Medieval Encounters 2,1 68 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

Medieval Jewish, Christian and Muslim Culture Encounters in Confluence and Dialogue

VOL. 2 NO. 1 APRIL 1996

EoJoB RI L L LEIDEN - NEW YORK COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY IN THE FATIMID, AYYüBID AND EARLY MAMLÜK PERIODS·

JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

1. Introduction

Historical works written in the Arabic language by mediaeval Coptic authors are not very great in number, but nevertheless represent a fascinating phenomenon from the point of view of cultural history. One particularly interesting approach to the study of Coptic-Arabic historiography-and, indeed, Coptic-Arabic literature as a whole-is to investigate how it reflects the social, religious and cultural relations that existed between the Cop tic community and other confessional groups in its immediate surroundings (Muslims, Jews, Chalcedonian/Melkite Christians). So far, few studies have dealt with the works of these Coptic historians from this angle. Such studies generally tend to emphasize the historians' original contributions, i.e. those parts of their work which are not based on earlier source texts, but in which they describe their own period as eyewitnesses, on the authority of informants, or by quoting official documents (letters etc.) accessible to them. Observations on these phenomena are to be found in scattered remarks in studies on wider-ranging subjects, and usually focus on the attitudes, particularly those towards Islamic rule or rulers, expressed in the works of Coptic or other Christian historians writing in Arabic. For instance, O.F.A. Meinardus makes some interesting remarks on the attitudes towards the Muslim governments in the History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria;2 Cl. Cahen mentions briefly that the historian al-Makin mostly writes in very much the same manner as did his Muslim colleagues;"

I This article focuses on one particular aspect of Coptic-Arabic historiography, vi<;. its cultural and confessional backgrounds. I am currently preparing more general and exhaustive descriptions of the texts in question, which will appear in a new reference work on the Christian Arabic literature of the Copts, edited by Prof. S.K. Samir (with contributions by Prof. Samir himself and several other scholars). This reference work is intended to replace the section on the Copts in G. Graf, Geschichte d£r Christlichm arabisdien Literatur, vol. 11 (Studi , Testi, 133) (Cittä del Vaticano: Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, 1947). My research on the historiography of the Copts is supported by the Foundation for Literary Studies, Musicology and Drama Research (LM1), which is subsidized by the Netherlands Organization of Scientific Research (NWO) and carried out at Leiden University and at the Netherlands Institute for Archaeology and Arabic Studies in Cairo. 2 O.F.A. Meinardus, Christian qgpt Faith and Lift (Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, 1970), 342-68. On the History of /he Patriarchs of Alexandria see below, section 2. , C. Cahen & R.-G. Coquin, "Al-Maktn b. al-'Amrd," Encyclopaedia of Islam, second edition, vol. VI (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1991), 141-2.

~ EJ. Brill, Leiden, 1996 Medieval Encounters 2,1 68 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

U. Haannann, followed by D.P. Little and S. Kortantamer, observes that al-Mufaddal b. Abi" al-Fadä'il, when compared to Muslim authors of the Mamlükperiod such as Ibn al-Dawädäri, can only be recognized as a Christian when he omits or modifies certain passages that must have embar- rassed his coreligionists, and when he adds bits of local ecclesiastical history to his otherwise rather Islamic-looking chronicle," Because of the isolated nature of such observations, a more systematic analysis of such attitudes is an urgent desideratum. In this article, however, I should like to focus on the Coptic historians in their capacity as compilers of texts based on older sources, rather than to approach them as authors of original works. For indeed, from the point of view of cultural history it seems rewarding to try to characterize their cultural outlook by investigating the confessional background of the texts they selected as sources for their historical works, and to compare the picture thus obtained with the available information on their own social position and on their relations with communities other than their own, particularly with the Muslims whom they used to encounter on a day-to-day basis. In this paper I will therefore present the source texts used by the Coptic historians according to the confessional groups from which they emanated: Muslims, Jews and Melkite Christians. Not all texts can be expected to fit into those categories, however, so there will also be such groups as "common Christian" and "common Muslim-Christian." With this method of pre- senting the Coptic historians as compilers, I shall try to contribute to the study of the cultural relations between the various religious communities in Egypt during the period under consideration. Occasionally, the nature of these relations will be further illustrated by tracing the impact that some of the Coptic historians in their turn had (directly or indirectly) on part of the work of some later Muslim authors. As in other sectors of Egyptian culture, such influences existed in both directions, as will be shown shortly. The phenomenon of' mutual influences between Christian and Muslim authors of historical works is not a novel subject. For it is quite well-known that some of the Coptic historians and chroniclers who wrote in Arabic between approximately A.D. 1000 and 1500, made use of Muslim and other

4 U. Haarmann, Q.uellenstudien zur fruhen Mamlukenzeit (Islamkundliche Untersuchungen, I) (Freiburg im Breisgau: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1970), 141-4; D.P. Little, An introduction to Mamluk histori- ograpqy. An analYsis of Arabic annalistic and bwgraphical sourcesJor the reign of aI-Malik an-Näpr Mul;arnmad ihn Q.alä'ün (Freihurger Islamstudien. 2) (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1970), 32-7; S. Kortantamer, A"gypten und Syrien zwischen 1317 and 1341 in der Chronik des Mrifat/4al b. Abi l-Ftu/ä'ü (Islamkundliche Untersuchungen, 23) (Freiburg im Breisgau: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1973), 38-40. [Only when the manuscript of this paper was finished was I able to consult a recent and very important article by Franceise Micheau, "Croisades et Croises vus par les historiens arabes chretiens d'Egypte," in Itiniraires d'Onent. Hommages a Claude Cahen (Res Orientales, 6) (Bures-sur- Yvette: Groupe pour I'Etude de la Civilisation du Moyen-Orient, 1994).] COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 69

non-Coptic sources: a case in point is al-Makin, who in the second part of his work on world history relies largely on al-Tabari, as has been known to western scholars for a long time," On the other hand, orientalists have real- ized that Muslim Egyptian authors such as al-Maqrlzr were interested in information on the traditions of their Christian compatriots, and that they found such information available in texts written by Copts. Again, it is al- Makin who has long been identified as al-Maqrizf's source for much of his account on Christian history," Generally speaking, though, historians have scarcely been interested in the processes of borrowing and passing on of information from one text to another, but rather in their contents, with regard to the question which text contains the more truthful account of what had actually happened in the past." Consequently, an overall picture of mutual textual influences and borrowings between Coptic (as well as other Christian Arabic) and Muslim historical writings is utterly lacking. In this article, we shall try to obtain such a picture by summarizing and re-arranging the data obtained from earlier studies, in such a way as to highlight the particular issue of the confessional setting of the texts in question. But it is important to point out that in the present state of research, any investigation into this fascinating issue of cultural history is bound to remain superficial and hence unreliable, as long as it fails to do justice to a considerable number of problems of a much more technical nature. The textual history of most works involved here has not been studied satisfactorily, and in several cases no adequate editions are available as yet. For this reason, this article cannot but include some remarks on remaining textual problems and suggestions for further research. Tentative answers to important questions will be given to a very limited extent only.

2. Mawhüb b. Mansür b. Mtifarrij and the History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria

2.1 The text and its structure The History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria (henceforth Hp) constitutes the principal literary source for Coptic history, and an important complementary

5 M. Plessner, "A1-Makin b. a1-'Amid," Enzyklopaedie des Islams, vol. III (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1936); Graf, GGAL, vol. Il, 348-51, particularly 349 (with references to earlier literature). 6 E. Tisserant & G. 'Viet, "La liste des partriarches d'A1exandrie dans Qalqachandi," Raue de l'Orient chritien 23 (1922/23), 123-43; Graf, GGAL, vol. 11, 349. 7 As an example, AJ. Butler, in his standard work, the Arab Conquest qf Egypt and the Last 1hirry rears tf the Roman Dominion, second edition, edited by P.M. Fraser (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978), provides a large number of references to a variety of Greek, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, Christian Arabic and Muslim Arabic sources, and usually reviews them quite criti- cally, but hardly ever does he pay attention to the relations between these texts. 70 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

source for Egyptian history in general. Its actual title used most frequently in the text is Siyar al-bi'a al-muqaddasa ("Biographies of the Holy Church")." Known to western scholarship since the 18th century, it is now available in a number of editions." none of which is truly critical or based on a serious study of the manuscript tradition of the text. to The text of the HP consists of a series of biographies of Patriarchs, divided into several parts and chapters. Within this biographical framework, it de- scribes various kinds of events belonging to ecclesiastical, political or social history, which are described from a point of view that may be taken as re- flecting the official position of the Coptic Church, since the authors involved in its composition generally belonged to circles close to the patriarch.'! It should be emphasized that this text is the result of a long tradition of historical writing. In various epochs, Coptic authors recorded the history of their church and their country, each one of them continuing the work of a predecessor. The early historians in this tradition wrote in Coptic, and their continuators, from the eleventh century onwards, wrote in Arabic." The HP,

8 The title History l!! the Patriarchs has become customary in western scholarly literature, and hence its literal translation TärfkJz al-Batänka is sometimes used in Arabic nowadays, although it is not rooted in the Coptic tradition itself. For the sake of convention, the title HP is used in this paper as well. 9 Since Renaudot's paraphrastic translation it has been accessible to western scholarship: E. Renaudot, Historia patriarcharum Alexandrinorum Jacobitarum a D. Marco usque ad finem saec. XIII (Parisiis: Fr. Fournier, 1713). The Arabic text is available in the following editions: C.F. Seybold, Severus Ben al-MuqtifJa~ Historia Patriarcharum Alexandnnorum (Corpus Scriptorum ChristUmorum Orientalium, Scriptores arabici, Textus, Seria tertia/Tomus IX) (Beryti: Typogr. Catho!.; Parisiis: C. Poussielgue; Lipsiae: O. Harrassowitz, 1904-10); B.T.A. Evetts, ed. and trans., History l!! the Patriarchs of the Coptic Churdi of Alexandria. Patrologia Orientalis, vol. I, 99-214, 381-619; vo!. V, 1-215; vol. X, 357-551 (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1904-15); C.F. Seybold, Seoerus ibn al-Muqqffa'. Alexandrinische Patriarchengeschichte von S. Marcus bis MichaelI (61-767), nach der ältesten 1266 geschriebenen Hamburger Handschrift im arabischen Urtext herausgegeben (Hamburg: Lucas Gräfe, 1912); A.S. Atiya, Y. 'Abd al-Masih, O.H.E. KHS-Burmester, A. Khater, ed. and trans., History of the Patriarchs of the Egyptian Church, known as the History l!! the Holy Church, by Sawfrus Ibn al-Muf:itifJa', bishop of al- Afmünfn (sic) (4 vols. Le Caire: Societe d'Archeologie Copte, 1943-1974).

