the counter-Crusade and capitals after Salah al-Din’s death, and, the ideological revival that went with it, as later, centres of Mamluk government, with ideal Islamic qualities were promulgated by Cairo leading as the sultan’s seat. From Nur both the ruling and religious classes and al-Din’s time onwards, the three cities had demanded by the people. The dar al-’adl visu- been joined by a highly popular common ally represented one of these qualities, jus- cause: fi ghting the Crusaders. The Zankids, tice, and provided the rulers with a forum to Ayyubids and early were intensely publicly claim their adherence to proper engaged in the counter-, and the Islamic codes. That religious ardour, ignited latter also repelled the Mongol forays into by external threats and internal schisms, Bilad al-Sham. had withered away by the middle of the No trace of any of the fi ve palaces of fourteenth century, after the Crusader and justice remains today. Their existence is Mongol offensives had been thwarted and known to us only from textual references, Egypt and Bilad al-Sham had been securely except for the last one, torn down in 1825, united under the rule of the Mamluks. The for which we have several plans, façades and dar al-’adl, along with other innovations of a few views drawn by European visitors to the period, such as the fada’il of the Holy Cairo in the eighteenth and nineteenth cen- Land and jihad literature, lost its raison d’être turies. Nor can archaeology help in investi- and vanished altogether when the circum- gating the history of dur al-’adl, for the areas stances that prompted its development had the buildings stood in have been built over passed. several times. The written sources, do, how- ever, provide a substitute for this lack of material remains, because for Egypt and THE DEVELOPMENT OF Syria, the medieval period is unusually rich THE QADA’ AL-MAZALIM in historical writing. Annals, biographical compendia, manuals for the chancery, geo- The qada’ al-mazalim or al-nazar fi -l-mazalim, graphical treatises (masalik) and topographi- which literally means ‘to consider or to look cal tracts (khitat) all exist in abundance for into acts of injustice’, is an Islamic judicial the period between the twelfth and the fi f- institution with a complex history. It has teenth centuries.2 The problem is that, been identifi ed as the organisation that numerous as they are, medieval Islamic ‘brings the litigants to an agreement by fear sources rarely deal directly with architec- and prevents the contestants from rebuffi ng

–147– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE judgment by awe. It is a position that com- lim.8 The next step was the institutionalisa- bines the authority of the ruler and the tion of qada’ al-mazalim, proposed by Abu impartiality of the judge.’3 This defi nition Yusuf (d. 798) in his book al-Khiraj, which he implies that the supervisor of the mazalim wrote for the fi fth Abbasid caliph, Harun must be a person who has greater executive al-Rashid (786–808).9 Abu Yusuf, who was power than a judge: he is able also to the qadi al-qudat (chief judge) of al-Rashid, enforce his decisions. Most Islamic sources recommended that the caliph regularly pre- attribute the conception of the qada’ al- side over mazalim sessions, obviously not to mazalim to some revered early caliphs, such undermine his own position, but because he as ‘Ali, Mu’awiya, ‘Abd al-Malik and ‘Umar saw the legitimising potential of supervising b. ‘Abd al-’Aziz, or even to Sasanian, pre- mazalim sessions and advised his caliph Islamic precedents.4 But some modern schol- accordingly. That political function was not ars have questioned whether the formal lost on the ambitious usurpers of Abbasid division between simple general qada’ and authority, whether they were in the prov- the qada’ al-mazalim appeared so early. They inces or in the capital, for they almost argue that during both the Rashidi and always took over the qada’ al-mazalim as part Umayyad periods, there was no clear-cut of their acquired power. Thus, Ibn Tulun separation between the political and judicial (868–884), the fi rst governor of Egypt to authorities. The caliphs and their provincial break away from Baghdad successfully and governors (wulat) were also judges. They to expand his domain into Syria, was also could exercise their judiciary authority the fi rst to hold mazalim sessions regularly.10 either directly in public or delegate it to an The Shi’ite Buyids, who overpowered the appointed qadi.5 It was not until the consoli- caliphate and its Iranian provinces, includ- dation of the Islamic legal corpus that ing Baghdad between 945 and 1055, and became known as the shari’a in the early reduced the Abbasid caliphs to fi gureheads, Abbasid period (the second half of the took control of the qada’ al-mazalim and eighth century), that a practical need for passed it on to the Shi’ite sharifs, whom they religiously qualifi ed judges had arisen. considered to be the imams.11 Gradually thereafter, the caliphs had to In the middle of the eleventh century, cede their judicial authority to the qadis. But the qada’ al-mazalim became for the fi rst time because they considered themselves to be an integral part of a comprehensive political the leaders of all Muslims and the succes- theory of Islamic rule. In his al-Ahkam sors (khulafa’) of the Prophet Muhammad, al-Sultaniyya, Abu al-Hasan al-Mawardi the Abbasids upheld the claim to be the (974–1058), a legist and a high offi cer in protectors of the shari’a and the ultimate the Abbasid court, developed a full discus- administrators of justice.6 sion of mazalim jurisdiction and its relation- This political motive helps to explain ship to qada’, and decreed it to be one of the why the qada’ al-mazalim was detached from fundamental duties of Muslim rulers or the nascent judicial system and retained their appointed deputies.12 It has been sug- under the caliph’s jurisdiction: it was seen as gested that Mawardi’s theoretical formula- one of the symbols of the Abbasid right to tions had direct political relevance.13 rule.7 The third and fourth Abbasid caliphs, Mawardi’s career fell between two phases al-Mahdi (775–785) and al-Hadi (785–786), in the turbulent history of the Abbasids, both supervised mazalim sessions in person. the Buyid dominance and the Seljuq sul- They also introduced the offi ce of sahib al- tanate. He served two successive caliphs, mazalim, which was occupied either by a al-Qadir (911–1031) and al-Qa’im (1031–75), high-ranking offi cial or a special qadi who were trying in the ensuing hiatus to responsible for the regular sessions of maza- regain some of the caliphate’s political

