The thugs and the harfish... the imprint of the poor and marginalized in Islamic history

Class has been and still has been, since ancient times, a basis and a social entry point for understanding the formation of civilizations, the reasons for their existence and their permanence, as well as the dialectical relations between their spectra.

Popular layers have emerged from the margins to play pivotal and influential roles in the course of Arab and Islamic history, and contribute to the rise of rulers and the undermining of others, and even to the fall of countries and the emergence of others on their ruins. These classes constituted a critical mass influential in the course of both social and political history, and their role was discussed by Gustave Le Bon a century ago, during the era of European volatility that produced the First World War, in his book "The Psychology of the Masses", describing them as a volatile emotional mass that, if combined, would She is extreme in her feelings and the collective mind that moves her towards the unknown, if she does not have a leader to move her and exploit her burning emotions[1].

Since the pre-Islamic and post-Islamic eras, we find “the tramps” an example of this rebellion against the tribe’s traditions and culture and its sanctification of the lines separating the masters and the slaves. The destitute are not bound by law, law, or custom, and sometimes without fear of the authority of the state and its armies. Then the phenomenon developed with the Fatimids with the emergence of the “Al-Ahdath” sect, and it took its course in the era of the Ayyubids and Mamluks with the emergence of the “Harafish and thugs” sects, all of which were groups that emerged as a result of factors of economic and social injustice, and political and cultural marginalization.

We see in the Mamluk “thugs and harassers” phenomenon, a living historical example of the crises of the marginalized and its serious attempts to create a new reality that would enable it to vent the pain and demands of the marginalized, either by using protest tools or by exercising violence towards society or the Mamluk military authority.

How, then, did the Harafish and the thugs express their outcry and their feeling of social injustice at that time?

And how did they try to change their political and social reality over the course of two centuries?

That's what we'll find out in this article.

The works of the harfish

The well-known historian and modernist “Ibn Katheer” gives us in his history “The Beginning and the End” some of the descriptions and habits that characterized the Harafish when he chronicles the death of Sheikh “The Magnificent Scholar” (as he describes it) “Ilm al-Din Ibn Shukr” in 688 AH / 1289 AD, after he turned from science to science. Babysitting the Harafish “and imitating them in dress and manner, and eating and using hashish”[2].

It appears from the previous description that the Harafish - unlike the thugs as we will see - were associated with the Sufi methods that existed at the time, where Sufism dominated public life in the Ayyubid and Mamluk eras, and each method had its own angle, and these methods possessed good financial resources from endowments, donations, alms and aid] 3], and it seems that the Harafish were the military arm of these sects - if the description is correct - in times of unrest and strife.

Depending on the historians’ description of these sects that spread in the major Mamluk metropolises, especially Cairo and Damascus, they were characterized by what can be described as lawlessness, lack of adherence to morals and morals of religion, intimidation of the safe when the grip of security weakened, and their combination of extreme poverty and lack of knowledge.

It is noteworthy that the phenomenon of harafish drew the attention of the most famous traveler “Ibn Battuta” when he landed in Cairo in 726 AH / 1326 AD, describing them as “a large sect of toughness and arrogance”[4], which indicates the presence of harfish since the period of the first Mamluk state in the era of the rule of the Turks, During the time of powerful sultans, such as "Al-Nasir Muhammad bin Qalawun" (741 AH / 1341 AD), who visited Ibn Battuta Egypt during his tenure.

This confirms the cajoling of the Harafish towards Sultan "Al-Mansur Hussam Al-Din Lajeen" (698 AH / 1299 AD) when he fell off his horse while he was playing the ball - ball or polo - at the bottom of the Cairo Citadel. “Oh, rod of gold, by God, show me your hand.”[5] So the Sultan raised his hand while holding the shovel, and when al-Mansur completed his recovery from those fractures, he decided to distribute the money to these scales.

"Taj al-Din al-Subki" describes the work of the Harafish as taking the profession of beggary as a means of earning, just as robbery was another means of their livelihood.

In another context, "Taj al-Din al-Subki" (771 AH/1370 CE) describes the work of the Harafish in begging and loitering in the streets, saying that "some of them expose their nakedness and walk naked among people and give the illusion that they find nothing to cover their nakedness"[6], meaning that they have taken the profession of begging. A means of earning, as looting was another means of their livelihood. In the year 662 AH / 1264 AD, Mamluk heavyweights were looted by the Mongols in one of the battles between the two sides, and another section was looted by the Harafish and Kasaba.