10 The primitive recension of the HP (see below) exists in three parts. Only the first part has been published (Seybold, 1912), but without a serious effort to reconstruct the original text with the help of later MSS. At present, I am preparing a new edition of this primitive recension, with an inventory of MSS, and an annotated (French) translation. Together with Prof. R.-G. Coquin (Paris), I am also working on indexes of the HP, based on both the primitive recension and the vulgate (see below), as well as on a number of other sources. A project of indexing the vulgate edition is being carried out by Dr. L. Atiya (Salt Lake City). The existing editions do not include indexes. liOn the general structure of the HP, see J. den Heijer, Mawhüb Ibn Mansia Ibn Mifarri- et l'historiographie copto-arabe. Etude sur la composition de l'Histoire des Patnarches d'Alexandrie (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, 513; Subsidia, 83) (Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1989), 1-14; for more detailed information on the authors of the HP, see 117-56. A summary of the main issues is given in J. den Heijer, "History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria," in A.S. Atiya, ed., Coptic Encyclopaedia (New York: Macmillan, 1991) vol. IV, 1238-42. 12 The last author to write a part of the HP in the Coptic language was Mikhä'i1, bishop COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 71 then, is to be defined as an Arabic compilation based mainly on the works of earlier Coptic-writing authors, and continued by later chroniclers writing in Arabic. In its earliest version extant today (the so-called "primitive recension"),'! the Arabic text of the HP thus consists of two elements: (1) An Arabic history, produced in the late 11th Century A.D. by the Alexandrian deacon and notable, Mawhüb b. Mansür b. Mufarrij, and based on five consecutive Coptic historical texts, which he discovered during several trips to the monasteries in the wsar al-Natrün and elsewhere." The Arabic text thus produced is not a mere translation of Coptic sources. In the first place, research carried out during the last decades has established that besides the five main Coptic historical works, several texts of a different nature (liturgical, hagiographical) were added in the Arabic redaction, most probably by Mawhüb, and possibly in some cases by later copyists." In the second place, whereas most of the original Cop tic source material is now lost, those parts which are preserved, when compared systematically to the Arabic version, demonstrate that the Arabic translation is not a literal one, but rather a freely reworked version, which includes numerous changes in style, abridgements and omissions (sometimes of long passages), additional remarks, and some adaptations to the redactor's own historical and cultural outlook." (2) The biographies of patriarchs written by Mawhüb himself, directly in Arabic (the 66th and 67th patriarchs, Christodoulos and Kfrillus 11), and those written by later authors who, in the 12th and 13th century, after copying the texts handed down to them by their predecessors, added the descriptions of events of their own time, again organized in the form of biographies of the patriarchs contemporary to them. In the process, these authors, while acting as scribes, sometimes added their own observations to the materials they were copying." In the primitive recension, the Arabic HP thus

of Tinnis, in 1051; see Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 149-53; also idem, "Mihä'Il, eveque de Tinnis, et sa contribution it I'Histoire des Patnarches d'Alexandrie" in S.K. Samir, ed., Actes du trcisiem« congres international d'etwUs arabes chretiennes (Louvain-la-Neuve, septembre 1988), Parole de l'Orient 16 (1990-91), 179-88. 13 The first part of the primitive recension of the HP was identified by Brockelmann and edited separately by Seybold in 1912 (above, n. 3). The second and third parts were identified much more recently: J. den Heijer, "L'Histoire des Patrumhes d'Alexandrie, recension primitive et Vulgate," Bulletin de la Societe d'Archeologie Copte 27 (1985), 1-29, and idem, Mawhüb, 14-80. The new edition announced above (n. 3) will comprise all three parts of this primitive recension.

If On Mawhüb's quest for Coptic historical materials and his redactional work, see Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 83-6, 95-109. I~ The primary and secondary source texts, identified by W.E. Crum, D.W. Johnson, T. Orlandi, R.-G. Coquin and others, are listed and further discussed in Den Heijer, Mauhüb, 117-56. See also below, section 2.3. 16 Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 157-216. 17 Den Hcijer, Mawhüb, 9-13, 111-13. 72 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

covers the history from the first to the thirteenth century. To most readers, however, the HP is not known in this primitive recension, but in the so- called Vulgate version, contained in the vast majority of MSS and in almost all printed editions. IS This Vulgate version was most probably produced in the 13th century A.D.,19 and later new continuations were added to it, in which, again, authors recorded events contemporary to them. In many cases, these later biographies of patriarchs consist of very brief biographical notes only. Such recent continuations of the HP were made (albeit sometimes with long intervals) from the fourteenth to as late as the early twentieth century."

2.2 Biographical data on Mawhüb b. Mansür b. Mtifarrij

From the preceding remarks it will be clear that various authors, redac- tors and scribes were involved in producing the HP as we know it today. \Vithin the limited framework of this paper, however, only the main compiler can be dealt with. For a long time, the famous Anbä Sawirus b. al- Muqaffa', bishop of al-Ushmünayn in the mid and late 10th century A.D.,21 was believed to be the main compiler or even the author of the HP.22 Recent scholarship, however, has cast increasing doubt upon his contribution to the genesis of this Arabic text, and for the last decade, it seems to have been generally agreed that the traditional attribution to Sawirus contradicts the data yielded by meticulous investigation of the oldest MSS of the HP, and that it is rather the Alexandrian notable Mawhüb b. Mansür b. Mufarrij who emerges as the main personality involved in the composition of the

18 The MSS of both recensions are listed in Den Heijer, Mawhüb, [9-27. Each part of the . primitive recension is known from one MS only. All other MSS contain the Vulgate recension, as do all editions except Seybold's edition of the Hamburg MS (1912) (n. 3). 19 Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 77-8. 20 Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 11-13. 21 Sawlrus b. a1-Muqaffa' was a prolific writer of pastoral treatises, works on dogmatics and apologies of anti-Chalcedonian Christianity. He is also the earliest Coptic author known to write in Arabic. See Graf, GGAL, vo!. Il, 300; S.K. Samir, "Un traite inedit de Sawirus Ibn a1-Muqaffa' (10' siede): 'le Flambeau de l'Intelligence,'" Onentalia Christiana Penodica 41 (1975), 150-2[0; A.S. Atiya, "Sawfrus b. a1-Muqaffa'," Coptie Encyclopaedia, vol. VII, 2100-2. 22 Apart from older literature, such as Graf, GGAL, vo!. Il 301-2, this identification persists even in some very recent studies and reference works, e.g. C.W. Griggs, EarlY Egyptian Chrirtianity (Coptie Studies, 2) (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1990), 90-2; R. A1theim-Stiehl, "The Sasanians in Egypt- Some evidence of historical interest," Bulletin de la Societe d'Archeologie Copte 31 (1992), 87-96, especially p. 91; A.S. Atiya, "Sawirus b. a1-Muqaffa'," Coptie Encyclopedia (n. 2[). With regard to the first sentence of my own entry "Mawhüb ibn Mansür ibn Mufarrij al-Iskandarärü," Coptie Encyclopedia, vo!. V, 1573-4, I should like to state that the words "begun by Sawirus ibn a1-Muqaffa'" were not written by me. This case of editorial interference is probably what R.-G. Coquin hints at in his contribution "Langue et litterature arabes chretiennes," in M. Albert, R. Beylot, R.-G. Coquin, B. Outtier, Ch. Renoux & A. Guillaumont, Chrirtianismes orieniaux. Introduction tl l'dude des langues et des litteratures (Paris: Les editions du Cerf, 1993), 37- 106, esp. 75. COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 73

HP.23 Therefore, when studying the main personalities responsible for the composition of Coptic-Arabic historical texts, it seems appropriate to con- centrate on Mawhüb in the case of the HP. The relatively abundant autobiographical notes scattered throughout the two patriarchal biographies written by Mawhüb himself" allow us to reconstruct a fairly accurate picture of his life and personality. He must have lived from about 1025 to just before 1100 A.D. and belonged to one of the most prominent Coptic families of Alexandria. Around 1050 his father was entrusted with the preservation of the skull of Saint Mark. At his father's death, Maw- hüb himself inherited this remarkable honour. Among his relatives was Tädrus, bishop of Rashld, Mawhüb's wealth and social prestige are particularly no- ticeable in episodes where he acts as an intermediary between the Coptic community and the Muslim authorities. When the governor of Alexandria manages to keep the church of Mär JiIjis in Alexandria open, despite the closing down of churches all over Egypt, Mawhüb is one of the persons who secretly receive the keys from him. Incidentally, Mawhüb also mentions his activities in the service of this governor, the emir al-Mu'ayyad Hisn al-Dawla al-Kitämi al-Dimashqi. When the marauding Lawäta Berbers take the patriarch Christodoulos as a hostage, it is Mawhüb who pays the ransom. When the prominent military leader Badr al:Jamälf assumes effective power over Egypt in 1074, and his son al-Awhad receives Alexandria as a fief, Mawhüb and his brother Abu al-(Alä' Fahd act as tax collectors on his behalf. Maw- hüb (and his family) owned an inn (där al-wakäla) in Alexandria, where for- eign traders, who sometimes came from as far as Muslim Spain were lodged."

2.3 Afawhüb's sources

The Arabic text as produced by Mawhüb on the basis of earlier sources, IS arranged as a series of 65 biographies of patriarchs. As primary source

23 Serious doubt upon Sawrrus' role as initiator of the HP was expresssed by Samir, "Ham- beau" (n. 21), 156-7 and by D.W. Johnson, "Further remarks on the Arabic History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria," Oriens Christianus 61 (1977), 103-16. In my article, "Sawirus Ibn al- Muqaffa', Mawhüb Ibn Mansür Ibn Mufarrig et la genese de Yllistoire des Patriarches d'Alexandrie," Bibliotheca Onentalis 41 (1984), 336-47, I have ascribed all redactional work to Mawhüb, thus denying any contribution by Sawfrus. I have dealt with this issue again, more elaborately, in Mawhüb, 81-116. So far, this complete attribution to Mawhüb has remained unchallenged; see for instance the reviews by 1\1. 1\lartin, Parole de l'Onen: Chritien (1990), 409, and U. Zanetti, "L' Histein des Patriarches d'Alexandtie n'est pas due ä Severel," Analeeta Bollandiana 108 (1990), 292. 24 Mawhüb wrote the biographies of the patriarchs Christodonlos (Akhristüdülus, nr. 66) and Cyril 11 (Klrillus, nr. 67), not nr. 66 only, as claimed by Graf, GGAL, vol. 11, 302; see Den Heijer, Afawhüb, 113. 2~ For a more elaborate account of Mawhüb's biographical data, see my article "Mawhüb Ibn Mansür Ibn Mufarrig (XI' siede): petit essai biographique," Parole de l'Orient 14 (1987), 203-17, and Mawhüb, 87-93. 74 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER material for this composition, he used the five consecutive Coptic historical works mentioned above. These five texts, lost except for part of the first one, are the following: (I) A Sahidic Coptic text known simply as the History of the Church (henceforth HC). The first part of this HG, in its turn, has been shown to depend on Eusebius of Caesarea's famous Greek Historia Ecclesiastica= The second part is an original composition, produced entirely in a Coptic milieu, and attributed to an otherwise unknown scribe called Menas, who may have been a monk at the monastery of St. Shenoute." The combined text covered the period from c. 60 AD. to the aftermath of the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century AD.28 (2) A further Coptic chronicle, which must have covered the period from 412 to c. 700 AD. Its author is a certain George the Archdeacon, who must have written at the beginning of the eighth century AD. (3) A Coptic text written by a monk called John, in the middle of the eighth century. (4) Another Coptic source text, written by a monk who was also called John, and who wrote his work in the years 865-866. (5) A final text written in Cop tic by Mikhä'Il, bishop of Tinnis, in 1051 or 1058. Besides these five main source texts, a number of additional sources were used in places where Mawhüb felt that more remained to be said about the persons or events in question. The most important of these additional sources, some of which are preserved, are:"

