Chapter 14

Bibliography.—Hellenistic Period.—See the special articlesAlexandria, &c., and especiallyPtolemies; J. P. Mahaffy,The Empire of the Ptolemies(London, 1895),A History of Egypt underthe Ptolemaic Dynasty(London, 1899); A. Bouché-Leclercq,Histoire des Lagides(4 vols., Paris, 1903- ); E. A. W. Budge,A History of Egypt, vols. vii.-viii. (London, 1902); J. G. Milne,A History of Egypt under Roman Rule(London, 1898); E. Gibbon,Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire(edited by J. B. Bury) (London, 1900). The administration and condition of Egypt under the Ptolemaic and Roman rules are abundantly illustrated in recently discovered papyri, see especially the English publications of B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt (Memoirs of the Graeco-Roman Branch of the Egypt Exploration Fund) and F. G. Kenyon (British Museum Catalogues); also Mr Kenyon’s annual summaries in theArchaeological Report of the Egypt Exploration Fund. An ample selection of the Greek inscriptions from Egypt is to be found in W. Dittenberger,Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selectae(2 vols., Leipzig, 1903-1905).

Bibliography.—Hellenistic Period.—See the special articlesAlexandria, &c., and especiallyPtolemies; J. P. Mahaffy,The Empire of the Ptolemies(London, 1895),A History of Egypt underthe Ptolemaic Dynasty(London, 1899); A. Bouché-Leclercq,Histoire des Lagides(4 vols., Paris, 1903- ); E. A. W. Budge,A History of Egypt, vols. vii.-viii. (London, 1902); J. G. Milne,A History of Egypt under Roman Rule(London, 1898); E. Gibbon,Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire(edited by J. B. Bury) (London, 1900). The administration and condition of Egypt under the Ptolemaic and Roman rules are abundantly illustrated in recently discovered papyri, see especially the English publications of B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt (Memoirs of the Graeco-Roman Branch of the Egypt Exploration Fund) and F. G. Kenyon (British Museum Catalogues); also Mr Kenyon’s annual summaries in theArchaeological Report of the Egypt Exploration Fund. An ample selection of the Greek inscriptions from Egypt is to be found in W. Dittenberger,Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selectae(2 vols., Leipzig, 1903-1905).

(R. S. P.; F. Ll. G.)

2.Mahommedan Period.

(1)Moslem Conquest of Egypt.—In accordance with the scheme of universal conquest conceived by the founder of Islam, an army of some 4000 men was towards the end of the yeara.d.639 sent against Egypt under the command of ‘Amr (see‘Amr-ibn-el-Ass), by the second caliph, Omar I., who had some doubt as to the expediency of the enterprise. The commander marched from Syria through El-‘Arīsh, easily took Farama or Pelusium, and thence proceeded to Bilbeis, where he was delayed for a month; having captured this place, he proceeded to a point on the Nile called Umm Dunain, the siege of which also occasioned him some difficulty. After taking it, he crossed the Nile to the Fayum. On the 6th of June of the following year (640) a second army of 12,000 men, despatched by Omar, arrived at Heliopolis (On). ‘Amr recrossed the river and joined it, but presently was confronted by a Roman army, which he defeated at the battle of Heliopolis (July 640); this victory was followed by the siege of Babylon, which after some futile attempts at negotiation was taken partly by storm and partly by capitulation on Good Friday, the 6th of April 641. ‘Amr next proceeded in the direction of Alexandria, which was surrendered to him by a treaty signed on the 8th of November 641, under which it was to be occupied by the Moslems on the 29th of September of the following year. The interval was spent by him in founding the city Fostat (Fusṭāṭ), near the modern Cairo, and called after the camp (Fossatum) occupied by him while besieging Babylon; and in reducing those coast towns that still offered resistance. The Thebaid seems to have surrendered with scarcely any opposition.

The ease with which this valuable province was wrenched from the Roman empire appears to have been due to the treachery of the governor of Egypt, Cyrus, patriarch of Alexandria, and the incompetence of the generals of the Roman forces. The former, called by the Arabs Mukaukis (Muqauqis) from his Coptic name Pkauchios, had for ten years before the arrival of ‘Amr maintained a fierce persecution of the Jacobite sect, to which the bulk of the Copts belonged. During the siege of Babylon he had been recalled and exiled, but after the death of Heraclius had been reinstated as patriarch by Heraclonas, and been welcomed back to Alexandria with general rejoicing in September 641. Since Alexandria could neither have been stormed nor starved out by the Arabs, his motives for surrendering it, and with it the whole of Egypt, have been variously interpreted, some supposing him to have been secretly a convert to Islam. The notion that the Arab invaders were welcomed and assisted by the Copts, driven to desperation by the persecution of Cyrus, appears to be refuted by the fact that the invaders treated both Copts and Romans with the same ruthlessness; but the dissensions which prevailed in the Christian communities, leading to riots and even civil war in Alexandria and elsewhere, probably weakened resistance to the common enemy. An attempt was made in the year 645 with a force under Manuel, commander of the Imperial forces, to regain Alexandria for the Byzantine empire; the city was surprised, and held till the summer of 646, when it was again stormed by ‘Amr. In 654 a fleet was equipped by Constans with a view to an invasion, but it was repulsed, and partly destroyed by storm. From that time no serious effort was made by the Eastern Empire to regain possession of the country. And it would appear that at the time of the attempt by Manuel the Arabs were actually assisted by theCopts, who at the first had found the Moslem lighter than the Roman yoke.

A question often debated by Arabic authors is whether Egypt was taken by storm or capitulation, but, so far as the transference of the country was accomplished by the first taking of Alexandria, there seems no doubt that theTerms of capitulation.latter view is correct. The terms were those on which conquered communities were ordinarily taken under Moslem protection. In return for a tribute of money (jizyah) and food for the troops of occupation (ḍarībat-al-ṭa’ām), the Christian inhabitants of Egypt were to be excused military service, and to be left free in the observance of their religion and the administration of their affairs.

From 639 to 968 Egypt was a province of the Eastern Caliphate, and was ruled by governors sent from the cities which at different times ranked as capitals. Like other provinces of the later Abbasid Caliphate its rulers were, during this period, able to establish quasi-independent dynasties, such being those of the Tulunids who ruled from 868 to 905, and the Ikshidis from 935-969. In 969 the country was conquered by Jauhar for the Fatimite caliph Mo’izz, who transferred his capital from Mahdia (q.v.) in the Maghrib to Cairo. This dynasty lasted till 1171, when Egypt was again embodied in the Abbasid empire by Saladin, who, however, was himself the founder of a quasi-independent dynasty called the Ayyubites or Ayyubids, which lasted till 1252. The Ayyubites were followed by the Mameluke dynasties, usually classified as Baḥri from 1252-1382, and Burji from 1382-1517; these sovereigns were nominally under the suzerainty of Abbasid caliphs, who were in reality instruments of the Mameluke sultans, and resided at Cairo. In 1517 Egypt became part of the Ottoman empire and was governed by pashas sent from Constantinople, whose influence about 1707 gave way to that of officials chosen from the Mamelukes who bore the title Sheik al-balad. After the episode of the French occupation, government by pashas was restored; Mehemet Ali (appointed pasha in 1805) obtained from the Porte in 1841 the right to bequeath the sovereignty to his descendants, one of whom, Ismail Pasha, received the title Khedive, which is still held by Mehemet Ali’s descendants.

(2) The following is a list of the governors of Egypt in these successive periods:—

