JIA 1.

1 (2014) 75104
doi: 10.1558/jia.v1i1.75

Journal of Islamic Archaeology ISSN (print) 2051-9710

Journal of Islamic Archaeology ISSN (print) 2051-9729

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in

Medieval Cairo
Iman R. Abdulfattah
Independent scholar
i.abdulfattah@gmail.com
The acquisition, trade and confiscation of relics of the Prophet Muammad during the Medieval period is well documented in the primary sources. Such relics, from the impression of
his feet in stone to artifacts believed to be his personal possessions, are prominently displayed in Egypt. The purpose of this article is to examine the history of footprints and other
relics of the Prophet Muammad associated with three buildings in Cairo that date to the
Mamluk period: Rib al-thr (707 AH/1307 CE); the Funerary Complex of Qaytby (877879
AH/14721474 CE); and the Funerary Complex of al-Ghur (908911 AH/15031505 CE). The
functions associated with these buildings vary, yet in all cases the main purpose of the foundation is to commemorate a deceased person and/or the relics of the Prophet. Although the
Prophet never traveled to Egypt during his lifetime, the presence of his footprints and other
effects in Cairo raises several questions. First, how and when did these artifacts arrive in
Cairo? Second, does their arrival several centuries after the Prophets death, and subsequent
collecting and displaying, raise questions of intent and motivation? Third, were there specific events that precipitated their arrival during the Mamluk period? Finally, what, if any,
is the significance of the placement of Prophets relics in these buildings?

Introduction: Vestiges of the Prophet Muammad

As the most revered and loved man by all Muslims, the Prophet Muammad is believed
by some to have left an impression of his feet in stone when he walked. Today, these
imprints are on display in mosques, museums and shrines in Jerusalem, Damascus, Taif,
Istanbul, the Indian Subcontinent and Egypt (Wheleer 2006, 7880; Hasan 1993, 335336);
and are often accompanied by other memorabilia that were part of the Prophets everyday life, such as his cup/bowl, shoes, cloak, kohl applicator, pencil, awl, turban, staff,
and his bed. Although relic is commonly used to refer to such artifacts in English, athar
al-nab (pl. al-thr al-nabawiyya) is the phrase used in Arabic to indicate effects, traces or
vestiges of the Prophet Muammad. Unlike their Christian counterparts, relics in Islam
are not actual bodily artifacts because of the prohibition placed on the mutilation of the
body, disturbing the grave of the deceased, and the special attention given to preserving
Keywords: Veneration, Prophet Muammad, Relics, Mamluk, Ottoman, Cairo
Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014, Office 415, The Workstation, 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, S1 2BX

76

Iman R. Abdulfattah

the integrity of the remains of a virtuous figure (Meri 2010, 98; Taylor 1999, 5455); the
exception to this rule is usayn ibn Ali ibn Ab lib (461 AH/626680 CE), the Prophets
grandson, who was killed and beheaded in the Battle of Karbala in Iraq, and whose head
is believed by some to be preserved in the Mosque-Shrine of usayn in Cairo. Consequently, there are no physical remains of the Prophet that are preserved aside from his
parings and strands of his hair, some of which were dispersed by his companions (aba)
or buried with them. Strands of the Prophets hair can be found today in several locations
throughout the Islamic world, including Istanbul, Aleppo, Egypt, and the Indian Subcontinent (Wheeler 2006, 7275; Zwemer 1948, 5253).
Many of these relics began to surface during the Medieval period in contexts where
they were never present before, with the buildings that housed them turning into holy
sites, shrines and places of veneration. Yet, most sources available on these relics, be
it impressions of the Prophets footprint (qadam rasl) left in stone or the above-mentioned personal effects, primarily focus on their use as devotional or cult objects (Meri
2010, 99103), their role as representations of the Prophets presence, or mediators of
prophetic blessing (baraka). These sources do not specifically address their authenticity,
nor do they shed light on their sudden appearance. In a short article on the subject of
relic worship in Islam, Goldziher (1911, 305) referred to the trafficking of such mementos
during the seventh century AH/thirteenth century CE and the duplicitous environment
around which they suddenly arose, were traded and multiplied. That said, and given the
multiplicity of prophetic relics from this period on, it appeared not to matter to the collectors that these relics might have been fabricated; it was simply more important that
artifacts of the Prophet existed and were available for circulation.
These relics can also be seen as an extension of the political and expansionist agendas
of the rulers who collected them and who used them as a ...demarcation of territorial
and civilizational boundaries (Wheeler 2006, 78). However, despite their popularity in
medieval Islam, there was opposition to these material practices of devotion that was
rooted in the teachings of Ahmad ibn Abd al-Halim ibn Taymiyah (661728 AH/1263
1328 CE), a Syrian theologian who was a staunch literalist and viewed various traditions
in popular religionincluding visiting graves (ziyrat al-qubr) and Sufismas heretical
and innovations (bida), because such practices are not supported by scripture (Ibn Taymiyah, Iqti al-ir al-mustaqm, 312344).
The most famous relic attributed to the Prophet is the footprint currently in the Dome
of the Rock in Jerusalem (72 AH/691 CE). In his Tarikh, the geographer al-Yaqubi (d. 284
AH/897 CE) stated that the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik (r. 6586 AH/685705 CE) built
the dome around the rock containing an impression of the Prophets footprint and from
which he ascended to the heavens (miraj) (al-Yaqubi, Tarikh al-Yaqubi, 2: 261), providing the earliest identification of this footprint and a belief that was advanced by later
visitors. The Persian traveler Nasir-i Khusraw (394481 AH/10041088 CE) recorded a different attribution. Prompted by a dream-vision, he embarked on a seven-year journey
from Merv to Egypt, passing through Jerusalem in 439 AH/1047 CE where he visited the
Dome of the Rock. He described Jerusalem and the architecture of the dome, informing
us that the rock at the center is bluish in color and had never been stepped on by anyone.
Closer to the qibla are the impressions which he was told were left by Isaac when he was

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

77

a small child (Khusraw, Book of Travels (Safarnama), trans. Thackston, 40). Nasir-i Khusraws attribution links these footprints with the biblical story in which God commands
Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac on Temple Mount.1 Regardless of its provenance, the
footprint(s) was famous enough to have an image of it illustrated on Ayyubid-period
pilgrimage scrolls of the sixth and seventh century AH/twelfth and thirteenth century
CE.2 Aside from the these tangible relics, the most important athar al-nab in Islam are
the recorded sayings, deeds and teachings of the Prophet, the Hadith, which continue to
serve as a tool for understanding the Quran as revealed to him and are, therefore, considered the second most relevant textual source after the scripture. The survival of such
teachings, collected and transcribed posthumously during the second and third centuries
AH/eighth and ninth centuries CE, became a source of the Prophets veneration (Meri
2010, 104), because the Hadith provided the foundation on which the Prophet served as a
living example for all Muslims and allowed his message to live eternally.
The purpose of this article is to examine the history of footprints and other relics of
the Prophet associated with three buildings in Cairo that date to the Mamluk period,
primarily because their setting is architecturally significant and their genealogy can be
easily traced using primary sources: Rib al-thr (Convent of the [Prophets] Relics; 707
AH/1307 CE) located south of Fustat and called the Mosque Athar al-Nab (1073 AH/1662
CE) today (Figure 1); the Funerary Complex of Qaytby in the Northern Cemetery (877879
AH/14721474 CE) (Figure 2); and the Funerary Complex of al-Ghur (908911 AH/1503
1505 CE) located in the heart of Historic Cairo (Figure 3).
The Cairo material
There are numerous relics of the Prophet that are specifically associated with Egypt. The
earliest of these may be the ones reported to have been brought to Cairo by the Fatimid
Caliph al-kim (r. 386411 AH/9961021 CE).3 Foremost among the extant prophetic relics are the kohl applicator, pencil, shirt, stick, added to which are two hairs from his
beard that were transferred from the Mausoleum of al-Ghur (909910 AH/15041505 CE)
to the Mosque-Shrine of al-usayn in the late thirteenth century AH/nineteenth century
CE (Taymur 2005, 4344). Ahmad Taymur Pasha, author of al-thr al-Nabawiyya, a monograph on the relics of the Prophet in Egypt, also referred to footprints in the Mosque of
1. Perhaps the oldest sacred footprints are those of Abraham preserved by the precinct of the Kaba.
According to Q 2:125128, the foundation of the Kaba was laid by Abraham (Ibrhm) and Ishmael (Isml). When Abraham was ordered to construct the Kaba impressions of both his feet
left a mark, which are now preserved in front of the entrance to the sanctuary. Called maqm
Ibrhm (station of Abraham) this spot was deemed a place suitable for prayer (M. J. Kister, Mam
Ibrhm, EI2, 6: 104).
2. A scroll dated to 608 AH/12111212 CE, now in the collection of the Museum of Turkish and Islamic
Arts in Istanbul (TEM 4091), includes representations of all the major stations of the hajj in Mecca,
Medina and Jerusalem, including the Dome of the Rock and the Prophets footprint (Aksoy and
Milstein 2000, 113114, fig. 4).
3. Caliph al-kim is said to have attempted to steal the remains of the Prophet, and caliphs Ab
Bakr (r. 1113 AH/ 632634 CE) and Umar (r. 1323 AH/634644 CE) from Medina to reinter them
in three shrines he built between Cairo and Fustat, presumably to attract pilgrims and reorient the
Muslim world to the Fatimid capital. In 400 AH/10091010 CE, al-kim also reportedly brought to
Cairo personal effects of Jafar al-Sdiq (83148 AH/702765 CE) from his home in Medina (Sayyid
1998, 356359; Walker 2003, 369).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

78

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 1. Exterior of the Mosque Athar al-Nab (photo by author).