26 O. von Lemm, Koptische Fragmente zur Patriarchengeschichte Alexandnens (Mbnoires de l'Acadimie impbio.le des sciences tk St-Phasbourg, VIle Serie, 36, No. 11) (St.-Petcrsbourg: M. Eggers & Cie. & J. Glasounof; Riga: M.N. Kymmel; Leipzig: Voss'Sortiment, 1888); W.E. Crum "Eusebius and Coptic Church histories," Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology 24 (1902), 68-84. This first part of the HG has been shown to be a reworked version rather than a poor translation of Eusebius' text, see J. den Heijer, "A propos de la traduction copte de I'Histoire Ecclisiastique d'Eusebe de Cesaree: nouvelles observations sur les parties perdues," M. Rassart- Debergh & J. Ries, cds., Actes du IV' congres international d'itudes coptes (Publications rh l'Institut Orientaliste de Louoain, 41) (Louvain-la-Neuve: Universire Catholique de Louvain, Institut orientaliste, 1992), 185-93. 27 Also known as the White Monastery, near Sohag: R.-G. Coquin, M. Martin, P. Grossmann & H.G. Severin, "Dayr Anbä Shinüdah," Goptic EruyclopeditJ, vol. Ill, 761-70. 28 The main parts of the HG are available in T. Orlandi, Storia della Chiesi di Alessandria. Testo copto, traduzione e commento, 1-11 (Testi e documenti per lo Studio ddl' Antichitti, 17, 31) (Milano-Varese: Istituto Editoriale Cisalpino, 1968-70); idem, "Nuovi frammenti della Historia Ecclesiastica copta," in S.F. Bondi a.o., eds., Studi in onore di Edda Bresdani (Pisa: Giardini, 1985),363-83; D.W.Johnson, "Further Fragments ofa Coptic History of the Church: Cambridge OR. 1699 R," Enduma 6 (1976), 7-17. 29 For more comments on the five main source texts mentioned above, see Johnson, "Further remarks" (n. 28); an outline of the translated part of the HP and its main and additional sources is given in Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 3-7, and 117-56. COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 75

(6) The Encomium Demetrii, a homily preserved in a Sahidic version, and attributed to Flavian, bishop of Ephesus." (7) The Panegyric of Peter, attributed to Alexander, the eighteenth bishop of Alexandria, a Coptic text transmitted together with the Martyrium of Peter?' (8) The Book of the Consecration of the Sanctuary of Benjamin, a liturgical text preserved in a bilingual Bohairic-Arabic version as well as in several Arabic MSS.32 (9) A lost additional source on a miracle involving the archon Maqära al- Nubräwl, set at the court of Härün al-Rashid in Baghdäd." (10) A treatise of Byzantine provenance known to Western scholarship as De Sacerdotio Christi (also: the Confession of 17zeodosius). This text is transmitted in Greek (both as an independent text and in Suidas's Lexicon) as well as in Georgian and other languages." Outside the HP, the Arabic version seems to have circulated among the Copts," but it is not known how and when it reached them. (11) The History (Tärfkh) by the most famous Melkite Egyptian author of the tenth century AD., the patriarch Sa'Id b. Bitriq (alias Eutychius)," which is

30 Edited and translated under the title "The Encomium of Flavianus, Bishop of Ephesus, on Demetrius, archbishop of Alexandria," in E.A. Wallis Budge, Coptic Martydoms in the dialect of Upper IWpt (London: British Museum, 1914), 137-56, transl. 391-408. It probably goes back to a lost Greek original, see T. Orlandi, "Le fante copti deUa Storia dei Patriarchi di Alessandria" in T. Orlandi, Studi Copti (Testi e docummti per lo Studio dell' Antichita, 22) (Milano-Varese: Istituto Editoriale Cisalpino, 1968), 53-68. 31 Edition and translation: "Panegyrique prononce par Abba Alexandre, archeveque d'Alexandrie, sur saint Pierre (... )," and "Martyre de Saint Pierre, archeveque d'Alexandrie (... )," in H. Hyvemat, Us Acles des Martyrs d'IWple, tires des manuscrits coptes de la Bibliothique vat- icane et du Musu Borgia (Paris: 1886; Nachdr. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1977), 247-62 and 263-83 respectively. Both texts survive in a Bohairic and a Sahidic version. The Martyrium goes back to a surviving Greek original. The combined text also exists in Armenian, Ethiopic, Latin and Syriac. More comments on these texts are given in Orlandi, "Fante copti," 79, and D. Spanel, "Two fragmentary Sa'idic Coptic texts pertaining to Peter I, Patriarch of Alexandria (Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris: 1\ISS. coptes 129'., fall. 109, 131)," Bulletin de la Societe d'Archiologie COple 24 (1982), 85-102, esp. 97-9 n. 1; Den Heijer, Mauihub, 132 n. 58. 32 This text was edited and translated by R.-G. Coquin, who, in his introduction, comments upon its relation to the HP; see R.-G. Coquin, Liore de la consecration du sanctuaire de Ben- jamin iBibliothiqu« d'Etudts COpies, 13) (Le Caire: Institut Francais d'Archeologie Orientale, 1975). 33 Nothing further is known about the original version of this text, but two short editorial notes, when combined, make it clear that such a text once existed; see Den Heijer, Mauhub, 149. 3. For information on the editions of the text in Greek, Georgian, Old Church Slavonic, Latin, Anglo-Norman, and Italian, see G. Ziffer, "Contributo allo studio della tradizione slava della 'Confessione di Teodosio," Otientalia Christiana Penodica 54 (1988), 331-51.

3S All three MSS listed by Graf, GGAL, vol. I, 245-6, belong to the Capric sphere of influence: two are kept in the Capric Orthodox Patriarchate, and the third one, according to its description, was also copied by a Coptic scribe; see Catalogue general des manuscrits des bibliotheques publiques de France. Departements, Tome XLVII. Strasbourg (by E. Wickersheimer) (Paris: Librairie Plan, 1923), 737-8. 36 This work is also known as Nasm al-jawhar, see Graf, GGAL, vol. Il, 32-5. According to 76 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

referred to very briefly at one point," and from which a short narrative involving al-Häkim (c. 1000 A.D.) is added to the Coptic text written by Mrkhä'fl of Tinnis." With regard to these sources, we can characterize Mawhüb's choice as one that remains firmly within the Coptic tradition. This picture is further confirmed by a number of texts that are only referred to in Mawhüb's editorial notes without being actually quoted." There is an exception, though, in sources (10) and (11), both of which are of Melkite origin. We do not know along which lines Mawhüb, the redactor of the HP, gained access to these texts: did he consult MSS from a Melkite milieu or, rather, codices produced and circulating within Coptic circles?"

2.4 The impact and reception if the text Throughout the ages, the HP was transmitted in a considerable number of MSS, nowadays kept in many libraries in Europe and Egypt. Some of

M. Breydy, it was transmitted in an original Alexandrian recension and in a later Antiochian recension; see M. Breydy, Etudes sur Sa'M Ibn Baitiq et ses sources (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Onentalium, Subsidia, 69) (Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1983). These recensions are covered, respectively, by the two following editions: M. Breydy, ed., Das Annalenwerk des Euiychios von Alexandrien. Aus- gewählte Geschichten und Legenden kompiliert von Sa'ld Ibn Batriq um 935 A.D. (Corpus Scriptorum Chris- tianorum Onentalium, Scriptores arabici, 44-45) (Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1985), and L. Cheikho, B. Carra de Vaux, H. Zayyat, eds., Euiychi: patriarchae alexandrini annales (2 vols., CSCO, Scriptores arabici, Textus, Series tertia, 6-7) (Beryti: Typogr. Catho!.; Parisiis: C. Poussielgue; Lipsiae: O. Harrassowitz, 1906-09). 37 The reference, inserted with the aim of confirming a date given in one of the early lives of Patriarchs, is now known to pertain to the aforementioned Antiochian recension; see Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 129-30. 38 Its provenance is indicated explicitly in a redactional note. The passage in question, however, cannot be found in either of the two recensions mentioned above. Its origin is as yet unknown. See Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 154. 39 Among these further additional sources, the most important texts are: (I) The Life and Martyrdom of St. Mark, which in the later vulgate recension of the HP is actually added to the text, partly on the basis of a Coptic text now known from a Bohairie MS in the monastery of SI. Macarius; see Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 127-8; (2) a so far unidentified Life of Dioscorus, from a MS of St. Macarius' library; see Den Heijer, op. eit., 140; (3) the correspondence between Peter Ill, the 27th patriarch of Alexandria, and Acacius of Constantinople, translated for Mawhüb, apparently from Coptic, by a priest called Yasib; see Den Heijer, op. cit., 143-4; (4) a separate biography of Khä'Il I, the 46th patriarch, by the same author, the monk John, who also wrote the Coptic source for the 46th biography of the HP; see Den Heijer, op. cü., 146; (5) a treatise on the hermit Ammüna, by Severus, bishop of Sanabü; see Den Heijer, op. cü., 148. 40 De Sacerdotio Christi was added at the beginning of the HP, probably to further emphasize the direct and linear relation between the patriarchs of Alexandria and Jesus Christ himself. We only know that Mawhüb discovered this text in a manuscript kept in the monastery of Our Lady at Nahyä, to which the name of a monk called Ya'qüb is somehow connected; see Den Heijer, Mauho», 126-7. As for Sa'id b. Bitrtq, more research into the transmission history of that text could help to solve the problem mentioned above, n. 38. COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 77 these MSS at some point circulated in Syria or Lebanon, or perhaps were even produced there, since they are written in garshuni:" The history of its reception in the works of later authors remains to be studied systematically, but it is quite clear that all such authors, either directly or indirectly, relied heavily on it for their information on the patriarchs of Alexandria, and occasionally for other topics as well. Its influence cannot only be detected in the works of the historians studied in the following sections of this paper, but also in the Coptic calendar of Saints, the Synaxarium,42 in general theological works," and in 19th and 20th century introductions to Coptic history."

3. Abu al-Makärim Sa'dalläh b. JirJis b. Mas'Ud and the History of the Churches and Monasteries of Egypt 3.1 The text and its structure The History if the Churches and Monasteries if Egypt (henceforth abbreviated as HCME)45 can be described as a topographical handbook containing historical information on places of interest for Christianity in Egypt (with an additional volume on other parts of the Middle East and even parts of Europe), with particular emphasis on churches and monasteries. This informative work is arranged geographically: each entry corresponds to a geographical unit (city, church, monastery) and contains a description of the locality, and, in many cases, one or more notes on events linked to it. These events may be dry historical facts as well as all kinds of legends or hagiographical data. One part of the text was published in 1895 by B.T.A. Evetts. In 1984, a new edition was published by Fr. Samuel al-Suryani. In this edition, Evetts' text is reproduced as Volume 11 of the text, and is preceded and followed

41 To my knowledge, 52 11SS contain the HP or parts of it. Among these, five MSS are written in gaTshünf; see Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 18-27. Such gorshüni MSS could also have orig- inated in Syriac circles within Egypt itself; cf. A. Drint, "The Mount Sinai Arabic Version of IV Ezra" (Ph.D. thesis Groningen, 1995), 78.

42 I. Forget, ed., ~naxarium Alexandnnum (2 vols., CSCO, Scriptores arabici, Series tertia, 18- 19) (Beryti: Typogr. Cathol.; Parisiis: C. Poussielgue; Lipsiae: O. Harrassowitz, 1905-1912). One instance of borrowing from the liP in the Synaxanum is studied in]. den Heijer, "Apologetic elements in Coptic-Arabic historiography: The Life of Afrahäm ibn Zur'ah, 62nd Patriarch of Alexandria," in S.K. Samir & ].S. Nielsen, eds., Christian Arabic Apologetics during the Abbasid Period (650-/258) (Studies in the History of Religion (Numen Booksenes), 63) (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1994), 192-202. 43 For example, the Mqjmü' U~ül al-Din by al-Mu'taman b. al-'Assäl, chapter 48 (see the forthcoming edition by Fr. Wadi' Abullif}; cf. Graf, GGAL, vol. 11, 306 . .. For instance, al-Qass Manassä Yühannä, Tätikh. al-kanisa al-qib!fyya (al-Qähira: 1924; 3rd edition al-Qähira: al-Qähira al-Hadüha, 1982); al-Kharida al-nofisa fi tärikh al-kanisa (2 vols., [Cairo?] 1964). •~ The text owes this title to modem scholarship. In the state in which it has survived the text itself is devoid of any indication of its original title: see Evetts' edition (next note), p. ix. 78 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER by Volumes I and III respectively, neither of which had been edited previ- ously. Volume I deals with Lower Egypt and a part of Cairo; Volume 11 with other parts of Cairo and with Upper Egypt, and very briefly with some places outside Egypt; and Volume III deals with the Sinai, Greater Syria and Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and Rome."