–148– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT authority, and was directly involved in that THE DAR AL-’ADL OF DAMASCUS attempt. Seen in this context, al-Ahkam al- Sultaniyya represents a model structure for In the late twelfth century, Nur al-Din a true Islamic government and refl ects the Mahmud ibn Zanki (1146–1174) introduced high hopes of the period that such a goal an innovation that had no precedent in was fi nally at hand. But the Abbasid resur- Islamic history. He built a special palace for gence project did not fully succeed. The mazalim sessions in Damascus, and named it Seljuqs did wrest Iraq from the Buyids and the dar al-’adl or dar kashf al-mazalim (house restored the caliphate and Sunnism to of justice or of mazalim’s inquest).17 We know religious supremacy, but they obliged the very little about this structure for it is rarely caliphs to delegate their political power mentioned in the sources and it entirely dis- (sultan) to them. appeared around the middle of the seven- Nizam al-Mulk al-Tusi (r. 1063–1092), teenth century.18 This led a recent study to the great vizier of the Seljuq doubt its very existence on the basis of Alp Arslan (1063–1072) and Malikshah uncertainties regarding its location, history, (1072–1092) who ingeniously planned their and contradictory reports on exactly where administration, realised the imperative Nur al-Din held his mazalim sessions.19 But political function of mazalim sessions and all the chroniclers who report the building stressed the importance of regularly con- of the Dar al-’Adl, including the great histo- vening them in his treatise on politics, rian of Damascus Ibn ‘Asakir (1105–1176) Siyasat-Namah.14 Some of the Seljuq sultans who was Nur al-Din’s contemporary, are must have heeded Nizam al-Mulk’s advice, clearly speaking about a specifi c structure.20 for they are reported to have held mazalim They do not record the date of its construc- sessions, with their viziers and qadis tion, however. Some scholars have suggested present, while others delegated the respon- that it must have been built shortly after sibility to their viziers. In the late Abbasid Nur al-Din took the city in 1154, but the period, when the caliphate managed for a wording of the sources does not support this short while to recoup some of its lost politi- suggestion.21 Dar al-’Adl was certainly built cal authority with the weakening of the after 1160, possibly around 1163 when the Seljuq overlords, individual caliphs, such prince fi nally settled on Damascus as his as al-Muqtafi (1136–1160) and al-Nasir capital after a period of domestic political (1180–1225), resumed the duty of selecting troubles in which he constantly moved mazalim supervisors, and one, al-Mustanjid between Damascus and Aleppo, his old (1160–70), is even reported to have pre- seat.22 sided over mazalim sessions personally.15 Nur al-Din sat in his Dar al-’Adl to The practice was maintained, at least review mazalim at least twice a week. Salah informally, by many rulers of other Islamic al-Din also held mazalim sessions there when states, especially of the Zankid, Ayyubid he was in Damascus, albeit intermittently.23 and Artuqid dynasties, whose dominions Later Ayyubids apparently maintained this were carved out of the vast Seljuq empire custom, for there are at least two references and who inherited many of its political and to princes holding sessions in the Dar al- bureaucratic structures. Sitting for two ’Adl, one in 1195, the other in 1198.24 Early days a week to look into acts of injustice Mamluk sultans, who based their legitimacy seems to have become part of the ruler’s on their claim of loyalty to the Ayyubid sul- routine. Sessions were held in different tan of Egypt, al-Salih Najm al-Din Ayyub places depending on ruler and locale, but (1240–1249), all headed mazalim sessions usually took place in a major hall in the in the Dar al-’Adl whenever they were in palace of government.16 Damascus.25 Otherwise, the vicegerent

–149– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE

(na’ib) of the city was the one who regularly was apparently institutionalised in the early presided over mazalim sessions there as part Mamluk period, probably as early as the of his normal duties.26 reign of Qutuz (1259–1260).33 The sultan In the mid-Mamluk period, however, and his retinue were housed at the citadel textual evidence becomes more complicated whenever they came from Cairo, until because the contemporary sources start al-Zahir Baybars constructed a royal palace using two names, Dar al-’Adl and Dar al- in 1269, the Qasr al-Ablaq (the Striped Sa’ada, interchangeably to designate what Palace), to the west of the city along the appears to be the same complex, without river Barada, which was reserved for the sul- specifying how or when they merged.27 The tan’s visits.34 The Dar al-Sa’ada was desig- Dar al-Sa’ada (the Palace of Felicity) was nated as the vicegeral palace, where the the vicegeral palace in Damascus through- na’ib resided and conducted business, while out the Mamluk period. It was initially the citadel became the base of a different called the Dar Farrukhshah, after a nephew offi cial, na’ib al-qal’a, who reported directly of Salah al-Din’s who was vicegerent (na’ib) to the sultan in Cairo. Though not recorded in Damascus until his death in 1182. It was in any source, the Dar al-’Adl must have ostensibly maintained as the private resi- been incorporated with the Dar al-Sa’ada dence of his son al-Amjad Bahramshah until during that time, for its function comple- 1230.28 Its transformation from private mented those under the jurisdiction of the property to the na’ib’s offi cial residence city’s na’ib. After the merger, Dar al-’Adl in Damascus and its connection with the seems to have been used for a wide range of Dar al-’Adl are not very clear.29 After services, such as the ceremony of pledging Bahramshah’s death, the palace inexplicably allegiance (bay’a) to the sultan, the reception passed to his cousin al-Ashraf Musa, the of foreign envoys and the appointment of king of Damascus (1229–1237), who deeded offi cials and qadis, although the sitting for it to his only daughter Malaka Khatun upon mazalim sessions remained predominant his death in 1237.30 The sources are silent among all these uses.35 about the palace’s legal status thereafter, The site of the Dar al-’Adl is not men- but it presumably passed to the Mamluk tioned in any of the sources, but the Dar al- state treasury at some point, perhaps in Sa’ada’s location is well established.36 The 1287, when Malaka Khatun was striped of entire governmental complex, including the some of her possessions, though the palace Dar al-’Adl, occupied a block south of the had already been the offi cial vicegeral citadel, across the street from its southern residence for twenty years before that postern, and slightly to the east of the city’s date.31 Bab al-Jinan (Gate of Gardens), which later The Dar al-Sa’ada appears to have became known as the Bab al-Nasr (Gate of preserved its offi cial aura from the days Victory), and still later, in the Mamluk when it was the residence of Salah al-Din’s period, as the Bab Dar al-Sa’ada (fi g. 13.1).37 na’ib Farrukhshah, even when it was still pri- The sources supply little information about vately owned in the late Ayybid period. The the architecture of Dar al-’Adl as an inde- Ayyubid kings of the city normally lived in pendent unit inside the na’ib’s complex.38 We the palaces of the citadel but twice at least know only that it was a grand qa’a that had they moved to Dar al-Sa’ada as a temporary an iwan, in the centre of which sat the na’ib residence whenever the sultan, whose capi- when the court sessions were convened; next tal was usually in Cairo, was in town.32 This to him was an empty seat covered with yel- notion of hierarchy in domicile whereby the low silk (the offi cial colour of the Mamluk citadel’s palaces were reserved for the sultan sultanate) representing the sultan.39 These and the Dar al-Sa’ada for the malik (king) references allow us to suggest that the Dar