Sayyid Amad al-Badaw in the Delta city of Tanta (Figure 4) (K. Vollers and E. Littmann,
Amad al-Badaw, EI2, 1: 280), and the Shrine of Uways al-Qaran in the village of Atfih
in Middle Egypt (Taymur 1955, 6162).
Although I will focus on the Cairo examples, the footprints in the provinces merit some
discussion as they are excellent examples of the mimetic practices that evolved around the
veneration of the Prophet during the Medieval period. While several secondary sources
refer to the footprints on display in the Mosque of Sayyid Amad al-Badaw (T. W. Arnold,
adam Sharf, EI2, 4: 367; Taymur 1955, 6162), none of the English-language sources
include the Uways example in the corpus of footprints. The shrine of Uways is dedicated
to a companion (ab) of the Prophet who was killed during the Battle of iffn in Syria
(37 AH/657 CE) while fighting on the side of Ali ibn Ab lib, the Prophets cousin and
son-in-law; he was a companion who never met the Prophet in person, but is said to have
communicated with him by means of telepathy (J. Baldick, Uways al-aran, EI2: 10, 957).4
Yet, he was not mentioned by any of the Prophets biographers, and his existence was questioned by many of the earliest jurists in Islam. Nevertheless, Uways is a venerated figure in
Sufism with tombs in Syria and Uzbekistan as well as Atfih (J. Baldick, Uways al-aran,
4. The dream sequence for which Uways became famous serves as an interesting antecedent of
several dream-visions associated with the Prophet that will be recounted later in this article.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

79

Figure 2. Exterior of the Funerary Complex of Qaytby (photo by author).

EI2, 10: 957). The shrine in Atfih is very modest and befitting of a provincial village with no
long-standing historical significance. A cenotaph in memory of Uways stands at the center
of the mausoleum, but the footprint is housed in another mausoleum-like structure that
is quite a distance away and apparently unrelated to the mausoleum dedicated to Uways.
The footprint preserved there is rather undefined with no clear contours suggesting the
imprint of a foot, leading one to conclude that the footprint preserved in Atfih is not a
trace of the Prophets presence whose pedigree can be established, but one whose existence is informed by its more famous cousins in Cairo. It is a vernacular marker, indirectly
connected to an oratory built so people in the local community could make vows and pray
for Uwayss intercession.
The footprints in the shrine of Sayyid Amad al-Badaw (Figure 4) (596675 AH/1199
1276 CE) in the Nile Delta follow a more traditional route, for they are linked to the most
popular and venerated saint in Muslim Egypt, whose ancestry has been traced back to
Ali ibn Ab lib (Vollers and Littmann, Amad al-Badaw, EI2, 1: 280; Mayeur-Jaouen,
an, EI2, 10: 189). Prone to having visions that summoned him to various places
within the Dar al-Islam, it was one such vision which brought Amad al-Badaw to Tanta
in 634 AH/12361237 CE; and it was in Tanta where Amad al-Badaw fully retreated into
a devotional life and was revered because of his lineage to the Prophet (sayyid) to the
extent that he was said to have been worshipped by the Mamluk Sultan al-Zhir Baybars
al-Bunduqdr (r. 658676 AH/12601277 CE) (Vollers and Littmann, Amad al-Badaw,
EI2, 1: 280). It was upon Sayyid al-Badaws death that his followers built a mosque surrounding his tomb, providing a space for his veneration and the beginning of the tradition
of mass pilgrimage to Tanta, especially during the Mamluk period (Vollers and Littmann,
Amad al-Badaw, EI2, 1: 280; Mayeur-Jaouen, an, EI2, 10: 189). The impression of

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

80

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 3. Floor plan of the Funerary Complex of al-Ghur: mausoleum (top) and madrasah (bottom), (by Nicholas Warner).

the Prophets feet are preserved on a single stone in the northwest corner of the main
dome chamber, and seem to have been added during the modern period (Mayeur-Jaouen,
an, EI2, 10: 189);5 other relics attributed to the Prophet, including his hairs, can be
found in a room off the main dome chamber (Figure 5).
What can be deduced from these two cases is the strong tradition of replicating footprints to lend sanctity, in both instances to the enhancement of individuals who were
directly or indirectly connected to the Prophet and acquired an exalted spiritual status
especially among Sufis.
5.

The original shrine was rebuilt and renovated several times as can be attested by the dedication
inscription found above the main entrance to the mosque: This blessed mosque was built during the
reign of the Khedive of Egypt, Abbas Pasha I, in the year 1267 AH/1851 CE, and it was restored and
improved during the reign of Khedive Abbas Hilm II in 1320 AH/1902 CE. Khedive Abbas Hilm I ruled
Egypt between 12641270 AH/18481854 CE and Abbas Hilm II between 13091333 AH/18921914 CE.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

81

Figure 4. Mosque of Sayyid Amad al-Badaw, footprints of the Prophet in the main dome chamber (photo by author).

The representation of feet was quite common in antiquity, particularly in Egypt

where bare or sandaled examples are found incised in ancient temples.6 Stone slabs covering the roof of Khonsu Temple at Karnak in Luxor, for example, are filled with such
votive footprints that are accompanied by inscriptions left by temple priest (Figure 6)
(Jacquet-Gordon 2003, 35). Whether these footprints served a precedent for the medieval prototypes does not fall within the scope of this article; they are only cited to illustrate
the existence of a tradition of copying footprints long before the arrival of Islam in Egypt.
The veneration and collection of such objects is not surprising in the medieval Egyptian
context, as one can also see these ritualistic practices as an extension of the shrines dedicated to members of the Prophets family (ahl al-bayt), all of which are connected to the
cemeteries of al-Qarafa. Conveniently founded on a plateau bound by the first Islamic
settlement of Fustat to the west, and the natural barriers of the Muqattam Hills and
al-abash Lake to the east and south,7 al-Qarafa interacted with the city in the Medieval
6. The Indian subcontinent, where shrines housing footprints of the Prophet are common, also had a
long and well-established pre-Islamic tradition of venerating footprints of the Buddha and Vishnu
impressed in stone (Hasan 1993, 336337).
7. This network of cemeteries gradually expanded north with the successive founding of the capitals

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

82

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 5. Mosque of Sayyid Amad al-Badaw, relics of the Prophet in room off main dome chamber (photo by author).

period through a series of processions that terminated at the cemetery with visitations to
specific shrines. Eventually occupying the final resting place of many important figures,
al-Qarafa ...held a special place in the sacred geography of Cairo. It contained the citys
largest concentrations of sites of visitation, such as shrines of saints (wals), relatives and
descendants of the Prophet, sites that were believed to have special healing powers and
answered prayers (al-Ibrashi 2006, 271).. It was, thus, the most suitable place for ziyra,
or the pious visitation of a holy place. Al-Qarafa was the place where visitors (zuwwr), by
virtue of supplication to Allh via the deceased holy persons, would receive divine baraka
to efficaciously fulfill the desired request (Meri, Ziyra, EI2, 11: 523).
Patronage of the Ban inn family
Possibly the first reference to actual relics in Egypt attributed to the Prophet himself
were those housed in Rib al-thr. Several chronicles of the Mamluk and Ottoman periods mention the Rib al-thr and its relics, as well as the practices associated with their
visitation. One of the earliest references to the rib and its content is by the biographer
al-Safadi (696764 AH/12961363 CE), who mentions a fragment of the Prophets spear
and bowl, awl, tweezers, and kohl applicator, relics that were passed down from one generation to the next and whose genealogy could be traced back to the Prophet himself.8
of al-Qataii, al-Askar and al-Qahira, to include what is now referred to as the City of the Dead or
Northern Cemetery.
8. Although the historian al- Maqrizi (Khitat, 4: 801-804) does repeat some of the details previously
cited by al- afad, with regards to the content of the relics he only mentions a fragment of wood
and iron. What happened to the other relics and any accounts of the reduction in the collection is
not mentioned.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

83

Figure 6. Votive footprints incised on the roof of Khansu Temple at Karnak in Luxor (photo by
author).

