Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T14:46:38.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The safe-conduct in Muslim chancery practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

John Wansbrough
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the several branches of Islamic law in which practice diverged most sharply from theory was the law of commerce. The divergence is especially striking in two respects: regular imposition of taxes regarded by the shariī‘a as illegal, and reliance upon written documents as legal proof of transactions for which juridical theory demanded only oral evidence of witnesses. A third problematical aspect of commercial law was the juridical status of the non-Muslim merchant in Dār al-Islām. Matters pertaining thereto were loosely subsumed by the jurists under the term amān, associated specifically with the law of war, and defined by recourse to as much precedent as could be gleaned from the Qur'ān and from the example of the Prophet and of the earliest Muslim communities. The consequences of this procedure have posed several historical problems upon which it is hoped the present paper will throw some light.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , February 1971 , pp. 20 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Schacht, J., An introduction to Islamic law, Oxford, 1964, 76–85 Google Scholar.

2 Heffening, W., Das islamische Fremdenrecht, Hannover, 1925 Google Scholar.

3 See reviews by Bergsträsser, G. in Der Islam, XV, 1926, 311–21Google Scholar, and Schacht, J., in Islamica, II, 1926–1927, 150–7, 323Google Scholar. Equally important are the observations of Schacht, J. in EI, second ed., s.v. amān, and of Brunschvig, R., La Berbérie orientale sous les Ḥafṣides, I, Paris, 1940, 431–40Google Scholar, where inconsistencies between juridical theory and chancery practice are indicated.

4 See Heffening, op. cit., ch. iii and v, for a summary discussion in which practice and theory are rather more closely related than would seem justified; the relevant pages of both Hamidullah, M., Muslim conduct of state, Lahore, 1945 (117–22, 192–3, 134–40, 200–3)Google Scholar, and Khadduri, M., War and peace in the law of Islam, Baltimore, 1955 (162–9, 202–22, 223–30, 239–50, 272–4) consist of general observations drawn largely from siyar literatureGoogle Scholar.

5 Published in Amari, M., I diplomi arabi del R Archivio Fiorentino, Firenze, 1863, doc. 81 (1:43), pp. 218–20Google Scholar.

6 See Wansbrough, , ‘A Mamluk ambassador to Venice in 913/1507’, BSOAS, xxvi, 3, 1963, 503–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. 510. It seems likely that Florentine merchants travelled to Venice to see Taghri Berdī, though I have found no corroboration of this in ASF.

7 Toscani, R Sopraintendenza degli Archivi, Elenco dei documenti orientali e dette carte nautiche e geografiche che si conservano negli Archivi di Stato di Firenze e di Pisa, Firenze, 1878, no. 8 Google Scholar.

8 Amari, , op. cit., p. 445 Google Scholar and tavola v; and Mayer, L. A., ‘Das Schriftwappen der Mamlukensultane’, Jahrbuch der Asiatischen Kunst (Leipzig), II, 1925, 183–7 and pl. 104Google Scholar. Cf. also Ernst, H., Die mamlukischen Sultansurkunden des Sinai-Klosters, Wiesbaden, 1960, pp. xxiv, 289, 294Google Scholar.

9 Amari, , op. cit., text, pp. 218–20, notes, p. 445Google Scholar; in 11 read , cf. BSOAS, xxvi, 3, 1963, 507 Google Scholar; in 11. 16 and 22 read for ; in l. 36 for read ; in l. 28 Amari's conjectural reading of the date is correct, see also BSOAS, XXXVII, 3, 1965, p. 509, n. 61Google Scholar.

10 For the introductory formulae employed for decrees in the Mamlūk chancery, cf. Stern, S. M. (ed.), Documents from Islamic chanceries, Oxford, [1966], 52, 61–2, 70Google Scholar.

11 For Taghrī Berdī's titles, cf. BSOAS, xxvi, 3, 1963, 506–8Google Scholar.

12 For the concluding formulae, cf. Stem, (ed.), DIC, 61, 69–70, 79Google Scholar.

13 cf. Heyd, W., Histoire du commerce du Levant au moyen-âge, Leipzig, 1885–1886, II, 490 Google Scholar.