In the epidemic that occurred in the year 695 AH / 1296 AD, the Harafish carried the corpses and buried them for half a dirham at best[7]. The mystical custom of their era[8].

their homes and organizations

The resemblance to the residence of the thugs and the Harafish sects in Egypt and the Levant (Cairo and Damascus) is striking. A number of historians tell us that they preferred to reside in the poor neighborhoods that lie on the borders and outskirts of these cities.

In Cairo, the thugs and the Harafish preferred to reside in three neighborhoods that were located on the northern and southern outskirts of Cairo, namely Al-Hussainiya, Al-Saliba, and Al-Jaidiya [9].

In Damascus, the activity of the thugs was concentrated in the “Bab Al-Saghir” area, which was considered at the time from the outskirts of Damascus and its remote neighborhoods associated with “Ghouta.” In Al-Shaghour, this area was linked to Bab Al-Saghir on the opposite side of Al-Hasab Square.

This reveals to us that they preferred stability in remote areas[10], which are the areas most closely connected to the countryside, in addition to being areas far from the hands of the authorities.

In the Levant, every neighborhood had its own thug, and these thugs were led by one or more leaders in the same neighborhood, and some historians describe him as a thug.

The interactions of poverty and marginalization led to an increase in crime activity. Over time, these groups turned into sects that realized themselves and their poverty. The thugs decided to take up arms and wear daggers, and they expressed that feeling of grievance by attacking innocent people by killing, plundering and looting[11], or entering into political conflicts with The Mamluks, for the benefit of one group at the expense of another, in return for financial or social benefits offered to them.

With time, they had a sheikh or a leader who would defend their interests in the cycle of civil violence that did not subside during the time of the Mamluks, especially during times of drought, plagues and internal political conflict.

This shows us that thugs were more violent and criminal than Harafish.

In the Levant, every neighborhood had its own thug, and these thugs were led by one or more leaders in the same neighbourhood, and some historians describe him as “a thug.” Their looting extended to the depths of the city in its markets when security was absent and the grip of the authority weakened[12].

horrific crimes

The cycle of violence by thugs and heretics did not subside for a long time, as Damascus thugs used to attack innocent people and steal their money, and complaints from the general public and merchants to judges abounded about this rampant danger that threatened the security and safety of everyone.

In the year 735 AH / 1335 AD, the judges went to the deputy of the Sultan in Damascus, Prince “Tankaz” (d. 741 AH / 1341 AD), demanding that he deter the thugs and confront them with brutality and heavy penalties that amount to torture [13].

However, despite the desperate attempts of the Mamluk authority and its deputies to confront the thugs, their criminal activity extended over a wide area and among the general public and their classes. In some sources there were references to repeated incidents of looting of shops and caesars in Damascus in the year 764 AH / 1345 AD, which negatively affected the security in the city. They stole the Jaqmaq market inside Bab al-Jabiya, and attacked Christian shops, where they stole seven cloth shops, then raided another market in 890 AH / 1485 AD [14].

The historian "Shams al-Din bin Tulun al-Salihi" - who lived at the end of the Mamluk era in the Levant - comes in his history "The Fruit of Lovers in the Accidents of Time" with catastrophic facts, shedding light on the crimes of this group, as the thugs sometimes fight among themselves for influence and looting, as happened in the year 893 AH / 1488 AD when they fought in the dumping lanes in the Al-Shaghour area, and at other times they harmed the men and notables of Damascus, such as Sheikh “Khidr bin Alaa Al-Din Al-Ma’arri” who witnessed the Suwaiqah Al-Musalla and his colleague Sheikh “Shahab Al-Din bin Al-Mahjub” who were attacked by the thugs, as Shihab Al-Din narrated: “We were We went to al-Ghaydah near the hill, and while he and I, when two Moroccans and a roaring man entered us, called Ibn al-Niyat from al-Shaghour, they wanted to injure me, so I ran away from them, and I did not know what they had done with my companion Khader mentioned. slain and smitten” [15].