3.2 Biographical data on Abu al-Makänm So'dalliili b. Jiv"is Traditionally, the HCME was ascribed to a certain Abü Sälih al-Armani (the Armenian)," but for some decades now, and more particularly since Fr. Samuel's edition, its real author is considered to have been the Coptic priest Abü al-Makärim Sa'dalläh b. JiIjis b. Mas'üd, and Abü Sälih al-Armani the name of someone who once owned the MS containing vol. 11.48 A careful analysis of the redactional notes in the text, however, seems to disallow a simple attribution of its authorship to one person. In fact, as I have had the opportunity to point out earlier, four layers can be identified in it. The first layer (the basic text) was compiled between c. 1160 and 1187 A.D., and involved several persons, one of whom might well have been the priest Abu al-Makärim himself. On top of this came two further layers, added around the year 1190 and between 1200 and 1220 respectively. Finally there is the contribution of an anonymous scribe in 1338 and 1349, who apparently made some sort of abridgement of the text. Abu al-Makärim, then, emerges as just one of several persons involved in compiling the HeME, and his contribution is hard to situate in time. All other contributors are rather shad- owy, including Abü Sälih the Armenian, who, however, no longer neces- sarily has to be dismissed as a mere owner of a manuscript." The latter

46 The Churches and Monasteries rif Egypt and some Neighbouring Countries attributed to Abü $alil) the Armenian, edited and translated by B.T.A. Evetts, with added notes by AIfr. J. Butler, (Anecdota Oxoniensa, Semitic Series, 7) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895); Abu al-Makärim, TiilikJz ol-kanä'is wa al-adyura fi al-qam al-thän: 'ashar al-müädt, li-Abi al-Makärim, alladhi nusiba khata' an ila Abi $alil} al-Armani, Uad wa-la'lrq al-rähib $amü'rl al-Suryanr (4 vols., Dayr as-Suryän, 1984). The fourth volume contains several texts by other authors, dealing with similar subjects. The editor is now Anba Samuel, bishop of Shibtn al-Qanätir. More recently, he published an English translation of Part I: Abu al-Makarern, History of the Churches and Monasteries in Lower Egypt in the 13th Century (Cairo: Institute of Coptic Studies, Anba Reweis, 1992). ., HCME, Evetts' edition, ix-x; Graf, GGAL, vol. II, 338-40. 48 It was the Egyptian scholar and collector of manuscripts, Jirjis Filüthä'us 'Awad, who came to this conclusion after comparing Evetts' edition of 1895 with the MS which he owned and which has now been published by Fr. Samuel; see the hand-written essay, published as an appendix to the fourth volume of Fr. Samuel's edition, 159-70. 49 J. den Heijer, "The composition of the History of the Churches and Monasteries of Egypt. some preliminary remarks," in D.W. Johnson & T. Orlandi, eds., Acts rif the fifth international Congress rif Coptic Studies (2 vols., Roma: C.I.M., 1993), vol. Il, 209-19. In a thorough codicological analysis of the HCME, U. Zanetti agrees with this identification of layers in the text; see U. Zanetti, "Abü l-Makärim et Abü Sälih," Bulletin de la Societe d'Archiologie Copt« 34 (1995) (forthcoming). COP'rIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 79 may, at least theoretically, have been responsible for the addition of some passages of particularly Armenian interest." but that is really all that can be said about a possible Armenian cultural element in the HCME. As far as Abu al-Makärim himself is concerned, the text yields insufficient information on his person as to allow for a clear picture of his cultural and confessional background in the sense defined in the introduction to this article. We only know that he owned a house in Härat Zuwayla in the Fätimid city (al-Qähira) and that his wife had her own property as well." His full name was al-Shaykh al-Mu'taman Abu al-Makärim Sa'dalläh b. Jirjis b. Mas'üd, From the mentioning of his wife, the niece of a high official, and referred to as al-siu aljalfla sitt al-där ("the noble lady, lady of the house"), it is obvious that his family was a prominent one in the Cairene population of his time. According to Jirjis Ftlüthä'us (Awag, Abu al-Makärim must have 52 been a qumm~ (hegoumenos), because of his tide al-Sho;ykh al-Mu'taman. ·

3.3 TIe sourcesof the HCME On a previous occasion, I presented a few preliminary remarks on the sources of the HCME. The paper in question mainly concerned the relation between the HCME and its most important source, the HP; other sources could only be dealt with at a superficial leve1.53 The following enumeration of source texts (inasmuch as these could be identified so far) only includes those sources that are quoted at least three times: (I) The HP itself. (2) An unknown text entitled Dalläl al-a'yäd, and elsewhere, Qiinün al-a'yiid: 3 quotations. Maybe these titles refer to a precursor of the Synaxarium. (3) The History, mentioned above, by Sa'Id b. Bitrlq (Eutychius). (4) Another historical work by a Melkite writer, the Täfikh of Mahbüb b. Qustantrn al-Manbiji, also known as Agapius. (5) The most famous work of all Arab historiography: al-Tabarr's Tärikh. al- rusul uia-al-mulilk: (6) A well-known collection of stories and legends relating to Egypt: 'Umar Muhammad al-Kindf's Ftu/.ä'il M~. (7) The topographical work al-Khüat by Abü "Umar Muhammad al-Kindi, (8) Another famous early Arabic historical work, Ibn 'Abd al-Hakam's Futü~ M~, on the conquest of Egypt.

50 HCA1E, Evetts' edition, x. SI HCA1E, edition Fr. Samuel, vol. I, ff. 5a, 18b; appendix JiIjis F. 'Awad, vol. IV, 159-60. S2 HCA1E, vol. IV, 161. S3 J. den Heijer, "The influence of the History of the Patriarchs of Alexandria on the History of the Churches and Monasteries of E,gpt by Abü l-Makärim (and Abü ~äliQ?)," in S.K. Samir, ed., Actes du 4' Congres iniemational d'Etudes arabes chretiennes (Cambridge, 1992) (forthcoming). 80 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

(9) A treatise on the Christian monasteries in the Middle East, !Gwh al-djyärät, by the Muslim author al-Shäbushtl." With respect to this choice of sources, we can consider the HCME a gen- uine Coptic composition, in that the HP, the principal Coptic historical text, is quoted far more often than any other source (at least 81 times).55 On the other hand, text number (2) is quoted three times only, while the two Melkite authors of texts numbers (3) and (4) are cited no fewer than 21 and 13 times respectively. Their presence in the HCME is thus remarkably more significant than in the HP.56 Moreover, the HCME makes use of five texts by Muslim authors: numbers (4) to (8). Although the number of quotations per text is relatively small in these cases (3, 7, 4, 7, and 11 respectively), the fact that some of these are given in passages dealing with such a crucial episode as the Arab conquest of Egypt, gives certain parts of the HCME an almost Islamic flavour." In addition, it should be borne in mind that the very con- cept of a topographical handbook such as the HCME finds its roots in the (Muslim) Arabic genre of Khita; literature. The mere fact that one of the sources quoted is al-Kindf's Khita; (nr. 6) proves that at least one of the contributors to the HCME was familiar with that genre. Indeed, it would be by no means an exaggeration to describe the HCME as a Coptic Christian Khitat text, and therefore as a most interesting phenomenon for the central theme of this study. The only reservation that must be made here is that this char- acterization is valid only for the HCME as we know it today, i.e. for the total multi-layered text: it is impossible to acknowledge Abu al-Makärim or any other contributor in particular with this interconfessional approach to his sources, because it is only in a limited number of cases that the layers can be distinguished, and it impossible to determine to which layer each quotation belongs.

!>i For more data on these and other less frequently used sources and bibliographical references, see section B of the forthcoming article referred to above (n. 53). 55 Besides 37 quotations indicated as such in the text of the HCME, the latter text contains a number of quotations from the HP without explicit reference. So far, 44 quotations have been identified as such through texual correspondence of varying accuracy. Finally, the HCME also contains numerous passages dealing with subjects that also appear in the HP but where further investigation is required in order to decide whether they are based on the latter text or not (at least 38 cases). Until now, it has proven fruitful to compare the passages based on the HP with their originals: by means of such a comparison, new light has been shed on the composition of both texts. For instance, this method has shown that the HCME must have made use of an intermediary recension of the HP, which must have existed in a stage between its primitive recension and the Vulgate (above, nn. 10 and (3); see section D of the article mentioned above (n. 53). 56 The quotations from Eutychius and Agapius remain to be studied systematically. Notably, the problem of the two recensions of Eutychius' text (above, n. 36) applies to the HCME just as much as to the HP. 57 This point is studied in detail in my paper "La conquete arabe vue par les historiens COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 81

3.4 the impact and reception of the text

Despite its importance from the point of view just expounded here, and its value as a source of information on mediaeval Coptic Egypt, the HCME cannot be called an influential text within its own tradition. Each of the three volumes has survived in one MS only," and the text apparently was not quoted by other authors before its discovery in modem times.

4. Yüsäb of Fuwa and his History of the Patriarchs 4.1 The text and its structure The historical work known as bishop Yüsäb of Fuwa's History of the Patriarchs59 is a series of biographies of patriarchs, shorter and more compact than the HP, with basically the same structure and contents. It consists of 103 units whose titles consist of the names and ordinal numbers of the consecutive patriarchs. Since, according to the Egyptian scholar Kärnil ~äliJ:t Nakhla, bishop Yüsäb must have died before 1271,60it is obvious that the biographical notes on the patriarchs Gabriel III (nr. 77) to John VI (or. 103) must be recent additions. The only difference in structure between the HP and Yüsäb's History is that the latter has no division into volumes or parts. The text remained virtually inaccessible until a few years ago, when an edition was published by Fr. Samuel al-Suryäni and Nabih Kämil Däwüd."

4.2 Biographical data on Yusäb of Fuwa The only research done on the personality of Yüsäb of Fuwa is a short analysis, by Kämil Sälih Nakhla, of his biographical data contained in his History/" From this description, bishop Yüsäb emerges as an active cleric, a former monk at Dayr Abü Yuhannis in the waar al-Natrün, who was deeply involved in defending the interests of the Coptic community. On some

coptes," given in the workshop on "Identites communautaires en Egypte," at the Institut Fran- cais d'Archeologie Orientale in Cairo, March 1995 (publication forthcoming). 58 A meticulous study of these volumes was carried out by U. Zanetti in the article cited above (n. 49). 59 Not to be confused with the liP, dealt with in section 2 of this article. The title History of the Patriarchs is not actually found in Yüsäb's text itself. se Kärnil ~ä1il) Nakhla, introduction to the edition (see below n. 62), 2-6. 61 Tärikh' al·äbä' al-Batätika, Li al-Anbä rusäb Usquf Fuwa, ed. al-Rähib Samü'Il al-Suryäni and al-Ustädh Nabth Kämil ([Cairo]: [Institute of Coptic Studies], [ea, 1987]). The first editor is now Bishop Anba Samuel (above, n. 46). 62 This analysis was added at the beginning of the edition mentioned above by way of introduction (pp. 2-6). An even shorter study by the same author can be found in his TöTfkh toa- Jadäwil Batätika: al-Iskandariyya (Tärikh al-Umma al-Qjb!!yya, 4) ([Cairo]: Lajnat al-Tärikh al-Qjb\i, 1943), 442-3. 82 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

occasions, he felt compelled to oppose the patriarch, Cyril III Ibn Laqlaq, to whom he presented a list of demands for reform. In these activities, he had such prominent allies as al-Safl b. al-CAssäland al-Shaykh al-Sani b. al- Thu'bän, priest of Abü Sarja Church in Old Cairo and father of the famous writer Ibn al-Rähib.P Yüsäb's name is also connected to a number of MSS which he copied, owned, or signed."