(a)During the undivided Caliphate.‘Amr-ibn-el-Ass, A.H. 18-24 (a.d.639-645).‘Abdallah b. Sa’d b. Abī Sarh, 24-36 (645-656).Qais b. Sa’d b. ’Ubādah, 36 (657-658).Mahommed b. Abu Bekr, 37-38 (658).Ashtar Mālik b. al-Hārith (appointed, but never governed).‘Amr-ibn-el-Ass, 38-43 (658-663).’Utbah b. Abu Sofiān, 43-44 (664-665).’Utbah b. ’Āmir, 44-45 (665).Maslama b. Mukhallad, 45-62 (665-682).Sa’īd b. Yazīd b. ‘Alqamah, 62-64 (682-684).Abdarrahman b. ’Utbah b. Jahdam, 64-65 (684).Abdalazīz (‘Abd al-‘Azīz) b. Merwān, 65-86 (685-705).‘Abdallah b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 86-90 (705-708).Qurrah b. Sharīk al-‘Absī, 90-96 (709-714).‘Abd al-Malik b. Rifā’ah al-Fahmī, 96-99 (715-717).Ayyūb b. Shuraḥbīl al-Aṣbaḥī, 99-101 (717-720).Bishr b. Ṣafwān al-Kalbī, 101-102 (720-721).Ḥanzalah b. Ṣafwān, 102-105 (721-724).Mahommed b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 105 (724).Ḥurr b. Yūsuf, 105-108 (724-727).Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 108 (727).‘Abd al-Malik b. Rifā’ah, 109 (727).Walīd b. Rifā’ah, 109-117 (727-735).‘Abd al-Raḥmān b. Khālid, 117-118 (735).Ḥanẓalah b. Ṣafwān, 118-124 (735-742).Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 124-127 (742-745).Ḥassān b. ‘Atāhiyah al-Tu’jibī, 127 (745).Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 127 (745).Hautharah b. Suhail al-Bāhilī, 128-131 (745-749).Mughīrah b. ’Ubaidallah al-Fazārī, 131-132 (749).‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwān al-Lakhmī, 132 (750).Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 133 (750-751).Abū ‘Aun ‘Abdalmalik b. Yazīd, 133-136 (751-753).Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 136-137 (753-755)—second time.Abū ‘Aun, 137-141 (755-758)—second time.Mūsā b. Ka’b b. ’Uyainah al-Tamīmī, 141 (758-759).Mahommed b. al-Ash’ath b. ’Uqbah al-Khuzā ī, 141-143 (759-760).Ḥumaid b. Qaḥṭabah b. Shabīb al-Ṭā’ī, 143-144 (760-762).Yazīd b. Ḥātim b. Kabīsah al-Muhallabī, 144-152 (762-769).‘Abdallah b. ‘Abdarraḥmān b. Moawiya b. Ḥudaij, 152-155 (769-772).Mahommed b. Abdarraḥman b. Moawiya b. Ḥudaij, 155 (772).Mūsā b. ’Ulayy b. Rabāh al-Lakhmī, 155-161 (772-778).’Īsā b. Luqmān b. Mahommed al-Jumahī, 161-162 (778).Wāḍiḥ, 162 (779).Manṣūr b. Yazīd b. Manṣūr al-Ru’ainī, 162 (779).Abū Ṣāliḥ Yaḥyā b. Dāwūd b. Mamdūd, 162-164 (779-780).Sālim b. Sawādah al-Tamīmī, 164 (780-781).Ibrāhīm b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 165-167 (781-784).Mūsā b. Mus’ab b. al-Rabī al-Khath’amī, 167-168 (784-785).Usāmah b. ‘Amr b. ‘Alqamah al-Ma’āfirī, 168 (785).al Faḍl b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 168-169 (785-786).‘Alī b. Sulaimān b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 169-171 (786-787).Mūsā b. ’Īsā b. Mūsā al-‘Abbāsī, 171-172 (787-789).Maslamah b. Yaḥyā b. Qurrah al-Bājilī, 172-173 (789-790).Mahommed b. Zuhair al-Azdī, 173 (790).Dāwūd b. Yazīd b. Ḥātim al-Muhallabī, 174-175 (790).Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 175-176 (790-792).Ibrāhīm b. Ṣāliḥ, 176 (792).Ṣāliḥ b. Ibrāhīm, 176 (792).Abdallah b. al-Musayyib b. Zuhair al Ḍabbī, 176-177 (792-793).Isḥāq b. Sulaimān b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 177-178 (793-794).Harthamah b. A’yan, 178 (794-795).’Obaidallah b. al-Mahdī, 179 (795).Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 179-180 (795-796).’Obaidallah b. al-Mahdī, 180-181 (796-797)—second time.Ismā’īl b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 181-182 (797-798).Ismā’īl b. ’Īsā b. Mūsā al-‘Abbāsī, 182-183 (798).Laith b. al-Faḍl al-Abīwardī, 183-187 (798-803).Aḥmad b. Ismā’īl b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 187-189 (803-805).’Obaidallah b. Mahommed b. Ibrāhīm al-‘Abbāsī, 189-190 (805-806).Ḥusain b. Jamīl, 190-192 (806-808).Mālik b. Dalham b. ’Īsā al-Kalbī, 192-193 (808).Ḥasan b. al-Taḥtāḥ, 193-194 (808-809).Ḥātim b. Harthamah b. A’yan, 194-195 (809-811).Jābir b. al-Ash’ath b. Yaḥyā al-Ṭā’ī, 195-196 (811-812).‘Abbād b. Mahommed b. Ḥayyān al-Balkhī, 196-198 (812-813).Moṭṭalib b. ‘Abdallah b. Mālik al-Khuzā’ī, 198 (813-814).‘Abbās b. Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 198-199 (814).Moṭṭalib b. ‘Abdallah, 199-200 (814-816)—second time.Sarī b. al-Ḥakam b. Yūsuf, 200-201 (816).Sulaimān b. Ghālib b. Jibrīl al-Bājilī, 201 (816-817).Sarī b. al-Ḥakam, 201-205 (817-820).Abū Naṣr Mahommed b. al-Sarī, 205 (820-821).’Obaidallah b. al-Sarī, 205-211 (821-826).‘Abdallah b. Ṭāhir, 211-213 (826-829).Mahommed b. Hārūn (al-Mo’tasim), 213-214 (829).’Umair b. Al-Walīd al-Tamīmī al-Bādhaghīsī, 214 (829).’Īsā b. Yazīd, 214 (829).‘Abduyah b. Jabalah, 215-216 (830-831).’Īsā b. Manṣūr b. Mūsā al-Rāfi‘ī, 216-217 (831-832).Naṣr b. Abdallah Kaidar al-Ṣafadī, 217-219 (832-834).Muzaffar b. Kaidar, 219 (834).Mūsā b. Abi‘l-‘Abbās Thābit al-Hanafī, 219-224 (834-839).Mālik b. Kaidar al Ṣafadī, 224-226 (839-841).‘Alī b. Yaḥyā abu l-Hasan al-Armanī, 226-228 (841-842).‘Isā b. Manṣūr al-Rāfi‘ī, 229-233 (843-847).Harthamah b. al-Naḍir al-Jabalī, 233-234 (848-849).Ḥātim b. Harthamah, 234 (849).‘Alī b. Yaḥyā, 234-235 (849-850).Ishāq b. Yaḥyā al-Khatlānī, 235-236 (850-851).‘Abd al-Wāhid b. Yaḥyā b. Manṣūr, 236-238 (851-852).‘Anbasa b. Ishāq b. Shamir, 238-242 (852-856).Yazīd b. ‘Abdallah b. Dīnār, 242-253 (856-867).Muzāhim b. Khāqān al-Turkī, 253-254 (867-868).Aḥmad b. Muzāhim b. Khāqān, 254 (868).Urjūz b. Ulugh Ṭarkhān al-Turkī, 254 (868).Tulunid house.Aḥmad b. Ṭūlūn, 254-270 (868-884).Khomārūya b. Aḥmad, 270-282 (884-896).Jaish b. Khomārūya, 282 (896).Hārūn b. Khomārūya, 283-292 (896-904).Shaibān b. Aḥmad, 292 (905).’Īsā b. Mahommed al-Naūsharī, 292 (905).Mahommed b. ‘Ali al-Khalanjī, 292-293 (905-906).’Īsā al-Naūsharī, 293-297 (906-910)—second time.Takīn b. Abdallah al-Khazarī, 297-302 (910-915).Dhukā al-Rūmī, 303-307 (915-919).Takīn b. ‘Abdallah, 307-309 (919-921)—second time.Abū Qābūs Maḥmūd b. Ḥamal, 309 (921).Hilāl b. Badr, 309-311 (921-923).Aḥmad b. Kaighlagh, 311 (923).Takīn b. Abdallah, 311-321 (923-933)—third time.Mahommed b. Takīn, 321 (933).Ikshīdī house.Mahommed b. Ṭughj al-Ikshīd, 321 (933).[Aḥmad b. Kaighlagh, 321-322 (933-934)].Mahommed b. Ṭughj, 323-334 (934-946)—second time.Ūnjūr b. al-Ikshīd, 334-349 (946-961).‘Alī b. al-Ikshīd, 349-355 (961-966).Kāfūr b. Abdallah al-Ikshīdī, 355-357 (966-968).Abu’l-Fawāris Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. al-Ikshīd, 357 (968).(b) Fāṭimite Caliphs, 357-567 (969-1171).Mo‘izz Abū Tamīm Ma’add (or li-dīn allāh), 357-365 (969-975).‘Azīz Abū Manṣūr Nizār (al-‘Azīz billāh), 365-386 (975-996).Ḥākim [Abū ‘Alī Manṣūr], 386-411 (996-1020).Ẓāhir [Abu’l-Ḥasan ‘Alī], 411-427 (1020-1035).Mostanṣir [Abū Tamīm Ma‘add], 427-487 (1035-1094).Mosta’lī [Abu’l-Qāsim Aḥmad], 487-495 (1094-1101).Amir [Abū ‘Alī Manṣūr], 495-524 (1101-1130).Ḥāfiz [Abu’l-Maimūn ‘Abd al-Majīd], 524-544 (1130-1149).Ẓāfir [Abu’l-Manṣūr Ismā’īl], 544-549 (1149-1154).Fā’iz [Abu’l-Qāsim ’Īsā], 549-555 (1154-1160).‘Ādid [Abū Mahommed ‘Abdallah], 555-567 (1160-1171).(c) Ayyūbite Sultans, 564-648 (1169-1250).Malik al-Nāṣir Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Yūsuf b. Ayyūb (Saladin), 564-589 (1169-1193).Malik al-‘Azīz ‘Imād al-dīn Othman, 589-595 (1193-1198).Malik al-Manṣūr Mahommed, 595-596 (1198-1199).Malik al-‘Adil Saif al-dīn Abū Bakr, 596-615 (1199-1218).Malikal-KāmilMahommed, 615-635 (1218-1238).Malik al-’Ādil II. Saif al-dīn Abū Bakr, 635-637 (1238-1240).Malik al-Ṣāliḥ Najm al-dīn Ayyūb, 637-647 (1240-1249).Malik al-Mo‘azzam Tūrānshāh, 647-648 (1249-1250).Malik al-Ashraf Mūsā, 648-650 (1250-1252).(d) Baḥri Mamelukes, 648-792 (1250-1390).Shajar al-durr, 648 (1250).Malik al-Mo’izz ‘Izz al-dīn Aibek, 648-655 (1250-1257).Malik al-Manṣūr Nureddin ‘Alī, 655-657 (1257-1259).Malik al-Moẓaffar Saif al-dīnKotuz, 657-658 (1259-1260).Malik al-Ẓāhir [Rukn al-dīn (Rukneddin)BibarsBundukdārī], 658-676 (1260-1277).Malik al-Sa’id Nāṣir al-dīn Barakah Khān, 676-678 (1277-1279).Malik al-’Ādil Badr al-dīn Salāmish, 678 (1279).Malik al-Manṣūr Saif al-dīnQalā’ūn, 678-689 (1279-1290).Malik al-Ashraf [Ṣalāḥ al-dīnKhalīl], 689-693 (1290-1293).Malik al-Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīn Mahommed], 693-694 (1293-1294).Malik al-’Ādil [Zain al-dīnKitboga], 694-696 (1294-1296).Manṣūr [Ḥusām al-dīnLājīn], 696-698 (1296-1298).Nāṣir Mahommed(again), 698-708 (1298-1308).Moẓaffar [Rukn al-dīn Bibars Jāshengīr], 708-709 (1308-1310).Nāṣir Mahommed (third time), 709-741 (1310-1341).Manṣūr [Saif al-dīnAbū Bakr], 741-742 (1341).Ashraf [Ala’u ’l-dīnKuchuk], 742 (1341-1342).Nāṣir [Shihāb al-dīn Aḥmad], 742-743 (1342).Ṣāliḥ ‘Imād al-dīn Ismā’īl], 743-746 (1342-1345).Kāmil [Saif al-dīnSha’ban], 746-747 (1345-1346).Moẓaffar [Saif al-dīnḤajji], 747-748 (1346-1347).Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīn Ḥasan], 748-752 (1347-1351).Ṣāliḥ [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Ṣāliḥ], 752-755 (1351-1354).Nāṣir [Ḥasan] (again), 755-762 (1354-1361).Manṣūr [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Mahommed], 762-764 (1361-1363).Ashraf [Nāṣir al-dīn Sha’bān], 764-778 (1363-1377).Manṣūr [‘Alā’u ’l-dīn ‘Alī], 778-783 (1377-1381).Ṣāliḥ [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Ḥājjī, 783-784 (1381-1382).Barḳūḳ or Barqūq (see below), 784-791 (1382-1389).Ḥājjī again, with title of Moẓaffar, 791-792 (1389-1390).(e) Burji Mamelukes, 784-922 (1382-1517).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Barqūq], 784-801 (1382-1398) [interrupted by Ḥājjī, 791-792].Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīnFaraj], 801-808 (1398-1405).Manṣūr [‘Izz al-dīn Abdalaziz (‘Abd al-‘Azīz)], 808-809 (1405-1406).Nāṣir Faraj (again), 809-815 (1406-1412).’Ādil Mosta’īn (Abbasid caliph), 815 (1412).Mu‘ayyad [Sheikh], 815-824 (1412-1421).Moẓaffar [Aḥmad], 824 (1421).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Tatār], 824 (1421).Ṣāliḥ [Nāṣir al-dīn Mahommed], 824-825 (1421-1422).Ashraf [Saif al-dīn Barsbai], 825-842 (1422-1438).‘Azīz [Jamāl al-dīn Yūsuf], 842 (1438).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Jakmak], 842-857 (1438-1453).Manṣūr [Fakhr al-dīn Othman], 857 (1453).Ashraf [Saif al-dīn Īnāl], 857-865 (1453-1461).Mu‘ayyad [Shihāb al-dīn Aḥmad], 865 (1461).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Khoshkadam], 865-872 (1461-1467).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Yelbai or Bilbai], 872 (1467).Ẓāhir [Tīmūrboghā], 872-873 (1467-1468).Ashraf [Saif al-dīn (Kait Bey)], 873-901 (1468-1495).Nāṣir [Mahommed], 901-904 (1495-1498).Ẓāhir [Kānsūh], 904-905 (1498-1499).Ashraf [Jānbalāt or Jan Belāt], 905-906 (1499-1501).’Ādil Tumanbey, 906 (1501).Ashraf [Kānsūh Ghūri], 906-922 (1501-1516).Ashraf [Tūmānbey], 922 (1516-1517).(f) Turkish Governors after the Ottoman Conquest.Khair Bey, 923 (1517).Ḥosain, 1085 (1674).Muṣṭafā Pasha, 926 (1520).Ḥasan al-Jānbalāṭ, 1087 (1676).Aḥmad, 929 (1523).Othmān, 1091 (1680).Qāsim, 930 (1524).Ḥasan al-Silaḥdār, 1099 (1688).Ibrāhīm, 931 (1525).Aḥmad, 1101 (1690).Suleimān, 933 (1527).‘Alī Qilij, 1102 (1691).Dāwūd, 945 (1538).Ismā‘īl, 1107 (1696).‘Alī, 956 (1549).Ḥosain, 1109 (1697).Mahommed, 961 (1554).Qarā Mahommed or Aḥmad, 1111 (1699).Iskandar, 963 (1556).Mahommed Rāmī, 1116 (1704).‘Alī al-Khādim, 968 (1561).‘Alī Muslim, 1118 (1706).Muṣṭafā, 969 (1561).Ḥosain Ketkhudā, 1119 (1707).‘Alī al-Sūfī, 971 (1563).Ibrāhīm Qabūdān, 1121 (1709).Maḥmūd, 973 (1566).Khalīl, 1122 (1710).Sinān, 975 (1567).Walī, 1123 (1711).Ḥosain, 980 (1573).’Ābidīn, 1127 (1715).Masīḥ, 982 (1575).‘Alī Izmīrli, 1129 (1717).Ḥasan al-Khādim, 988 (1580).Rajab, 1130 (1718).Ibrāhīm, 991 (1583).Mahommed al-Bāshimī, 1132 (1720).Sinān, 992 (1584).‘Alī, 1138 (1728).Uwais, 994 (1585).Bākīr, 1141 (1729).Ḥāfiz Aḥmad, 999 (1591).‘Abdallah Kubūrlu, 1142 (1729).Kurṭ, 1003 (1595).Mahommed Silaḥdār, 1144 (1732).Sayyid Mahommed, 1004 (1596).Othman Ḥalabī, 1146 (1733).Khiḍr, 1006 (1598).Bākīr, 1148 (1735).‘Alī al-Silaḥdār, 1009 (1601).Muṣṭafā, 1149 (1736).Ibrāhīm, 1012 (1604).Sulaimān b. al-‘Azīm, 1152 (1739).Mahommed al-Kūrjī, 1013 (1605).‘Alī Ḥakīm Oghlu, 1153 (1740).Ḥasan, 1014 (1605).Yaḥyā, 1154 (1741).Mahommed al-Sūfī, 1016 (1607).Mahommed Yedkeshi, 1156 (1743).Aḥmad al-Daftardār, 1022 (1613).Mahommed Rāghib, 1158 (1745).Muṣṭafā Lafakli, 1026 (1617).Aḥmad Kuruzīr, 1161 (1748).Ja’far, 1027 (1618).Sharīf ‘Abdallāh, 1163 (1750).Muṣṭafā, 1028 (1619).Mahommed Amīn, 1166 (1753).Ḥosain, 1028 (1619).Muṣṭafā, 1166 (1753).Mahommed, 1031 (1622).‘Alī Ḥakīm Oghlu, 1169 (1756).Ibrāhīm, 1031 (1622).Mahommed Sa’īd, 1171 (1758).Muṣṭafā, 1032 (1623).Muṣṭafā, 1173 (1759).‘Alī, 1032 (1623).Aḥmad Kāmil, 1174 (1761).Muṣṭafā, 1032 (1624).Bākīr, 1175 (1761).Bairām, 1036 (1626).Ḥasan, 1176 (1761).Mahommed, 1037 (1627).Ḥamzah, 1179 (1765).Mūsā, 1040 (1631).Mahommed Rāqim, 1181 (1767).Khalīl al-Bustānjī, 1041 (1631).Mahommed Urflu, 1182 (1768).Aḥmad al-Kūrjī, 1042 (1633).Aḥmad, 1183 (1770).Ḥosain, 1045 (1636).Qara Khalīl, 1184 (1770).Mahommed b. Aḥmad, 1047 (1638).Muṣṭafā Nābulsī, 1188 (1774).Muṣṭafā al-Bustānjī, 1049 (1639).Ibrāhīm ‘Arabgīrli, 1189 (1775).Maqsūd, 1050 (1641).Mahommed ‘Izzet, 1190 (1776).Suyān Bey, 1054 (1644).Ismā‘īl, 1193 (1779).Ayyūb, 1055 (1645).Mahommed Mālik, 1195 (1781).Mahommed b. Ḥaidar, 1057 (1647).Sharīf ‘Alī Qaṣṣāb, 1196 (1782).Aḥmad, 1058 (1648).Mahommed Silaḥdār, 1198 (1783).‘Abd al-Raḥmān, 1061 (1651).Mahommed Yeyen, 1200 (1785).Mahommed al-Silaḥdār, 1062 (1652).‘Ābidīn Sharīf, 1201 (1787).Ghāzī, 1066 (1655).Ismā‘īl Tūnisī, 1203 (1788).Omar, 1067 (1652).Ṣāliḥ Qaisarli, 1209 (1794).Aḥmad, 1077 (1666).Abū Bakr Ṭarābulsī, 1211 (1796).Ibrāhīm, 1078 (1667).French Occupation.Khosrev, 1216 (1802).Ali Jazā’irlī’ or Ṭarābulsī, 1218 (1803).Ṭāhir, 1218 (1803).Khorshīd, 1219 (1804).(g) Hereditary Pashas (later Khedives), from 1220 (from 1805).Mehemet ‘Alī, 1220-1264 (1805-1848).Ismā‘īl 1280-1300 (1863-1882).Ibrāhīm, 1264 (1848).Tewfīk, 1300-1309 (1882-1892).‘Abbās I., 1264-1270 (1848-1854).Abbās II., 1309 (1892).Sa‘īd, 1270-1280 (1854-1863).

