The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that large parts of Ibn Baṭṭūṭuta's description of his travels in Palestine were in fact copied, with certain abbreviations and deletions, from the records of another Muslim traveller, Muhammad b. Muḥammad al-‛Abdarī.
1 The Arabic edition of the Riḥla quoted throughout this paper is: Voyages d'lbn Battoutah, texte arabe, accompagné d'une traduction par C. Defrémery et Sanguinetti, B. R., Tome premier (Paris, 1893). [= Ibn Baṭṭūṭa]
Following is a list of the studies of the Riḥla and of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa which have been used in this work:
a) Ibn Baṭṭūṭa: Travels in Asia and Africa, 1325–1354, Translated and Selected by Gibb, H. A. R. (London, 1929). [= Gibb, Selections]
b) The Travels of Ibn Baṭṭṭūṭa, Translated with Revisions and Notes from the Arabic Text. … by Gibb, H. A. R., Vols. I–II (Cambridge, 1958). [= Gibb, Travels]
c) Janssens, H. F., Ibn Batouta “Le Voyageur de l'Islam” (1304–1369) (Bruxelles, 1948). [=Janssens]
d) The Reḥlah of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa (India, Maldive Islands and Ceylon), Translation and Commentary by Mahdi Husain (Baroda, 1953). [= Mahdi]
e) Nafis, Ahmad, Muslim Contribution to Geography (Lahore, 1947). [= Ahmad Nafis]
f) Mu'nis, Ḥusayn, Ibn Baṭṭūṭa wa-Riḥlatuhu, (taḥqīq wa-dirāsa wa-taḥlit), (al-Qāhira: Dār al-Ma‘ārif, 1980). [=Mu'nis]
g) Janicsek, Stephen, “Ibn Baṭṭūṭa's Journey to Bulghār: Is It a Fabrication?” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1929, pp. 791–800. [= Janicsek]
h) Hrbek, I., “The Chronology of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa's Travels,” Archiv Orientālnī, Vol. XXX (1962), pp.409–489. [= Hrbek]
i) Mattock, J. N., “The Travel Writings of Ibn Jubayr and Ibn Baṭṭūṭa,” Transactions of the Glasgow University Oriental Society, Vol. XXI (1965–1966) pp. 35–47 [= Mattock]
j) Idem., “Ibn Baṭṭūṭa's Use of Ibn Jubayr's Riḥla,” Proceedings of the Ninth Congress of the Union Europeenne des Arabisants et Islamisants (Amsterdam, 1st to 7th 09, 1978), Ed. Peters, R. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1981), pp. 209–18 [= Mattock, “Ibn Baṭṭūṭa”]. I wish to thank Prof. E. Kohlberg for drawing my attention to this article.
k) Netton, I. R., “Myth and Magic in the Riḥla of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa,” Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. XXIX/I (1984), pp. 131–140. [= Netton]
l) Krachkovski, I. V., Istoriya Arabski Geograficheskoi Literatury (Moskva-Leningrad, 1957). I have used the Arabic translation, Ta'rīkh al-adab al-jughrāfiyy al-‘arabī, naqalahu ilā ’l-lugha al-‘arabiyya Ṣalāḥ al-Dīn ‘Uthmān Hāshim, qāma bi-murāja‘ atihi Ighur Bliyaf, Vol. I (Cairo, 1963). [= Krachkovski]
m) Miquel, A., “Ibn Baṭṭūṭa,” Encyclopaedia of Islam,2 s. v.
2 Miquel, loc. cit.
3 Mu'nis, pp. 240–41; Ahmad Nafis, p. 45.
4 For evaluations of this sort, see Gibb, , Travels, I, pp. xi–xiii; Hrbek, pp. 409–11; Krachkovski, pp. 421,431; Mahdi, introduction; for the importance of the Riḥla in literature, folklore and social affairs, see also Netton, pp. 133–34; Levtzion, N. and Hopkins, J. F. P., Corpus of Early Arabic Sources for West African History, Translated by Hopkins, J. F. P., Edited and Annotated by Levtzion, N. and Hopkins, J. F. P. (Cambridge, 1981), p. 280.