4.3 Tüsäb': sources

No research has yet been carried out to identify Yüsäb of Fuwa's sources. All we have is a remark by Kämil ~älil) Nakhla, according to whom Yüsäb collected or compiled (qäma bijam') the biographies of the patriarchs, and wrote (qäma bi-war!') those of the patriarchs of his own days." Graf states, without further comment, that Yüsäb's text completes and continues the HP, with its own biography of Klrillus III.66 Needless to say, such vague indica- tions do not suffice for the present purpose. In the first place, we need to know more precisely in what way Yüsäb treated the text of the HP. Did he quote parts of it verbatim and completely leave out other parts? Or is his text rather a shortened paraphrase of its modeli''" Furthermore, we will have to determine whether any sources other than the HP were used. In the present state of research, this seems to be the case: for one thing, the text deals with Dioscorus and his opposition to Chalcedon, in a section that can indeed be called a biographical note," whereas the HP, in its stead, only contains an editorial remark, probably written by Mawhüb, explaining the absence of a real biography of this historically so important patriarch."

4.4 TIe impact and reception of the text Only two MSS of bishop Yüsäb's History are known today." This is to say that, despite Anbä Yüsäb's fame as a prominent Copt in his time, his History never gained the same fame and authority as the HP. As far as I can see now, no other texts have borrowed from it. A special case, though, is the lengthy biography of the 75th patriarch, Kirillus Ill, published as vol.

63 On Ibn al-Rähib and his father see below, section 5.2. 64 See Graf, GGAL, vo!. 11, 370-1. 6.1 Yüsäb of Fuwa, Täiikh, introduction, 5. 66 Graf, GGAL, vo!. 11, 369. 67 My own preliminary research suggests that the second description fits best. In the forthcoming study on the Arab conquest (above, n. 57), it will be shown that some information is omitted altogether and that passages are reduced to single sentences. 68 Yüsäb of Fuwa, Tätikh, 37-9. 69 Den Heijer, Mawhüb, 117-18. As to the question on which recension of the HP Yüsäb's text is based, a limited number of samples would seem to point towards the primitive recension. 70 Graf, GGAL, vol. n, 369-70. COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 83

IV (2 fascicles) in the Cairo edition of the HP.71 This biography is extant in one MS of the HP only, which, in combination with the existence of a shorter biography of the same patriarch in other MSS of the HP,72 casts a certain amount of doubt upon its status as an original part of that text. According to A. Sidarus, the long biography is based on several contemporary documents, one of which is a biography by Yüsäb of Fuwa." But Sidarus made his observation before Yüsäb's text was edited completely; now that there is an edition, the question should be checked once more and be studied systematically.

5. Ibn al-Riihib and his Kitäb al-Tawärikh 5.1 The text and its structure The thirteenth-century Coptic author Abü Shäkir, also known under the name Ibn al-Rähib, is famous for an important and elaborate book on chronography, astronomy, and history from the creation to the author's own time, which bears the title Kitäb al-tauiärikh. (henceforth abbreviated KT).74 This text itself is stilI unedited. A compendium of part of it, though, has been available in print for almost a century, under the title given to it by western scholarship, Chronicon Orientale (abbreviation: CO). Based only on the part dealing with history, and excluding most of the material on chronology and astronomy, this compendium was formerly believed to be Ibn al-Rähib's original text." The two rather late MSS of the KT itself were supposed to contain an anonymous work, but A. Sidarus was able to identify the text of these two MSS as Ibn al-Rähib's text, and argued that the abridged and reworked Chronicon was produced soon after the KT, though not by Ibn al- Rähib himself." The }(T7 contains 51 chapters of very uneven length. Chapters 1-47 deal with chronography and astronomy. They include many tables, which show

1. For the editions of the HP see above, n. 9. 12 Den Heijer, Jo.lawhüb, 12-13. 13 A.Y. Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und IVerk. Ein koptisch-arabischer Enzyklopädist des 7.//3. Jahrhunderts ilslamkunlidu Untersuchungen, 36) (Freiburg: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, 1975), 5 n. 14. 14 This title appears in both MSS consulted by Sidarus: Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 41-2; the word Tauarikl: is to be understood as "historical tracts," as "chronographical systems," and as "eras," all at the same time; op. cit., 31. 15 Petrus Ibn Rahib, Chronicon Orientale, edidit L Cheikho S.1. (Textus-Versio) (Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Onentalium, Scriptores arabici, Series tertia, I) (Beryti: Typogr. Catho!.; Pari siis: C. Poussielgue; Lipsiae: O. Harrassowitz, 1903). 76 Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 43-6. 71 Although the KT is still unedited, the following description of its structure and contents can be provided thanks to the important work done by A. Sidarus in the second chapter of his study on Ibn al-Rähib, '84 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER the author's systematic and practical attitude. Chapters 48.-50 (which, taken together, are longer than the first 47 chapters), deal with the history of the world (mostly of the Near East) from the creation up to the 13th century AD. Chapter 48 contains sections on the Old Testament Prophets, the Kings and Judges of the Jews, the Assyrians, the Persians (Achaemenids and Sasanids), the Greeks, and the Roman and Byzantine emperors. Chapter 49 consists of short biographical notes on the Muslim rulers of the Middle East, particularly those whose territory included Egypt, from the rise of Islam to the Ayyübid al-Malik al-Mansür, Chapter 50 is a similarly arranged series of biographies of the Coptic patriarchs of Alexandria, from St, Mark to Athanasius b. Kahl, the 76th patriarch. Chapter 51 is an account of the history of Church Councils. The historical parts contain much more running text than the chronographical and astronomical chapters, but nevertheless their narrative is almost everywhere accompanied by synoptic tables, which immediately grant the reader a clear overview of the various dates that occur in the sources used by Ibn al-Rähib. The most striking difference between Ibn al-Rähib's original KT and the better-known CO is precisely the absence, or at least strongly reduced form, of these tables." Now that all these facts have been established, it goes without saying that the original KT is urgently in need of a critical edition.

5.2 Biographicaldata on Ihn al-Rähih Sidarus' study contains an excellent analysis of the available data on Ibn al-Rähib's life and personality, in which attention is paid also to several of his relatives, particularly to his father,"? All this information is of the utmost relevance for our topic, for it gives us a clear picture of Ibn al-Rähib's social and confessional environment. The essential elements in Sidarus' analysis are the following: the author, fully named Nushü' al-Khiläfa Abü Shäkir b. al- Rähib Abi al-Karam Butrus b. al-Muhadhdhib, belonged to a Cairene Coptic family prominent in Church affairs as well as on the political scene in the late Ayyübid period. His father, al-Shaykh al-Sant'" Abu al-Majd, was a person of great authority, who in later life became a monk at the monastery

78 It is again A. Sidarus who has pointed this out, in his analysis of the relation between the KT and the Chronicon: Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 42-3. [In her comparative study on Coptic-Arabic sources for the history of the Crusades however, Franceise Micheau rejects Sidarus' identification of these two MSS as Ibn al-Rähib's original text; see Micheau, "Croisades et Croises" (above, n. 4), 173·4.] 79 Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 1-25. 80 According to Sidarus, this name should be read properly as al-Sanä', an abbreviated form of the honorific title Sanä' al-Mulk; Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 9 n. 27. COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 85 of St. Antony, but was summoned back to the capital by al-Malik al-Kämil and was appointed to the Diuiän al-nazar 'alä al-diyär al-m~riyya (the principal department of government, "the Diwan of overseeing the Egyptian ter- ritories"). During the 19 years' vacancy preceding the patriarchate of Kirillus Ill, he functioned as head of the Coptic community, and he is described as a man with great influence among the Muslims as well. Later, he was actively involved in the conflict with patriarch Cyril Ill, together with bishop Yüsäb of Fuwa, as mentioned earlier." By the middle of the 13th century, Abü Shäkir himself, as may be inferred from his title (laqab) Nushü' al-Khiläfa, must have had a high position in the Ayyübid administration as well. Sidarus suggests that this post may have been in the Diuiän al-Juyüsh, the administration of the armies/" He must have been born between 1200 and 1210. He finished the KT, his first work, in 1257. Between 1264 and 1271, he wrote three more important books: a philological work on Coptic lexicogra- phy and grammar (Sullam) of which only the grammatical introduction (Muqad- dima) is preserved; the Kitäb al-Shift!, an elaborate christological and exegeti- cal work; and his philosophical and theological Summa, the Kitäb al-Burhän. His death is to be dated between 1282 and 1295.83

5.3 Ibn al-Rähib's sources Sidarus has justly characterized Ibn al-Rähib as an encyclopaedist, who systematically arranges information from a variety of sources, without pro- foundly going into the contents hirnself In the light of what we are interested in here, it is necessary briefly to present the sources identified by Sidarus," and to arrange these according to confessional background. Most of these sources are indicated faithfully by Ibn al-Rähib in his synoptic tables: (1) The Kitäb al-Abaqti ("Book of the Epacts"), a chronographical work by Yühannä b. Säid b. Yahyä al-Qulzumi, who is also known as one of the authors of the HP.85 In this text, as reproduced by Ibn al-Rähib in his chapters on chronography, Yühannä in his turn quotes Murqus b. Qunbar, and the famous Jacobite philosopher Yahyä b. (Adr. (2) A lost and unknown Coptic chronicle, referred to as Täriklz li-bactI al- $aCfdryyfn("History of some Upper Egyptian(s))."86

81 See above, section 4.2. 82 Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 7-8. 83 Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 21-5. 84 These sources are listed, with references, by Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 33-40. Further references, not given by Sidarus, are provided here only when directly relevant for the present purpose. ~ Yühannä is the author of the Lives 68 and 69 of the HP; see above n. 24. 86 Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 37 n. 32, alludes to a number of anonymous 86 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

(3) The HP, on which Ibn al-Rähib bases his chapter about the Coptic patriarchs. (4) Sa'Id b. Bitriq (alias Eutychius), Tä1iklz.87 (5) Mahbüb b. Qustanün al-Manbijl (alias Agapius), Täfiklz.88 (6) Various biblical and patristic sources. (7) An otherwise unknown chronicle ascribed to John Chrysostomos, Täfiklz Yü&annä Fam al-Dhahab. (8) An equally unknown chronicle ascribed to Epiphanius, Täfiklz Abifoniyüs. (9) The Almagest, i.e. the Arabic version of the astronomical work, the Megate Syntaxis by Claudius Ptolemaeus." (10) A history of the Jews, Tiuikh al-Tahüd, by aJewish convert to Christianity named Abu al-Fakhr." (11) The compilation known as Yosippon, by an unknown Jewish author, who most probably wrote in Hebrew in tenth century Italy. The Arabic version is entitled Kitäb Yüsrif b. Kuryün. (12) Al-Zfj al-~äkimi, by the prominent Egyptian astronomer Ibn Yünus, (13) Unidentified sources related to al-Tabari, used for Ibn al-Rähib's account of Muslim history. This brief survey of Ibn al-Rähib's sources clearly illustrates his universalist and interconfessional cultural orientation. Texts (1) to (3) belong to the Coptic tradition properly speaking, (4) and (5) are the same Melkite histories encountered among the sources of the HCME, and (6) to (8) can best be characterized as belonging to the common Christian heritage. The remaining texts are of non-Christian origin: (9) is part of the tradition of Arabic translations from the Greek, that circulated among all confessional groups in the Muslim world. Texts (10) and (11) go back to Jewish scholarship, and (12) and (13) are texts written by Muslim scholars. A careful comparison of the KT, together with the CO, with all these source texts is necessary in order fully to understand the KTs textual history. With regard to the HP, more information is needed on the way its contents were used in the KT,91 and the same goes for Sa'Id b. Bitriq's

historical texts, and seems to suggest that one of these could be identical to the text under consideration. M. Breydy refers to the authors of this source as "two brothers from Upper Egypt" (akhayn ~a'rd!YY'!Yn),and implicitly links them to an equally unknown historian referred to as Ibn al-Sa'Id, "Son of Upper Egypt"; M. Breydy, Eludes sur Sa'rd Ibn Battiq et ses sources (CSCO, Subsidia, 69) (Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1983), 47.