The Mamluk authorities tried to confront this growing “thug” with deterrence when they imposed the death penalty on one of the chiefs of thugs. Ibn Tulun tells that in Dhul-Qa’dah 895 AH / 1490 AD, “the representative ordered to strike the neck of a hoarse man, known as Ibn Suwaidan, who was seized with reprehensible matters such as murder and others.”] 16].

In Egypt, it seems that the grip of the Mamluk government was stronger than in the Levant. It is true that the Harafish were found in abundance, and participated in the political and social conditions of their time, but their appearance and violence were often in times of security leisure and deteriorating economic conditions, such as the lack of grain and wheat as a result of the decline of the Nile or The harvest was delayed, as happened in the year 736 AH / 1336 AD [17] when the Harafish looted flour and bread from some stores in Cairo due to an emergency crisis, and the authorities stood before this lawlessness without a noticeable reaction.

However, at other times the Mamluk government stood firm and strong against these Harafish. The circulars issued were warning the Harafish not to exploit the crisis, or else they would be punished by crucifixion or nail-biting at the gates of Cairo, as happened in the crisis of the year 774 AH / 1372 AD, when “It was called in Cairo and Egypt not to Someone gives alms over a harfush, and any sharpened steel harfush”[18].

Harfish and the political game

Despite the uprisings and the manifestations of murder and robbery that the thugs and heretics were famous for in the Levant and Egypt, and what seemed, at first glance, that they were just outlaw “gangs” who lived in marginalized neighborhoods and took advantage of their distance from the authority of the center and were armed with daggers and practiced begging and theft to keep themselves, these groups were not - Qat - separated from the political reality and the internal relations between the Mamluks and the common people, or between the Mamluks and the class of scholars.

Harafish and thugs have always expressed their opinion on what is happening on the scene, either by word or by coarse practical participation. It seems that the Mamluks recognized their existence as a fait accompli that is inescapable as long as they adhered to the law and maintained public security, especially the Harafish of Egypt, who had become a “sheikh.” Or “Sultan.” The Mamluk authority represented in its sultan and its princes did not communicate with them except through him.

The scholar "Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani" (852 AH / 1448 AD) came to the translation of one of these Harafish sultans, "Ali bin Abi Ali al-Juaidi" who died on 16 Jumada al-Ula 792 AH / 1390 AD, and Ibn Hajar praised him when He said: "No one has come after him in his art like him" [19].

When the powerful Sultan al-Nasir Muhammad ibn Qalawun decided to imprison Prince Tashtamur, his benevolence became famous among the common people, including the Harafish.

Likewise, the historian "Jamal al-Din Ibn Taghri Bardi" (874 AH / 1470 AD) gave us in his famous history "The Shining Stars in the News of Egypt and Cairo" a glimpse of a crisis that occurred in Shawwal 841 AH / 1438 AD when Sultan "Al-Ashraf Barsbay" (841 AH / 1438 AD) descended from the citadel To some parks in Cairo, and during that time he ordered the distribution of alms to the poor and needy, so he unjustly participated in this with the Harafish and the Juaidiyah (a sect close to them whose work was beggars and begging), and they took money from them by force and fighting, which led to the downfall of the employee responsible for separating alms from his horse. Ibn Taghri Bardi narrated: “The Sultan got angry about this, and asked the Sultan of Al Harafish and the Sheikh of the Taifas, and he obliged them to prevent the Ja’idiyyah from asking in the streets and obliged them to earn money, and that those who sharpen them were arrested”[20].

The recognition of the “Sultan of the Harafish” seems clear evidence of the Mamluk government’s assimilation of these groups within the categories of “sects” that were supervised by Mohtaseb or the governor of Cairo at the time[21]. The times of the Mamluk disputes among them are seasons to display their power to those who win over them with money and prestige and improve their miserable conditions.

This seems clear when the powerful Sultan Al-Nasir Muhammad bin Qalawun (741 AH / 1341 AD) decided to imprison Prince Tashtamur, and he was one of the most sympathetic Mamluk princes to the poor and orphans. They gathered at the bottom of the mountain fortress in a spectacle of protest.