–150– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT

FIG. 13.1. The Location of the Dar al-‘Adl in Damascus.

al-’Adl might have been similar to most pri- al-Din, who ruled the city during his father’s vate and princely reception halls of the reign.42 Located south of the citadel, which period, for they had qa’a plans with one, two, was being refurbished at the same time, the three or even four iwans fl anking a central Dar al-’Adl was a separate structure inte- space.40 The form of the iwan and the grated within what may be considered the appearance of the qa’a are impossible to extension of the citadel’s royal complex out- determine since the two words were used in side the walls and towards the city. In what generically in medieval times to designate seems to have been a planned act, Ghazi any type of arched opening and hall respec- enclosed the Dar al-’Adl and the surround- tively. The Dar al-’Adl was destroyed by fi re ing area, which contained the maydan (train- and rebuilt a few times along with the rest ing fi eld) built earlier by Nur al-Din for of the Dar al-Sa’ada, until the latter was equestrian exercises, between the old walls moved to another place, extra-muros, at the of the city and new ones he had added espe- end of the sixteenth century. By that time cially for that purpose further to the east. the term dar al-’adl ceased to be used by The character of exclusivity of this new chroniclers to refer to any part of the na’ib’s royal enclosure was conveyed through the palace. control of its access and the establishment of a private passage leading to it from the royal palaces in the citadel (fi g. 13.2). At the THE DAR AL-’ADL OF ALEPPO citadel end of this passage, Ghazi con- structed a new gate, called the Bab al-Jabal Although Aleppo had been Nur al-Din’s (the Gate of the Mountain), while the gate capital before Damascus, it appears that nei- at the other end was appropriately called ther he nor Salah al-Din after him estab- the Bab Dar al-’Adl. This passage was lished any palace for justice there.41 Aleppo’s reserved only for the king when he rode out Dar al-’Adl, the second such palace after of the citadel to the Dar al-’Adl or the city that of Damascus, was not started until beyond. The petitioners coming from the 1189. It was built by the Ayyubid king al- city used another gate called the Bab al- Zahir Ghazi (1186–1216), the son of Salah Saghir (Little Gate) to gain access to the

–151– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE

FIG. 13.2. The Location of the Dar al-‘Adl in Aleppo. enclosure of the palace. Construction of all maintain his independence and to consoli- the gates and fortifi cations around the Dar date his hold on his territories, and his al-’Adl ended in 1214.43 policy of administrative centralisation.44 It is clear that the construction of the From the beginning, Ghazi used his Dar al-’Adl was initiated by Ghazi as a Dar al-’Adl for many court ceremonials major step in a general plan of organisation other than mazalim sessions; these included devised to renovate the Citadel of Aleppo the reception of foreign envoys and learned and to redefi ne its relationship to the city. debates among scholars presided over by the The king, his offi cials and his army resided king. The day after his death, 200 slaves he in the citadel or around it, while the popu- had freed as an act of devotion were assem- lation was restricted to the city extending bled in Dar al-’Adl before they were to be to the west at the foot of the hill. The Dar released.45 This report indicates that the al-’Adl represented the transitional zone structure also played a role as a way station between the city and the citadel where the between the citadel and the city. The offi cial ruler and the ruled meet, and it visually and mourning services after Ghazi’s death and spatially underlined the pivotal role of the the assembly that gathered to discuss the king in the state administration. This urban arrangement for the transition of power to programme should be seen in the larger his son took place in the Dar al-’Adl as context of al-Zahir Ghazi’s reign: his well.46 Ghazi’s two successors, al-’Aziz involvement in the insidious world of Muhammad (1216–1237) and al-Nasir Yusuf Ayyubid politics, his constant struggle to (1237–1260), are reported to have main-