5 Miquel, , loc. cit.; Hrbek, pp. 409–10; Gibb, , loc. cit.;Krachkovski, , loc. cit.;Mahdi, , loc. cit.
6 Hrbek, p.411 n. 8; Miquel, , loc. cit.
7 Gibb, , Selections, pp. 10–12; Krachkovski, p. 427; but see also Mahdi, p. lxxiv, who is quite certain that Ibn Battuta did have notes; Mu'nis, , op. cit., pp. 12, 141,237.
8 Gibb, , loc. cit.; Ahmad Nafis, p. 48; Krachkovski, pp. 421,425, is of the opinion that most of the deficiencies and faults of the Riḥla originate with Ibn Juzayy. With respect to most of the places which he described, Ibn Baṭṭūṭa presumably dictated his reports approximately thirty years later; furthermore, he did not always dictate in a logical, continuous sequence. Krachkovski is of the impression that Ibn Baṭṭūṭa never intended to give a full account and that it fell to Ibn Juzayy, who was not familiar with either the names or the places, to put the material together.
9 Gibb, , op. cit., pp. 12–13.
10 Hrbek, p. 410 nn. 3,4, a partial bibliography.
12 The capital of the Bulghārs, who adopted Islam during the Xth century. The remains of the city are located near the village of Bolgarskoye or Uspenskoye, located, according to Gibb, 115 kms. south of Kazan, at a distance of approximately 7 kms. east of the Volga River. (Selections, p. 357 n. 25; Travels, II, p. 490 n. 282).
13 See also Gibb, , Selections, loc. cit.; Travels, II, p. 491 n. 295) who notes that Ibn Baṭṭūṭa could not have travelled 800 miles in ten days; Mu'nis, p. 140, also expresses surprise in this regard.
14 It should be noted that Janssens also tried to check the problematic sections in Ibn Baṭṭūṭa against the texts of various other geographers, as for example in the case of the description of the Maldives. (Janssens, p. 109.)
15 Gibb, , op. cit., pp. 490–91.
16 See for instance, Ibid.; Krachkovski, p. 421; Janssens, pp. 108–109; Hrbek, p. 472; Mu'nis, , loc. cit.
17 Ahmad Nafis is one of the few scholars who does not doubt the credibility of the description of Bulghār. Regarding the description of Constantinople, see Hrbek, pp. 473–482; Gibb, , Selections, pp. 13–14.Krachkovski, , loc. cit., believes that Ibn Baṭṭūṭa was in Constantinople. With regard to China, he does not make any conclusive statement, even though he unequivocally notes that most scholars conclude that he was never there (ibid., p. 429). T. Yamamoto believes that he was in China: see, iIdem., “On Ṭawālisī Described by Ibn Baṭṭūṭa,” Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko (The Oriental Library), VIII (1936), p. 103. (Having been unable to procure this article in the original, I have used the quotation from it adduced by Netton, p. 133 n. 12). Janssens, pp. 101–103, concludes that Ibn Baṭṭūṭa was neither in Bulghār nor in Asia Minor nor in Constantinople. With regard to Bulghār, he follows the opinion of Janicsek, as we have said; with respect to the latter two places, he bases his opinion upon the thorough critique of Wittek, P. as presented in “Le Sultan de Rūm,”Mélanges E. Boisacq, II (1938), pp. 371–72, which he cites (p. 103 n. 1); he also gives two more references on this subject (p. 103 n. 2). With regard to China, Janssens does not totally reject the description even though he is aware, as are other scholars, of the tremendous difficulties which it creates. He even quotes Gibb's humorous comment concerning Ibn Baṭṭūṭa's description of the funeral of the Emperor Toghon Temür, who died in 1370 (while a copy of the manuscript of the Riḥla in Ibn Juzayy's own handwriting exists from 1356) “this is a problem better suited for investigation by the Psychic Society than by the matter-offact historian” (Gibb, , Selections, pp. 373 n. 35.).