(a)During the undivided Caliphate.

‘Amr-ibn-el-Ass, A.H. 18-24 (a.d.639-645).‘Abdallah b. Sa’d b. Abī Sarh, 24-36 (645-656).Qais b. Sa’d b. ’Ubādah, 36 (657-658).Mahommed b. Abu Bekr, 37-38 (658).Ashtar Mālik b. al-Hārith (appointed, but never governed).‘Amr-ibn-el-Ass, 38-43 (658-663).’Utbah b. Abu Sofiān, 43-44 (664-665).’Utbah b. ’Āmir, 44-45 (665).Maslama b. Mukhallad, 45-62 (665-682).Sa’īd b. Yazīd b. ‘Alqamah, 62-64 (682-684).Abdarrahman b. ’Utbah b. Jahdam, 64-65 (684).Abdalazīz (‘Abd al-‘Azīz) b. Merwān, 65-86 (685-705).‘Abdallah b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 86-90 (705-708).Qurrah b. Sharīk al-‘Absī, 90-96 (709-714).‘Abd al-Malik b. Rifā’ah al-Fahmī, 96-99 (715-717).Ayyūb b. Shuraḥbīl al-Aṣbaḥī, 99-101 (717-720).Bishr b. Ṣafwān al-Kalbī, 101-102 (720-721).Ḥanzalah b. Ṣafwān, 102-105 (721-724).Mahommed b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 105 (724).Ḥurr b. Yūsuf, 105-108 (724-727).Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 108 (727).‘Abd al-Malik b. Rifā’ah, 109 (727).Walīd b. Rifā’ah, 109-117 (727-735).‘Abd al-Raḥmān b. Khālid, 117-118 (735).Ḥanẓalah b. Ṣafwān, 118-124 (735-742).Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 124-127 (742-745).Ḥassān b. ‘Atāhiyah al-Tu’jibī, 127 (745).Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 127 (745).Hautharah b. Suhail al-Bāhilī, 128-131 (745-749).Mughīrah b. ’Ubaidallah al-Fazārī, 131-132 (749).‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwān al-Lakhmī, 132 (750).Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 133 (750-751).Abū ‘Aun ‘Abdalmalik b. Yazīd, 133-136 (751-753).Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 136-137 (753-755)—second time.Abū ‘Aun, 137-141 (755-758)—second time.Mūsā b. Ka’b b. ’Uyainah al-Tamīmī, 141 (758-759).Mahommed b. al-Ash’ath b. ’Uqbah al-Khuzā ī, 141-143 (759-760).Ḥumaid b. Qaḥṭabah b. Shabīb al-Ṭā’ī, 143-144 (760-762).Yazīd b. Ḥātim b. Kabīsah al-Muhallabī, 144-152 (762-769).‘Abdallah b. ‘Abdarraḥmān b. Moawiya b. Ḥudaij, 152-155 (769-772).Mahommed b. Abdarraḥman b. Moawiya b. Ḥudaij, 155 (772).Mūsā b. ’Ulayy b. Rabāh al-Lakhmī, 155-161 (772-778).’Īsā b. Luqmān b. Mahommed al-Jumahī, 161-162 (778).Wāḍiḥ, 162 (779).Manṣūr b. Yazīd b. Manṣūr al-Ru’ainī, 162 (779).Abū Ṣāliḥ Yaḥyā b. Dāwūd b. Mamdūd, 162-164 (779-780).Sālim b. Sawādah al-Tamīmī, 164 (780-781).Ibrāhīm b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 165-167 (781-784).Mūsā b. Mus’ab b. al-Rabī al-Khath’amī, 167-168 (784-785).Usāmah b. ‘Amr b. ‘Alqamah al-Ma’āfirī, 168 (785).al Faḍl b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 168-169 (785-786).‘Alī b. Sulaimān b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 169-171 (786-787).Mūsā b. ’Īsā b. Mūsā al-‘Abbāsī, 171-172 (787-789).Maslamah b. Yaḥyā b. Qurrah al-Bājilī, 172-173 (789-790).Mahommed b. Zuhair al-Azdī, 173 (790).Dāwūd b. Yazīd b. Ḥātim al-Muhallabī, 174-175 (790).Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 175-176 (790-792).Ibrāhīm b. Ṣāliḥ, 176 (792).Ṣāliḥ b. Ibrāhīm, 176 (792).Abdallah b. al-Musayyib b. Zuhair al Ḍabbī, 176-177 (792-793).Isḥāq b. Sulaimān b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 177-178 (793-794).Harthamah b. A’yan, 178 (794-795).’Obaidallah b. al-Mahdī, 179 (795).Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 179-180 (795-796).’Obaidallah b. al-Mahdī, 180-181 (796-797)—second time.Ismā’īl b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 181-182 (797-798).Ismā’īl b. ’Īsā b. Mūsā al-‘Abbāsī, 182-183 (798).Laith b. al-Faḍl al-Abīwardī, 183-187 (798-803).Aḥmad b. Ismā’īl b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 187-189 (803-805).’Obaidallah b. Mahommed b. Ibrāhīm al-‘Abbāsī, 189-190 (805-806).Ḥusain b. Jamīl, 190-192 (806-808).Mālik b. Dalham b. ’Īsā al-Kalbī, 192-193 (808).Ḥasan b. al-Taḥtāḥ, 193-194 (808-809).Ḥātim b. Harthamah b. A’yan, 194-195 (809-811).Jābir b. al-Ash’ath b. Yaḥyā al-Ṭā’ī, 195-196 (811-812).‘Abbād b. Mahommed b. Ḥayyān al-Balkhī, 196-198 (812-813).Moṭṭalib b. ‘Abdallah b. Mālik al-Khuzā’ī, 198 (813-814).‘Abbās b. Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 198-199 (814).Moṭṭalib b. ‘Abdallah, 199-200 (814-816)—second time.Sarī b. al-Ḥakam b. Yūsuf, 200-201 (816).Sulaimān b. Ghālib b. Jibrīl al-Bājilī, 201 (816-817).Sarī b. al-Ḥakam, 201-205 (817-820).Abū Naṣr Mahommed b. al-Sarī, 205 (820-821).’Obaidallah b. al-Sarī, 205-211 (821-826).‘Abdallah b. Ṭāhir, 211-213 (826-829).Mahommed b. Hārūn (al-Mo’tasim), 213-214 (829).’Umair b. Al-Walīd al-Tamīmī al-Bādhaghīsī, 214 (829).’Īsā b. Yazīd, 214 (829).‘Abduyah b. Jabalah, 215-216 (830-831).’Īsā b. Manṣūr b. Mūsā al-Rāfi‘ī, 216-217 (831-832).Naṣr b. Abdallah Kaidar al-Ṣafadī, 217-219 (832-834).Muzaffar b. Kaidar, 219 (834).Mūsā b. Abi‘l-‘Abbās Thābit al-Hanafī, 219-224 (834-839).Mālik b. Kaidar al Ṣafadī, 224-226 (839-841).‘Alī b. Yaḥyā abu l-Hasan al-Armanī, 226-228 (841-842).‘Isā b. Manṣūr al-Rāfi‘ī, 229-233 (843-847).Harthamah b. al-Naḍir al-Jabalī, 233-234 (848-849).Ḥātim b. Harthamah, 234 (849).‘Alī b. Yaḥyā, 234-235 (849-850).Ishāq b. Yaḥyā al-Khatlānī, 235-236 (850-851).‘Abd al-Wāhid b. Yaḥyā b. Manṣūr, 236-238 (851-852).‘Anbasa b. Ishāq b. Shamir, 238-242 (852-856).Yazīd b. ‘Abdallah b. Dīnār, 242-253 (856-867).Muzāhim b. Khāqān al-Turkī, 253-254 (867-868).Aḥmad b. Muzāhim b. Khāqān, 254 (868).Urjūz b. Ulugh Ṭarkhān al-Turkī, 254 (868).

‘Amr-ibn-el-Ass, A.H. 18-24 (a.d.639-645).

‘Abdallah b. Sa’d b. Abī Sarh, 24-36 (645-656).

Qais b. Sa’d b. ’Ubādah, 36 (657-658).

Mahommed b. Abu Bekr, 37-38 (658).

Ashtar Mālik b. al-Hārith (appointed, but never governed).

‘Amr-ibn-el-Ass, 38-43 (658-663).

’Utbah b. Abu Sofiān, 43-44 (664-665).

’Utbah b. ’Āmir, 44-45 (665).

Maslama b. Mukhallad, 45-62 (665-682).

Sa’īd b. Yazīd b. ‘Alqamah, 62-64 (682-684).

Abdarrahman b. ’Utbah b. Jahdam, 64-65 (684).

Abdalazīz (‘Abd al-‘Azīz) b. Merwān, 65-86 (685-705).

‘Abdallah b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 86-90 (705-708).

Qurrah b. Sharīk al-‘Absī, 90-96 (709-714).

‘Abd al-Malik b. Rifā’ah al-Fahmī, 96-99 (715-717).

Ayyūb b. Shuraḥbīl al-Aṣbaḥī, 99-101 (717-720).

Bishr b. Ṣafwān al-Kalbī, 101-102 (720-721).

Ḥanzalah b. Ṣafwān, 102-105 (721-724).

Mahommed b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 105 (724).

Ḥurr b. Yūsuf, 105-108 (724-727).

Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 108 (727).

‘Abd al-Malik b. Rifā’ah, 109 (727).

Walīd b. Rifā’ah, 109-117 (727-735).

‘Abd al-Raḥmān b. Khālid, 117-118 (735).

Ḥanẓalah b. Ṣafwān, 118-124 (735-742).

Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 124-127 (742-745).

Ḥassān b. ‘Atāhiyah al-Tu’jibī, 127 (745).

Ḥafṣ b. al-Walīd, 127 (745).

Hautharah b. Suhail al-Bāhilī, 128-131 (745-749).

Mughīrah b. ’Ubaidallah al-Fazārī, 131-132 (749).

‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwān al-Lakhmī, 132 (750).

Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 133 (750-751).

Abū ‘Aun ‘Abdalmalik b. Yazīd, 133-136 (751-753).

Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 136-137 (753-755)—second time.

Abū ‘Aun, 137-141 (755-758)—second time.