–152– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT tained the custom of holding mazalim an amir in 1310 who barricaded himself in sessions in the Dar al-’Adl twice a week, on his residence, they refer to that structure as Mondays and Thursdays.47 We know next to the Dar al-’Adl al-Kamiliyya, and place it nothing about the appearance of the palace. inside the citadel.51 This attribution to the Ibn Wasil (d. 1298) states in a passing Ayyubid al-Kamil (1200–1238) is very plau- reference that the caliph’s envoy to Ghazi sible, for we know that he was the one was accommodated in the iwan of the Dar responsible for the completion of the citadel al-’Adl.48 and its endowment with palatial and admin- As in Damascus, the Dar al-’Adl in istrative structures.52 The Dar al-’Adl seems Aleppo was built next to the citadel, which to have been located in the narrow end of constituted the government centre and the the northern enclosure where today it meets royal residence in both cities. Like the Dar the southern enclosure not very far from the al-’Adl of Damascus, the Dar al-’Adl of Qulla Gate which separated the two enclo- Aleppo was enlarged in the Mamluk period sures (fi g. 13.3). It probably belonged to the to include the residence of the na’ib of fi rst stage in the construction of the citadel’s Aleppo and ultimately acquired the name administrative section since we know that, Dar al-Sa’ada as well.49 It was used for vari- in the Mamluk period, this area contained ous court ceremonials, among which the many other administrative buildings such as biweekly mazalim ceremony remained promi- the Dar al-Niyaba (vicegeral palace) and the nent.50 However, unlike Damascus, where Qa’at al-Sahib (hall of the vizier). It is the spatial link between the citadel and the impossible, however, to fi x a date for the palace of justice was ambivalent, the rela- construction of any of al-Kamil’s structures tionship of the Aleppine Dar al-’Adl with the since the sources speak of them only in royal complex was made more pronounced passing without even providing their names. by enclosing it between two parallel city There is no mention of the Dar al-’Adl walls and joining it to the citadel by a direct al-Kamiliyya having been used as a palace passage. This line of development reached of justice during al-Kamil’s time, although its logical conclusion in Cairo. After two the name implies that it was, but during trials, which applied similar solutions to the reign of al-Salih Najm al-Din Ayyub the one used in Aleppo, the last Mamluk (1240–1249), al-Kamil’s second son, the Dar al-’Adl was moved into the southern structure appears to have been used as it enclosure of the citadel, which was simul- was intended. This is deduced from a vague taneously rearranged and partitioned to account stating that in 1239, Sultan al-Salih accommodate both private and public delegated the authority to hold the sessions functions of the sultan. of mazalim in an unidentifi ed dar al-adl to a triad of military men ( jund). Two of them are further identifi ed: the fi rst was al-Sharif DAR AL-’ADL AL-KAMILIYYA Shams al-Din, the judge of the army (qadi al-’askar), and the second, named al-faqih Of the three major capitals of the Ayyubid ‘Abbas, was the preacher (khatib) of the cita- realm, Cairo, Damascus and Aleppo, Cairo del’s mosque.53 Both must have resided in was the last one to have its own Dar al-’Adl. the citadel in order to attend to their work, We have no straightforward reference to the which implies that the dar al-adl they sat in building of a Dar al-’Adl in Cairo prior to may have been that of al-Kamil. The struc- the coming of the Mamluks in 1250, but a ture was apparently neglected after al- few remarks indirectly indicate that one Salih’s death, for the sessions of mazalim existed in Ayyubid times. When two were held in the madrasas he had built in Mamluk sources report the disobedience of Fatimid al-Qahira (1239–45) rather than at

–153– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE

FIG. 13.3. The Location of the Three Dur al-‘Adl in Cairo. the citadel during the reign of the fi rst DAR AL-’ADL AL-ZAHIRIYYA Mamluk Sultan al-Mu’izz Aybak (1250–1257). They were presided over by the amir The second Cairene Dar al-’Adl was the one Aydakin al-Bundaqdari, Aybak’s vicegerent built or renovated by the Mamluk sultan al- and the master of the future sultan al-Zahir Zahir Baybars. His two biographers, Ibn Baybars, who was assisted by a number of Shaddad and Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, give inade- qadis and administrators.54 The Dar al-’Adl quate reports about this structure, although al-Kamiliyya was turned into a residence they elaborate on his ardour to uphold the after the end of the Ayyubid period, for the principle of justice and to attend mazalim sources we have speak of it as the living sessions. Ibn Shaddad speaks only of a quarters of an amir who had offi cial duties fenced, square mastaba (platform) installed that required his permanent presence at the in the middle of the court in front of the cit- citadel.55 adel gate, covered by a canopy to protect it

–154– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT from the sun and the rain and designated entrance to the citadel and stood at the end for the public sittings of the vicegerent and of a stepped path that ascended from a spot the vizier. In the same list of structures, near the Gate of the Chain to an elevation he mentions a dar al-’adl under the citadel, 40ft above the maydan. Baybars’ Dar al-’Adl without attributing it to Baybars.56 Ibn ‘Abd was somewhere along this path of nearly al-Zahir reports in 1262 that Baybars 600ft, probably in a spot high enough to per- ordered the renovation and remodelling of mit the sultan seated in the royal stand to a building under the citadel and the estab- review the parades that took place in the lishment of the dar al-’adl in it, suggesting maydan. A brief reference in the waqf of the that the structure existed prior to Baybars.57 zawiya of Hasan al-Rumi, built in 1522, Casanova, who wrote a history of the Citadel further establishes the location of al-Nasir’s of Cairo, demonstrated that the structure Tablakhana, or Baybars’ Dar al-’Adl. The was a mausoleum (turba) of a Fatimid family waqf, dated to 1535, states that the of princes, the Banu al-Muhtar, but mistak- Tablakhana was above the zawiya, which enly assigned its refurbishing and transfor- still stands today on the eastern side of the mation into the Dar al-’Adl to al-Kamil road leading to the original Mudarraj without any historical basis.58 Baybars is the Gate.64 The waqf also specifi es that the zaw- patron who restored that turba, which was iya is situated between the Mudarraj Gate probably in disrepair like many other and the Chain Gate, exactly the site given Fatimid remains, put it to a new use as the in al-Maqrizi’s Khitat as that of al-Nasir’s Dar al-’Adl and added the canopied mastaba Tablakhana. Baybars’ Dar al-’Adl, then, in front of it for less formal ceremonies.59 He might have stood where Muhammad ‘Ali’s is credited in the sources with sitting in the Dar al-Mahfuzat (Archives Administration) Dar al-’Adl on Mondays and Thursdays, stands today. both to inspect mazalim petitions and to review the Mamluk army.60 After Baybars’ death, his structure became known as the THE IWAN OF THE CITADEL dar al-’adl al-qadima (the old), and was occa- sionally used for offi cial events presided over By 1280, when Qalawun (1280–1290) by high-ranking administrators.61 It was acceded to the throne, Baybars’ Dar al-’Adl eventually converted into the Tablakhana had ceased to be the setting for mazalim ses- (Drummery, the place where the military sions. It may have been replaced by the band plays at specifi c hours as a sign of roy- iwan, which was the principal royal audi- alty) in 1322 during the reign of al-Nasir ence hall in the citadel, but the date of the Muhammad.62 transfer is not known. The iwan is fi rst men- The site of Baybars’ Dar al-’Adl is dif- tioned in the sources at the time of Baybars’ fi cult to ascertain today, after the major crowning ceremony in 1259.65 Chroniclers changes in the topography of the area during do not credit anyone with its building, but the reign of Muhammad ‘Ali (1805–1848), its most probable patron is al-Kamil, as he when the new carriage route was completed is the only sultan who undertook major in 1825. Al-Nasir’s Tablakhana, or Baybars’ works at the citadel. Baybars, however, built Dar al-’Adl, was reportedly located between a domed hall as a replacement of, or addi- the Bab al-Silsila (Gate of the Chain) and tion to, the earlier iwan.66 In 1284, Qalawun the Mudarraj Gate.63 The Gate of the Chain ordered the demolition of Baybars’ hall to (probably the present Katkhuda Gate) build a new one, named the Iwan al- was the main royal entrance to the citadel Mansuri (of Qalawun).67 Al-Ashraf Khalil from the maydan. The Mudarraj Gate, also (1290–1294) rebuilt, or perhaps only refur- named the Citadel Gate, was the public bished, the iwan of his father as the sources