18 See on him Ch. Pellat, , “Ibn Djubayr” E1 2,s.v. The Arabic version of his Riḥla: The Travels of Ibn Jubayr, ed. Wright, W., rev. De Goeje, M. J. (E. J. W. Gibb Memorial Series, Vol. V, Leyden, 1907); [= Ibn Jubayr, Riḥla]. English translation: The Travels of Ibn Jubayr, trans, by Broadhurst, R. J. C., with an Intro, and Notes, (London, 1951). [= Ibn Jubayr]
19 Gibb, , Travels, I, pp. 83, 84, 94–95, 178–79, 190; idem., Selections, pp. 11,12,345 nn. 45 and pp. 52, 347 n. 68; Jubayr, Ibn, Riḥla p. 17; Krachkovski, p. 426; Netton, p. 132; Mattock, pp. 36,38–39; Janssens, pp. 108, 111; Miquel, , loc. cit.; Mu'nis, p. 12; Strange, G., “Baghdad During the “Abbāsid Caliphate,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1899), pp. 884–85;Idam., Baghdad During the Abbasid Caliphate, (Oxford, 1924), p. 346; see also, Muhadhdhab Riḥla Ibn Baṭṭūṭa … Vol. I, eds. Aḥmad al-‘Awāmirī Bek and Muḥammad Aḥmad Jād al-Mawlā Bek, (Cairo, 1934), intro., p. and especially, Mattock, “Ibn Baṭṭūṭa”, whose entire article is devoted to examples of copying and borrowing by Ibn Baṭṭūṭa from Ibn Jubayr. After an in-depth, painstaking, comparative study, Mattock concludes: “Thus. … we may say that about 250 pages of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa are borrowed more or less directly from Ibn Jubayr. This represents about 160 pages of the latter. As a rough fraction of the whole of either work, this is the equivalent of perhaps one-seventh of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa and three-sevenths of Ibn Jubayr” (ibid., p. 211).
20 Levtzion and Hopkins (above n. 4) pp. 280–81.
21 His first article (Mattock), deals mainly with stylistic matters but in his second article (Mattock, , “Ibn Baṭṭūṭa”), he extensively compares those texts of Ibn Battuta which were copied from Ibn Jubayr's Riḥla.
22 Gibb, , Travels, I, p. xv;Idem., Selections, pp. 12–13.
23 Hrbek, (above n. 1 no. h).
24 Gibb, , Travels, op. cit., p. 81; Hrbek, pp. 418, 422; Janssens, p. 11.
25 Gibb, op. cit., n.48
26 Hrbek, pp. 421–25,483–84; he reduces the number of places visited by Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, on his first trip to Syria and Palestine, to seven: Ghazza (Gaza) — Bayt haḥm — Jerusalem — Nābulus (Shechem) — ‘Ajlūn — al-Quṣayr.
27 Ed. Aḥmad b. Jadū (Alger, 1965), but I did not have access to this edition.
28 Ed. Muḥammad al-Fāsī (Rabat, 1968); [=al-‘Abdarī]; in the Introduction, the editor states that the previous edition, that of Aḥmad b. Jadū, was faulty. References in this essay are to the second edition.
29 Following is a partial list of the research dealing with the Riḥla of al-‘Abdarī:
a) Cherbonneau, M., “Un Voyage d'el ‘Abdary,” Journal Asiatique, V/4 (1854), pp. 144–76.
b) Zaydān, Jirjī, Kitāb ta’rīkh adab al-lugha al-‘arabiyya, III Cairo, 1931), p. 223.
c) al-Fāsī, Maḥmūd, “al-Raḥḥāla al-Shāhir, Abū ‘Abdallāh Muḥammad al-‘Abdarī,” Ma'had al-dirāsāt al-islāmiyya fī-Madrid (Revista del Instituto de Estudios Islámicos en Madrid), IX–X (1961–1962), pp. 1–14.
d) Ziyāda, Niqūlā, al-Jughrāfiyya wa- l-riḥlāt ‘inda l-‘arab (Beirut, 1962), pp. 170–80.
e) Mu'nis, Ḥusayn, “Al-Jughrāfiyya wa- 1-Jughrāfiyyūn fī- 1-Andalus,” Ma‘had al-dirāsāt al-islāmiyya fī-Madrid, XI–XII (1963–1964), pp. 244–54, which also appeared as a book under the same title, Madrid, 1386/1967 pp. 518–28.
f) al-Shādhilī, [A]bū Yaḥyā, “Al-Riḥla al- Maghribiyya,” Hawliyāt al-Jāmi'a al-Tūnisiyya, IV (1967), pp. 177–87. On p. 180, Shādhilī comments upon the very poor edition of this work produced by Ibn Jadū in 1965.
g) Krachkovski, p. 368.
h) Hoenerbach, W., Das nordafrikanische Itinerar des ‘Abdarī, (Leipzig, 1940).
i) El 2, “Al-‘Abdarī” (Muh. Ben Cheneb-W. Hoenerbach), s.v.
j) The recent article of Frenkel, J., “References to Palestine in al-Riḥla al-Maghribiyya, by al-‘Abdarī,” Cathedra XXXI (1984), pp. 67–75 (in Hebrew).