87 See above sections 2.3 and 3.3. 88 See above section 3.3. 89 With respect to Claudius Ptolemaeus, Sidarus supposes that the Tabulae Manuales were used by Ibn ar-Rähib as well: Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 38. 90 This author is also known from an exchange of letters with one of his former correli- gionists; see Graf, GGAL, vol. n, 435-6. 91 More particularly, it must be determined on which recension of this text the quotations COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 87

History.92 For a proper understanding of the confessional background of the sources, we should also look for an answer to the question whether the Arabic version of the Yosippon was already read by the Coptic public in Ibn al-Rähib's days." As for the Muslim historical texts related to al-Tabarf (nr. 13), these sources would have to be identified. A detailed comparison with al-Makin's quotations from al-Tabarr?' may be a first step in that direction.

5.4 The impact and reception of the text Some MSS of the KT cannot be located but have been documented in the past. When these MSS are added to those extant, a total number of six MSS is known to us today. Two of these probably circulated in Syrian Chris- tian circles." The shorter CO is found in one old MS (1307 A.D., kept in the Vatican library), but no surviving copies of this MS are known to exist which were made before the end of the 19th century." Despite this rather limited manuscript tradition, the Arabic KT has had a considerable impact on later developments. In the first place, it is now generally acknowledged to be the main source for the first part of al-Makin's world history, which will be dealt with below." And either through al-Makin or directly, its chapter on the Coptic patriarchs was used by the famous Muslim historians, Ibn Khaldün and al-Maqrtzt." Furthermore, in the 16th century it was translated into Ge'ez by the well-known translator and writer

in Ibn al-Rähib's work are based. This problem is studied in the paper announced above, n.57. 92 Here, again, the question of recensions of Eutychius' text should be taken into account, cf. above, nn. 36 and 56. 93 The Yosippon was translated into Arabic by a Jew from Yemen. The first Muslim author to quote it, according to Fische!, was Ibn Khaldün (and not the much earlier Ibn Hazrn); see W J. Fische!, Ibn Khaldün in IWpt: his public fonetions and his historical research (1382-1406). A Study in Islamic Hiswriograplry (Berke!ey-Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1967), 142-4. It gained popularity among Oriental Christians; see M. Kropp, "Arabisch-äthiopische Überset- zungstechnik am Beispie! der '::;pzaAyhud (rosippon) und des Tankä Wäldä-'Amid," Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morganländischen Gesellstheft 136 (1986), 314-46, esp. 316-17 (with bibliographical data on the Hebrew and Arabic versions). That at least some of the Arabic MSS belong to the Coptic tradition appears from Wellhausen's description; J. Wellhausen, Der Arabische Josippus (Abhandlungen der Königlichen Geschelschtifl der Wissenschajlen zu Gö'tlingen, Phil.-hist., Klasse, N.F., 1,4) (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1897), 42. 94 See below, section 6.3. 95 Sidarus refers to one 1\1S from Aleppo and one from Charfch, neither of which can any longer be found; Sidarus, Ibn at-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 47-8. 96 In the late 19th century, three MSS kept in Beirut were copied from the old MS of the CO; see Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 48-9. 97 See below, section 6.3. 98 See below, section 6.4.

99 On this author, see EJ. van Donzel, 'Enbaqom, Anqasa amin (la parte de la foi). Apologie 88 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

became very popular among the Ethiopians, who quoted parts of it in various texts (on chronography and history).'?'

6. Al-Makin's world history and its continuation l!Ji al-Mufaddal b. Abi al-Fadii'il 6.1 the texts and their structures

Al-Makin, also known as Ibn al-cArnld, is well-known for his world history in two parts: the first part, which covers pre-Islamic history from Creation until the eleventh year of Heraclius' rule, seems to be called simply Tiaikh in the MSS which contain it; the second part, dealing with the Islamic period until the accession of Baybars in 1260, is generally known as Tärfkh al- Muslimin (in the European tradition: Historica Saracenica). This latter part was one of the first mediaeval oriental chronicles to become known in Europe, and played a significant part in the early studies on Arab history by Western scholars. JOl In spite of its generally acknowledged importance, the first part as a whole remains unedited.!" The second part was edited by Th. Erpenius in 1625 with a Latin translation, but his edition is based on just one out of the many MSS known today, and it is incomplete in that it does not contain the part that covers the period from 1130 onwards. Only in 1955 did C. Cahen pub- lish this remaining portion of al-Makin's text. And just very recently (1994), a French translation of this latter portion was published by A.-M. Edde and Fr. Micheau.l'" It is evident that both parts are in need of a comprehensive

ithiopienne du Christianisme contre l'lslam a panir du Coran (Introduction, texte, critique, traduction) (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1969). 100 Sidarus devotes one section of his second chapter to the Ethiopic translation and another to the Ethiopic texts influenced by it; see Ibn ar-Rühibs Leben und Werk, 51-61.]. Neugebauer, on the other hand, denies (without reference to Sidarus) any influence of Ibn al-Rähib on the Ethiopic calendrical procedures;]. Neugebauer, "Abü-Shäker and the Ethiopic /fasäb," Journal of Near Eastern Studies 42 (1983), 55-8. 101 Graf, GGAL, vol. n, 348-51; C. Cahen and R.-G. Coquin, "Al-Makln b. al-'Amld," EF, vol. VI, 143-4. The term al-Majmit al-Mubärak, quoted in these two standard works and elsewhere, is taken from the colophons of some of the MSS which contain the text, and may actually be a mere formula added by a scribe rather than the author's original title of the work.

102 Some passages from this first part were quoted by Hottinger in 1658; see Graf, GGAL, vol. Il, 349. Additionally, the two last folios of an otherwise lost MS from the 13th century were edited and collated with one later MS in garshüni, in C.F. Seybold, "Zu El Makln's Welt- chronik. Der Breslauer Schlußfragment und der Codex Gothanus Arabicus (KarSüni) 1557 des 1. noch unedierten Teils," Zeitschrifl der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft 64 (1910), 140-53. 103 Th. Erpenius, Historia Saracenica (••. ) a GeorgW Elmacino, (Lugdunum Batavorum: Typogr. Erpeniana, 1625); C. Cahen, "La 'Chronique des Ayyoubides' d'al-Maktn B. al-'Amrd," Bulletin des Etudes Orientales IS (1955), 109-84, transI., A.-M. Edde and F. Micheau, Al-Makin Ibn al- Amid, Chronique des AJYoubUles (602-658/1205-6-1259-60) (Documents relatifs a Ihistoiredes Croisades, 16) (Paris: Academic des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 1994). COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 89 study of the manuscript tradition, which should result in a critical edition of the complete text.'?' Al-Makin's universal history is arranged in the form of consecutive num- bered biographical units pertaining to key personalities (beginning with Adam), preceded by some chapters on astronomical and cosmological issues. Up to the year 586 B.C., the Old Testament provides the basic structure; then the Mesopotamian and Persian monarchs are taken as the biographical framework, followed by Alexander the Great, the Roman and Byzantine emperors and, in the second part, the Caliphs and Sultans of the various Muslim dynasties. As a historian, al-Makin found a successor in al-Mufaddal b. Abi al-Fadä'il, whose work was explicitly meant to be a continuation of the former's Tärikh, as appears from its title in the unique MS: al-Nah] al-sadid wa al-durr al-farid fi mä ba'd tärikh Ibn al-'Amld ("The Correct Path and the Unique Gem of what succeeds the History of Ibn al-'Amid"). It has an annalistic structure, begins with the accession of Baybars I, al-Malik al-Zähir, in 1259-1260 A.D., and ends with the death of al-Malik al-Näsir in 1341. It was completed in 1357-1358. The greater part of the text was edited, with a French translation, by E. Blochet. Its remaining part was edited, translated and commented upon by S. Kortantamer. When used together, these two complementary editions render the text reasonably accessible to modern scholarship.l'"

104 Graf, GGAL, vol. 11, 349-51, lists 6 MSS containing both parts of the text, 19 which include part I only, and 11 in which only part II is found. The only step so far taken towards a classification of the USS is the preliminary work done by G. Wiet; see below, section 6.4. Although the urgency of a critical edition was already pointed out by Seybold, "Zu El Makln's Weltchronik," 151-2, and by M. Plessner, "al-Makrn" in er, vol. Ill, 188-90, esp. 188, little progress has been made so far. \Viet's classification of the MSS was obviously intended for an edition, and M. Breydy also announced an edition of part I in Bulletin d'Arabe Chrdien 6 (1990), but neither scholar lived to carry out these plans (Prof. Breydy passed away in late 1994, just a few weeks before this paper was presented in Birmingham). Incidentally, on the same page in the BAC, I myself also announced a project for the edition of Part 11, which it has not been possible to carry out thus far either. A newly formed committee for the edition of Arabic texts pertaining to the Coptic tradition, and consisting of Samir Khalil Samir, Fuad Megally, David Thomas, Mark Swanson, Rifaat Y. Ebied, and myself, has decided to include both parts of al-Makin's History, as well as Ibn al-Rähib's Kitäb al- Taioärikh, in a corpus of texts that should be edited with priority, through the combined efforts of members of this committee and a small group of Coptic monks who have direct access to the MSS kept in the Egyptian monastic libraries. It is worth mentioning that this plan, which is now being carried out within the framework of the "Egyptian-Netherlands Cooperation for Coptic Art Preser- vation" (ENCCAP) programme, has received the warm support of H.H. Pope Shenouda Ill. 10' E. Blochet, Moufaual ihn Abi l-Fazail, Histoire des Sultans Mamlouks. Texte arabe publit et traduü en francais, Patrologia Orientalis 12 (1919), 345-550, 14 (1920), 375-672, 20 (1929), 3-270; S. Kortantamer, Ag)'P/en und ~ ~wischen 1317 und 134/ (see above, n. 4); cf. J. den Heijer, "al-Mufaddal b. Abi 'l-Fadä'il," EP, vol. VII, 305. 90 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

6.2 Biographical data on al-M, akin and al-Mufaddal

Al-Makin's full name is al-Maktn jirjis b. Abi al-Yäsir'?" b. Abi al-Makärim, also known as Ibn al-'Amid.!" At the end of part II of his History, al-Makin gives a rather lengthy note on his family history, on which later biographical entries by Ibn al-Suqä'I, al-Safadl, and al-Maqrizf were based. In this note, he mentions that his grandfather, apparently a Syriac merchant, had emigrated from Takrit to Egypt under the caliphate of Al-Ämir, Al-Maktn's father held high offices in the Dituän al-Jaysh (military department) from Saläh al-Din's days up to the time of al-Sälih Ayyüb. Al-Makin himself had a similar career in Egypt and Syria. Involved in the unrest which troubled Syria during the Mongol invasion and at the beginning of Baybars' reign, al-Makin spent several years in prison. He ended his life in Damascus, but always remained in close contact with Coptic scholars such as Abü Ishäq b. al-cAssäl.108 On the basis of a statement by the Muslim writer GhäzI b. al-Wäsitl on a certain Abu al-Fadä'il, nephew (ibn ukJz~ of al-Makin b. al-cAmId, F. Nau has suggested that the historian al-Mufaddal b. Abi al-Fadä'il may well have been this nephew's son and hence al-Makin's great-nephew.l'"