14 Amari, , Diplomi, doc. 80 (II:49), p. 387 Google Scholar (now listed ASF as Signori Carteggio, Missive Ia Canc, fil. 55, fol. 202).

15 Amari, , Diplomi, doc. 82 (11:50), p. 388 (listed ASF, Diplomatico, Atti Pubblici, Spoglio III, no. 10)Google Scholar.

16 Amari, , op. cit., note f, pp. 445–6Google Scholar.

17 cf. the references given in Stern, (ed.), DIC, p. 70, n. 1Google Scholar; it must be stated clearly, though, that evidence for the late Middle Ages consists of documents preserved in European archives, all of which are related to commerce. For two notable exceptions: the collections belonging to the Monastery of St. Catherine at Mt. Sinai and to the Franciscan Custodia Terrae Sanctae in Jerusalem, see Stern, S. M., BSOAS, xxix, 2, 1966, 234–5Google Scholar.

18 al-Qalqashandī, Abū 'l-‘Abbās Aḥmad, Kitāb ṣubḥ al-a‘shā, ed. Cairo, , 1913–1919, XIII, 342 Google Scholar. Qala'ūn's safe-conduct has been the subject of much discussion, cf. references in Wiet, G., ‘Les marchands d'épices sous les sultans mamlouks’, Cahiers d'Histoire Égyptienne, VII, 2, 1955, p. 138, n. 76Google Scholar. The problem of whether the Arabic maṣdar, amān, ought to be restricted, as it undoubtedly is in the writings of the jurists, to the (abstract) notion of security, or whether it was also used to designate the actual document or ‘pass’ containing the promise of security, is one which appears to me to have been needlessly provoked by Heffening (Fremdenrecht, 12), whose own position seems anyway not to have been finally decided (cf. op. cit., 95). If in juridical, and historical, sources amān tends to retain its abstract quality, it seems clear that in chancery manuals and in the documents themselves the word refers to the instrument of security, though possibly only as an abbreviation for kitāb amān or amāna. In either sense amān can be safely rendered in English by ‘safe-conduct’.

19 See Björkman, W., Beiträge zur Geschichte der Staatskanzlei im islamischen Ägypten, Hamburg, 1928, 170–1Google Scholar.

20 Sūrat al-barā'a, 6.

21 cf. Hishām, Ibn, al-Sīra al-Nabawīya, Cairo, 1955, I, 502 Google Scholar.

22 See below, p. 29.

23 Hishām, Ibn, op. cit., II, 596 Google Scholar.

24 Al-Tabarī, , Ta'rīkh , Cairo, 1963, IV, 109 (ed. Leiden, , prima ser., 2588–9)Google Scholar.

25 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 170Google Scholar.

26 Björkman, loc. cit.

27 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 171 Google Scholar.

28 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 77, 171Google Scholar; Stern, S. M., Fāṭimid decrees, London, 1964, p. 105, n. 1Google Scholar.

29 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 76, 171Google Scholar.

30 Björkman, , Staaiskanzlei, 13, 76, 171Google Scholar.

31 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 76, 171Google Scholar.

32 See above, p. 25, n. 18, and Labib, S., Handelsgeschichte Äyptens im Spätmittelalter, Wies-baden, 1965, 84–6Google Scholar.

33 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 75, 171Google Scholar.

34 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 75, 171Google Scholar.

35 Björkman, loc. cit.

36 See above, p. 27, n. 28.

37 Björkman, , Staatskanzlei, 67, 77, 171Google Scholar.

38 cf. Heffening, , Fremdenrecht, 17, 20–3Google Scholar; Aghnides, N., Mohammedan theories of finance, New York, 1916, 355–9Google Scholar.