30 Hoenerbach (above n. 29 no. h).
31 Idem., pp. 36–40, 153–54 n.3, 155 n.2,156 nn.2, 156 nn.2, 4, 158 nn. 1, 4–6; concerning the lighthouse of Alexandria, he concludes that Ibn Baṭṭūṭa should not be considered an independent source for the history of that place, as he was by Asín Palacios in Andalus, I, 1933; see also Hoenerbach's comment in this vein in El 2, “Al-‘Abdarī”, s.v.
32 See for instance Gibb's amazement over Ibn Baṭṭūṭa's description of the division of the Nile (Gibb, , Travels, I, p. 50 n. 156; the confused, interrupted description of the Pyramids (ibid., p. 51 n. 161) and references to Ashkelon (ibid., p. 81 n. 48); cf. Hrbek, p. 422 (quoting Janssens, p. 11).
34 See for instance, ibid., pp. 21–23, 27, 29–30, 34, 36–37, 39, 44–45. There are many more such examples.
35 Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, p. 30; Gibb, , op. cit., p. 19.
36 Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, pp.31–40; Gibb, , op. cit., pp. 20–25.
37 Sections dearly copied from al-‘Abdarī 1) the cemetery of Cairo: cf. al-‘Abdarī, pp. 152 1.11–153 1.6 to Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 761.1–77 1.2;2) the Nile: cf. al-‘Abdarī, pp. 145 1.14–146 1.16 to Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 77 1.3–801.7; 3) the Pyramids: cf. al-‘Abdarī, pp. 146 1.20–148 1.15 to Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 80 1.6 –83 1.6; apparently authentic details: Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 83–93 (= Gibb, , Travels, I, pp. 52–58).
38 Ibid., p. 58 n. 180 (the Damascene scholar); p. 59 n. 181 (concerning the maḥmal).
39 Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, p. 128 (= Gibb, , op. cit., p. 82).
40 Ibid., p. 85, mentions Ibn Jubayr, al-Harawī and Yāqūt.
41 Ibid., p.83n. 59.
42 Al-Dimashqī, , Nukhbat al-Dahr (ed. Mehrn, ) (St. Petersburg, 1866), p. 200.
43 It is possible that al-Muqaddasī's description of Palestine, written towards the middle of the Xth century, already includes this syrup among the products of Palestine. See Aḥsan al-taqāsīm fī-ma ‘ rifat al-aqālīm (BGA III) (Leiden, 1906), p. 181, and also pp. 183–84, where he describes this carob syrup, called al-qubayṭ, among the other products of Syria and Palestine. Detailed descriptions of manufactured goods and the manner of their production are found throughout Ibn Baṭṭūṭa's descriptions of the places which he visited, as for example, Latakiya, Baalbek and Sarmīn.
44 Gibb, , op. cit., p. 83 n. 57; Yāqūt, , Mu‘jam al-Buldān, III, (Wüstenfelded.), p. 722, quoting al-Muhallabī, the author of al-Masālik wa'l-mamālik (mid-Xth century), who locates ‘Amtā midway between ‘Ammān and Tiberias (12 parasangs from Tiberias and ‘Ammān). Abū l-Fidā”, Taqwīm al-buldān (Dresden, 1846), p. 142 1. 12, also quotes al-Muhallabī's book, according to which the distance between Tiberias and ‘Ammān is 72 miles; (According to W.Hinz, , “Farsakh”, El 2,s.v., a farsakh is the equivalent of 3 miles). For the identification of the grave at ‘Amtā, see also Abī Bakr al-Harawī, ‘Alī b., Kitāb al-ishārāt ilā ma‘rifat al-ziyārāt, ed. Sourdel-Thomine, J., (Damascus, 1953), p. 17 (French translation: Guide des lieux de pélerinage, Traduction annotée par Janine Sourdel-Thomine, Damas, 1957, p. 45 and nn. 2, 3); al-Harawī also locates the grave of Abū ‘Ubayda in Tiberias, ibid., p. 19; (French trans, p.49); and see also al-‘Umarī, Ibn Faḍlallāh, Masālik al-abṣāār fī-mamālik al-amṣār, I, (Cairo, 1342/1924), p. 217; for al-Quṣayr, see Gibb, , Travels, I, p. 83 n. 58, who remarks that Yāqūt, , op. cit., IV, p. 126, places Quṣayr Mu‘īn al-Dīn in the Jordan Valley (al-Ghūr), belonging to the Jordan District (Jund al-Urdunn). Ibn Faḍlallāh al-‘Umarī confirms Gibb's identification of this site: “The grave of Mu‘ādh b. Jabal in al-Quṣayr al-Ma‘īnī.” The editor [?] vocalizes al-Ma‘īnī while Yāqūt's version is al-Mu‘īnī. This grave has also been identified in other locations: outside Tiberias (Yāqūt, , op. cit., III, pp. 512–13) and in Cairo (ibid., IV, p. 555); see also al-Harawī, , loc. cit., who locates his grave in Dayr al-Fākhūr (in the vicinity of al-Quṣayr? See the French translation, p. 50, editor's note.)