Mūsā b. Ka’b b. ’Uyainah al-Tamīmī, 141 (758-759).

Mahommed b. al-Ash’ath b. ’Uqbah al-Khuzā ī, 141-143 (759-760).

Ḥumaid b. Qaḥṭabah b. Shabīb al-Ṭā’ī, 143-144 (760-762).

Yazīd b. Ḥātim b. Kabīsah al-Muhallabī, 144-152 (762-769).

‘Abdallah b. ‘Abdarraḥmān b. Moawiya b. Ḥudaij, 152-155 (769-772).

Mahommed b. Abdarraḥman b. Moawiya b. Ḥudaij, 155 (772).

Mūsā b. ’Ulayy b. Rabāh al-Lakhmī, 155-161 (772-778).

’Īsā b. Luqmān b. Mahommed al-Jumahī, 161-162 (778).

Wāḍiḥ, 162 (779).

Manṣūr b. Yazīd b. Manṣūr al-Ru’ainī, 162 (779).

Abū Ṣāliḥ Yaḥyā b. Dāwūd b. Mamdūd, 162-164 (779-780).

Sālim b. Sawādah al-Tamīmī, 164 (780-781).

Ibrāhīm b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī, 165-167 (781-784).

Mūsā b. Mus’ab b. al-Rabī al-Khath’amī, 167-168 (784-785).

Usāmah b. ‘Amr b. ‘Alqamah al-Ma’āfirī, 168 (785).

al Faḍl b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 168-169 (785-786).

‘Alī b. Sulaimān b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 169-171 (786-787).

Mūsā b. ’Īsā b. Mūsā al-‘Abbāsī, 171-172 (787-789).

Maslamah b. Yaḥyā b. Qurrah al-Bājilī, 172-173 (789-790).

Mahommed b. Zuhair al-Azdī, 173 (790).

Dāwūd b. Yazīd b. Ḥātim al-Muhallabī, 174-175 (790).

Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 175-176 (790-792).

Ibrāhīm b. Ṣāliḥ, 176 (792).

Ṣāliḥ b. Ibrāhīm, 176 (792).

Abdallah b. al-Musayyib b. Zuhair al Ḍabbī, 176-177 (792-793).

Isḥāq b. Sulaimān b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 177-178 (793-794).

Harthamah b. A’yan, 178 (794-795).

’Obaidallah b. al-Mahdī, 179 (795).

Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 179-180 (795-796).

’Obaidallah b. al-Mahdī, 180-181 (796-797)—second time.

Ismā’īl b. Ṣāliḥ b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 181-182 (797-798).

Ismā’īl b. ’Īsā b. Mūsā al-‘Abbāsī, 182-183 (798).

Laith b. al-Faḍl al-Abīwardī, 183-187 (798-803).

Aḥmad b. Ismā’īl b. ‘Alī al-‘Abbāsī, 187-189 (803-805).

’Obaidallah b. Mahommed b. Ibrāhīm al-‘Abbāsī, 189-190 (805-806).

Ḥusain b. Jamīl, 190-192 (806-808).

Mālik b. Dalham b. ’Īsā al-Kalbī, 192-193 (808).

Ḥasan b. al-Taḥtāḥ, 193-194 (808-809).

Ḥātim b. Harthamah b. A’yan, 194-195 (809-811).

Jābir b. al-Ash’ath b. Yaḥyā al-Ṭā’ī, 195-196 (811-812).

‘Abbād b. Mahommed b. Ḥayyān al-Balkhī, 196-198 (812-813).

Moṭṭalib b. ‘Abdallah b. Mālik al-Khuzā’ī, 198 (813-814).

‘Abbās b. Mūsā b. ’Īsā al-‘Abbāsī, 198-199 (814).

Moṭṭalib b. ‘Abdallah, 199-200 (814-816)—second time.

Sarī b. al-Ḥakam b. Yūsuf, 200-201 (816).

Sulaimān b. Ghālib b. Jibrīl al-Bājilī, 201 (816-817).

Sarī b. al-Ḥakam, 201-205 (817-820).

Abū Naṣr Mahommed b. al-Sarī, 205 (820-821).

’Obaidallah b. al-Sarī, 205-211 (821-826).

‘Abdallah b. Ṭāhir, 211-213 (826-829).

Mahommed b. Hārūn (al-Mo’tasim), 213-214 (829).

’Umair b. Al-Walīd al-Tamīmī al-Bādhaghīsī, 214 (829).

’Īsā b. Yazīd, 214 (829).

‘Abduyah b. Jabalah, 215-216 (830-831).

’Īsā b. Manṣūr b. Mūsā al-Rāfi‘ī, 216-217 (831-832).

Naṣr b. Abdallah Kaidar al-Ṣafadī, 217-219 (832-834).

Muzaffar b. Kaidar, 219 (834).

Mūsā b. Abi‘l-‘Abbās Thābit al-Hanafī, 219-224 (834-839).

Mālik b. Kaidar al Ṣafadī, 224-226 (839-841).

‘Alī b. Yaḥyā abu l-Hasan al-Armanī, 226-228 (841-842).

‘Isā b. Manṣūr al-Rāfi‘ī, 229-233 (843-847).

Harthamah b. al-Naḍir al-Jabalī, 233-234 (848-849).

Ḥātim b. Harthamah, 234 (849).

‘Alī b. Yaḥyā, 234-235 (849-850).

Ishāq b. Yaḥyā al-Khatlānī, 235-236 (850-851).

‘Abd al-Wāhid b. Yaḥyā b. Manṣūr, 236-238 (851-852).

‘Anbasa b. Ishāq b. Shamir, 238-242 (852-856).

Yazīd b. ‘Abdallah b. Dīnār, 242-253 (856-867).

Muzāhim b. Khāqān al-Turkī, 253-254 (867-868).

Aḥmad b. Muzāhim b. Khāqān, 254 (868).

Urjūz b. Ulugh Ṭarkhān al-Turkī, 254 (868).

Tulunid house.

Aḥmad b. Ṭūlūn, 254-270 (868-884).Khomārūya b. Aḥmad, 270-282 (884-896).Jaish b. Khomārūya, 282 (896).Hārūn b. Khomārūya, 283-292 (896-904).Shaibān b. Aḥmad, 292 (905).’Īsā b. Mahommed al-Naūsharī, 292 (905).Mahommed b. ‘Ali al-Khalanjī, 292-293 (905-906).’Īsā al-Naūsharī, 293-297 (906-910)—second time.Takīn b. Abdallah al-Khazarī, 297-302 (910-915).Dhukā al-Rūmī, 303-307 (915-919).Takīn b. ‘Abdallah, 307-309 (919-921)—second time.Abū Qābūs Maḥmūd b. Ḥamal, 309 (921).Hilāl b. Badr, 309-311 (921-923).Aḥmad b. Kaighlagh, 311 (923).Takīn b. Abdallah, 311-321 (923-933)—third time.Mahommed b. Takīn, 321 (933).

Aḥmad b. Ṭūlūn, 254-270 (868-884).

Khomārūya b. Aḥmad, 270-282 (884-896).

Jaish b. Khomārūya, 282 (896).

Hārūn b. Khomārūya, 283-292 (896-904).

Shaibān b. Aḥmad, 292 (905).

’Īsā b. Mahommed al-Naūsharī, 292 (905).

Mahommed b. ‘Ali al-Khalanjī, 292-293 (905-906).

’Īsā al-Naūsharī, 293-297 (906-910)—second time.

Takīn b. Abdallah al-Khazarī, 297-302 (910-915).

Dhukā al-Rūmī, 303-307 (915-919).

Takīn b. ‘Abdallah, 307-309 (919-921)—second time.

Abū Qābūs Maḥmūd b. Ḥamal, 309 (921).

Hilāl b. Badr, 309-311 (921-923).

Aḥmad b. Kaighlagh, 311 (923).

Takīn b. Abdallah, 311-321 (923-933)—third time.

Mahommed b. Takīn, 321 (933).

Ikshīdī house.

Mahommed b. Ṭughj al-Ikshīd, 321 (933).[Aḥmad b. Kaighlagh, 321-322 (933-934)].Mahommed b. Ṭughj, 323-334 (934-946)—second time.Ūnjūr b. al-Ikshīd, 334-349 (946-961).‘Alī b. al-Ikshīd, 349-355 (961-966).Kāfūr b. Abdallah al-Ikshīdī, 355-357 (966-968).Abu’l-Fawāris Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. al-Ikshīd, 357 (968).

Mahommed b. Ṭughj al-Ikshīd, 321 (933).

[Aḥmad b. Kaighlagh, 321-322 (933-934)].

Mahommed b. Ṭughj, 323-334 (934-946)—second time.

Ūnjūr b. al-Ikshīd, 334-349 (946-961).

‘Alī b. al-Ikshīd, 349-355 (961-966).

Kāfūr b. Abdallah al-Ikshīdī, 355-357 (966-968).

Abu’l-Fawāris Aḥmad b. ‘Alī b. al-Ikshīd, 357 (968).

(b) Fāṭimite Caliphs, 357-567 (969-1171).

Mo‘izz Abū Tamīm Ma’add (or li-dīn allāh), 357-365 (969-975).‘Azīz Abū Manṣūr Nizār (al-‘Azīz billāh), 365-386 (975-996).Ḥākim [Abū ‘Alī Manṣūr], 386-411 (996-1020).Ẓāhir [Abu’l-Ḥasan ‘Alī], 411-427 (1020-1035).Mostanṣir [Abū Tamīm Ma‘add], 427-487 (1035-1094).Mosta’lī [Abu’l-Qāsim Aḥmad], 487-495 (1094-1101).Amir [Abū ‘Alī Manṣūr], 495-524 (1101-1130).Ḥāfiz [Abu’l-Maimūn ‘Abd al-Majīd], 524-544 (1130-1149).Ẓāfir [Abu’l-Manṣūr Ismā’īl], 544-549 (1149-1154).Fā’iz [Abu’l-Qāsim ’Īsā], 549-555 (1154-1160).‘Ādid [Abū Mahommed ‘Abdallah], 555-567 (1160-1171).

Mo‘izz Abū Tamīm Ma’add (or li-dīn allāh), 357-365 (969-975).

‘Azīz Abū Manṣūr Nizār (al-‘Azīz billāh), 365-386 (975-996).

Ḥākim [Abū ‘Alī Manṣūr], 386-411 (996-1020).

Ẓāhir [Abu’l-Ḥasan ‘Alī], 411-427 (1020-1035).

Mostanṣir [Abū Tamīm Ma‘add], 427-487 (1035-1094).

Mosta’lī [Abu’l-Qāsim Aḥmad], 487-495 (1094-1101).

Amir [Abū ‘Alī Manṣūr], 495-524 (1101-1130).

Ḥāfiz [Abu’l-Maimūn ‘Abd al-Majīd], 524-544 (1130-1149).

Ẓāfir [Abu’l-Manṣūr Ismā’īl], 544-549 (1149-1154).

Fā’iz [Abu’l-Qāsim ’Īsā], 549-555 (1154-1160).

‘Ādid [Abū Mahommed ‘Abdallah], 555-567 (1160-1171).

(c) Ayyūbite Sultans, 564-648 (1169-1250).

Malik al-Nāṣir Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Yūsuf b. Ayyūb (Saladin), 564-589 (1169-1193).Malik al-‘Azīz ‘Imād al-dīn Othman, 589-595 (1193-1198).Malik al-Manṣūr Mahommed, 595-596 (1198-1199).Malik al-‘Adil Saif al-dīn Abū Bakr, 596-615 (1199-1218).Malikal-KāmilMahommed, 615-635 (1218-1238).Malik al-’Ādil II. Saif al-dīn Abū Bakr, 635-637 (1238-1240).Malik al-Ṣāliḥ Najm al-dīn Ayyūb, 637-647 (1240-1249).Malik al-Mo‘azzam Tūrānshāh, 647-648 (1249-1250).Malik al-Ashraf Mūsā, 648-650 (1250-1252).

Malik al-Nāṣir Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Yūsuf b. Ayyūb (Saladin), 564-589 (1169-1193).

Malik al-‘Azīz ‘Imād al-dīn Othman, 589-595 (1193-1198).

Malik al-Manṣūr Mahommed, 595-596 (1198-1199).

Malik al-‘Adil Saif al-dīn Abū Bakr, 596-615 (1199-1218).

Malikal-KāmilMahommed, 615-635 (1218-1238).

Malik al-’Ādil II. Saif al-dīn Abū Bakr, 635-637 (1238-1240).

Malik al-Ṣāliḥ Najm al-dīn Ayyūb, 637-647 (1240-1249).

Malik al-Mo‘azzam Tūrānshāh, 647-648 (1249-1250).

Malik al-Ashraf Mūsā, 648-650 (1250-1252).

(d) Baḥri Mamelukes, 648-792 (1250-1390).