–155– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE are very imprecise about the kind of work the zeal of the sultans to be the patrons of he ordered at the citadel.68 This last struc- the most visible, and most publicly accessi- ture was in turn destroyed by Khalil’s ble, structure in the citadel. We know that brother and successor, al-Nasir Muhammad, the hall of Baybars was not intended as a to be replaced by his famous hall, the Iwan Dar al-’Adl, since there was another one al-Kabir al-Nasiri (the Great Iwan of al- outside the citadel. We know also that the Nasir). The Great Iwan is better known to Great Iwan of al-Nasir Muhammad was the us. We have its plan, elevations and sections stage of mazalim sessions twice a week dur- as documented by the savants of the French ing his reign. The sources are silent as to Expedition (1798–1801). We also have its whether Qalawun or his son Khalil ever location on the map of the Description de used their halls as settings for dar al-’adl, l’Egypte, where it is labeled as le divan de although we encounter a few references to Joseph.69 From that map we can note that the the practice as being sporadically observed Great Iwan stood where the court extending during their reigns.70 In the case of to the north-east of the Mosque of Qalawun, we can assume that he never per- Muhammad ‘Ali towards the Police Museum sonally presided in this offi ce, for the is located today (fi g. 13.4). sources tell us that his Arabic was very poor, The successive building and rebuilding which would have prevented him from com- of the main audience hall in the citadel in municating with his subjects on dar al-’adl such a short period could be explained by days.71 He, on the other hand, sat in his

FIG. 13.4. Location of the Divan de Joseph on the Map of the Description de l’Égypte.

–156– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT iwan to review troops and distribute war- al-Nasir surpassed all his predecessors in rants of iqta’ to amirs and soldiers, or to Mamluk Egypt, who were extreme auto- receive foreign dignitaries and ambassadors cratic rulers themselves. At the beginning of on offi cial occasions. his reign, the sultan was also interested in strengthening the support he had enjoyed among the common people (al-harafi sh or AL-IWAN AL-KABIR AL-NASIRI al-’amma) of Cairo and Damascus in his struggle to maintain his throne.75 Appearing Al-Nasir Muhammad came to the throne as as a ruler concerned with the fair applica- a boy of eight in 1294. His long reign was tion of justice helped al-Nasir in maintain- interrupted by two periods of usurpation ing this positive popular sentiment towards (1295–1299, and 1309–1310), and it was not him. It is from within these two sets of con- until 1310 that he fi nally became the siderations, dominating the Mamluk hier- supreme ruler of the Mamluk sultanate. In archy and pleasing the populace, that 1311, less than a year after he assumed the rebuilding the iwan and holding mazalim rule for the third time, al-Nasir demolished sessions in it should be seen.76 the iwan of his brother Khalil and built a The Great Iwan of al-Nasir Muhammad new one.72 At the same time, he decided to was a monumental stone structure made to regularly preside over mazalim sessions in impress and to inspire awe. The illustrations the new iwan, which became known as the of the Description show it to have been open Dar al-’Adl: a fundamental shift in policy with arcades on three sides: the north-east, from the one established under Qalawun, which formed its main façade, the south- Khalil and even al-Nasir himself in his fi rst east and the north-west. The southwestern two reigns when mazalim supervision was the side was built up with a thick wall pierced duty of the vicegerent.73 He also elevated the with fi ve doors which led to the sultan’s pri- event to a formal ceremony where all the vate quarters (al-dur al-sultaniyya) through important amirs of the realm and the mem- the dihliz al-’ubur, or the passageway, behind bers of the sultan’s inner circle had to be the iwan.77 The plan of the iwan consisted of present and seated around him in a set a wide, central aisle fl anked by two lateral order. ones formed by rows of red granite columns These ceremonial innovations had which were taken from ancient Egyptian their immediate roots in the political cir- temples. The central aisle was surmounted cumstances of the time.74 They tallied with by a huge wooden dome covered on the out- the implementation of changes in the struc- side with green tiles. That dome – which ture of the Mamluk hierarchy and the con- had already collapsed when the French solidation of the sultan’s role at its apex as drawings were made – had been the most if to engender them and give them their striking feature of the iwan.78 A broad physical manifestations. When al-Nasir inscription band, with characters made of Muhammad returned to the throne in 1310, large gilded-wood units, ran around the he orchestrated drastic shifts of power to perimeter of the inner square under the ensure his throne. He pitted the strong dome. Its text seems to have consisted of amirs against each other, replaced most of the full titulature of al-Nasir Muhammad them with his own Mamluks and systemati- and probably the construction date.79 cally weakened the authority of many top- We have a detailed account of the dar ranking offi cers by assuming some of their al-’adl ceremony during the reign of al-Nasir duties himself. Consequently, he not only Muhammad written by Ibn Fadl-Allah controlled the internal affairs of the state, al-’Umari (1301–1349), who was a high he effectively became the state. As such, administrator at the court.80 On dar al-’adl