This small cache of relics was purchased for 60,000 silver dirhams from the tribe of Ban
Ibrhm in Yanbu, a major Red Sea port in the province of Medina (al-Safadi, Kitb al-wf
bi-al-wafayt, 1: 217218; al-Maqrizi, Khitat, 4: 801802). The rib was commissioned by
al-Sib Tj al-Dn Muammad ibn al- Sib Fakhr al-Dn Muammad ibn al-Sib Bah
al- Dn Ali ibn inn al-Mar (640707 AH/12421307 CE), the son and grandson of the
chief viziers of Egypt during the Bahri Mamluk period, to house the relics of the Prophet
Muammad. It was built overlooking the Nile to the south of Fustat, and near a lush garden that is close to al-abash Lake called Bustn al-Mashq. Tj al-Dn died before the
completion of the rib, but left instructions for the jurist (faqh) Izz al-Dn ibn Maskn to
finish it from the revenue of the garden (waqf). Ibn Maskn continued with the construction of the rib for a short period of time until his own death, and construction was completed by Tj al-Dns son, Nasr al-Dn Muammad. From al-Maqrizis (766845 AH/1364
1442 CE) seminal work on the planning of the city of Cairo and its monuments, we learn
of two Mamluk-period restorations: Sultan al-Ashraf Shabn (r. 764778 AH/13631376
CE) added a madrasah for Shafi jurists who received a monthly salary from the waqf;
and Sultan al-Zhir Barqq (r. 784791 AH/13821389 CE and 792801 AH/13901399 CE)
endowed it with a quay on the Nile to facilitate access to its premises (al-Maqrizi, Khitat,
4: 802; Behrens-Abouseif 1994, 236).
Al-Safadi and al-Maqrizi provide more details regarding Tj al-Dns pedigree. The Ban
inn were a family of highly esteemed and powerful viziers who were very charitable,
and gave generously to Sufis and the needy (al- Safadi, Kitb al-wf bi-al-wafayt, 1: 217;
al-Maqrizi, Khitat, 4: 474476, 802; al-Maqrizi, Kitb al-muqaff al-kabr, 7: 111). Originally
from Fustat, they commissioned several pious and charitable foundations in the area. For

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

84

Iman R. Abdulfattah

example, Bah al-Dn Ali (603677 AH/12071279 CE), the patriarch of the family and
a descendant of a Christian,9 was made vizier by Sultan al-Zhir Baybars al-Bunduqdr
in 659 AH/1261 CE; while vizier he built a rib near al-abash Lake in 645 AH/1269
1270 CE and a highly regarded madrasah at Zuqaq al-Qanadl in Fustat called al-Sibiya
al-Bahiya (al-Maqrizi, Khitat, 4: 473). The Ban inn supervised the madrasah and
taught there until it ceased to function, was abandoned and demolished by the amir Tj
al-Dn al-Shawbak al-Damishq, governor of Cairo and Superintendent of Royal Buildings, in 818 AH/1415 CE (al- Safadi, Kitb al-wf bi-al-wafayt, 22: 30; al-Maqrizi, Khitat,
4: 473, n. 3). Bah al-Dns son, Fakhr al-Dn (622668 AH/12251270 CE), built a rib in
al-Qarafa in 668 AH/1270 CE overlooking al-abash Lake and not so far from his fathers
rib (al-afad, Kitb al-wf bi-al-wafayt, 4: 185; al-Maqrizi, Khitat, 4: 795; al-Maqrizi, Kitb
al-muqaff al-kabr, 6: 335). From these biographical sketches we learn that all three members of the Ban inn family commissioned and supported the construction of pious
foundations in and around Fustat and in proximity to al-Qarafa.
The background of the Ban inn family is also quite relevant for several reasons.
Firstly, these viziers held office during a period of significant turmoil and transition, for
it was under the leadership of Sultan al-Zhir Baybars al-Bunduqdr and his immediate successors that the Bahri Mamluks defeated the two greatest threats in the eastern
Mediterraneanthe Mongols and Crusaders. Consequently, following the fall of Baghdad to the Mongols in 656 AH/1258 CE, the Caliphate was transferred to Cairo in 659
AH/1261 CE, thereby providing the Mamluk sultans and and their court with the added
incentive to construct many spectacular buildings. Under the rule of the Bahri Mamluks,
Cairo witnessed an impressive construction phase that included several religious and
secular buildings, monumental structures such as the Funerary Complex of Qalwn (683
AH/12841285 CE), the Madrasah of al-Nir Muammad (694703 AH/12951303 CE) and
the Khanqa of Baybars al-Jashankr (706710 AH/13071310 CE), all of which were meant
to emphasize courtly patronage and dominate the cityscape. Such religious foundations
were the focal points around which Cairo developed, and the massive building activity
and nature of the foundations sponsored by the Ban inn family could be interpreted
as a visual reflection of their political and spiritual ambitions, and position.
Relevant to the general discussion on patronage, shrines and ziyra, the cemeteries surrounding the city were especially developed during the Mamluk period and transformed
the urban landscape, as evidenced by four surviving ziyra guidebooksout of at least
twentythat date to the Ayyubid and Mamluk periods respectively.10 These guidebooks
were not solely intended for visitors interested in experiencing the tombs of saints to
receive the baraka of the holy, as the stories and hagiographic material that formed the
content were also used as tools to transport the reader to the cemetery. Of the four,
9. Hence the attribution of Hanna, a Christian name, in the secondary sources.
10. They are al-Muwaffaq al-Dn ibn Uthmans Murshid al-zuwwr il qubr al-abrr (d. ca. 615 AH/1218
CE); Majd al-Dn Muammad ibn Abd Allh al-Nasikhs Misbh al-dayj wa-ghawth al-rj wa-kahf
al-lj (d. ca. 696 AH/1297 CE); Shams al-Dn Muammad ibn Muammad al-Zayyts al-Kitb
al-kawkib al-sayyrah f tartb al-ziyrah f al-qarfatayn al-kubra wa-al-ughra (d. ca. 814 AH/1412 CE);
and Nur al-Dn al-Sakhaws Tuhfat al-ahbb wa bughya al-tulln fi al-khitat wa al-mazart wa al-tarjim
wa al-biq al-mubarakt (d. ca. 889 AH/1484 CE) (al-Ibrashi 2006, 271; Ohtoshi 2006, 301302; Taylor
1999, 229230).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

85

Ibn al-Nasikhs Misbh al-dayj guidebook remains unpublished with a surviving manuscript in the National Library and Archives in Cairo (Dar al-Kutub MS 87 Buldn Taymur)
(al-Ibrashi 2006, 273). This guidebook was dedicated to the same Tj al-Dn Muammad
ibn inn who commissioned Rib al-thr (Ohtoshi 2006, 301).11 What is especially
noteworthy is an anecdote concerning the Ban inn family plot in al-Qarafa al-Sughra,
or the Lesser Qarafa, located near Imam al-Shafis (150204 AH/767820 CE) grand
mausoleum (608 AH/1211 CE),12 one of the most revered sacred spaces in all of Egypt.
When Fakhr al-Dn was buried there, Imam Muammad ibn Sad al-Br (ca. 608696
AH/12111297 CE), composer of the Qadat al-Burda (Mantle Ode, henceforth referred to
as Burda), a famous panegyric written in praise of the Prophet, stood and recited to those
gathered in the mausoleum of Ban inn the following verses:
Oh! Muammad ibn Ali sleep comfortably
With the favor given in your hands
Still, you were our support over time until
We were overcome by the hand of the One who is benevolent to you
You were good to us in life
May God be good to you in death
(al-afad, Kitb al-wf bi-al-wafayt, 4: 186;
al-Maqrizi, Kitb al-muqaff al-kabr, 6: 335)

These two facts are quite telling because they shed light on the Ban inns interest
in patronage and the concentration of their building program around Fustat and al-Qarafa. To understand their implications, two additional facts need to be introduced: Imam
al-Shafis tomb was first built by the Ayyubid Sultan Sal al-Dn (Saladin; r. 564589
AH/11691193 CE) in 576 AH/1180 CE, followed by a larger mausoleum that was added
by his nephew Sultan al-Malik al-Kmil (r. 615635 AH/12181238 CE) in 608 AH/1211 CE
(Taylor 1999, 20); it was the epicenter of al-Qarafa al-Sughra, a sacred space that is until
today the largest freestanding shrine in all of Cairo. Sal al-Dn endowed the mausoleum
with a madrasah that served as a symbol of the spiritual rebirth of Sunni Islam after two
centuries of Fatimid Shii rule, a gesture befitting the Imam al-Shafis role as the founder
of one of the major Sunni schools of Islamic law and the official one of Egypt. Thus, while
the location of the Ban inn family plot near Imam al-Shafis mausoleum is an indication of the familys status and influence, it could also be interpreted as a reflection
of their desire to secure blessings and petition the Imams intervention.13 Secondly, the
relationship between Imam al-Br and the Ban inn family was not limited to the
eulogy of Fakhr al-Dn Muammad.
In his article on al-Br, the late Victor Danner stated that Baha al-Dn Ibn inn was
key in ensuring the Burdas success and instrumental in making al-Br famous (Dan11. Ibn al-Nasikh served as an advisor to Tj al-Dn (referred to as Tj al-Dn Ab Abdallah ibn
Muammad by Taylor), which explains why his guidebook was dedicated to the vizier who was
known to have visited al-Qarafa regularly (Taylor 1999, 230, 233).
12. A brief description of the Ban inn family plot and a dream encounter featuring Baha al-Dn can
be found in Ibn al-Zayyts (Kitb al-kawkib, 106) cemetery guidebook.
13. From al-Maqrizis biographical profile of Fakhr al-Dn we learn that he studied Islamic law (fiqh)
according to the Shafii school in his fathers madrasah, suggesting that the Ban inn family
were Shafiis (al-Maqrizi, Kitb al-muqaff al-kabr, 6: 334335; Taymur 1955, 29).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