45 This important treatise was first identified by J. Frenkel; see his discussion of the subject, above n. 29, no. j.
46 Al-‘Abdarī, pp. 222 11.2–6; Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 115 11.10–11,116 13.
47 Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 116 1.6–117 1.2 (= al-‘Abdarī, pp. 233 11.11–17).
48 See al-‘Ulaymī, Mujīr al-Dīn, al-Uns al-jalīl bi-tașrīkh al-Quds wa'l-Khalīl, II (‘Ammān, 1973), pp. 153–54.
49 He is ‘Abd al-Raḥmān b. ‘Amr Abū Zur‘a al-Dimashqī (d. 893); see on him, Sezgin, F., Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, I, (Leiden, 1967), p. 302.
50 Al-‘Abdarī, pp. 223 1.18–224 1.3 (= Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 117 11.2–7).
51 In the opinion of Lévi-Provençal, Abū ‘Ubayd al-Bakrī (d. 1094) and al-Idrīsī (d. 1165) were the most important Muslim geographers of the West. Al-Bakrī's most important geographical work, Kitāb al-masālik wa'l-mamālik, was probably compiled in 1068. Examples of passages copied from al-‘Abdarī in which Ibn Baṭṭūṭa omitted the name of al-Bakrī: al-‘Abdarī, p. 146 11.3–4,6,16; cf. Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 79 11.2–3,78 1.10; and especially al-‘Abdarī, p. 147 11. 20–21, 25 (quoting al-Bakrī who quotes al-Mas‘udī); cf. Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, p. 81 1. 10. Additional pages of material from al-Bakrīi's book: al-‘Abdarā, pp. 224–226.
52 As it stands, the relationship of Ibn Baṭṭūṭa's text to that of al-‘Abdarī is not always immediately apparent but a change in the order of the sentences as they appear in the former reveals the borrowing. This technique of changing the order of the sentences is common in Ibn Baṭṭūṭa and is pointed out by Mattock in “Ibn Baṭṭūṭa”, pp. 213–14, in which he gives examples of changes of order between Ibn Baṭṭūṭa and Ibn Jubayr's original.
53 Al-‘Abdarī, p. 227; Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, p. 119.
54 Cf. for example al-‘Abdarī, p. 146 11. 8–10 to Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, p. 80 11. 2–3; in another place, al-‘Abdarī himself measured the inner dimensions of the dome of the mausoleum of al-Shāfi‘ī in the al-Qarāfa cemetery in Cairo, and he writes: “ … and I measured it from within and found that its width is greater than 30 cubits,” (p. 152, 1. 15), but Ibn Baṭṭūṭa writes: “ … and it is wider than 30 cubits,” (p. 76 1. 3), after which he goes back to copying and reproducing all the names of the Muslim scholars buried in al-Qarāfa and cited by al-‘Abdarī, in the exact order in which they appear there.
55 Al-‘Abdarī, p. 227 11. 2–20; Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, p. 119 11. 2–12; cf. Frenkel, loc. cit. It is interesting to note that Y. Yadin (“Arabic Inscriptions from Palestine,” Eretz Israel VII, L. A. Mayer's Volume (1964), p. 112) remarks that the plate on which the inscription of the poem appears is broken and that half of the opening hemistiches of stanzas III and IV are missing. Yadin proceeded to complete stanza IV according to Ibn Baṭṭūṭa. With regard to the third stanza he expresses surprise that Ibn Baṭṭūṭa omitted it and assumes that he had forgotten it. It is noteworthy that Yadin's completion of the opening of the first hemistich of the third stanza and part of its second hemistich is identical to that of al-‘Abdarī.