–157– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE days, usually Mondays and Thursdays them in al-Nasir Muhammad’s army, so except in Ramadan, al-Nasir would come they probably sat twelve on each side (fi g. out of his inner palaces through the vesti- 13.7). The less important amirs of forty and bule behind the iwan and enter through the other civil servants would be placed further central door with the muqarnas conch.81 He away from these high-ranking amirs, com- would sit on a wooden chair covered with a pleting the rows towards the entrance to the silk cloth (dast) next to his marble throne, in iwan, but these amirs and administrators the centre of the iwan’s back wall (fi g. 13.5). had to remain standing. Behind this fi rst The marble throne, which resembled the row stood several other rows of amirs of ten minbar of a mosque, was only used on offi cial and of Mamluks. Attendants and clerks of occasions when foreign envoys were the chancery formed the outermost circle received.82 The sultan’s place lay at the apex around the three open sides of the iwan. of a concentric circle of dignitaries sur- The rows of important amirs probably rounding him in a strict hierarchical order. reached as far as the fi rst row of columns Nearest to him were those offi cials directly which supported the dome; the lesser amirs involved in the proceedings. To the right and Mamluks stood in the space between were the four supreme judges (qudat al-qudat) the inner and outer rows of columns. The of the four Sunni schools of jurisprudence in attendants stood in the wide space in the the order of their importance: the Shafi ’ite front of the iwan and escorted the petitioners judge closest to the sultan, followed by the there to face the assembly (fi g. 13.8). Hanafi te, the Malikite and the Hanbalite. The order of seating in dar al-’adl ses- Next to the Hanbalite judge came the treas- sions matches almost exactly the plan of the ury controller (wakil bayt al-mal), then the Great Iwan (fi g. 13.9). Whether this means market inspector (muhtasib) of Cairo. To the that the dar al-’adl’s ceremony was designed left of the sultan sat his secretary (katib to follow the logic of the iwan’s spatial al-sirr), who between 1329 and 1332 was Ibn arrangement, or that al-Nasir Muhammad Fadl-Allah al-’Umari himself,83 followed rebuilt the iwan to accommodate the cere- by the army supervisor (nazir al-jaysh). The monial he had introduced we do not know. circle would be completed by a group known But the latter alternative is the more plausi- as the clerks of the chair (kuttab al-dast), ble one since the plan of the iwan was radi- after the royal dast, who sat facing the sul- cally different from the common hall type tan. Their job was to record the minutes of in Islamic Egypt, generally known as a the sessions. These functionaries were prob- qa’a.84 It may have been inspired by its four ably seated under the dome, with the sultan direct predecessors at the Citadel in Cairo, close to the centre, some distance from the but this is impossible to ascertain for we back wall, as both court protocol and the have no idea what they looked like. Yet sultan’s safety required suffi cient space analysis of the iwan’s architecture suggests behind him for two rows of guards to his that, although it appears to be a synthesis of right and left, the silahdariyya, jamadariyya a variety of elements taken from existing and the khassakiyya Mamluks (fi g. 13.6). and familiar structures, its plan bore a man- The great amirs of hundred, the high- ifest resemblance to a specifi c type, the est rank in the Mamluk system, were seated basilica, with its central nave and two in a row opposite each other on either side arcaded side aisles. In the Great Iwan, how- of the sultan and some fi fteen cubits ever, the typical basilical plan is modifi ed by (approximately 15ft) from him. They were opening the sides to provide an unob- called amirs of the council (umara’ al- structed view to the outside and to suggest mashura), and they functioned as the sultan’s the accessibility of the sultan sitting within, offi cial advisers. There were twenty-four of who could be seen from all sides when he sat

–158– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT

FIG. 13.5. Diagram of the Sultan Entry into the Great Iwan on the Dar al-‘Adl Days.

FIG. 13.6. Diagram of the Circle Forming around the Sultan on the Dar al-‘Adl Days.

FIG. 13.7. Diagram of the Circle around the Sultan and the Amirs of Hundred.

–159– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE

FIG. 13.8. Diagram of the Complete Seating Layout on the Dar al-‘Adl Days.

for mazalim sessions on dar al-’adl days or for The Great Iwan began to lose its embassy receptions.85 The formal affi nity of prominence as the offi cial Dar al-’Adl during the Great Iwan’s plan with the basilica type the undistinguished rules of al-Nasir may have been a consequence of a func- Muhammad’s twelve powerless epigones tional one, for although basilicas are usually who succeeded one another in a frantic connected with early Christian churches, turnover between 1341 and 1382. Their vice- the original Roman functions as a royal hall gerents became the effective power brokers of justice and for public audiences symbol- in the sultanate, and their residence in the ism of this widespread type was never lost northern enclosure of the citadel, the Dar or forgotten.86 al-Niyaba, which was rebuilt in 1343,

–160– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT

FIG. 13.9. Plan of the Iwan with the Seating Layout of the Dar al-‘Adl superimposed on it. became the real centre of government.87 sessions, probably as a sign of kingship and Offi cially, the iwan had remained the throne as an attempt to associate himself with hall where coronations and receptions of for- established royal customs. eign envoys took place, but the day-to-day The defi nitive shift in focus came upon reviews of troops, the administration of iqta’ in 1387, when Barquq completely broke with and the biweekly dar al-’adl sessions were the Qalawunid tradition. He replaced the transferred to the Dar al-Niyaba. With the Great Iwan as the setting for dar al-’adl with advent of the Burji period, the Great Iwan an unspecifi ed place in the royal stables regained some of its glory for a short while. (most probably the hall called al-Harraqa), After he acceded to the throne, Barquq and changed the days of the service to (1382–1389, 1390–1399), the fi rst Burji sul- Tuesdays and Saturdays. 88 This choice was tan, started to sit in the iwan for dar al-’adl probably dictated by Barquq’s fi rst offi cial