86

Iman R. Abdulfattah

ner 1987, 43, 48). Unfortunately, Danner does not cite any primary sources to support
this claim; however, it is known from al-Brs own introduction to the Burda that when
Baha al-Dn requested a copy of the poem, of which he heard lots of praise, he ...vowed
that he would not listen to it unless he was standing, barefoot with his head uncovered; he
loved to listen to it often and enjoy its blessing, he and his family (al-Safadi, Kitb al-wf
bi-al-wafayt, 3: 112113; al-Maqrizi, Kitb al-muqaff al-kabr, 5: 663; Stetkevych 2011).
The Burda is the most revered poem ever written in praise of the Prophet and one of
the most significant poems written in the Arabic language, from which enumerable commentaries, responses, translations and imitations were generated (Stetkevych 2010, 70).
The Burda is a supplicatory panegyric ode that was composed during a moment of crisis in
al-Brs life, after the Prophet appeared to him in a dream and cured the poet of paralysis by wrapping him in his mantle (burda) (Abou-Khatwa 2009, 45; Stetkevych 2006, 145).
Meri (2010, 112113) adds to this by explaining the historical significance of the Prophets
mantle, where like the Sasanian kings and Byzantine emperors, the burda represented
the Prophets power, authority and person; more importantly, for the Abbasid caliphs
the burda was ...a symbol of the Prophets protection which he conferred upon them his
baraka. One of the main purposes of the poem was to foster a relationship with Allh
through love for the Prophet, and devotion to the Prophet by seeking his presence is one
of the most important tenets of Sufism. Believers in the power of the poem attached rituals to specific verses. For example, the recitation and inscription of certain verses on the
walls of a house had healing properties, while others were used as amulets to remedy/
rectify difficult situations (Abou-Khatwa 2009, 56-57; Stetkevych 2006, 181). Stetkevych
(2010, 83) suggests that the Burda is efficacious three-fold because ...the poem generated
many blessings: a dream-vision of the Prophet, a miraculous cure, its mysterious revelation to, or witnessing by, a Sufi adept. Like other relics of the Prophet, including the
Hadith, there is a performative aspect to the Burda: just as baraka can be attained by participating in rituals associated with his footprints, supplications to the Prophet through
the medium of a dream will also yield positive results, a miraculous cure upon being
draped in the Prophets mantle. Ultimately, al-Brs ode itself took on the qualities of
the Prophets curative mantle.
There are further implications that can be drawn from these facts, namely a familial
interest in the Prophet on the part of the Ban inn, be it the commissioning of a rib
to house relics associated with him (Tj al-Dn) or by playing an instrumental role in
the popularity of the most famous ode honoring him (Bah al-Dn). One can see this as
another example of securing the presence of the Prophet, for his personal effects (thr)
are a form of mediated presence, just as the verses of the Burda are a textual manifestation of the Prophets unmediated, but real presence by appearing in al-Brs dream to
fulfill his wish for a cure. Both are efficacious devotional objects that carried prophetic
blessing and are believed to bring good fortune to the pious believer. In this regard, the
Ban inn family, through their actions, can be viewed as receivers and mediators of
baraka: they appreciated the power of baraka as confirmed by their collecting of the relics
of the Prophet and possible patronage of the Burda, but also reciprocated by affording the
less fortunate with an opportunity to cultivate a life of devotion.
The success of this undertaking is apparent from the fact that in his monumental Rila,

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

87

recounting his travels from Tangier to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina for pilgrimage, Ibn Baa (ca. 703779 AH/13041377 CE) passed through Cairo in 726 AH/1326
CE, visited Rib al-thr and recorded the existence of a kohl applicator, standard, awl,
and fragment of the Prophets spear for which Tj al-Dn paid 100,000 silver dirhams.
Ibn Baa spent the night in the rib, located then on the hajj route, because it was
endowed to provide food for all learned travelers (Ibn Baa, 1997, 223; Taymur 1955,
3436). This would, perhaps, make the rib an important station for pilgrims en route to
the Hijaz, thereby allowing them to seek prophetic baraka before and/or after performing one of the most important rites in Islam.
From Rib al-thr to Athar al-Nab
The mosque as it appears today is an Ottoman construction called Athar al-Nab (1073
AH/1662 CE), (Figure 7). It has a very simple exterior, a ribbed side dome, and minaret
with a tier of muqarnas. The dome in particular has an archaized appearance that harks
back to, but not as sophisticated as, the carved stone domes of the late Mamluk period.
The plan is also typical of Mamluk-period funerary complexes that combined a prayer
area and attached dome chamber (Figure 8). There are also vestiges of the mosques Mamluk past in the form of six columns. The south and north columns of the second arcade
in the prayer hall have an octagonal shaft and an incomplete inscription that reads, Has
ordered the restoration of this blessed place, our lord the Sultan al-Malik...14 Four other
columns from the rib are in the collection of the Museum of Islamic Art in Cairo (MIA
37203723).15 The information provided by al-Maqrizi combined with the inscriptions on
these six columns informs us that four Mamluk sultans made endowments or restorations to this shrine: sultans al-Ashraf Shabn and al-Zhir Barqq in the eighth century
AH/fourteenth century CE; Sultan Faraj ibn Barqq in the ninth century AH/fifteenth
century CE; and Sultan Qansuh al-Ghur in the tenth century AH/sixteenth century CE
(Figures 9 and 10).
There are no Quranic inscriptions adorning the buildings exterior, but the surviving inscriptions inside are quite telling. A foundation inscription (Figure 11) in Ottoman
Turkish is located in a rectangular panel on the south wall of the prayer hall:
14. Mention of the Mosque of Athar al-Nab appears in the bulletins of the Comit de Conservation des
Monuments de lArt Arabe. When the mosque was surveyed by the Comit in 1900, four columns
with an octagonal shaft were found, one partially embedded in the ground and inscribed with ...
al-Nir Nir al-Dunya wa al-Dn Faraj... (Comit 1900, 121, 123).
15. The inscription on the octagonal shafts of MIA 3720 and 3721 complete the inscription on the
columns in situ, ...al-Nir Nir al-Dunya wa al-Dn Faraj, son of the late Sultan Barqq (r. 801
815 AH/13991405 CE) (Wiet, 1971, 7980, Cat. No. 107). MIA 3722 and 3723, two columns with a
round shaft, are inscribed with Glory to our Lord Sultan al-Ghur, may his victory be glorified.
Gaston Wiet, Director of the MIA from 1926-1951, surmised that al-Ghurs restorations were
completed in 910 AH/1504 CE, when he planned to transfer relics from the mosque to his tomb
(Wiet, 1971, 103104, Cat. No. 129). It might seem strange that al-Ghur would restore the rib
at the same time that he transferred the relics; however, by the start of the tenth century AH/
sixteenth century CE the rib had become a relic by association as the place housing important
memorabilia of the Prophet. In this context, one can interpret al-Ghurs restoration as a means
to offset his removal of the artifacts. The transfer of these columns to the MIA was recorded by
the Comit in 1908, when the existence of seven columns was noted in the ruined mosque, four of
which were of high quality and worthy of display in the Museum (Comit 1909, 52).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

88

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 7. Exterior of the Mosque Athar al-Nab, detail of the dome and minaret (photo by Mamdouh M. Sakr).

God has turned the virtuous nature of Sultan Muammad Ghz [Mehmet IV; r.
10581099 AH/16481687 CE] towards pious works. God Almighty has inspired
his sincere heart.
He built this mosque above the Footprint and named the sacred place for its
founder, Ibrhm,16 who is the just governor of the kingdom of Egypt.
He is the humblest servant of the sovereign of the age. In this manner he
brought to life a work of art in his name. Rubbing his face on the likeness of
the footsteps of the Sultan,
may he be the recipient of prayers of intercession for judgment day. Praying
justly, Zak said this chronogram, in this place a lofty mosque without peer
has been founded. (Abu al-Amayim 2003, 210)

The foundation inscription provides the name of the surviving Ottoman mosques
builder, Ibrhm Pasha al-Shaytn, who is reported to have prayed in the Mosque of Athar
al-Nab on Friday, 12 Shawwl in 1073 AH/1663 CE, when, in conjunction with his visit,
he expanded and restored the mosque, built a wall to protect it from the flood waters of
Nile, and endowed it with money and land (Taymur 1955, 37, 50).17 A second inscription
16. A double reference to Ibrhm the Ottoman Pasha, and Ibrhm the Patriarch and legendary builder
of the Kaba.
17. Ibrhm Pasha al-Shaytn al-Diftardr was the governor (pasha) of Egypt from 10711074 AH/1661
1664 CE and Sultan Muammads son-in-law (Ibn Abd al-Ghan, Awa al-ishrt, 1978, 159160;

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

89

Figure 8. Floor plan of the Mosque of Athar al-Nab (by Nicholas Warner).

above the southern gate of the mosques enclosure wall reads:

A water channel was made in the name of Sultan Muammad; a water dispensary
was built beside it. May the thirsty, while drinking the water provided by him,
say many prayers for the glory of this sultan. When it was completed Hatif
said its date: This pious work has been made suitable for the name of Sultan
Muammad. In the year 1077 AH/1667 CE.
(Mantran 1972, 214; Abu al-Amayim 2003, 210)
Attached to the prayer hall is a domed shrine whose walls are clad with blue-and-white
glazed tiles. On the east wall are two niches, one is a mihrab and to its right another
containing a footprint in stone. A third Ottoman Turkish inscription sits in a panel above
the footprint: This shrine was renewed by Ibrhm Pasha, may God prolong his life,
above the Footprint (Taymur 1955, 50; Abu al-Amayim 2003, 210) (Figures 12 and 13).
Taymur Pasha, who seems to have seen the mosque while preparing his monograph,
refers to two footprints and describes the stone holding the impressions as being reddish (Taymur 1955, 50); however, what is visible today is one footprint in a white-colored stone. The footprint(s) must have been installed prior to the restoration attributed
Behrens-Abouseif 1994, 125).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