Shajar al-durr, 648 (1250).Malik al-Mo’izz ‘Izz al-dīn Aibek, 648-655 (1250-1257).Malik al-Manṣūr Nureddin ‘Alī, 655-657 (1257-1259).Malik al-Moẓaffar Saif al-dīnKotuz, 657-658 (1259-1260).Malik al-Ẓāhir [Rukn al-dīn (Rukneddin)BibarsBundukdārī], 658-676 (1260-1277).Malik al-Sa’id Nāṣir al-dīn Barakah Khān, 676-678 (1277-1279).Malik al-’Ādil Badr al-dīn Salāmish, 678 (1279).Malik al-Manṣūr Saif al-dīnQalā’ūn, 678-689 (1279-1290).Malik al-Ashraf [Ṣalāḥ al-dīnKhalīl], 689-693 (1290-1293).Malik al-Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīn Mahommed], 693-694 (1293-1294).Malik al-’Ādil [Zain al-dīnKitboga], 694-696 (1294-1296).Manṣūr [Ḥusām al-dīnLājīn], 696-698 (1296-1298).Nāṣir Mahommed(again), 698-708 (1298-1308).Moẓaffar [Rukn al-dīn Bibars Jāshengīr], 708-709 (1308-1310).Nāṣir Mahommed (third time), 709-741 (1310-1341).Manṣūr [Saif al-dīnAbū Bakr], 741-742 (1341).Ashraf [Ala’u ’l-dīnKuchuk], 742 (1341-1342).Nāṣir [Shihāb al-dīn Aḥmad], 742-743 (1342).Ṣāliḥ ‘Imād al-dīn Ismā’īl], 743-746 (1342-1345).Kāmil [Saif al-dīnSha’ban], 746-747 (1345-1346).Moẓaffar [Saif al-dīnḤajji], 747-748 (1346-1347).Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīn Ḥasan], 748-752 (1347-1351).Ṣāliḥ [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Ṣāliḥ], 752-755 (1351-1354).Nāṣir [Ḥasan] (again), 755-762 (1354-1361).Manṣūr [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Mahommed], 762-764 (1361-1363).Ashraf [Nāṣir al-dīn Sha’bān], 764-778 (1363-1377).Manṣūr [‘Alā’u ’l-dīn ‘Alī], 778-783 (1377-1381).Ṣāliḥ [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Ḥājjī, 783-784 (1381-1382).Barḳūḳ or Barqūq (see below), 784-791 (1382-1389).Ḥājjī again, with title of Moẓaffar, 791-792 (1389-1390).

Shajar al-durr, 648 (1250).

Malik al-Mo’izz ‘Izz al-dīn Aibek, 648-655 (1250-1257).

Malik al-Manṣūr Nureddin ‘Alī, 655-657 (1257-1259).

Malik al-Moẓaffar Saif al-dīnKotuz, 657-658 (1259-1260).

Malik al-Ẓāhir [Rukn al-dīn (Rukneddin)BibarsBundukdārī], 658-676 (1260-1277).

Malik al-Sa’id Nāṣir al-dīn Barakah Khān, 676-678 (1277-1279).

Malik al-’Ādil Badr al-dīn Salāmish, 678 (1279).

Malik al-Manṣūr Saif al-dīnQalā’ūn, 678-689 (1279-1290).

Malik al-Ashraf [Ṣalāḥ al-dīnKhalīl], 689-693 (1290-1293).

Malik al-Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīn Mahommed], 693-694 (1293-1294).

Malik al-’Ādil [Zain al-dīnKitboga], 694-696 (1294-1296).

Manṣūr [Ḥusām al-dīnLājīn], 696-698 (1296-1298).

Nāṣir Mahommed(again), 698-708 (1298-1308).

Moẓaffar [Rukn al-dīn Bibars Jāshengīr], 708-709 (1308-1310).

Nāṣir Mahommed (third time), 709-741 (1310-1341).

Manṣūr [Saif al-dīnAbū Bakr], 741-742 (1341).

Ashraf [Ala’u ’l-dīnKuchuk], 742 (1341-1342).

Nāṣir [Shihāb al-dīn Aḥmad], 742-743 (1342).

Ṣāliḥ ‘Imād al-dīn Ismā’īl], 743-746 (1342-1345).

Kāmil [Saif al-dīnSha’ban], 746-747 (1345-1346).

Moẓaffar [Saif al-dīnḤajji], 747-748 (1346-1347).

Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīn Ḥasan], 748-752 (1347-1351).

Ṣāliḥ [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Ṣāliḥ], 752-755 (1351-1354).

Nāṣir [Ḥasan] (again), 755-762 (1354-1361).

Manṣūr [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Mahommed], 762-764 (1361-1363).

Ashraf [Nāṣir al-dīn Sha’bān], 764-778 (1363-1377).

Manṣūr [‘Alā’u ’l-dīn ‘Alī], 778-783 (1377-1381).

Ṣāliḥ [Ṣalāḥ al-dīn Ḥājjī, 783-784 (1381-1382).

Barḳūḳ or Barqūq (see below), 784-791 (1382-1389).

Ḥājjī again, with title of Moẓaffar, 791-792 (1389-1390).

(e) Burji Mamelukes, 784-922 (1382-1517).

Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Barqūq], 784-801 (1382-1398) [interrupted by Ḥājjī, 791-792].Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīnFaraj], 801-808 (1398-1405).Manṣūr [‘Izz al-dīn Abdalaziz (‘Abd al-‘Azīz)], 808-809 (1405-1406).Nāṣir Faraj (again), 809-815 (1406-1412).’Ādil Mosta’īn (Abbasid caliph), 815 (1412).Mu‘ayyad [Sheikh], 815-824 (1412-1421).Moẓaffar [Aḥmad], 824 (1421).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Tatār], 824 (1421).Ṣāliḥ [Nāṣir al-dīn Mahommed], 824-825 (1421-1422).Ashraf [Saif al-dīn Barsbai], 825-842 (1422-1438).‘Azīz [Jamāl al-dīn Yūsuf], 842 (1438).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Jakmak], 842-857 (1438-1453).Manṣūr [Fakhr al-dīn Othman], 857 (1453).Ashraf [Saif al-dīn Īnāl], 857-865 (1453-1461).Mu‘ayyad [Shihāb al-dīn Aḥmad], 865 (1461).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Khoshkadam], 865-872 (1461-1467).Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Yelbai or Bilbai], 872 (1467).Ẓāhir [Tīmūrboghā], 872-873 (1467-1468).Ashraf [Saif al-dīn (Kait Bey)], 873-901 (1468-1495).Nāṣir [Mahommed], 901-904 (1495-1498).Ẓāhir [Kānsūh], 904-905 (1498-1499).Ashraf [Jānbalāt or Jan Belāt], 905-906 (1499-1501).’Ādil Tumanbey, 906 (1501).Ashraf [Kānsūh Ghūri], 906-922 (1501-1516).Ashraf [Tūmānbey], 922 (1516-1517).

Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Barqūq], 784-801 (1382-1398) [interrupted by Ḥājjī, 791-792].

Nāṣir [Nāṣir al-dīnFaraj], 801-808 (1398-1405).

Manṣūr [‘Izz al-dīn Abdalaziz (‘Abd al-‘Azīz)], 808-809 (1405-1406).

Nāṣir Faraj (again), 809-815 (1406-1412).

’Ādil Mosta’īn (Abbasid caliph), 815 (1412).

Mu‘ayyad [Sheikh], 815-824 (1412-1421).

Moẓaffar [Aḥmad], 824 (1421).

Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Tatār], 824 (1421).

Ṣāliḥ [Nāṣir al-dīn Mahommed], 824-825 (1421-1422).

Ashraf [Saif al-dīn Barsbai], 825-842 (1422-1438).

‘Azīz [Jamāl al-dīn Yūsuf], 842 (1438).

Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Jakmak], 842-857 (1438-1453).

Manṣūr [Fakhr al-dīn Othman], 857 (1453).

Ashraf [Saif al-dīn Īnāl], 857-865 (1453-1461).

Mu‘ayyad [Shihāb al-dīn Aḥmad], 865 (1461).

Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Khoshkadam], 865-872 (1461-1467).

Ẓāhir [Saif al-dīn Yelbai or Bilbai], 872 (1467).

Ẓāhir [Tīmūrboghā], 872-873 (1467-1468).

Ashraf [Saif al-dīn (Kait Bey)], 873-901 (1468-1495).

Nāṣir [Mahommed], 901-904 (1495-1498).

Ẓāhir [Kānsūh], 904-905 (1498-1499).

Ashraf [Jānbalāt or Jan Belāt], 905-906 (1499-1501).

’Ādil Tumanbey, 906 (1501).

Ashraf [Kānsūh Ghūri], 906-922 (1501-1516).

Ashraf [Tūmānbey], 922 (1516-1517).

(f) Turkish Governors after the Ottoman Conquest.

French Occupation.

(g) Hereditary Pashas (later Khedives), from 1220 (from 1805).

(3)Period under Governors sent from the Metropolis of the eastern Caliphate.—The first governor of the newly acquired province was the conqueror ‘Amr, whose jurisdiction waspresently restricted to Lower Egypt; Upper Egypt, which was divided into three provinces, being assigned to Abdallāh b. Sa’d, on whom the third caliph conferred the government of Lower Egypt also, ‘Amr being recalled, owing to his unwillingness to extort from his subjects as much money as would satisfy the caliph. In the troubles which overtook the Islamic empire with the accession of Othman, Egypt was greatly involved, and it had to be reconquered from the adherents of Ali for Moawiya (Mo‘awiyah) by ‘Amr, who in A.H. 38 was rewarded for his services by being reinstated as governor, with the right to appropriate the surplus revenue instead of sending it as tribute to the metropolis. In the confusion which followed on the death of the Omayyad caliph Yazīd the Egyptian Moslems declared themselves for Abdallāh b. Zobair, but their leader was defeated in a battle near Ain Shams (December 684) by Merwān b. Ḥakam (Merwān I.), who had assumed the Caliphate, and the conqueror’s son Abd al-‘Azīz was appointed governor. They also declared themselves against the usurper Merwān II. in 745, whose lieutenant al-Ḥautharah had to enter Fostat at the head of an army. In 750 Merwān II. himself came to Egypt as a fugitive from the Abbasids, but found that the bulk of the Moslem population had already joined with his enemies, and was defeated and slain in the neighbourhood of Giza in July of the same year. The Abbasid general, Ṣāliḥ b. Ali, who had won the victory, was then appointed governor.

During the period that elapsed between the Moslem conquest and the end of the Omayyad dynasty the nature of the Arab occupation had changed from what had originally been intended, the establishment of garrisons, to systematic colonization. Conversions of Copts to Islam were at first rare, and the old system of taxation was maintained for the greater part of the first Islamic century. This was at the rate of a dinar perfeddan, of which the proceeds were used in the first place for the pay of the troops and their families, with about half the amount in kind for the rations of the army. The process by which the first of these contributions was turned into coin is still obscure; it is clear that the corn when threshed was taken over by certain public officials who deducted the amount due to the state. In general the system is well illustrated by the papyri forming the Schott-Reinhardt collection at Heidelberg (edited by C.H. Becker, 1906), which contain a number of letters on the subject from Qurrah b. Sharīk, governor from A.H. 90 to 96. The old division of the country into districts (nomoi) is maintained, and to the inhabitants of these districts demands are directly addressed by the governor of Egypt, while the head of the community, ordinarily a Copt, but in some cases a Moslem, is responsible for compliance with the demand. An official called “receiver” (qabbāl) is chosen by the inhabitants of each district to take charge of the produce till it is delivered into the public magazines, and receives 5% for his trouble. Some further details are to be found in documents preserved by the archaeologist Maqrīzī, from which it appears that the sum for which each district was responsible was distributed over the unit in such a way that artisans and tradesmen paid at a rate similar to that which was enforced on those employed in agriculture. It is not known at what time the practice of having the amount due settled by the community was altered into that according to which it was settled by the governor, or at what time the practice of deducting from the total certain expenses necessary for the maintenance of the community was abandoned. The researches of Wellhausen and Becker have made it clear that the difference which is marked in later Islam between a poll-tax (jizyah) and a land-tax (kharāj) did not at first exist: the papyri of the 1st century know only of the jizyah, which, however, is not a poll-tax but a land-tax (in the main). The development of the poll-tax imposed on members of tolerated cults seems to be due to various causes, chief of them the acquisition of land by Moslems, who were not at first allowed to possess any, the conversion of Coptic landowners to Islam, and the enforcement (towards the end of the 1st century of Islam) of the poll-tax on monks. The treasury could not afford to lose the land-tax, which it would naturally forfeit by the first two of the above occurrences, and we read of various expedients being tried to prevent this loss. Such were making the Christian community to which the proselyte had belonged pay as much as it had paid when his lands belonged to it, making proselytes pay as before their conversion, or compelling them to abandon their lands on conversion. Eventually the theory spread that all land paid land-tax, whereas members of tolerated sects paid a personal tax also; but during the evolution of this doctrine the relations between conquerors and conquered became more and more strained, and from the time when the control of the finance was separated from the administration of the country (a.d.715) complaints of extortion became serious; under the predecessor of Qurrah, ‘Abdallāh b. ‘Abd al-Malik, the country suffered from famine, and under this ruler it was unable to recover. Under the finance minister Obaidallah b. Ḥabḥāb (720-734) the first government survey by Moslems was made, followed by a census; but before this time the higher administrative posts had been largely taken out of the hands of Copts and filled with Arabs. The resentment of the Copts finallyCoptic revolt.expressed itself in a revolt, which broke out in the year 725, and was suppressed with difficulty. Two years after, in order that the Arab element in Egypt might be strengthened, a colony of North Arabians (Qaisites) was sent for and planted near Bilbeis, reaching the number of 3000 persons; this immigration also restored the balance between the two branches of the Arab race, as the first immigrants had belonged almost exclusively to the South Arabian stock. Meanwhile the employment of the Arabic language had been steadily gaining ground, and in 706 it was made the official language of the bureaux, though the occasional use of Greek for this purpose is attested by documents as late as the year 780. Other revolts of the Copts are recorded for the year 739 and 750, the last year of Omayyad domination. The outbreaks in all cases are attributed to increased taxation.