39 Heffening, , op. cit., 29, 31Google Scholar.

40 Heffening, , op. cit., 33 ffGoogle Scholar.

41 Following Hartmann, M., ‘Die islamisch-fränkischen Staatsverträge (Kapitulationen)’, Zeitschrift für Politik, XI, 1918–1919, esp. pp. 24–6Google Scholar; Heffening, (Fremdenrecht, 100, 126–7)Google Scholar inclines to the view that the general safe-conduct contained elements of classical Muslim jurisprudence. Cf. also his article ‘Die Entstehung der Kapitulationen in den islamischen Staaten’, Schmollers Jahrbuch, LI, 1927, 97–107 Google Scholar, where he displays reservation with regard to the principle of consular jurisdiction. Hartmann's argument (loc. cit.) that their being composed in Arabic [sic] contributed to the ‘Islamic’ character of these documents is important but perhaps misleading. Many of them may have been Arabic versions of Italian ‘originals’, though it is true that the employment of stereotyped formulae containing a high degree of classical rhetorical elements tended (and must have been intended) to conceal juridical innovation in their contents. The linguistic problem, of ‘originals’ and ‘translations’, is indeed the crux of the matter, and one which may prove insoluble (cf. BSOAS, XXVIII, 3, 1965, 483–7)Google Scholar. See below, p. 32, n. 54.

42 See Tyan, E., Institutions du droit publique musulman, I, Paris, 1954, 60–7Google Scholar; Fraenkel, S., ‘Das Schutzrecht der Araber’, in Bezold, C. (ed.), Orientalische Studien Theodor Nöldeke … gewidmet, Giessen, 1906, I, 293–301 Google Scholar; EI, second ed., s.v. djiwār; and the parallelism jiwār-amān in Hisham, Ibn, Sīra, Cairo, 1955, II, 411 Google Scholar.

43 Wansbrough, , ‘A Mamluk ambassador’, BSOAS, xxvi, 3, 1963, 510–11, 516–17Google Scholar.

44 ibid., 514.

45 Elezović, G., Turski spomenici, I, pt. II, Beograd, 1952, p. 185, 1. 3Google Scholar.

46 Not at all impossible in the Mamlūk chancery, owing to the practice of keeping a supply of ‘alāmāt which could be used for regular correspondence, presumably without recourse to the sultan, but also for political emergencies. See BSOAS, XXVIII, 3, 1965, pp. 509–10, n. 63Google Scholar.

47 Wansbrough, , ‘A Mamluk ambassador’, 519–21Google Scholar. Ṣubḥ, XIV, 71, 72, 75, 76, 78Google Scholar. Oaths, if sworn, were not always attached, however, to the texts, see Ṣubḥ, XIII, 314–15. For Ottoman chancery practice see Ménage, V. L., in Stern, (ed.), DIC, 94 Google Scholar.

48 Wansbrough, ‘A Mamluk ambassador’, loc. cit.

49 According to Ṣubḥ, XIV, 13, Shāfī‘ī jurists insisted that a treaty, in order to be valid, must specify its duration.

50 See Wansbrough, , ‘A Moroccan amīr's commercial treaty with Venice’, BSOAS, XXV, 3, 1962, 471 Google Scholar. And cf. Heffening, , Fremdenrecht, £33–6, 104–5Google Scholar.

51 ASV, Senato Mar, I, fol. 113.

52 Thomas-Predelli, , Diplomatarium veneto-levantinum, Venezia, 1880–1899, II, doc. 176 Google Scholar. The definition of fazolato/fudūlī proposed by Heyd, , Histoire du commerce, II, p. 473 and n. 7Google Scholar, is probably to be rejected in favour of that suggested by Berg, van den, De contractu ‘do ut des’ (bai‘) jure mohammedano, Leiden, 1868, 35–6Google Scholar: namely, one disqualified from participating in commercial transactions, a definition evidently corroborated by the use of ‘fedolie’in the Mamlūk-Venetian treaty of 1442 (BSOAS), XXVIII, 3, 1965, p. 494, art. XIIGoogle Scholar.

53 e.g., Thomas-Predelli, , Diplomatarium, II, doc. 168 (1415)Google Scholar.

54 See above, p. 30, n. 41: the relationship between bilingual versions of the same text involves the application of external (linguistic) and internal (juridical) criteria, and is the subject of my study, in preparation, on lingue franche in the Mediterranean.