90

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 9. Detail of the column added by Sultan Faraj ibn Barqq to Rib al-thr in the ninth
century AH/fifteenth century CE. The column is currently in the collection of the MIA
in Cairo under Inventory Number 3721 (photo by Sandro Vannini).

to Ibrhm Pasha since two of the inscriptions imply that the mosque was built around
it. What can be extrapolated from this is the sudden arrival or deposit of a footprint(s)
attributed to the Prophet in circumstances that are unclear, preceding the rebuilding
and subsequent name change of the mosque that occurred under the patronage of the
Ottoman governor of Egypt.
Evliy elebi (10201095 AH/16111684 CE), the Turkish polyglot traveler, visited Cairo
in 1082 AH/1672 CE and lived there for around nine years during which he visited the
footprint. He provided a detailed description of a large property that included a beautifully decorated mosque, a famous rib accommodating 100 married Sufis of the Khalwati
order, a dome chamber built above the footprint of the Prophet, and pavilions for pilgrims closer to the Nile. The complex was sponsored by Ibrhm Pasha and was a heavily
visited pilgrimage site in Cairo. He informs us of the footprints location, adding that it
was placed in a niche, submerged in rose water and covered with a silver lid. Visitors to
the footprint would literally throw themselves to the ground before the spot where they
believed the Prophet left his footprint. He also transcribed several Ottoman inscriptions
left by Ibrhm Pasha, some which are no longer extant, including his own graffito (elebi

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

91

Figure 10. Detail of the column added by Sultan al-Ghur to Rib al-thr in 910 H/1504 CE. The
column is currently in the collection of the MIA in Cairo under Inventory Number 3723
(photo by Sandro Vannini).

2000, 154158). elebis contemporary, the well-known Damascene Sufi, theologian and
traveler, who wrote a poem in praise of the Prophet Muammad and dream interpretation, Abd al-Ghani ibn Ismail Nabulusi (10501143 AH/16411731 CE), visited the footprint in 1105 AH/1694 CE during his epic trip throughout Syria, Palestine, Egypt and the
Hijaz, and described similar practices associated with visitations to the mosque. After
praying with the congregation, he noted that the footprint was sprinkled with rose water
and a curtain draped over it. Nabulusi and the rest of the congregation prayed beside
the footprint and he recited a poem about the experience, the merits of the footprint
and the effect on visitors (Nabulusi, al-aqqah wa-al-majz, 2: 166). These details recall
some of the practices carried out in the Indian subcontinent in the twelfth century AH/
eighteenth century CE and later, where the footprint in Nabiganj in Bangladesh is also
placed in a shrine, submerged in rose water, and whose touch provides baraka (Hassan
1993, 340).
Athar al-Nab does not appear in the Arabic sources as a reference to the rib before
the eleventh century AH/seventeenth century CE, so this name change must post-

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

92

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 11. Mosque of Athar al-Nab, south wall of the prayer hall, foundation inscription in Ottoman Turkish (photo by author).

date the installation of the qadam.18 Al-Jabarti (Ajib al-thr, 4: 162163) (11671240
AH/17531825 CE), a historian who witnessed the French occupation of Egypt at the end
of the twelfth century AH/ eighteenth century CE, stated that on 1 Rajab 1224 AH/12
August 1809 CE Egypts viceroy Muammad Ali Pasha (r. 12201264 AH/18051848 CE)
instructed Khawj Mamud asan Bazrajn Pasha to re-build the palace and mosque
known as al-thr al-Nabawiyya which had fallen into ruins according to its original
form. The name Athar al-Nab was also given to the neighboring village and the street
leading to the mosque from Fustat, an indication of the mosques importance during the
Ottoman period and suggests that ceremonial processions might have been held along
this street on certain occasions. Three questions remain: What happened to the relics
that were documented by earlier historians in Rib al-thr? Why are there discrepancies with regards to the content of the cache purchased by Tj al-Dn? And what happened to the footprints described by Taymur? The first of these questions is easier to
answer than the other two, since we know that relics were transferred in 910 AH/1504
CE to the Mausoleum of al-Ghur supposedly because the rib had fallen into ruins (Ibn
Iys, Badi al-zuhr, 4: 6869), providing us with a possible terminus post quem for the
arrival of the footprint.
Relics in the Funerary Complex of Sultan al-Ghur
The Burji Mamluk Sultan al-Ashraf Qansuh al-Ghur (905922 AH/15011516 CE) ascended
the throne in 906 AH/1501 CE, and like the Bahri Mamluk sultans before him he was a
great builder despite Egypts economic and political hardships at the time, namely the
bankruptcy of the states treasury and the re-routing of the trade routes from the eastern
Mediterranean to the Cape of Good Hope. He enjoyed a rather long reign until he was
18. Neither elebi nor Nabulusi, both of whom visited the footprint several decades after the Ottoman
reconstruction, mention the name of the building but refer to it as the monastery or mosque ( )
housing the footprint of the Prophet. Their description of the placement of the footprint in a domed
chamber attached to the mosque corroborates what one sees at Athar al-Nab today (elebi 2000,
154155; Nabulusi, al-aqqah wa-al-majz, 2: 166).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

93

Figure 12. Mosque of Athar al-Nab, domed chamber, footprint of the Prophet (photo by author).

killed in the Battle of Marj Dabiq fought against the Ottoman Sultan Selim (r. 918926
AH/15121520 CE), the Mamluks greatest rival who succeeded in conquering Egypt and
put an end to two and a half centuries of Mamluk rule (Alhamzeh 2009, 4, 4144). Al-Ghur
built a massive complex on either side of al-Qasaba, the main thoroughfare and processional route that terminates at al-Qarafa al-Sughra. The building on the east side of the
street centers on his mausoleum,19 while the building on the west side is his mosquemadrasah (Figure 3). Ali Mubrak (12391311 AH/18231893 CE), the public works minister responsible for establishing the boundaries of Cairos modern districts, writes in his
Khitat, after asan ibn usayn ibn al-Tuln (d. 922 AH/1517 CE), that al-Ghurs mausoleum was built to house the effects of the Prophet, a Quran written by Uthman ibn
Affn, one of the Prophets companions and the third Rightly Guided Caliphs (r. 2335
AH/644655 CE), as well as al-Ghurs body. This is confirmed by the foundations most
important document, the waqfiyya currently preserved in the Ministry of Endowments in
Cairo (no. 883), which mentions that:
[The Tomb] was prepared by the patron, whose noble name has been mentioned
abovemay God give him a most long and pleasant lifefor the burial of himself,
his children and his harem. At the far end of of this tomb there is a noble mihrab
with a marble-revetted face and hood. It is flanked by two chests, one for the
noble Quran of the [Caliph] Uthman, and the other for the Noble Relics of the
Prophet [Muammad]. Each [box] has a gold-colored door made from imported
wood. (Alhamzeh 2009, 94, 101)

The transfer of the remains from the Rib al-thr to al-Ghurs mausoleum was celebrated with a grand procession unlike anything seen in Cairo before (Ibn Iys, Badi
al-zuhr 4: 6869). By acquiring the Prophets effects from Rib al-thr, the Mausoleum
19. Al-Ghur died on 25 Rajab 922 AH/21 August 1516 CE while fighting the Ottoman Sultan Selim
outside Aleppo; his body was never found, thus, he was not buried in his expensive mausoleum.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

94

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 13. Mosque of Athar al-Nab, domed chamber, Ottoman Turkish inscription above the stone
footprint (photo by Mamdouh M. Sakr).

of al-Ghur was invested with the status of a pilgrimage site; and by building his mausoleum on al-Qasaba he was securing baraka for himself in the hereafter via the presence
of the Prophets relics and the passersby heading towards the cemetery for ziyra. The
relics remained in the Mausoleum of al-Ghur until 1275 AH/1858 CE, after which they
were transferred several times until they came to rest at the Mosque-Shrine of al-usayn
(Taymur 1955, 4243).20 The reason for the repeated discrepancies cited in the different
chronicles with regards to the effects transferred by al-Ghur, is that few of the historians
probably saw the relics kept at either the Rib al-thr or Mausoleum of al-Ghur.21
20. It should be noted that according to one Ottoman narrative, Sultan Selim took relics from the
treasury of Sultan al-Ghur and kept them in the Topkapi Palace where the Ottoman sultans lived,
relics that the Mamluks had acquired from the Abbasids when the caliphate was transferred from
Baghdad to Cairo in 659 AH/1261 CE. Other accounts imply that some of these relics were taken
from Damascus, or sent to Istanbul from Cairo for safekeeping during the reign of Sultan Sulaymn
(926974 AH/15201566 CE) (Aydin 2004, 78, 72).
21. Of the cited historians, al-Safadi, Ibn Baa, elebi and Nabulusi probably saw the relics in the
Rib al-thr and footprint in the Mosque of Athar al-Nab respectively, because their accounts
are based on first-hand visits. Taymur Pasha created a cumulative list of relics from all the works
he cited: during the eight century AH/fourteenth century CE we hear of the Prophets spear,