The Abbasid period was marked at its commencement by the erection of a new capital to the north of Fostat, bearing the name‘Askaror “camp.” Apparently at this time the practice of farming the taxes began, which naturally led to even greater extortion than before; and a fresh rising of the Copts is recorded for the fourth year of Abbasid rule. Governors, as will be seen from the list, were frequently changed. The three officials of importance whose nomination is mentioned by the historians in addition to that of the governor were the commander of the bodyguard, the minister of finance and the judge. Towards the beginning of the 3rd Islamic century the practice of giving Egypt in fief to a governor was resumed by the caliph Mamūn, who bestowed this privilege on ‘Abdallāh b. Ṭāhir, who in 827 was sent to recover Alexandria, which for some ten years had been held by exiles from Spain. ‘Abdallāh b. Ṭāhir decided to reside at Bagdad, sending a deputy to Egypt to govern for him; and this example was afterwards followed. In 828, when Mamūn’s brother Motaṣim was feudal lord, a violent insurrection broke out in the Ḥauf, occasioned, as usual, by excessive taxation; it was partly quelled in the next year by Motaṣim, who marched against the rebels with an army of 4000 Turks. The rebellion broke out repeatedly in the following years, and in 831 the Copts joined with the Arabs against the government; the state of affairs became so serious that the caliph Mamūn himself visited Egypt, arriving at Fostat in February 832; his general Afshīn fought a decisive battle with the rebels at Bāsharūd in the Ḥauf region, at which the Copts were compelled to surrender; the males were massacred and the women and children sold as slaves.

This event finally crushed the Coptic nation, which never again made head against the Moslems. In the following year the caliph Motaṣim, who surrounded himself with a foreign bodyguard, withdrew the stipends of the Arab soldiers in Egypt; this measure caused some of the Arab tribes who had been long settled in Egypt to revolt, but their resistance was crushed, and the domination of the Arab element in the country from this time gave way to that of foreign mercenaries, who, belonging to one nation or another, held it for most of its subsequent history. Egypt was given in fief to a Turkish general Ashnās(Ashinas), who never visited the country, and the rule of individuals of Turkish origin prevailed till the rise of the Fāṭimites, who for a time interrupted it. The presence of Turks in Egypt is attested by documents as early as 808. While the governorTurkish governors appointed.was appointed by the feudal lord, the finance minister continued to be appointed by the caliph. On the death of Ashnās in 844 Egypt was given in fief to another Turkish general Ītākh, but in 850 this person fell out of favour, and the fief was transferred to Montaṣir, son of the caliph Motawakkil. In 856 it was transferred from him to the vizier Fatḥ b. Khāqān, who for the first time appointed a Turkish governor. The chief places in the state were also filled with Turks. The period between the rise of the Abbasids and the quasi-independent dynasties of Egypt was marked by much religious persecution, occasioned by the fanaticism of some of the caliphs, the victims being generally Moslem sectarians. (For Egypt under Motawakkil seeCaliphate, § c. par. 10.)

The policy of these caliphs also led to severe measures being taken against any members of the Alid family or adherents of their cause who were to be found in Egypt.

In the year 868 Egypt was given in fief to a Turkish general Bayikbeg, who sent thither as his representative his stepson Aḥmad b. Ṭūlūn, the first founder of a quasi-independent dynasty. This personage was himself theṬūlūnid Dynasty.son of a Turk who, originally sent as a slave to Bagdad, had risen to high rank in the service of the caliphs. Aḥmad b. Ṭūlūn spent some of his early life in Tarsus, and on his return distinguished himself by rescuing his caravan, which conveyed treasure belonging to the caliph, from brigands who attacked it; he afterwards accompanied the caliph Mosta‘īn into exile, and displayed some honourable qualities in his treatment of the fallen sovereign. He found a rival in Egypt in the person of Ibn al-Modabbir, the finance minister, who occupied an independent position, and who started the practice of surrounding himself with an army of his own slaves or freedmen; of these Ibn Ṭūlūn succeeded in depriving the finance minister, and they formed the nucleus of an army by which he eventually secured his own independence. Insurrections by adherents of the Alids gave him the opportunity to display his military skill; and when in 870 his stepfather died, by a stroke of luck the fief was given to his father-in-law, who retained Aḥmad in the lieutenancy, and indeed extended his authority to Alexandria, which had till that time been outside it. The enterprise of a usurper in Syria in the year 872 caused the caliph to require the presence of Aḥmad in that country at the head of an army to quell it; and although this army was not actually employed for the purpose, it was not disbanded by Aḥmad, who on his return founded a fresh city called Kaṭā’i‘, “the fiefs,” S.E. of modern Cairo, to house it. On the death of Aḥmad’s father-in-law in the same year, when Egypt was given in fief to the caliph’s brother Mowaffaq (famous for his defeat of the Zanj), Aḥmad secured himself in his post by extensive bribery at headquarters; and in the following year the administration of the Syrian frontier was conferred on him as well. By 875 he found himself strong enough to refuse to send tribute to Bagdad, preferring to spend the revenues of Egypt on the maintenance of his army and the erection of great buildings, such as his famous mosque; and though Mowaffaq advanced against him with an army, the project of reducing Aḥmad to submission had to be abandoned for want of means. In 877 and 878 Aḥmad advanced into Syria and obtained the submission of the chief cities, and at Tarsus entered into friendly relations with the representatives of the Byzantine emperor. During his absence his son ‘Abbās revolted in Egypt; on the news of his father’s return he fled to Barca, whence he endeavoured to conquer the Aghlabite dominions in the Maghrib; he was, however, defeated by the Aghlabite ruler, and returned to Barca, where he was again defeated by his father’s forces and taken prisoner.

In 882 relations between Aḥmad and Mowaffaq again became strained, and the former conceived the bold plan of getting the caliph Mo’tamid into his power, which, however, was frustrated by Mowaffaq’s vigilance; but an open rupture was the result, as Mowaffaq formally deprived Aḥmad of his lieutenancy, while Aḥmad equally formally declared that Mowaffaq had forfeited the succession. A revolt that broke out at Tarsus caused Aḥmad to traverse Syria once more in 883, but illness compelled him to return, and on the 10th of May 884 he died at his residence in Kaṭā’i‘. He was the first to establish the claim of Egypt to govern Syria, and from his time Egypt grew more and more independent of the Eastern caliphate. He appears to have invented the fiction which afterwards was repeatedly employed, by which the money spent on mosque-building was supposed to have been furnished by discoveries of buried treasure.

He was succeeded by his son Khomārūya, then twenty years of age, who immediately after his accession had to deal with an attempt on the part of the caliph to recover Syria; this attempt failed chiefly through dissensions between the caliph’s officers, but partly through the ability of Khomārūya’s general, who succeeded in winning a battle after his master had run away from the field. By 886 Mowaffaq found it expedient to grant Khomārūya the possession of Egypt, Syria, and the frontier towns for a period of thirty years, and ere long, owing to the disputes of the provincial governors, Khomārūya found it possible to extend his domain to the Euphrates and even the Tigris. On the death of Mowaffaq in 891 the Egyptian governor was able to renew peaceful relations with the caliphs, and receive fresh confirmation in his possessions for thirty years. The security which he thereby gained gave him the opportunity to indulge his taste for costly buildings, parks and other luxuries, of which the chroniclers give accounts bordering on the fabulous. After the marriage of his daughter to the caliph, which was celebrated at enormous expense, an arrangement was made giving the Ṭūlūnid sovereign the viceroyalty of a region extending from Barca on the west to Hīt on the east; but tribute, ordinarily to the amount of 300,000 dinars, was to be sent to the metropolis. His realm enjoyed peace till his death in 896, when he fell a victim to some palace intrigue at Damascus.

His son and successor Abu’l-‘Asākir Jaish was fourteen years old at his accession, and being without adequate guidance soon revealed his incompetence, which led to his being murdered after a reign of six months by his troops, who gave his place to his brother Hārūn, who was of about the same age. In the eight years of his government the Ṭūlūnid empire contracted, owing to the revolts of the deputies which Hārūn was unable to quell, though in 898 he endeavoured to secure a new lease of the sovereignty in Egypt and Syria by a fresh arrangement with the caliph, involving an increase of tribute. The following years witnessed serious troubles in Syria caused by the Carmathians, which called for the intervention of the caliph, who at last succeeded in defeating these fanatics; the officer Mahommed b. Solaimān, to whom the victory was due, was then commissioned by the caliph to reconquer Egypt from the Ṭūlūnids, and after securing the allegiance of the Syrian prefects he invaded Egypt by sea and land at once. Before the arrival of these troops Hārūn had met his death at the hands of an assassin, or else in an affray, and his uncle Shaibān, who was placed on the throne, found himself without the means to collect an army fit to grapple with the invaders. Fostat was taken by Mahommed b. Solaimān after very slight resistance, at the beginning of 905, and after the infliction of severe punishment on the inhabitants Egypt was once more put under a deputy, ’Īsā al-Nausharī, appointed directly by the caliph.

The old régime was not restored without an attempt made by an adherent of the Ṭūlūnids to reconquer Egypt ostensibly for their benefit, and for a time the caliph’s viceroy had to quit the capital. The vigorous measures of the authorities at Bagdad speedily quelled this rebellion, and the Ṭūlūnid palace at Kaṭā’i‘ was then destroyed in order that there might be nothing to remind the Egyptians of the dynasty. In the middle of the year 914 Egypt was invaded for the first time by a Fāṭimite force sent by the caliph al-Mahdī ’Obaidallah, now established at Kairawān. The Mahdi’s son succeeded in taking Alexandria, and advancing as far as the Fayūm; but once more the Abbasidcaliph sent a powerful army to assist his viceroy, and the invaders were driven out of the country and pursued as far as Barca; the Fāṭimite caliph, however, continued to maintain active propaganda in Egypt. In 919 Alexandria was again seized by the Mahdi’s son, afterwards the caliph al-Qā’im, and while his forces advanced northward as far as Ushmunain (Eshmunain) he was reinforced by a fleet which arrived at Alexandria. This fleet was destroyed by a far smaller one sent by the Bagdad caliph to Rosetta; but Egypt was not freed from the invaders till the year 921, when reinforcements had been repeatedly sent from Bagdad to deal with them. The extortions necessitated by these wars for the maintenance of armies and the incompetence of the viceroys brought Egypt at this time into a miserable condition; and the numerous political crises at Bagdad prevented for a time any serious measures being taken to improve it. After a struggle between various pretenders to the viceroyalty, in which some pitched battles were fought, Mahommed b. Ṭughj, son of a Ṭūlūnid prefect of Damascus, was sent by the caliph to restore order; he had to force his entrance into the country by an engagement with one of the pretenders, Ibn Kaighlagh, in which he was victorious, and entered Fostat in August 935.

Mahommed b. Ṭughj was the founder of the Ikshīdī dynasty, so called from the title Ikshīd, conferred on him at his request by the caliph shortly after his appointment to the governorship of Egypt; it is said to have had theIkshidite Dynasty.sense of “king” in Ferghana, whence this person’s ancestors had come to enter the service of the caliph Motaṣim. He had himself served under the governor of Egypt, Takīn, whose son he displaced, in various capacities, and had afterwards held various governorships in Syria. One of the historians represents his appointment to Egypt as effected by bribery and even forgery. He united in his person the offices of governor and minister of finance, which had been separate since the time of the Ṭūlūnids. He endeavoured to replenish the treasury not only by extreme economy, but by inflicting fines on a vast scale on persons who had held offices under his predecessor and others who had rendered themselves suspect. The disaffected in Egypt kept up communications with the Fāṭimites, against whom the Ikshīd collected a vast army, which, however, had first to be employed in resisting an invasion of Egypt threatened by Ibn Rāiq, an adventurer who had seized Syria; after an indecisive engagement at Lajūn the Ikshīd decided to make peace with Ibn Rāiq, undertaking to pay him tribute. The favour afterwards shown to Ibn Rāiq at Bagdad nearly threw the Ikshīd into the arms of the Fāṭimite caliph, with whom he carried on a friendly correspondence, one letter of which is preserved. He is even said to have given orders to substitute the name of the Fāṭimite caliph for that of the Abbasid in public prayer, but to have been warned of the unwisdom of this course. In 941, after the death of Ibn Rāiq, the Ikshīd took the opportunity of invading Syria, which the caliph permitted him to hold with the addition of the sacred cities of Mecca and Medina, which the Ṭūlūnids had aspired to possess. He is said at this time to have started (in imitation of Aḥmad Ibn Ṭūlūn) a variety of vexatious enactments similar to those afterwards associated with the name of Hākim,e.g.compelling his soldiers to dye their hair, and adding to their pay for the purpose.