6.3 The sources used by al-M. akin and by al-MtifcuJr/.al

As a result of the research carried out by A. Sidarus, it has been solidly established that al-Makin relies heavily on Ibn al-Rähib. Indeed, it is from the KT that al-Makin borrows his older contemporary's quotations from the earlier sources mentioned above.'!" Within the framework of the present study, it is of paramount importance to determine to what extent al-M akin also used source material directly, i.e. independently from Ibn al-Rähib's KT. An answer to this question would enable us to judge al-Makin's degree of originality as a compiler: did he limit himself to copying large sections of the KT, including its quotations from earlier texts? Or did he also peruse those (and other) sources himself, borrow passages from them and integrate such passages into his text where applicable? This question has gained much importance now

106 Seybold, "Zu El Maktn's Weltchronik," 151-2, mentions the possibility that this name should rather be read as "Ilyäs." 107 M. Breydy prefers the vocalisation Ibn 'Omaid; see his Etudes (above, n. 36), 8 n. 11. lOB Cahen and Coquin, Efl, vol. VI, 143. 109 F. Nau, "Sur al-Makin et Ibn Abi l-Fazail," Raxe tk i'Orient ehretien 26 (1927-28), 208-11. On p. 209, Nau cautiously introduces his theory by stating that this identification "n'est pas certaine, mais il semble qu'on puisse la proposer." Kortantamer, A"gyptm und Syrien zwischen 1317 und 1341 (see above, n. 4), still follows this attitude on pp. 4-6, but further on (p. 36), she seems to regard this identification as a certainty. [The same goes for Micheau, "Croisades et Croises" (above, n. 4), 173-4.] 110 Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 44-5. On Ibn al-Rähib's sources see above, section 5.3. COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 91 that Sidarus has established al-Makin's general dependence on Ibn al-Rähib: indeed, this new insight has caused C. Cahen and R.-G. Coquin to wonder whether al-Makin can be credited for any originality at all. III A first contribution to a solution of this problem can be given by comparing the quotations from the HP in Ibn al-Rähib with those in al-Makin, and by investigating whether the latter quotes these texts via Ibn al-Rähib only, or independently as well. On the basis of a preliminary and incomplete investigation, it would appear that al-Makin indeed occasionally quotes the HP directly, but further research is needed before this impression can be confirmed. m With regard to the question of the confessional background of the sources used, the present state of research allows for no more than the general impression that al-Makin did incorporate non-Coptic material independently. In order to provide a more balanced answer, however, we will have to wait for the results of a detailed comparison between the KT, al-Makin's History, and all sources of both texts. In particular, research should focus on the textual relations between al-Makin and a number of Melkite, common, and Muslim texts. First of all, Sa'Id b. Bitriq (Eutychius) has been recognized as the source of large sections of al-Makin's History. Indeed, when A. Sidarus states that al-Makin copied his quotations of earlier works directly from Ibn al-Rähib, he mentions Eutychius and Agapius of Manbij as the only exceptions.!" And M. Breydy has detected such a high degree of parallelism between Eutychius and al-Makin that he uses two MSS of the former as witnesses for his edition of the latter's Histoiyl" It would also be helpful to reassess the statement by M. Plessner, that al-Makin must have used at least part of his sources independently from Ibn al-Rähib. The evidence for this is found, according

III Cahen and Coquin, El", vo!. VI, 144. In the English version, this statement is not put as clearly as in the (original) French (EncyclopMie de l'Islam, vo!. VI, 142), where it says that a publication of the KT "permettra sans doute de degager ce qui reste d'originalite ä al-Makln." 112 As pointed out by Cahen and Coquin, El", vo!. VI, 144, it is "not known" whether al- Makin utilised the HP. My provisional positive answer to this question is based on research carried out within the framework of the new edition of the HP (see above, n. 10). I have ascertained that al-Makin's text contains phrases corresponding to the text of the HP which do not seem to occur in the KT. Incidentally, both Ibn al-Rähib and al-Makfn appear to quote the HP in an intermediate recension. I hope to present the evidence for these state- ments in a separate article, still in preparation, on the influence of the HP on the works of Ibn al-Rähib and al-Maktn. III Sidarus, Ibn ar-Rähibs Leben und Werk, 45. 114 Breydy, Eludes, introduction, xi. Breydy, who distinguished between an early (Alexandrian) and a later (Antiochian) recension of Eutychius' work, seems to imply that al-Maktn borrowed his quotations from a lost early version of the later recension. Unfortunately Breydy ignores the issue of textual relationship between al-Maktn and Ibn al-Rähib, Therefore his observations on the link between Eutychius and Ibn al-Rähib need to be checked against the background of Sidarus' findings. In general, the study of Christian Arabic historiography would indeed be greatly stimulated by a systematic study on the reception of Eutychius' work. 92 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER to Plessner, in a number of long literal quotations, in Part I of al-Makin's History, from the old Arabic Hermetic treatise al-Istamäkhis: these quotations neither appear in the secondary CO, nor in the Ethiopic version of the KT.115 It is of course impossible to check the validity of this statement until the Ethiopic version has been systematically compared with the yet unedited Arabic original. At any rate, if indeed al-Makm could have had direct access to this text, this would imply his familiarity with Hermetic literature common to Muslim and Christian scholars.!" As indicated in the introductory section of this paper, Part 11of al-Makin's History has long been recognized as an abridged version of al-Tabart for the Islamic period until 920 A.D., supplemented with material from more recent sources dealing with the history of Syria and Egypt. More recently, however, Cahen has denied that al-Makin was responsible for this work himself, by arguing that he most probably copied his Tabari material from Ibn Wäsil's al- TäTfkh al-~äli/:tf.1I7 However, this contention seems to be contradicted by al-Makin's preface to his second part, where he explicitly explains how and why he abridged al-Tabarr's work.'!" Therefore, a comparison with Ibn Wä~il's work and other texts is necessary in order to explain this contradic- tion and to identify the sources of al-Makin's account of the periods not covered by al-Tabari. Only when these problems are solved will we be able to determine to what degree al-Makin's high position in the (preponderantly Muslim) Ayyübid administration is reflected in his familiarity with and orientation on Muslim Arabic historiography. Returning, finally, to the question of al-Makin's degree of originality, it is at least generally acknowledged that he did more than just copying, and that he, in the process of quoting his Muslim sources, added dates according to the Era of the Martyrs to those of the Hijra calendar, as well as cer-

115 This Hermetic text is also attested in the Ghäyal al-Hakim, attributed to al-Majrttt; M. Plessner in EJI (see above, n. 104). It should be borne in mind that Plessner wrote this entry when the CO was still considered to be Ibn al-Rähib's original work. 116 On Hermetic literature, see M. UlImann, DU Natur- und Geheimwissmschajlm im Islam (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1972), 286ff. Further references are given in J. den Heijer, "Malhamat Däniyäl and Christian Arabic literature," in S.K. Samir, ed., Actes du premier congres international d'hudes arabes chrhiennes (Orientalia Christiana Analeeta. 218) (Roma: Pont. Institutum Studiorum Orientalium, 1982), 223-32, esp. 225 n. 8. 117 C. Cahen, "Al-Makin Ibn al-'Amid et I'historiographie musulmane: un cas d'interpene- tration confessionnelle," in J.M. Barral, ed., Orientalia Hispanica, we Studia FM. Parqa octogenano dicata I, Arabica-Islamica, pars prior (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1974), 158-67, esp. 160-1. liB Al-Makin, Historia Saracenica, 1. Cahen's view would imply that this preface was not written by al-Makin, but merely copied by him from an earlier abridgement of al-Tabari, The author of the preface, whoever he may have been, mentions both al-Tabart's original text and a compendium by one Kamäl al-Dln al-Armünf (?), "and other excerpts." I am grateful to Dr. G.H.A. Juynboll for allowing me to use his personal copy of Erpenius' edition, with hand- written annotations by various scholars of the past centuries. COPrIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 93 tain episodes of ecclesiastical history.'!" The origins of the latter additions have not been determined, and must be investigated within the framework of the comparison between the KT, al-Makin's History and their sources discussed above. As for al-Makin's continuator, al-Mufaddal, it has been shown that he used the same sources as did the Muslim historians describing the events of the same period. At least for the period reaching to 1300, his text is a reworked version of the chronicle of al-jazari, with just a few added reports on matters pertaining to the Coptic Church.!" which, once more, will have to be traced back to their sources. He also seems to have consulted the Mus- lim authors Ibn al-Dawädäri' and Baybars al-Mansürl. In any case, it is quite obvious that al-Mufaddal, also in his choice of sources, very much belonged to an Arabic cultural milieu in which the Islamic element was prominent.'!'

6.4 the impact and reception of the texts Al-Makin's History is transmitted in a relatively large number of MSS and may therefore be supposed to have circulated quite widely in Coptic circles. Moreover, several MSS probably stem from a Syriac milieu.!" Like Ibn al- Rähib's KT, al-Makin's text was translated into Ge'ez, and gained much popularity in Ethiopia.F' From our point of view of confessional cultural history, it is interesting to note that al-Makin was known in Muslim circles as well. In the first place, as stated above, his biography is given by such famous authors as al-Safadf and al-Maqrizl. Furthermore, at least one MS of this text contains readers' notes by persons with unmistakably Muslim names.!" But the most important phenomenon in this respect is the fact, well-known by now, that three

119 Cahen and Coquin, EP, vol. VI, 144.

120 Haannann, Qgellenstudien (see above, n. 4), 142.

121 Theoretically, however, one might argue that al-Mufaddal had access to Baybars al- Mansürl's work through Cop tic channels, since the famous Coptic author Abu al-Barakät b. Kabar is sometimes considered Baybars' main ghostwriter; see E. Ashtor, "Baybars al-Mansüri," El", vol. I, 1127-8; Haannann, Quellenstudien, 136. For Christian traits in al-Mufaddal's work, see the introductory section of this paper. 122 Among the MSS referred to above (n. 1(2), two are written in garshiinf. Moreover, some copies are kept in Lebanese collections. 123 Graf, GGAL, vol. II, 351; Kropp, "Arabisch-äthiopische Übersetzungstechnik" (above, n. 93), 318-19. Incidentally, in note 15 (p. 319), Kropp suggests that certain elements in the Ge'ez version of Ibn al-Rähib's work, which, according to an unpublished study by R. Cowley, are not found in the CO, may derive from al-Makin. This suggestion, once again, should be checked against the background of a comparison between the KT and al-Makin's History. 124 MS London, British Library, Or. 7564, datable to c. 1280: A.E. Ellis & E. Edwards, A descriptive list of tJu Arabic manuscripts acquired by the Trustees of the British Museum since 1894 (London: British Museum, 19(2), 33. As a correction to Graf, GGAL, vol. 11, 349, it should be mentioned that this ~lS contains only Part 11, rather than the complete text. 94 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

prominent Muslim authors used al-Makln's work as the main source for their accounts of Christian history: (I) Ibn Khaldün, the most famous among the later Arab historians. Born and raised in Tunis in a family from Seville, he spent periods of his life in Fez, Granada, Tlemcen, and other places in the Maghreb, as well as in Cairo. It must have been in his Egyptian period (1382-1406) that he came across al-Makin's World History.!" In the long pre-Islamic part (corresponding to two whole volumes) of his prolific Kitäb al-Thar (seven volumes), he inter- mittently quotes passages from al-Makin in his chapters on the Roman and Byzantine emperors.!" passages that include information on the patriarchs of Alexandria. Considering Ibn Khaldün's fame, we may presume that al- Makin's quotations were thus read by interested Muslim readers in various parts of the Middle East and North Africa at the end of the Mamlük period and in Ottoman times.!" (2) Al-Qalqashandi (1355-1418). His SuM al-dshii (fourteen volumes)!" is not an historiographical work, but a kind of handbook containing useful background information for secretaries in the Mamlük government in Cairo. Precisely because of this function, it may well have reached a considerable readership of influential personalities. Its concise section based on al-Makin deals almost exclusively with the Patriarchs of Alexandria.F? (3) Al-Maqrizf (1364-1442). His Khitat, one of his most famous works, extant in a large number of MSS, is a geographical-historical account of Egypt.P" It contains quite a lengthy account of the history of the Copts, which has long been identified as relying on al-Makin.!"