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

95

Significantly, across the street from al-Ghurs mausoleum, in his mosque-madrasah,

we find inscriptions from the Burda, the famous panegyric written for the Prophet that
acquired the status of a relic in its own right. The ode is found inscribed in several Cairene houses of the Ottoman period; but aside from the Madrasah of al-Ghur, none of the
surviving religious or secular foundations from the Mamluk period document its usage.
The verses in al-Ghurs madrasah are found in two different locations. The first set of
inscriptions, verse numbers 135 and 152, are carved and painted on lintels in the south
sidilla of the qibla iwan. Verses from chapter 10 are carved and painted beneath the ceiling of a room connected to the platform (dikka) that was reserved for the Sultan (AbouKhatwa 2009, 45) (Figures 14 and 15). The implication here is that verses from the Burda
were not only beautifully and carefully inscribed on the walls of al-Ghurs madrasah, but
were possibly recited by the Sultan located as they were in spaces reserved for him and
across the road from his tomb chamber containing some of the Prophets most resonant
relics (Figure 16).
Footprints in the funerary complex of Sultan Qaytby
Al-Ghurs amassing of prophetic relics in his funerary chamber had been anticipated by
his predecessor Sultan al-Ashraf Qaytby (r. 872901 AH/14681496 CE). While Qaytbys
reign was affected by the gradual rise of the Ottomans influence in the eastern Mediterranean, economic decline, a calamitous plague, and internal rebellions (Behrens-Abouseif 1994, 41; Behrens-Abouseif 2007, 273), it was also a golden age for the patronage of
architecture and art. Qaytbys funerary complex in the Northern Cemetery (877879
AH/14721474 CE) was the first in a long series of pious and architectural foundations
and is one of the most famous buildings in both the cemetery and the city (Figure 2). For
his tomb, which included substantial structures most of which have since vanished or
fallen into ruins, Qaytby was reported to have purchased two footprints from the Hijaz
so that he could receive blessings (baraka) (Taymur 1955, 53)I would suggest that the
desired baraka was both prophetic, by means of the installation of Prophets footprints in
the mausoleum; and divine, by means of the Prophets intercession and supplication to
Allh on behalf of the Sultan.
According to Taymur (1955, 53), the purchase is not confirmed in any of the historical accounts, and the posthumous placement of the impressions is probably why there
is no record of them in the official endowment deed (waqf) inventorying the contents
of the complex.22 Several travelers refer to this rumor and in one account, the scholar
Shihb al-Dn al-Khafj (9791069 AH/15711659 CE), reporting after Qad Ayad, said
that Qaytby purchased the footprints for 20,000 dinars to be placed next to his tomb
fragment of wood and metal, his bowl, kohl applicator and awl used to patch his shoes, comb, and
the Quran of Ali ibn Ab lib; during the ninth century AH/fifteenth century CE, a fragment of the
Prophets kohl applicator, shirt, his spear, awl, bowl, pencil, tweezers used to remove thorns from
his feet; and during the twelfth century AH/eighteenth century CE, a fragment of the Prophets
walking stick and shirt (Taymur 1955, 4647).
22. The endowment deed (waqfiyya document no. 886) is dated to 879881 AH/14741476 CE and 884
AH/1479 CE respectively, and voids earlier endowments. Qaytby died on 27 Dhl Qaida 901 AH/
7 August 1496 CE, almost two decades after the last date on the endowment deed (Behrens-Abouseif
1998, 30).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

96

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 14. Madrasah of al- Ghur, lintel in the south sidilla of the qibla iwan, verse 135 from the Burda:

Whoever is succored by the Messenger of God, if lions were to find him in their lair, they
would fall silent (photo by author)

Figure 15. Madrasah of al- Ghur, lintel in the south sidilla of the qibla iwan, verse 152 from the Burda:

O most generous of all Creation, I have no one to turn to but you, when the dreaded
Day of Judgement comes (photo by author).

where they are today. Another explanation is that a well-known Damascene merchant
and Qaytbys Superintendent of Royal Buildings in the Hijaz, Shams al-Dn ibn al-Zaman
(824897 AH/14211492 CE), brought the stones from Khaybar in the Hijaz to place them
in the madrasah he commissioned in the Cairene port district of Bulaq. Taymur suggests
that the Sultan took these footprints from the madrasah after Shams al-Dns death on
the grounds that the whereabouts of those footprints are presently unknown (Taymur
1955, 5354). That these footprints were purchased from the Hijaz, like the relics originally in the Rib al-thr, is very interesting in and of itself: it suggests that there was

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

97

Figure 16. Madrasah of al- Ghur, view of the qibla iwan from the dikka (photo by author).

a strong emphasis on relics having to be acquired directly from the Hijaz, as though to
emphasize their authenticity and perhaps to prefigure a connection between Egypt and
western Arabia, and by extension between ziyra and the hajj.
Al-Nabulusi, who on 19 Jumd I 1105 AH/11 February 1694 CE arrived at the Complex
of Sultan Qaytby, described his experience in great detail. As is customary, he read Surat
al-Ftia and then referred to the location and setting of the footprints. The first rested
on a stool covered by a small silver dome inlaid with fine gilded inscriptions,23 and was
placed next to the crypt reserved for the men. He proceeded to kiss the footprint to
receive blessings. The second footprint, that of Abraham and referred to as qadam Ibrhm
al-Khall,24 was located by the north wall near the female crypt and was covered by a
23. Nabulusi visited the mausoleum twice: during his first visit on 19 Jumd I 1105 AH/11 February
1694 CE, he described the dome as made of silver with gilt inscriptions; yet during his second visit
on 6 Rajab 1105 AH/28 March 1694 CE, he described it as made of copper with gilt inscriptions
(Nabulusi, al-aqqah wa-al-majz, 2: 192193, 276).
24. Perhaps the misidentification of the second footprint was a way for Nabulusi to intensify his
mystical experience to acquire baraka from two highly venerated righteous prophets, Abraham

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

98

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Figure 17. Floor plan of the Funerary Complex of Qaytby. The two footprints are currently in the
domed mausoleum, one by each of the two indicated crypts (by Nicholas Warner).

wooden dome. After seeing it, he prayed in order to receive more blessings (al-Nabulusi,
al-aqqah wa-al-majz, 2: 192193; Taymur 1955, 5455) (Figures 1719).
The Prophet in Dream Narratives
There is a curious story that adds a dimension of intrigue to these footprints. The Ottoman
Sultan Ahmad I (r. 10121026 AH/160317 CE) learned of the footprints in the Complex of
Qaytby and professed by way of an edict that they should be transferred to his newly built
complex in Istanbul (11081125 AH/16091617 CE), which includes his mausoleum and the
burials of other members of his family. After they arrived in Istanbul the footprints were
paraded through the city, stopping first at the Mosque and Trbe Ayyb al-Ansr (862
AH/1458 CE), a tomb dedicated to a companion of the Prophet and the site where other
remains attributed to the Prophet were later placed by Sultan Mamud II (r. 12231255
AH/18081839 CE) (Lvi-Provenal et al. Ab Ayyb Khlid, EI2, 1: 108). However, Sultan Ahmads attempt to seize these footprints was preempted by a dream in which all the
prophets and Sultan Qaytby appeared before him. The Prophet acted as judge in an attempt
and Muammad. By associating the second footprint with Abraham, the Mausoleum of Qaytby
was inextricably linked to the footprints at the Kaba, or maqm Ibrhm.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

99

Figure 18. Interior of the Mausoleum of Qaytby, qibla wall, first footprint by male crypt (photo by
author).

Figure 19. Interior of the Mausoleum of Qaytby, north wall, second footprint by the female crypt
(photo by author).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

100

Iman R. Abdulfattah

to resolve the issue of the transfer of his footprints from Cairo to Istanbul. Qaytby stated
his case as the rightful owner, and further substantiated this by reminding the assembled
prophets of all the battles he fought in the name of Islam, that he commissioned many
mosques, as well as a beautiful mausoleum where he placed the qadam rasl to secure his
place in the hereafter. In turn, he lawfully received the visitation of believers who recited
Surat al-Ftia and asked for blessings. While speaking to the Prophet, Qaytby lamented
that Sultan Ahmad had stolen the footprints. In response, Sultan Ahmad stated that he was
the Prophets servant, the guardian and absolute representative of the holy places (Mecca
and Medina); he learned of the Cairo footprints, that they rested in a decaying building,
and decided to transfer them to Istanbul out of respect for them and love of God. A consensus was finally reached and the footprints were returned to Cairo. The sultan awoke
from the dream, retold it to his advisors, who all agreed that the seized footprints should
be returned to Cairo immediately (elebi 2000, 226233; Baci 2009, 74). Before doing so, a
silver dome with gilded inscriptions was crafted for it in 40 days.25 Taymur Pasha published
the inscription on the silver dome that still survives in Qaytbys mausoleum:
His highness Sultan Ahmad desired to visit the location of the noble footprint.
He was moved by the longing to take the footprint, so he took the noble
footprint to Constantinople. And he [Sultan Ahmad] entered his home with his
right foot out of loving respect for the exalted footprint. The Beloved of God,
our Master Muammad, upon him be the prayers and blessings of our Lord. And
he [Sultan Ahmad] returned the footprint in great esteem to its earlier place.
Lord, prolong the life of Sultan Ahmad. (Taymur 1955, 57)26