In the year 944 he was summoned to Mesopotamia to assist the caliph, who had been driven from Bagdad by Tūzūn and was in the power of the Ḥamdānids; and he proposed, though unsuccessfully, to take the caliph with him to Egypt. At this time he obtained hereditary rights for his family in the government of that country and Syria. The Ḥamdānid Saif addaula shortly after this assumed the governorship of Aleppo, and became involved in a struggle with the Ikshīd, whose general, Kāfūr, he defeated in an engagement between Homs and Hamah (Hamath). In a later battle he was himself defeated by the Ikshīd, when an arrangement was made permitting Saif addaula to retain most of Syria, while a prefect appointed by the Ikshīd was to remain in Damascus. The Buyid ruler, who was now supreme at Bagdad, permitted the Ikshīd to remain in possession of his viceroyalty, but shortly after receiving this confirmation he died at Damascus in 946.

The second of this dynasty was the Ikshīd’s son Ūnjūr, who had been proclaimed in his father’s time, and began his government under the tutelage of the negro Kāfūr. Syria was immediately overrun by Saif addaula, but he was defeated by Kāfūr in two engagements, and was compelled to recognize the overlordship of the Egyptian viceroy. At the death of Ūnjūr in 961 his brother Abu’l-Ḥasan ‘Alī was made viceroy with the caliph’s consent by Kāfūr, who continued to govern for his chief as before. The land was during this period threatened at once by the Fāṭimites from the west; the Nubians from the south, and the Carmathians from the east; when the second Ikshīdī died in 965, Kāfūr at first made a pretence of appointing his young son Aḥmad as his successor, but deemed it safer to assume the viceroyalty himself, setting an example which in Mameluke times was often followed. He occupied the post little more than three years, and on his death in 968 the aforementioned Aḥmad, called Abu’l-Fawāris, was appointed successor, under the tutelage of a vizier named Ibn Furāt, who had long served under the Ikshīdīs. The accession of this prince was followed by an incursion of the Carmathians into Syria, before whom the Ikshīdī governor fled into Egypt, where he had for a time to undertake the management of affairs, and arrested Ibn Furāt, who had proved himself incompetent.

The administration of Ibn Furāt was fatal to the Ikshīdīs and momentous for Egypt, since a Jewish convert, Jacob, son of Killis, who had been in the Ikshīd’s service, and was ill-treated by Ibn Furāt, fled to the Fāṭimite sovereign, and persuaded him that the time for invading Egypt with a prospect of success had arrived, since there was no one in Fostat capable of organizing a plan of defence, and the dissensions between the Buyids at Bagdad rendered it improbable that any succour would arrive from that quarter. The Fāṭimite caliph Mo’izz li-dīn allāh was also in correspondence with other residents in Egypt, where the Alid party from the beginning of Abbasid times had always had many supporters; and the danger from the Carmathians rendered the presence of a strong government necessary. The Fāṭimite general Jauhar (variously represented as of Greek, Slav and Sicilian origin), who enjoyed the complete confidence of the Fāṭimite sovereign, was placed at the head of an army of 100,000 men—if Oriental numbers are to be trusted—and started from Rakkāda at the beginning of March 969 with the view of seizing Egypt.

Before his arrival the administration of affairs had again been committed to Ibn Furāt, who, on hearing of the threatened invasion, at first proposed to treat with Jauhar for the peaceful surrender of the country; but though at first there was a prospect of this being carried out, the majority of the troops at Fostat preferred to make some resistance, and an advance was made to meet Jauhar in the neighbourhood of Giza. He had little difficulty in defeating the Egyptian army, and on the 6th of July 969 entered Fostat at the head of his forces. The name of Mo’izz was immediately introduced into public prayer, and coins were struck in his name. The Ikshīdī governor of Damascus, a cousin of Abu’l-Fawāris Aḥmad, endeavoured to save Syria, but was defeated at Ramleh by a general sent by Jauhar and taken prisoner. Thus the Ikshīdī Dynasty came to an end, and Egypt was transferred from the Eastern to the Western caliphate, of which it furnished the metropolis.

(4)The Fāṭimite periodbegins with the taking of Fostat by Jauhar, who immediately began the building of a new city, al-Kāhira or Cairo, to furnish quarters for the army which he had brought. A palace for the caliph and a mosque for the army were immediately constructed, the latter still famous as al-Azhar, and for many centuries the centre of Moslem learning. Almost immediately after the conquest of Egypt, Jauhar found himself engaged in a struggle with the Carmathians (q.v.), whom the Ikshīdī prefect of Damascus had pacified by a promise of tribute; this promise was of course not held binding by the Fāṭimite general (Ja’far b. Falāh) by whom Damascus was taken, and the Carmathian leader al-Ḥasan b. Aḥmad al-A’ṣam receivedaid from Bagdad for the purpose of recovering Syria to the Abbasids. The general Ja’far, hoping to deal with this enemy independently of Jauhar, met the Carmathians without waiting for reinforcements from Egypt, and fell in battle, his army being defeated. Damascus was taken by the Carmathians, and the name of the Abbasid caliph substituted for that of Mo’izz in public worship. Ḥasan al-A’ṣam advanced from Damascus through Palestine to Egypt, encountering little resistance on the way; and in the autumn of 971 Jauhar found himself besieged in his new city. By a timely sortie, preceded by the administration of bribes to various officers in the Carmathian host, Jauhar succeeded in inflicting a severe defeat on the besiegers, who were compelled to evacuate Egypt and part of Syria.

Meanwhile Mo’izz had been summoned to enter the palace that had been prepared for him, and after leaving a viceroy to take charge of his western possessions he arrived in Alexandria on the 31st of May 973, and proceeded to instruct his new subjects in the particular form of religion (Shī’ism) which his family represented. As this was in origin identical with that professed by the Carmathians, he hoped to gain the submission of their leader by argument; but this plan was unsuccessful, and there was a fresh invasion from that quarter in the year after his arrival, and the caliph found himself besieged in his capital. The Carmathians were gradually forced to retreat from Egypt and then from Syria by some successful engagements, and by the judicious use of bribes, whereby dissension was sown among their leaders. Mo’izz also found time to take some active measures against the Byzantines, with whom his generals fought in Syria with varying fortune. Before his death he was acknowledged as caliph in Mecca and Medina, as well as Syria, Egypt and North Africa as far as Tangier.

In the reign of the second Egyptian Fāṭimite ‘Azīz billah, Jauhar, who appears to have been cashiered by Mo’izz, was again employed at the instance of Jacob b. Killis, who had been raised to the rank of vizier, to deal with the situation in Syria, where a Turkish general Aftakīn had gained possession of Damascus, and was raiding the whole country; on the arrival of Jauhar in Syria the Turks called the Carmathians to their aid, and after a campaign of many vicissitudes Jauhar had to return to Egypt to implore the caliph himself to take the field. In August 977 ‘Azīz met the united forces of Aftakīn and his Carmathian ally outside Ramleh in Palestine and inflicted a crushing defeat on them, which was followed by the capture of Aftakīn; this able officer was taken to Egypt, and honourably treated by the caliph, thereby incurring the jealousy of Jacob b. Killis, who caused him, it is said, to be poisoned. This vizier had the astuteness to see the necessity of codifying the doctrines of the Fāṭimites, and himself undertook this task; in the newly-established mosque of el-Azhar he got his master to make provision for a perpetual series of teachers and students of his manual. It would appear, however, that a large amount of toleration was conceded by the first two Egyptian Fāṭimites to the other sects of Islam, and to other communities. Indeed at one time in ‘Azīz’s reign the vizierate of Egypt was held by a Christian, Jesus, son of Nestorius, who appointed as his deputy in Syria a Jew, Manasseh b. Abraham. These persons were charged by the Moslems with unduly favouring their co-religionists, and the belief that the Christians of Egypt were in league with the Byzantine emperor, and even burned a fleet which was being built for the Byzantine war, led to some persecution. Azīz attempted without success to enter into friendly relations with the Buyid ruler of Bagdad, ‘Aḍod addaula, who was disposed to favour the ‘Alids, but caused the claim of the Fāṭimites to descend from ‘Ali to be publicly refuted. He then tried to gain possession of Aleppo, as the key to ‘Irāk, but this was prevented by the intervention of the Byzantines. His North African possessions were maintained and extended by ‘Ali, son of Bulukkīn, whom Mo’izz had left as his deputy; but the recognition of the Fāṭimite caliph in this region was little more than nominal.

His successorAbū ‘Alī al-Manṣūr, who reigned under the titleal-Hāḳim bi‘amr allāh, came to the throne at the age of eleven, being the son of ‘Azīz by a Christian mother. He was at first under the tutelage of the Slav Burjuwān, whose policy it was to favour the Turkish element in the army as against the Maghribine, on which the strength of the Fāṭimites had till then rested; his conduct of affairs was vigorous and successful, and he concluded a peace with the Greek emperor. After a few years’ regency he was assassinated at the instance of the young sovereign, who at an early age developed a dislike for control and jealousy of his rights as caliph. He is branded by historians as the Caligula of the East, who took a delight in imposing on his subjects a variety of senseless and capricious regulations, and persecuting different sections of them by cruel and arbitrary measures. It is observable that some of those with which Ḥākim is credited are also ascribed to Ibn Ṭūlūn and the Ikshīd (Mahommed b. Tughj). He is perhaps best remembered by his destruction of the church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem (1010), a measure which helped to provoke the Crusades, but was only part of a general scheme for converting all Christians and Jews in his dominions to his own opinions by force. A more reputable expedient with the same end in view was the construction of a great library in Cairo, with ample provision for students; this was modelled on a similar institution at Bagdad. It formed part of the great palace of the Fāṭimites, and was intended to be the centre of their propaganda. At times, however, he ordered the destruction of all Christian churches in Egypt, and the banishment of all who did not adopt Islam. It is strange that in the midst of these persecutions he continued to employ Christians in high official positions. His system of persecution was not abandoned till in the last year of his reign (1020) he thought fit to claim divinity, a doctrine which is perpetuated by the Druses (q.v.), called after one Darazī, who preached the divinity of Ḥākim at the time; the violent opposition which this aroused among the Moslems probably led him to adopt milder measures towards his other subjects, and those who had been forcibly converted were permitted to return to their former religion and rebuild their places of worship. Whether his disappearance at the beginning of the year 1021 was due to the resentment of his outraged subjects, or, as the historians say, to his sister’s fear that he would bequeath the caliphate to a distant relative to the exclusion of his own son, will never be known. In spite of his caprices he appears to have shown competence in the management of external affairs; enterprises of pretenders both in Egypt and Syria were crushed with promptitude; and his name was at times mentioned in public worship in Aleppo and Mosul.

His sonAbū’l-Ḥasan ‘Ali, who succeeded him with the titleal-Ẓāhir li‘i’zāz dīn allāh, was sixteen years of age at the time, and for four years his aunt Sitt al-Mulk acted as regent; she appears to have been an astute but utterly unscrupulous woman. After her death the caliph was in the power of various ministers, under whose management of affairs Syria was for a time lost to the Egyptian caliphate, and Egypt itself raided by the Syrian usurpers, of whom one, Ṣāliḥ b. Mirdās, succeeded in establishing a dynasty at Aleppo, which maintained itself after Syria and Palestine had been recovered for the Fāṭimites by Anushtakin al-Dizbarī at the battle of Ukhuwānah in 1029. His career is said to have been marked by some horrible caprices similar to those of his father. After a reign of nearly sixteen years he died of the plague.