125 \V. FischeI, Ibn Khaldün in Egypt (see above, n. 93), 116·17. 126 Tärikh. al-ialläma Ibn Khaldün. Kitäb al-ilbar ua-diuiän al-mubtada' toa-al-khabar fi ayyäm al- 'Arab wa-al-'Ajam ioa-al-Barbar uia-man 'dsarahum min dhawi al-Sultän al-akbar (7 vols., Beirut: Maktabat al-Madrasa and Där al-Kitäb al-Lubnäni, 1967-68). The sections on Greek, Roman and Byzantine history arc to be found in vol. 11, 374-489. 127 MSS of the Kitäb aloe/bar are preserved in Fez, Cairo and Istanbul, among other places; see C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Liueratur (Leiden: EJ. Brill, 1937-1949), Supp!. 11, 343-4 (with further references). 128 Al-Qalqashandt, $ub~ al-A'shäfi $inä'at al-Inshä' (al-Qähira: Där al-Kutub al-Khudaywiyya, 1331/1913-1338/1919); index: M. Qindrl al-Baqlf and S.'A. 'Äshur (al-Qähira: Där al-Ma'ärif, 1390/1970). 129 $ub~ al-A'shä, vol. V, 308-21; E. Tisserant and G. Wiet, "La liste des Patriarches d'Alex- andrie dans Qalqachandi," Revue de l'Onent ehrelim 23 (1922-1923), 123-43. 130 The edition still commonly used, despite its notoriously high number of corruptions and other shortcomings, is al-Mawä'i?:, ua-al-itibär fi dhikr al-khitat toa-al-athiir (Buläq: [al-Matba'a al- Amrriyya], 1272/1853); the critical edition by G. \Viet, whose five volumes cover less than the first part of the Büläq edition (Le Caire: Institut Francais d'Archeologie Orientale, 1911- 1927), was never completed. A recent study on the history of this text, with a survey of the khita; genre, was published by A.F. Sayyid, "Remarques sur la composition des /filal de Maqrrzt d'a;m'!s un manuscrit autographe," in Hommages a la mimoire de Serge Sauneron, 1-11 (Bibliotheque d'Etude, 81-82) (Le Caire: Institut Francais d'Archeologie Orientale, 1979), 11, 231-58. 131 Al-Khüat, vol. I, 480-501. On the relation with al-Makin, see the introduction to this paper. COPTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY 95

With regard to the interrelationship between these three works, G. Wiet has demonstrated convincingly that al-Qalqashandt and al-Maqrizf used al- Makin independently from each other. He was able to prove this by demon- strating that, whereas al-Qalqashandf quoted al-Makin's original text, al- Maqrizf made use of an expanded version of it, in which further quotations from Eutychius were added to the ones already included.P" But whether there is a textual relationship between the quotations in Ibn Khaldün and those in al-Maqrizr remains an open question, which will have to be tack- led in the future, since it is known that the two historians were in touch for some time.!" Finally, it is not known whether Ibn Khaldün and al-Maqrizr, when mentioning the books now known to be the sources of al-Makln (particularly Ibn al-Rähib's KT), are just repeating al-Makin's words, or are actually quoting the earlier texts independently. This question is all the more important since Fischel insists at some length on the importance of Ibn Khal- dün's wide range of sources on non-Muslim history for his assessment of this historian's genius and erudition.!" In the same vein, Sidarus implies that al- Maqizf used both Ibn al-Rähib and al-Makin.P! Such problems can only be solved if the comparison between the KT, al-Makin's History, and their sources is extended to the works of the three Muslim authors discussed here. Whatever the case may turn out to be, it is clear that these three authors limited their borrowings from al-Makin to subject-matter pertaining to Chris- tianity. On the other hand, Cahen has pointed out that a lesser known Mus- lim author, Shäfi' b. (Alf, used al-Makln's second part, on Islamic history, which he copied and slightly revised, mainly by omitting the passages of exclusively Christian interest.!" With regard to al-Mufaddal, circumstances are not like those of his famous predecessor at all. His Nahj survives in one MS only and was virtually unknown until Blochet's edition appeared. This may well be due to the fact that al-Mufaddal, as he openly declares in his preface, wrote the text for his personal use only.

132 Wiet has so far identified one MS containing this secondary combined version of al- Maktn; see above, n. 104. It stands to reason that more MSS may contain this secondary version. I3S F. Rosenthal, "al-Makrizt," EP, vol. VI, 193-4. I3t FISChel, Ihn Khaldün in Egypt (see above, n. 93), 114-20. m Sidarus, Ibn ar-Riihibs Leben und Werk, 28, states that Ibn Khaldün and al-Maqrizf used the KT as well as al-Makln's Tätikh. as sources for their accounts of Christian history. In a footnote (n. 5) he qualifies this statement by saying that Ibn Khaldün seems to know Ibn al- Rähib through al-Makrn only. From this, then, it would follow that al-Maqrrzt used both Ibn al-Rähib and al-Maktn. FischeI, too, lists both Ibn al-Rähib and al-Maktn as sources of Ibn Khaldün, Ihn Khaldün in Egypt, 117. 136 This author's work is partly preserved in the form of quotations by Ibn al-Furät; see C. Cahen, "Ibn al-'Amid et I'historiographie musulmane" (see above, n. 117), 160. 96 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER

7. Conclusion Summarizing and further evaluating the main results of this incomplete overview of the Coptic Arabic historical authors, their works, their sources and their impact on later writers, I must conclude with the following remarks. Concentrating our analysis of the first Coptic historical work written in Arabic, the History of the Patriarchs, on Mawhüb b. Mansür b. Mufarrij's work as a compiler of earlier source material, we have seen that he remains largely within the Coptic tradition, using Coptic historical texts as his main sources, and various hagiographical and liturgical texts as supplementary ones. In two cases, Mawhüb quotes the Melkite author Sa'Id b. Bitriq (Eutychius), and the chapter on the Priesthood of Christ is also a text that, at least in an earlier stage, belonged to the Byzantine tradition. Mawhüb's social and professional relations with Muslim compatriots on a social and professional level perhaps had a cultural aspect as well, but if this was the case, in no way did this influence his choice of sources for the HP. Within the limited framework of this paper, Mawhüb is the only author and compiler of the HP that could be dealt with. His continuators in the transmission and recording of the Patriarchal biographies, however, display very much the same confessional and intellectual outlook as he does. As notables (aräkhina), most of them were deeply involved in the internal matters of the Coptic community as well as in the Fätimid, Ayyübid or early Mamlük administrations.P? but again, their familiarity with Islamic culture is hardly reflected in their choice of source material.!" About Abu al-Makärim (and the other contributors to the History of the Churches and Monasteries of EgyM little is known as far as their social position is concerned. It is obvious, however, that we are dealing here with a cultural and intellectual milieu of the late twelfth century that is different from the environment of the HP: besides the HP itself, which is, admittedly, its primary source, the HCME also rather frequently quotes Melkite sources (Eu- tychius and Agapius), and to a lesser but yet significant extent, Muslim texts as well, particularly in passages dealing with such epoch-making events as the Arab conquest. Bishop Yüsäb of Fuwa, by contrast, seems to quote Coptic sources only. So far, all that is known about his use of sources is that his text (prior to the accounts of events belonging to his own time) is an abridged paraphrase of the HP. In one case, however, we have seen that supplementary material is used where the HP contains an important historical lacuna.

J37 Den Heijer, Mawhub, 10-13. 138 [One exception may be found in the letters written by Saläh al-Din, apparently diffused as anti-Crusader propaganda, and quoted in the biography of the patriarch Murqus III b. Zur'a; see Micheau, "Croisades et Croises" (above, n. 4), 170.] COPTIC HlSTORIOGRAPHY 97

Ibn al-Rähib, an influential personality among Christians and Muslims in his time, displays an encyclopaedic knowledge and interest that truly tran- scends confessional boundaries. His sources belong to the Coptic, Melkite, common Christian, Jewish and Muslim traditions, and also to the Graeco- Arabic heritage shared by intellectuals of all confessions. His text, including many quotations from the sources just alluded to, is copied in many places by al-Makin, who also held high offices in the late Ayyübid administration, and who adds more information borrowed from Melkite sources (Eutychius and Agapius) and probably, in one case at least, from Hermetic literature. In the second part of his History, his main sources are Islamic (al-Tabarl, Ibn Wä~il). On the other hand, it could be established in this paper that his use of the Coptic traditions is not limited to Ibn al-Rähib only, since he turns out to quote the HP independently as well. His independence from Ibn al-Rähib in this respect is also apparent in his completely different chronological structure: whereas Ibn al-Rähib has a separate chapter for the Coptic patriarchs, al-Makin includes his notes on the patriarchs, whether borrowed from Ibn al-Rähib or directly from the HP, in his general chrono- logically arranged narrative, Le. in his sections on the Roman/Byzantine emperors and in those on the Muslim caliphs and sultans. Now that we have gained more information on the degree to which al- Makm depends on Ibn al-Rähib, it is quite clear that the texts of both authors should be edited within the framework of one research project. This is to say that al-Makin must not only be studied in his own right, but also as a secondary witness of Ibn al-Rähib, Such a project will of necessity prove a complex exercise, for besides the MSS containing the texts themselves, the following other witnesses will have to be taken into account as well: (1) all the source texts mentioned above, inasmuch as they are available today; (2) the Chronicon Orientale, which, it should be remembered, is a slightly later reworking of part of the Kitäb al-taioätikh, but extant in an important 13th century MS; (3) the secondary version of al-Makin, which includes additional quotations from Eutychius; (4) the Ethiopic versions of the KT and al-Makin's History, as well as the Ethiopic texts influenced by the KT; (5) the texts by Ibn Khaldün, al-Qalqashandi and al-Maqrizi, which must be compared with the relevant passages in al-Makin, their Vorlage. One cannot be sure whether, with such a small number of representative texts available, it is methodologically sound to postulate the existence of a trend or a particular development in time, in Coptic-Arabic historiography. But if such a development can be discerned, it is clearly one moving from a cultural horizon limited to the cultural heritage of its own confessional 98 JOHANNES DEN HEIJER group, towards a much more cosmopolitan or universalist cultural environment, that is eager to absorb material from other confessions as well, and more particularly from the Arabic-Islamic milieu. Very important also is the readiness, displayed by almost all Coptic authors in question, to borrow from Melkite sources, and especially from Eutychius. Even the HP, which is over- whelmingly Coptic in its choice of sources, bears some traces of Sa

Summary This article intends to give a brief overview of Arabic historiographical works compiled by Coptic authors between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries. Each section of the paper deals with various aspects of one particular text. Within each section, an account is given first of the structure of the composition of the text. This is followed by a short outline of the biographical data on the author or compiler, whenever available. The aim of this sub-section is to characterize the author in terms of his social and confessional position and more particularly to try to find out to what extent he may have been subject to influences from the adjacent (Muslim, Jewish, Mel- kite) communities. In the third sub-section, the sources, in as far as these have been identified in previous studies, are reviewed and presented in such a way as to indi- cate to what degree the compiler made use of material originating from confessional groups other than his own Coptic tradition. Conversely, the fourth and last sub-section on each text, contains remarks on the later impact and reception of the text, both within and outside Cop tic readership itself. In the concluding section, it is argued that this analysis, despite the man- ifold uncertainties it cannot solve immediately, suggests a development that moves from a horizon limited to the cultural heritage or the traditions of the Coptic community towards the much more cosmopolitan or universalist cultural environment of the "Coptic Renaissance" of the thirteenth century.