There are three aspects to this account that relate to the more theoretical focus of
this article: the dream itself; the appearance of the Prophet in the dream; and the theft,
confiscation or borrowing of the footprints. Although focusing on dream accounts of
the Mamluk period, Frenkel (2008, 205) explains that the Muslims in Egypt and Syria ...
envisioned the Prophet Muammad as a timeless source of inspiration, a presence who
guided his congregation to avert them from wrongdoing. Many people claimed to have
seen the Prophet in a dream, and dreams were a way of communicating with him...
which calls to mind the following Hadith: The Prophet said, Whoever has seen me in a
dream, then no doubt, has seen me, for Satan cannot imitate my shape (Bukhr 1979,
104). The appearance of the Prophet in Sultan Ahmads dream, as in the earlier dream of
al-Br, establishes his unmediated presence, with communication confirmed by the
25. Interestingly, Sultan Ahmad also commissioned an iron grille inlaid with silver in 1018 AH/1609 CE
for the footprint in the Dome of the Rock (T. W. Arnold, adam Sharf , EI2, 4: 367; Hasan 1993,
335). The footprint in the Mosque of Athar al-Nab was also covered with a silver lid when visited
by elebi, perhaps an indication of the importance of these noble footprints during the Ottoman
period and the desire to protect them (elebi 2000, 155).
26. Nabulusi refers to a similar trip made by Sultan Selim to the Mausoleum of Qaytby after the
conquest of Egypt in 923 AH/1517 CE, during which the sultan visited the footprint to receive
blessings. He sent a delegation to collect the Prophet Muammads footprint so that he could
receive baraka in Istanbul. One night, he had a dream in which Qaytby appeared and said,
I have taken this footprint with the permission of the Prophet from Medina. When Sultan Selim
awoke, he immediately returned the footprint to Cairo (Nabulusi, al-aqqah wa-al-majz, 2: 193).
According to Taymur this dream account is not confirmed by any of the sources, reinforcing that
is was Sultan Ahmad who actually took the footprint to Istanbul and later dreamt the dream, as
confirmed by the inscription on the silver dome (Taymur 1955, 55).

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

101

conversation and the decision to return the footprint to Cairo. The footprints equal the
Prophets mediated presence, an index of the real, evidence and an indication, or a trace,
of his existence. The transfer of the footprint to Istanbul is another form of presence
in that Sultan Ahmad wanted to attain the Prophets baraka at his disposal and in his
domain, his complex in the imperial capital and new seat of the caliphate. The presence
of the Prophet is, thus, duplicated several times and in different ways: through the footprints (mediated), the dream (unmediated), and his active role as judge in the dream. The
entire scenario provides two ways of accessing the Prophet: directly, via the temporary
dream encounter; and indirectly, through the touch of his footprint.
Conclusion
In Egypt, footprints of the Prophet were placed in the burial chamber of an important
sultan or venerated saint, where they served as objects transmitting prophetic blessing. Visitors to these shrines would often recite Surat al-Ftia, then engage in rituals
like rubbing and kissing the stone, practices that parallel the customs related to Abrahams footprint at maqm Ibrhm and the black stone (al-ajar al-aswad) at the Kaba.
The relics were also placed in shrines that were meant to be visited for the intended
purpose of receiving baraka (Meri 2010, 117), which can be corroborated by the accounts
and description of them by several historians and travelers. They are an indication of the
widespread desire to have the Prophets presence in buildings commissioned by important individuals and sultans. Their popularity during the Mamluk period can be attributed to Sufism, which rose to a prominent position in Egypts socio-religious structure
at that time. However, the relicsincluding the footprintswere not easily accessible
to the public, for in two instances they were stored away in the private mausoleum of
the sultan rather than displayed in the more public parts of the respective complexes,
the mosque-madrasah; additionally, we know from Ibn Iys (Badi al-zuhr, 4: 69) survey of events during al-Ghurs reign that the relics formerly in the rib were visited on
Wednesdays, implying that they were only accessible one day during the week. As for the
relics in the mausolea of Qaytby and al-Ghur, the baraka was intended for the personal
benefit of the ruling sultan.
In the Islamic experience competition for relics emerged in the context of dynastic
legitimacy and the desire to connect with the Prophet and his family (Meri 2010, 100,
103). For example, in his article on the subject Walker (2003, 365369) refers to Ali ibn
Ab libs sword, Dhl-Fiqr, as a souvenir of power that bestowed the owner with both
cultural and spiritual superiority. It passed from the hands of the Abbasids to the Fatimid
counter-caliphate in 320 AH/932 CE, the two greatest powers in the Near East and eastern Mediterranean who, like the Mamluks and Ottomans after them, were competing for
control of the holy cities of Islam. Similar to the relics that form the focus of this article,
the sword, a symbol of power and kingship, was not on view to the public except on
specific occasions, lending them a certain mystique and aura. In addition to legitimacy
and righteous rule, the successful theft of a prophetic relic diminished the power of the
former owner because the baraka generated from the relic would be transferred with
ownership. These developments act as a prelude to the enthusiastic collecting of relics
during the Ottoman period.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

102

Iman R. Abdulfattah

The link between political development and relic collecting is especially clear in Mamluk Egypt, as their theft revolves around major episodes in Egypts early modern history.
The transfer of the relics from the Rib al-thr by Sultan al-Ghur took place shortly
before the Ottomans succeeded in defeating the Mamluks and seized their territory. Sultan Selim, the victor in the long rivalry between the Mamluks and Ottomans, began collecting noble relics for Topkapi Palace and the tradition of acquiring relics from within
the Ottoman domain was continued by his successors (Aydin 2004, 9). He supposedly
acquired relics from the treasury of the Mamluk Sultan al-Ghur. Assuming these relics are different from those once in al-Ghurs mausoleum, based on the content of the
respective caches and the fact that Egyptians believe the latter were transferred to the
Mosque-Shrine of al-usayn in the thirteenth century AH/nineteenth century CE, one
wonders why Sultan Selim did not take both collections. One possibility is that Sultan
Selim overlooked those in the mausoleum of his vanquished rival in favor of prophetic
relics that would better secure legitimacy for the Ottoman Empire, relics that were
owned by the Abbasid caliphs and were in the custody of the Mamluks. Added to this is
the substantial rebuilding of the Rib al-thr by the Ottoman governor of Cairo above
the noble footprint, and Sultan Ahmads attempted theft of the footprint in the Mausoleum Qaytby. Venerated vehicles of divine blessing that they are, these relics were used
by rulers and the ruling elite not only as powerful symbols of legitimacy, but as sacred
weapons in struggles for legitimacy, a tradition that the Ottomans would continue well
into the thirteenth century AH/nineteenth century CE.
Acknowledgments
This research came to fruition with the encouragement and support of several individuals. Thanks goes initially to Finbarr Barry Flood, William R. Kenan Jr. Professor of the
Humanities at the Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, in whose seminar on iconography, representation and relics in the Islamic world this article was first developed.
I greatly benefited from his guidance and input. I would also like to thank the following friends and colleagues: Noha Abou-Khatwa for her thoughtful suggestions and for
reviewing the translated Arabic texts; Ayin Yoltar-Yldrm for reading and translating
the three Ottoman Turkish inscriptions found in the Mosque of Athar al-Nab; Birgitta
Augustin for translating the relevant passages of Evliy elebis travel narrative from
German to English; Nicholas Warner for drawing the floor plans of the Mosque of Athar
al-Nab, and funerary complexes of sultans Qaytby and al-Ghur; and Mamdouh M. Sakr
and Sandro Vannini for kindly providing the additional photographs.
References
Abou-Khatwa, N.
2009. An Ode to Remember: The Burda of al-Busri in Cairene Ottoman Houses. In Creswell Photographs Re-Examined: New Perspectives on Islamic Architecture, edited by B. OKane, 4369. Cairo: The
American University in Cairo Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.5743/cairo/9789774162442.003.0002
Abu al-Amayim, M.
2003. Athar al-Qahirah al-Islamiyah fi al-Asr al-Uthmani. Istanbul: Markaz al-Abhath lil-Tarikh wa-alFunun wa-al-Thaqafah al-Islamiyah bi-Istanbul