–161– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE position as amir akhur (stable master), and by Egypt? Elucidating these questions would the general mistrust that dominated this help us better situate this unique and pecu- struggle-ridden transitional period, when liar Islamic institutional structure in its controlling the stables meant blocking the wider cultural context. movement in and out of the palatial area of As already noted, building dur al-’adl the citadel. The ceremonial changes insti- coincided with the height of the Crusader tuted by Barquq signaled his intention to and Mongol attacks on the Islamic world. restructure the sultanate, and his introduc- The fi ve structures were established in the tion of a new site and different days for the Syrian and Egyptian capitals of the Islamic ceremonies consecrated these changes. states that conducted the counter-offensives The convention of holding mazalim ses- to these attacks: the Zankid, Ayyubid and sions in the royal stables was intermittently Mamluk sultanates. The founders of these followed by Barquq’s immediate successors, dur al-’adl were all rulers of non-Arabic ori- but eventually the dar al-’adl ceremony was gin who belonged to a recently Islamised downgraded, and at times totally suspended. and staunchly Sunni military caste that The Great Iwan was still occasionally used dominated the political scene in the Eastern to receive foreign embassies, undoubtedly Mediterranean after the eleventh-century because its size and spatial arrangement Seljuqid expansion.91 They led armies made made it the most impressive structure at the up mainly of Turkish and Kurdish free and citadel. Otherwise, it too had fallen into dis- manumitted cavalry, expanded their princi- use by the middle of the Burji period, palities through war, conquest and intrigue, although a few sultans attempted for short and distinguished themselves in jihad periods to revive the biweekly review of against a host of enemies: the Byzantines, Mamluks (khidma) in it, and at least two, splinter Shi’ite groups, the Crusaders and, Barsbay and Qaytbay, had it restored.89 The later, the Mongols. It is probably no histori- Great Iwan was still standing in ruins at the cal coincidence that the fi rst known Dar beginning of the nineteenth century, when it al-’Adl was built by Nur al-Din, the fi rst was documented for the Description de organiser of an Islamic front against the l’Egypte. It was razed by Muhammad ‘Ali in Crusaders. It is no coincidence either that 1825 to clear the ground for his new the last palace was constructed by al-Nasir mosque.90 Muhammad, in whose early years of rule the Crusaders fi nally were driven out of the Orient, with the conquest of the island of INTERPRETING THE Arwad off the Syrian coast in 1302, and the DAR AL-’ADL PHENOMENON Mongols checked in 1303 on their last incur- sion into the country until Tamerlane’s The Great Iwan of al-Nasir Muhammad was invasion at the end of the fourteenth the last Dar al-’Adl built in Islamic central century. lands. Although qada’ al-mazalim continued Evidently, however, the relationship to be a duty of Muslim rulers, they appear between the upsurge of jihad and the build- to have reverted to the old practice of hold- ing of dur al-’adl was not simply causal or ing its sessions in a non-specifi c hall in their reciprocal. After all, many great warriors of palaces. This conclusion leaves us with a few the period, such as Salah al-Din and historical puzzles, such as why did Dar Qalawun, did not sponsor any such struc- al-’Adl come into existence in the fi rst place? tures, and at least two dur al-’adl builders, al- And why did it fade out of use 160 years after Zahir Ghazi and al-Nasir Muhammad, were it was introduced? Why did it appear only in better known for their diplomatic skills than the three capital cities of Bilad al-Sham and their fi ghting abilities. The explanation for

–162– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT the connection lies in the wider context of sultan of Islam, the deputy of the universal the religious awakening in that time of caliph and the leader of jihad.94 From that intense ontological crisis. The fi erce encoun- point on, the Abbasid caliphs, kept in Cairo ters between Christian Europe and the with no real political role to play, were Islamic East during the Crusades generated employed as legitimising fi gureheads in a combative religious passion among all ceremonies of investiture throughout the classes of society in the Islamic Orient. It Mamluk period, and even, in some also heightened the rulers’ awareness of instances, as tools in the hands of the sul- their ideological obligations and, at the tans to bestow religious recognition on the same time, provided them with a political rules of allies elsewhere in the Islamic platform around which popular approval world.95 and support would surely coalesce. A The early Mamluk sultans also used number of energetic rulers, notably Zanki, the caliphal ratifi cation of their rule, along his son Nur al-Din, Salah al-Din and later with their jihad credentials, to boost their Baybars, Qalawun and al-Ashraf Khalil, position in their correspondence with their were able to channel the immense moral bitter enemies, the Ilkhanid Mongols, during repercussions of the Crusades and Mongol the late thirteenth and early fourteenth cen- attacks to mount their counter-offensives. turies.96 They deliberately contrasted their They, and others, also consciously used their services to Islam and their instituted legiti- image as defenders and supporters of Islam misation by its utmost legal authority, the to advance their political agenda both on caliph, with the Ilkhanid history of destroy- the external and internal fronts.92 ing the caliphate and wrecking havoc in its The emphasis on their achievements eastern territories. This image must have in furthering the cause of Islam can be been quite effective, not only in the Mamluk observed in the diplomatic letters they sent sultanate itself, where we have ample evi- to announce their conquests, to ask for mili- dence of the pride felt by the Mamluk intel- tary, fi nancial and logistic support, to berate ligentsia in the pivotal role played by their their opponents and competitors, and to rulers in defending Islam but also, and most request diplomas of investiture (taqlids) from surprisingly, among some of the intellectu- the Abbasid caliphs in Baghdad, who repre- als who served in the Ilkhanid court. Sharaf sented the ultimate legitimising authority in al-Din Wassaf al-Hadra (1264–1330), the the land of Islam. The letters of Nur al-Din, Persian historian who dedicated his treatise, Salah al-Din and later Ayyubids addressed Tajziyat al-Amsar wa Tazjiyat al-A’sar, to the to the Abbasid caliphs in Baghdad are Ilkhan Öljeytü (1304–1317), dared in the replete with references to their jihad, their same text to praise the Mamluks for their veneration of the caliphate and readiness to steadfastness in jihad and their adherence defend it, and their emphasis on applying to the tenets of Islam.97 the shari’a rules in their realms.93 Similarly On the home front, although most elaborate discourses on jihad, shari’a and Ayyubid and Mamluk rulers of the period the requirements of Islamic rule appear in depended heavily on their repressive power, the khutbas of investiture delivered and the they still sought acceptance by, and perhaps taqlids written by the titular caliphs installed popularity among, their subjects. To this in Cairo by Baybars after the fall of the end, they allied themselves with, employed Abbasid caliphate in Baghdad. The khutba of and patronised the religious class, including investiture written in 1261 by the fi rst both the learned fuqaha’ and popular sheikhs Egyptian Abbasid caliph, al-Mustansir II, who sometimes served them as propa- recognised Baybars not only as the sultan of gandists and apologists.98 They endowed Egypt and Syria but also as the universal civic structures to prove their piety and