His successor,Abū Tamīm Ma‘add, who reigned with the titleal-Mostanṣir, was also an infant at the time of his accession, being little more than seven years of age. The power was largely in the hands of his mother, a negress, who promoted the interests of her kinsmen at court, where indeed even in Ḥākim’s time they had been used as a counterpoise to the Maghribine and Turkish elements in the army. In the first years of this reign affairs were administered by the vizier al-Jarjarā‘ī, by whose mismanagement Aleppo was lost to the Fāṭimites. At his death in 1044 the chief influence passed into the hands of Abu Sa’d, a Jew, and the former master of the queen-mother, and at the end offour years he was assassinated at the instance of another Jew (Ṣadaḳah, perhaps Zedekiah, b. Joseph al-Falāḥī), whom he had appointed vizier. In this reign Mo’izz b. Badis, the 4th ruler of the dependent Zeirid dynasty which had ruled in the Maghrib since the migration of the Fāṭimite Mo’izz to Egypt, definitely abjured his allegiance (1049) and returned to Sunnite principles and subjection to the Bagdad caliphate. The Zeirids maintained Mahdia (seeAlgiers), while other cities of the Maghrib were colonized by Arab tribes sent thither by the Cairene vizier. This loss was more than compensated by the enrolment of Yemen among the countries which recognized the Fāṭimite caliphate through the enterprise of one ‘Ali b. Mahommed al-Ṣulaiḥī, while owing to the disputes between the Turkish generals who claimed supremacy at Bagdad, Mostanṣir’s name was mentioned in public prayer at that metropolis on the 12th of January 1058, when a Turkish adventurer Basāsīrī was for a time in power. The Egyptian court, chiefly owing to the jealousy of the vizier, sent no efficient aid to Basāsīrī, and after a year Bagdad was retaken by the Seljūk Toghrul Beg, and the Abbasid caliph restored to his rights. In the following years the troubles in Egypt caused by the struggles between the Turkish and negro elements in Mostanṣir’s army nearly brought the country into the dominion of the Abbasids. After several battles of various issue the Turkish commander Nāṣir addaula b. Hamdān got possession of Cairo, and at the end of 1068 plundered the caliph’s palace; the valuable library which had been begun by Ḥākim was pillaged, and an accidental fire caused great destruction. The caliph and his family were reduced to destitution, and Nāṣir addaula began negotiations for restoring the name of the Abbasid caliph in public prayer; he was, however, assassinated before he could carry this out, and his assassin, also a Turk, appointed vizier. Mostanṣir then summoned to his aid Badr al-Jamālī, an Armenian who had displayed competence in various posts which he had held in Syria, and this person early in 1074 arrived in Cairo accompanied by a bodyguard of Armenians; he contrived to massacre the chiefs of the party at the time in possession of power, and with the title Amīr al-Juyūsh (“prince of the armies”) was given by Mostanṣir complete control of affairs. The period of internal disturbances, which had been accompanied by famine and pestilence, had caused usurpers to spring up in all parts of Egypt, and Badr was compelled practically to reconquer the country. During this time, however, Syria was overrun by an invader in league with the Seljūk Malik Shah, and Damascus was permanently lost to the Fāṭimites; other cities were recovered by Badr himself or his officers. He rebuilt the walls of Cairo, of more durable material than that which had been employed by Jauhar—a measure rendered necessary partly by the growth of the metropolis, but also by the repeated sieges which it had undergone since the commencement of Fāṭimite rule. The time of Mostanṣir is otherwise memorable for the rise of the Assassins (q.v.), who at the first supported the claims of his eldest son Nizār to the succession against the youngest Ḁhmed, who was favoured by the family of Badr. When Badr died in 1094 his influence was inherited by his son al-Afḍal Shāhinshāh, and this, at the death of Mostanṣir in the same year, was thrown in favour ofAḥmed, who succeeded to the caliphate with the titleal-Mosta’lī billāh.

Mosta’lī’s succession was not carried through without an attempt on the part of Nizār to obtain his rights, the title which he chose beingal-Moṣṭafā lidīn allāh; for a time he maintained himself in Alexandria, but the energeticThe Crusades.measures of his brother soon brought the civil war to an end. The beginning of this reign coincided with the beginning of the Crusades, and al-Afḍal made the fatal mistake of helping the Franks by rescuing Jerusalem from the Ortokids, thereby facilitating its conquest by the Franks in 1099. He endeavoured to retrieve his error by himself advancing into Palestine, but he was defeated in the neighbourhood of Ascalon, and compelled to retire to Egypt. Many of the Palestinian possessions of the Fāṭimites then successively fell into the hands of the Franks. After a reign of seven years Mosta’lī died and the caliphate was given by al-Afḍal to an infant son, aged five years at the time, who was placed on the throne with the titleal-Āmir biahkām allāh, and for twenty years was under the tutelage of al-Afḍal. He made repeated attempts to recover the Syrian and Palestinian cities from the Franks, but with poor success. In 1118 Egypt was invaded by Baldwin I., who burned the gates and the mosques of Farama, and advanced to Tinnis, whence illness compelled him to retreat. In August 1121 al-Afḍal was assassinated in a street of Cairo, it is said, with the connivance of the caliph, who immediately began the plunder of his house, where fabulous treasures were said to be amassed. The vizier’s offices were given to one of the caliph’s creatures, Mahommed b. Fātik al-Batā’iḥī, who took the titleal-Ma’mūn. His external policy was not more fortunate than that of his predecessor, as he lost Tyre to the Franks, and a fleet equipped by him was defeated by the Venetians. On the 4th of October 1125 he with his followers was seized and imprisoned by order of the Caliph Āmir, who was now resolved to govern by himself, with the assistance of only subordinate officials, of whom two were drawn from the Samaritan and Christian communities. The vizier was afterwards crucified with his five brothers. The caliph’s personal government appears to have been incompetent, and to have been marked by extortions and other arbitrary measures. He was assassinated in October 1129 by some members of the sect who believed in the claims of Nizār, son of Mostanṣir.

The succeeding caliph,Abu’l-Maimūn ‘Abd al-Majīd, who took the titleal-Ḥāfiẓ lidīn allāh, was not the son but the cousin of the deceased caliph, and of ripe age, being about fifty-eight years old at the time; for more than a year he was kept in prison by the new vizier, a son of al-Afḍal, whom the army had placed in the post; but towards the end of 1131 this vizier fell by the hand of assassins, and the caliph was set free. The reign of Ḥāfiẓ was disturbed by the factions of the soldiery, between which several battles took place, ending in the subjection of the caliph for a time to various usurpers, one of these being his own son Ḥasan, who had been provoked to rebel by the caliph nominating a younger brother as his successor. For some months the caliph was under this son’s control; but the latter, who aimed at conciliating the people, speedily lost his popularity with the troops, and his father was able to get possession of his person and cause him to be poisoned (beginning of 1135).

His sonAbu’l-Manṣūr Ismā‘īl, who was seventeen years old at the time of Ḥāfiẓ’s death, succeeded him with the titleal-Zāfir lia’dā allāh. From this reign to the end of the Fāṭimite period we have the journals of two eminent men, Usāmah b. Muniqdh and Umārah of Yemen, which throw light on the leading characters. The civil dissensions of Egypt were notorious at the time. The new reign began by an armed struggle between two commanders for the post of vizier, which in January 1150 was decided in favour of the Amir Ibn Sallār. This vizier was presently assassinated by the direction of his stepson ‘Abbās, who was raised to the vizierate in his place. This event was shortly followed by the loss to the Fāṭimites of Ascalon, the last place in Syria which they held; its loss was attributed to dissensions between the parties of which the garrison consisted. Four years later (April 1154) the caliph was murdered by his vizier ‘Abbās, according to Usāmah, because the caliph had suggested to his favourite, the vizier’s son, to murder his father; and this was followed by a massacre of the brothers of Zāfir, followed by the raising of his infant sonAbu’l-Qāsim ’Īsāto the throne.

The new caliph, who was not five years old, received the titleal-Fā’iz binaṣr allāh, and was at first in the power of ‘Abbās. The women of the palace, however, summoned to their aid Ṭalā’i’ b. Ruzzīk, prefect of Ushmunain, at whose arrival in Cairo the troops deserted ‘Abbās, who was compelled to flee into Syria, taking his son and Usāmah with him. ‘Abbās was killed by the Franks near Ascalon, his son sent in a cage to Cairo where he was executed, while Usāmah escaped to Damascus.

The infant Fā’iz, who had been permanently incapacitated by the scenes of violence which accompanied his accession, died in 1160. Ṭalā’i’ chose to succeed him a grandson of Ẓāfir, who was nine years of age, and received the titleal-‘Āḍid lidīn allāh. Ṭalā’i’, who had complete control of affairs, introduced thepractice of farming the taxes for periods of six months instead of a year, which led to great misery, as the taxes were demanded twice. His death was brought on by the rigour with which he treated the princesses, one of whom, with or without the connivance of the caliph, organized a plot for his assassination, and he died in September 1160. His son Ruzzīk inherited his post and maintained himself in it for more than a year, when another prefect of Upper Egypt, Shāwar b. Mujīr, brought a force to Cairo, before which Ruzzīk fled, to be shortly afterwards captured and beheaded. Shāwar’s entry into Cairo was at the beginning of 1163; after nine months he was compelled to flee before another adventurer, an officer in the army named Ḍirghām. Shāwar’s flight was directed to Damascus, where he was favourably received by the prince Nureddin, who sent with him to Cairo a force of Kurds under Asad al-dīn Shīrgūh. At the same time Egypt was invaded by the Franks, who raided and did much damage on the coast. Dirghām was defeated and killed, but a dispute then arose between Shāwar and his Syrian allies forFrankish invasion.the possession of Egypt. Shāwar, being unable to cope with the Syrians, demanded help of the Frankish king of Jerusalem Amalric (Amauri) I., who hastened to his aid with a large force, which united with Shāwar’s and besieged Shīrgūh in Bilbeis for three months; at the end of this time, owing to the successes of Nureddin in Syria, the Franks granted Shīrgūh a free passage with his troops back to Syria, on condition of Egypt being evacuated (October 1164). Rather more than two years later Shīrgūh persuaded Nureddin to put him at the head of another expedition to Egypt, which left Syria in January 1167, and, entering Egypt by the land route, crossed the Nile at Itfīḥ (Atfih), and encamped at Giza; a Frankish army hastened to Shāwar’s aid. At the battle of Bābain (April 11th, 1167) the allies were defeated by the forces commanded by Shīrgūh and his nephew Saladin, who wasSaladin.presently made prefect of Alexandria, which surrendered to Shīrgūh without a struggle. Saladin was soon besieged by the allies in Alexandria; but after seventy-five days the siege was raised, Shīrgūh having made a threatening movement on Cairo, where a Frankish garrison had been admitted by Shāwar. Terms were then made by which both Syrians and Franks were to quit Egypt, though the garrison of Cairo remained; the hostile attitude of the Moslem population to this garrison led to another invasion at the beginning of 1168 by King Amalric, who after taking Bilbeis advanced to Cairo. The caliph, who up to this time appears to have left the administration to the viziers, now sent for Shīrgūh, whose speedy arrival in Egypt caused the Franks to withdraw. Reaching Cairo on the 6th of January 1169, he was soon able to get possession of Shāwar’s person, and after the prefect’s execution, which happened some ten days later, he was appointed vizier by the caliph. After two months Shīrgūh died of indigestion (23rd of March 1169), and the caliph appointed Saladin as successor to Shīrgūh; the new vizier professed to hold office as a deputy of Nureddin, whose name was mentioned in public worship after that of the caliph. By appropriating the fiefs of the Egyptian officers and giving them to his Kurdish followers he stirred up much ill-feeling, which resulted in a conspiracy, of which the object was to recall the Franks with the view of overthrowing the new régime; but this conspiracy was revealed by a traitor and crushed. Nureddin loyally aided his deputy in dealing with Frankish invasions of Egypt, but the anomaly by which he, being a Sunnite, was made in Egypt to recognize a Fāṭimite caliph could not long continue, and he ordered Saladin to weaken the Fāṭimite by every available means, and then substitute the name of the Abbasid for his in public worship. Saladin and his ministers were at first afraid lest this step might give rise to disturbances among the people; but a stranger undertook to risk it on the 17th of September 1171, and the following Friday it was repeated by official order; the caliph himself died during the interval, and it is uncertain whether he ever heard of his deposition. The last of the Fāṭimite caliphs was not quite twenty-one years old at the time of his death.

(5)Ayyubite Period.—Saladin by the advice of his chief Nureddin cashiered the Fāṭimite judges and took steps to encourage the study of orthodox theology and jurisprudence in Egypt by the foundation of colleges and chairs. On the death of the ex-caliph he was confirmed in the prefecture of Egypt as deputy of Nureddin; and on the decease of the latter in 1174 (12th of April) he took the title sultan, so that with this year the Ayyubite period of Egyptian history properly begins. During the whole of it Damascus rather more than Cairo counted as the metropolis of the empire. The Egyptian army, which was motley in character, was disbanded by the new sultan, whose troops were Kurds. Though he did not build a new metropolis he fortified Cairo with the addition of a citadel, and had plans made for a new wall to enclose both it and the double city; this latter plan was never completed, but the former was executed after his death, and from this time till the French occupation of Egypt the citadel of Cairo was the political centre of the country. It was in 1183 that Saladin’s rule over Egypt and North Syria was consolidated. Much of Saladin’s time was spent in Syria, and his famous wars with the Franks belong to the history of the Crusades and to his personal biography. Egypt was largely governed by his favourite Karākūsh, who lives in popular legend as the “unjust judge,” though he does not appear to have deserved that title.

Back to IndexNext