55 Lists of appointments to be found in ‘Reggimenti’, Ital. cl. vii, cod. 8383, Biblioteca Marciana, Venice.

56 See Schacht, J., ‘Droit byzantin et droit musulman’, in Convegno Volta, XII, Roma, 1957, 201–6Google Scholar; and for a descriptive analysis of the siyar literature, Kruse, H., ‘Die Begründung der islamischen Völkerrechtslehre’ (al-Shaybānī), SaecuÉm, V, 2, 1954, 221–41Google Scholar; and idem, ‘The Islamic doctrine of international treaties’ (al-Kashānī), Islamic Quarterly, XXVIII, 1, 1954, 152–8Google Scholar.

57 cf. BSOAS, XXX, 1, 1967, 185–7Google Scholar.

58 ‘A Mamlūk commercial treaty concluded with the Republic of Florence 894/1489’, in Stern, (ed.), DIC, 39–79 Google Scholar; and ‘Venice and Florence in the Mamluk commercial privileges’ BSOAS, XXVIII, 3, 1965, 483–523 Google Scholar. And cf. Heffening, , Fremdenrecht, 125–30Google Scholar.

59 Stern, (ed.), DIC, p. 78, n. 33Google Scholar. Cf. Heffening, , Fremdenrecht, 128 Google Scholar.

60 BSOAS, XXVIII, 3, 1965, p. 515, n. 79Google Scholar.

61 Stern, (ed.), VIC, p. 75, n. 14Google Scholar.

62 See Brunschvig, , La Berbérie orientale sous les Ḥafṣides, I, 436 Google Scholar; and Latrie, M. L. de Mas, Traités de paix et de commerce, Paris, 1866, Documents, p. 84, art. 26, p. 204, art. 10Google Scholar.

63 Details in the (unpublished) ‘Copialettere di Piero Zen’, Fondo Dandolo cod. 975/51, Museo Correr, Venice; and cf. BSOAS, XXVI, 3, 1963, p. 511, n. 8Google Scholar.

64 ASV, Archivio Proprio Egitto, I, fol. 71, art. 2, section II B.

65 See Hamidullah, M., ‘Theorie und Praxis des Völkerrechts im frühen Islam’, Kairos, 1963, 2, pp. 100–14Google Scholar (citing al-Sarakhsī Sharh al-siyar al-kabīr, IV, 108); and idem, ‘Exterritorial capitulations in favour of Muslims in classical times’, Islamic Research Association Miscellany, I, 12, 1948, 47–60 Google Scholar. But note the principle of reciprocity expressed in a fatwā of 754/1353 concerning a breach of amān, Atiya, A., ‘An unpublished XIVth century fatwā’, in Heffening, W. and Kirfel, W. (ed.), Studien … Paul Kahle, Leiden, 1935, 55–68 Google Scholar.

66 Bognetti, G. P., ‘Note per la storia del passaporto e del salvacondotto’, Studi nelle Scienze Giuridiche e Sociali, Università di Pavia, XVI, 1931, 269–322, XVII, 1932, 125–210, XVIII, 1933, 247–481Google Scholar; and idem, in Enciclopedia Italiana, XXX, 574.

67 Bognetti, , ‘Note, III’, 319 ffGoogle Scholar.

68 ibid., 334 ff.

69 ibid., 424.

70 For North Africa, see Brunschvig, , La Berbérie orientale, I, 435 Google Scholar; and for Egypt. Sanuto, M., Diarii, Venezia, 1877–1900, II, 122 Google Scholar.

71 Bognetti, , ‘Note, III’, 431 Google Scholar.

72 cf. BSOAS, XXVIII, 3, 1965, p. 495 Google Scholar, art. XII.

73 Bognetti, , ‘Note, III’, 414 ffGoogle Scholar.

74 ASV, Libri Commemoriali, I, doc. 517 (1311: Thomas-Predelli, Diplomatarium, I, doc. 48).

75 See Stern, S. M., Fāṭimid decrees, 159 Google Scholar.

76 ASV, Libri Commemoriali, XIX, fol. 29; and Sanuto, , Diarii, XV, 264–6Google Scholar.