–163– MAMLUK HISTORY THROUGH ARCHITECTURE their support for religious activities: madra- endowment and laud its patron. This is evi- sas to educate a new class of fuqaha’, ribats denced not only in the special places and khanqahs to lodge the Sufi s, and mau- reserved in Islamic historiography for the solea to commemorate themselves and to rulers who combined jihad and justice, such aggrandise their deeds. They actively publi- as that assigned to Nur al-Din as the exem- cised their enactment of religious regula- plary just ruler comparable only to the tions regarding social organisation and Rashidi caliphs,103 but also in the tales that relied heavily on elaborate titulatures that developed from the popular lore concerning stressed their religiously glorifying actions the same princes. Even today, we have and qualifi cations which they inscribed on songs, epics and stories that celebrate the their buildings and objects.99 heroism and justice of Nur al-Din, of Salah The introduction of new attributes in al-Din and of al-Zahir Baybars.104 royal protocols is a strong case in point. Nur By the time al-Nasir Muhammad al-Din’s titulature changed drastically early acceded to the throne for the third time in in his reign, following the decisive battles he 1310, the Crusaders were already routed and won against the Crusaders between 1146 the Ilkhanid Mongol menace had been and 1150.100 When the titles in his inscrip- repeatedly thwarted; the Mamluk sultanate tions are compared with those of his father had fi nally achieved political maturity and and predecessor, what is notable is that, regional supremacy. Al-Nasir’s third reign, unlike his father’s protocol which mixed stable and prosperous, proved to be a turn- Turkish, Persian and Arabic titles, his were ing point in Mamluk history and in the all Arabic and concentrated on Islamic vir- character of the Mamluk state. Unlike his tuous traits as seen through the prism of predecessors, al-Nasir was a better tactician traditional Sunnism. Out of the thirty-eight and diplomat than a fi ghter and leader of preserved inscriptions on structures built by armies. He preferred alliances and clientage Nur al-Din, the epithet al-mujahid (the jihad bonds and, at times, relied on fi dawiyya (hit fi ghter) is present in sixteen. The title men of the Assassin sect) to eliminate his al-’adil (the just), which was his regnal title, political opponents. He used limited mili- is to be found in all of them.101 tary force only on rare occasions to reach a There is no doubt that the adoption of prominent position among the rulers of his these two titles by Nur al-Din was intended time. He had his name pronounced in the to accentuate his qualifi cations as a good Friday khutba and sometimes struck on Muslim ruler. His building of the fi rst Dar coins in various regions in North Africa, al-’Adl at the same time should be regarded Nubia and Anatolia without sending in his as part of the same concern. Like later rul- troops (both acts were considered signs of ers, who all adopted titles with some refer- recognition of sovereignty).105 ence to justice, such as al-’adil or muhiyy Because both external and internal al-’adl fi al-’alamin (the reviver of justice in threats had been removed and because al- the world), building a palace of justice was a Nasir relied mostly on negotiation and magnifi cent propaganda tool. It was intrigue in his foreign policy, the military intended as another of their legitimising function of the state and the emphasis on acts.102 ‘A just ruler is a legitimate ruler’ the role of the ruling Mamluks as the war- seems to have been the slogan embodied in riors of Islam were slowly softening.106 The the building of a palace of justice and the fi rst sign of change surfaced in the 1330s establishment of a ceremonial for its usage. when al-Nasir Muhammad formed a new The masses driven by religious fervour in circle of hand-picked great amirs who, con- that period of danger to Islam and to its trary to established procedures, were not all lands was prone to appreciate such an accomplished fi ghters. The two most infl u-

–164– THE DAR AL-‘ADL IN THE MEDIEVAL ISLAMIC ORIENT ential among them, Qawsun and Bashtak, or their pro-religion stances in their politi- came to Egypt as free men and sold them- cal image making.109 Their contemporary selves to the sultan who raised them to the observers no longer saw in them the deserv- highest ranks without their having to ing leaders they once were, skilfully and endure the prerequisite military training.107 thoughtfully managing a great empire and Other signs of disintegration were soon to fi ghting for the cause of Islam.110 It was follow, but the effect of this shift on the during that same period that the dar al-’adl elite’s character did not spread among the ceremony lost its signifi cance and the entire Mamluk class until the Burji period, Great Iwan succumbed to neglect and was for the structure of the army remained more abandoned. or less intact during the reigns of al-Nasir’s This interpretation of the dar al-’adl twelve Qalawunid successors. Mamluks phenomenon is clearly infl uenced by the were still bought at a young age and lodged scope and nature of our written sources. in special barracks at the citadel where they Since they mostly wrote about the political, were put through rigorous training and a military and religious state of affairs, with thorough religious education that inculcated the social and material conditions touched upon them a military mentality and respect upon only as they became relevant to the for Islamic tenets before they were manu- narration of political events, our view of the mitted and enlisted in the army.108 same period is conditioned by these idio- Barquq maintained the same strict syncrasies. It has to be stressed, however, programme that governed the Mamluks’ that the general historical and ideological training during his fi rst reign, which context of the period and the almost perfect marked the transition between the Bahri concurrence of the upsurge in the jihad and Burij periods, but relaxed it tremen- movement with the appearance of dur al-’adl dously in his second reign. From then on, strongly support the politico-cultural inter- Mamluks were permitted to live in the city pretation. and to fraternise with the local population Finally, it is appropriate to note that through marriage and business transac- the only short-lived attempt to revive the tions. The system deteriorated even further role of the Great Iwan as a Dar al-’Adl dur- after Barquq, when new Mamluks were ing the Burji period was initiated by the one brought at a fairly advanced age, after their sultan, Barsbay (1422–1437), who also tried character had already been formed, and to instigate a revival of the jihad mentality were no longer required to undergo an among his troops in order to conquer one of extensive religious education before their the last Crusader footholds in the Orient. manumission. Consequently, the once fi ercely Barsbay sent three successive fl otillas proud and strictly segregated Mamluks against the Kingdom of Cyprus in 1424, began slowly to adopt an urbane culture in 1425 and 1426, the last of which occupied which few of their glorifi ed military and the island, captured its king Janus, and political attributes were still operative. By brought him to Cairo where the sultan the beginning of the fi fteenth century the imposed on him tough terms of vassalage. Mamluks’ acculturation was discernible not Barsbay is also reported to have refurbished only in their attitudes, tastes and prefer- the Great Iwan in 1427 and reinstituted the ences, but most of all, in the lack of interest dar al-’adl ceremony in it for a short while in they showed in emphasising their jihad role 1431.111 Was it just a coincidence?

–165–