56 Al-‘Abdarī, p. 227 11.22–228 1.4 (= Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, p. 12011.1–5). In his short description of Bethlehem, Ibn Baṭṭūṭa adds (to al-‘Abdarī) “and there is the remains of the trunk of the Palm tree,” referring most probably to the palm tree mentioned in the Qur‘īn (sūra 19, Maryam, V.23) to which Mary went when she was about to deliver Jesus. An early tradition, from the beginning of the VIII century (Sulaymīn, Muqītil b., Tafsīr, MS. Saray Ahmed III, p. 74, I fol. 210a) relates that God caused the palm tree to grow in Jerusalem especially for Mary; cf. Yīqūt, , op. cit., I, pp. 409–10 (“Annīs”), according to which that same trunk is to be found in al-Annīs, Egypt, where some say Jesus was born.
57 Cf. al-‘Abdarī, p. 228 11.4–14 to Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 120 1.6–1211.3; ‘A., p. 228 11.15–17 to I.B., p. 124 11.6–9;‘A., p.22811.20–23 to I.B., p. 124 11.1–4‘A., p.229 11.1–17 to I.B., p. 121 11.4–8; ‘A., p. 230 11.1–22 to I.B., pp. 122 1.6–123 1.9.
58 Gibb claims that, with the exception of the breaching of the wall in conjunction with his entry into the city, there is nothing which would indicate that Ṣalīḥ al-Dīn destroyed any part of the wall. See also, Lyons, M. C. and Jackson, D. E. P., Saladin, The Politics of the Holy War (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 267–77, specifically the statement: “ … during the conquest, a part of the northern wall was destroyed by the besieging Muslims.” (ibid., p. 273).
59 See Drori, J., “Jerusalem in the Mamlūk Period,” Jerusalem in the Middle Ages, Selected Papers, ed. Kedar, B. Z. (Jerusalem: Yad Izhaq ben Zvi, 1979), p. 170; see also Elad, A., “An Early Arabic Source Concerning the Markets of Jerusalem,” (Hebrew) Cathedra XXIV (1982), p.39 n. 35.
60 Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, p. 121 1. 7: min al-qibla ilī l-jawf. For the commonly accepted meaning of jawf as “north” among the Maghrib authors see Dozy, , Supplément, I, p. 235. Prof. P. Shinar has brought this to my attention for which I am most grateful. He also directed me to Idhārī, Ibn, al-Bayīn al-Mughrib fī-Akhbīr Mulūk al-Andalus wa-l-Maghrib, eds. Colin, G. S. and Lévi-Provençal, É. (Leiden, 1948), p. 6, where Ibn al-‘Idhīrī quotes another Maghribī historian, Ibn Ḥammīda al-Ṣinhājī (d. 628/1231) who uses the word; jawf to mean “north”; see also Jubayr, Ibn, op. cit., p. 232, where jawf means “north”.
61 See the detailed and important research on the dimensions of the Temple Mount in the Middle Ages by Van Berchem, M., Matériaux pour un Corpus Inscriptionum Arabicorum, Syrie du Sud, Vol. II (Jerusalem, Ḥaram Le Caire 1922), pp. 84–99 (no. 163). Al-‘Abdarī's work was not known to Van Berchem; al-‘Abdarī copied this text concerning the dimensions of the Haram from al-Bakrī. Nāṣir-i-Khusraw, who visited Jerusalem in 1047, describes an inscription in the northern wall of the Temple Mount which gives the dimensions of the Ḥaram as 704 × 455 cubits; al-Harawī also reports seeing this (?) inscription, in 1173, but gives the dimensions as 700 × 455; see Van Berchem, loc. cit.; al-Bakrī's description is a little later than that of Nāṣir, since he completed his book in 1068.
62 Gibb, , Travels, I, p. 80.
63 Al-‘Abdarī, pp. 2311.11–232 1.25 (= Ibn Baṭṭūṭa, I, pp. 126 1.1–128 1.1).
64 Gibb, , op. cit., p. 81 n. 48.
* An earlier version of this paper was read at the Yad Izhak Ben-Zvi Institute, Jerusalem, 1984.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.
Usage data cannot currently be displayed