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

103

Alhamzeh, K.
2009. Late Mamluk Patronage: Qansuh al-Ghurs Waqf and His Foundations in Cairo. Boca Raton, FL: Universal Publishers.
Aksoy, S. and Milstein, R.
2000. A Collection of Thirteenth-Century Illustrated Hajj Certificates. In M. Ugur Derman Festschrift:
Papers Presented on the Occasion of his Sixty-fifth Birthday, edited by I. C. Schick, 101134. Istanbul:
Sabanc Universitesi.
Arnold, T. W.
1978, adam Sharf. Encyclopaedia of Islm, 2nd edition. Edited by E. van Donzel, B. Lewis and Ch. Pellat, 4: 367368. Leiden: Brill.
Aydin, H.
2004. Pavilion of Sacred Relics: The Sacred Trusts, Topkapi Palace Museum, Istanbul. Somerset, NJ: Light.
Baci, S.
2009. The Falnama of Ahmed I (TSM H.1703). In Falnama: The Book of Omens, edited by M. Farhad and
S. Bac, 6875. Washington, DC: Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution.
Baldick, J.
2000. Uways al- aran. Encyclopaedia of Islm, 2nd edition. Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C. E.
Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs, 958. Leiden: Brill.
Behrens-Abouseif, D.
1994. Egypts Adjustment to Ottoman Rule: Institutions, Waqf and Architecture in Cairo (16th and 17th Centuries).
Leiden: Brill.
1998. Qaytbays Investments in the City of Cairo: Waqf and Power. Annales Islamologiques 32: 2940.
2007. Cairo of the Mamluks: A History of the Architecture and its Culture. Cairo: The American University in
Cairo Press.
Bukhr, Muammad ibn Isml.
1979. The Translation of the Meanings of ah al-Bukhr: Arabic-English. Edited by Muhamamd Muhsin
Khan. Chicago, IL: Kazi Publications.
elebi, E.
2000. Kairo In der Zweiten Hlfte des 17. Jahrhunderts: Beschrieben von Evliya elebi. Translated by Erich
Prokosch. Istanbul: Simurg.
Comit de Conservation des Monuments de lArt Arabe.
1900 Procs Verbaux des SancesRapports de la Section Technique. Exercice 1900, Fascicule 17. Cairo:
Imprimerie de lInstitut franais darchologie orientale.
1909. Procs Verbaux des SancesRapports de la Section Technique. Exercice 1908, Fascicule 25. Cairo:
Imprimerie de lInstitut franais darchologie orientale.
Danner, V.
1987. al-Br: His Times and His Prophetology. In Islamic and Middle Eastern Societies: a Festchrift in
Honor of Professor Wadi Jwaideh, edited by R. Olson, 4161. Beltsville, MD: Amana Books.
Frenkel, Y.
2008. Dream Accounts in the Chronicles of the Mamluk Period. In Dreaming Across Boundaries: The
Interpretation of Dreams in Islamic Lands, edited by L. Marlow, 202220. Boston, MA: Ilex Foundation.
Goldziher, I.
1911. The Cult of Saints in Islam. The Moslem World 1: 302212. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1111/j.1478-1913.1911.tb00039.x
Hasan, P.
1993. The Footprint of the Prophet. Muqarnas 10: 335343. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1523198
Ibn Abd al-Ghan, Ahmad Shalab.
1978. Awa al-ishrt fman tawall Mir al-Qhirah min al-wuzar wa-al-bsht: al-mulaqqab bi-al-Trkh
al-ayn, edited by Abd al-Ram Abd al-Ramn Abd al-Ram. Cairo: Tawz Maktabat al-Khnij
bi-Mir.
Ibn Baa.
1997. Rihlat Ibn Baa, edited by Abd al-Had al-Taz. Rabat: Royal Academy of Morocco.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

104

Iman R. Abdulfattah

Ibn Iys, Muammad ibn Ahmad.

1984. Badi al-zuhr f waqi al-duhr, edited by Muammad Muaf, 5 vols. Cairo: al-Hayah
al-Miryah al-mmah lil-Kitb.
Ibn Taymiyah, Ahmad ibn Abd al-Halim.
1979. Iqti al-ir al-mustaqm: mukhlafat ab al-jam, edited by Muhammad Hamid al-Fiqi. Cairo:
Mabaat al-Sunnah al-Muammadyah.
Ibn al-Zayyat, Muhammad ibn Muhammad.
2005. Kitb al-Kawkib al-sayyrah f tartb al-ziyrah f al-qarfatayn al-kubra wa-al-ughra. Cairo: Al-Maktaba al-Azhariyya lil Turath.
Al-Ibrashi, M.
2006. Cairos Qarafa as Described in the Ziyara Literature In Development of Sufism in Mamluk Egypt,
edited by R. McGregor and A. Sabra, 269297. Cairo: Institut franais darchologie orientale.
al-Jabart, Abd al-Rahman.
1998. Ajib al-thr f al-tarjim wa-al-akhbr, edited by Abd al-Ram Abd al-Ramn Abd al-Ram, 4
vols. Cairo: Dr al-Kutub wa-al-Wathiq al-Qawmyah.
Jacquet-Gordon, H.
2003. The Graffiti on the Khonsu Temple Roof at Karnak: a Manifestation of Personal Piety. Chicago, IL: Oriental
Institute of the University of Chicago.
Kister, M. J.
1991. Mam Ibrhm. Encyclopaedia of Islm, 2nd edition. Edited by C. E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and
Ch. Pellat, 6: 104107. Leiden: Brill.
Nasir-i Khusraw.
2001. Book of Travels (Safarnama). Translated from Persian by W. M. Thackston Jr. Costa Mesa: Mazda
Publishers.
Lvi-Provenal, E., J. H. Mordtmann and Cl. Huart.
1960. Ab Ayyb Khlid b. Zayd b. Kulayb al-Najr al-Anr. Encyclopaedia of Islm, 2nd edition.
Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C. E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs, 1: 108109.
Leiden: Brill.
Mantran, R.
1972. Inscriptions turques ou de lpoque turque du Caire. Annales Islamologique 11: 211233.
al-Maqrizi, Taq al-Dn Ahmad ibn Ali.
1991. Kitb al-muqaff al-kabr. Edited by Muammad Yalw, 8 vols. Beirut: Dr al-Gharb al-Islm.
2002. al-Mawaiz wa-al-itibar fi dhikr al-khitat wa-al-athar. Edited by Ayman Fuad Sayyid, 4 vols. London:
Muassasat al-Furqn lil-Turth al-Islm.
Mayeur-Jaouen, C.
2000. an. Encyclopaedia of Islm, 2nd edition. Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C. E. Bosworth, E.
van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs, 10: 188190. Leiden: Brill.
Meri, J. W.
2002. Ziyra. Encyclopaedia of Islm, 2nd edition. Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C. E. Bosworth, E.
van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs, 11: 524529. Leiden: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pastj/gtq014
2010. Relics of Piety and Power in Medieval Islam. Past & Present 5: 97120.
Mubrak, Ali.
1980. al-Khia al-Tawfqyah al-jaddah li-Mir al-Qhirah wa-mudunih wa-bildih al-qadmah wa-shahrah,
14 vols. Cairo: al-Hayah al-Miryah al-mmah lil-Kitb.
Nabulusi, Abd al-Ghani ibn Ismail.
1998. al-aqqah wa-al-majz f rilat bild al-Shm wa-Mir wa-al-ijz, edited by Riy Abd al-amd
Murd, 3 vols. Damascus: Dar al-Marifa.
Ohtoshi, T.
2006. Tasawwuf as Reflected in Ziyra Books and the Cairo Cemeteries. In Development of Sufism in Mamluk
Egypt, edited by R. McGregor and A. Sabra, 299330. Cairo: Institut franais darchologie orientale.
Safadi, Khalil ibn Aybak.
20081010 Kitb al-wf bi-al-wafayt. Edited by Helmut Ritter, 30 vols. Beirut: al-Mahad al-Almn lilAbth al-Sharqyah f Bayrt.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014

Relics of the Prophet and Practices of His Veneration in Medieval Cairo

105

Sayyid, A. F.
1998. La capitale de lEgypte jusqu lpoque fatimide Al-Qhira et Al-Fus: essai de reconstitution
topographique. Beirut: Orient-Institut der Deutschen Morgenlndischen Wissenschaft.
Stetkevych, S. P.
2006. From Text to Talisman: al-Brs Qasidat al-Burdah (Mantle Ode) and the Supplicatory Ode.
Journal of Arabic Literature 37: 2: 145189. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157006406778660331
2010. The Mantle Odes: Arabic Praise Poems to the Prophet Muammad. Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
2011. Takhmis as Verbal Reliquary: Enshrinement, Inscription and Performance in Shams al-Din
al-Fayyumis Takhmis al-Burdah. Keynote Lecture for the 26th Annual Middle East History and
Theory Conference: Mutual Perceptions, The University of Chicago.
Al-Tabari.
1985. The History of al-Tabari. Translated by R. Stephen Humphreys, 40 vols. Albany: State University of
New York Press.
Taylor, C. T.
1999. In the Vicinity of the Righteous: Ziyra and the Veneration of Muslim Saints in Late Medieval Egypt. Leiden: Brill.
Taymur, Ahmad.
1951. al-thr al-Nabawiyya. Cairo: Matbi Dr al-Kitb al-Arab.
Vollers K. and E. Littmann.
1960. Amad al-Badaw. Encyclopaedia of Islm, 2nd edition. Edited by P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C. E.
Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs, 1: 280281. Leiden: Brill.
Wheeler, B.
2006. Mecca and Eden: Ritual, Relics, and Territory in Islam. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Walker, P. E.
2003. Purloined Symbols of the Past: The Theft of Souvenirs and Sacred Relics in he Rivalry Between
the Abbasids and Fatimids. In Culture and Memory in Medieval Islam: Essays in Honor of Wilfred
Madelung, edited by F. Daftary and J. W. Meri, 364387. New York: I. B. Tauris Publishers.
Wiet, G.
1971. Catalogue gnral du Muse de lart islamique du Caire : inscriptions historiques sur pierre. Cairo: Imprimerie de lInstitut franais darchologie orientale.
Yaqubi, Ahmad ibn Abi Yaqub.
1960. Tarikh al-Yaqubi: wa-huwa tarikh Ahmad ibn Abi Yaqub ibn Jafar ibn Wahb ibn Wadih al-Katib
al-Abbasi al-maruf bi-al-Yaqubi. 2 vols. Beirut: Dar Sadir.
Zwemer, S. M.
1948. Hairs of the Prophet. In Ignace Goldziher Memorial Volume, edited by S. Lwinger and J. Somogyi,
4854. Budapest: Globus.

Equinox Publishing Ltd. 2014