Ibn Battuta witnessed this incident himself when he visited Cairo, saying: “And King Al-Nasir imprisoned him once, so thousands of Harafish gathered and stood at the bottom of the castle and called in one tongue: O lame jinx (meaning the Nasserite King), take him out; take him out of his prison”[22].

When Sultan "Qansuh al-Ghouri" came out at the head of his army from Cairo to confront the Ottomans in "Marj Dabiq", these Harafish and their "sultan" joined him.

These Harafish did not fear a sultan who was considered one of the greatest and most powerful and powerful of the Mamluk sultans at the time, and decided to insult him in his castle and the largest fortress with insults and insults, reminding him of his limp for which he was famous. There is no doubt that this act of protest that forced Al-Nasir to release Prince Tashtamir is clear evidence of The involvement of marginal groups - such as the Harafish - in the political life of that era in defense of their rights, which they saw always stolen or forgotten by the Sultan and his entourage.

Rather, the presence and authority of the Harafish in the political equation developed during the time of strife or the transitional period between the state of the Maritime Mamluks and the towering Mamluks, especially during the struggle of the two princes “Mentash al-Zahiri” ruler of “Maltia” and “Yalbugha al-Nasiri” ruler of “Aleppo”, with Sultan “Al-Zahir Barquq”. “Sultan Al Harafish” took an oath of allegiance to Al-Zahir Barquq before traveling to the Levant to confront both Mantash and Yalbgha [23]. Thus, the role of “Sultan Al Harafish” evolved from a mere sheikh of a marginal Sufi sect made up of the poor of the common people who took advantage of sedition and crises for looting, robbery and begging, to one of the great notables who were entrusted with essential tasks in that period.

Then the position of "Sultan of the Harafish" evolved to participate in the Mamluk military campaigns that were launched from Cairo at the height of the Mamluk-Ottoman conflict, and the Harafish sect at that time had its own flag and paramilitary organization.

When Sultan Qansuh al-Ghouri left Cairo at the head of his army in the spring of the second year in 922 AH / 1516 AD to confront the Ottomans in “Marj Dabiq”, these Harafish and their “sultan” joined him [24].

Thus, the thugs and the harfish, or marginal groups of people from the poor social classes, played a remarkable role in the history of the medieval Islamic ages, socially and politically, and they expressed their living and daily crises in various ways, most of which combined violence, organized crime, and deviation from the norm, a phenomenon similar to its counterparts in today's world of Many aspects.

________________________________________________

Sources:

[1] Gustave Le Bon: The Psychology of the Masses, p. 65.

[2] Ibn Kathir: The Beginning and the End, 13/316.

[3] Ibrahim Zaarour: Al-Saqeb, p. 144.

[4] Ibn Battuta: The Journey of Ibn Battuta (1/214).

[5] Unknown: The History of the Mamluk Sultans, Zitterstein investigation, Brill Press, Leiden 1919, p. 44.

[6] Al-Subki: The restorer of blessings and the exterminator of curses, p. 114.

[7] Badr al-Din al-Ayni: The Contract of Juman in the History of Ahl al-Zaman 1/153-156.

[8] Al-Dhahabi: History of Islam 52/480.

[9] André Raymond: Chapters from the Social History of Ottoman Cairo, p. 268.

[10] Shakir Mustafa: Popular Movements and Their Leaders in Damascus, pp. 174-213.

[11] Ibn Tulun Al-Salihi: Informing Al-Wari who was appointed as a representative of the Turks in Greater Damascus, pp. 195-203.

[12] Ibrahim Zaarour: Previous, p. 142.

[13] Al-Maqrizi: Al-Suluk Part 2, Volume 2, p. 381.

[14] Ibn Tulun Al-Salihi: The Fruit of Al-Khalan in Accidents of Time, pg. 70.

[1] Ibn Tulun: Al-Saqib, p. 145.

[16] Ibn Tulun: Al-Iqtisad, p. 95.

[17] Al-Maqrizi: Al-Salakh to Know the Countries of the Kings 3/211.

[18] Al-Maqrizi: Previous 4/375.

[19] Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani: Anba’ al-Ghamr with the sons of al-Omar, 1/405.

[20] Jamal al-Din bin Taghri Bardi: The Shining Stars in the News of Egypt and Cairo, 15/97.

[21] Ibn Taghri Bardi: The same previous one.

[22] The Journey of Ibn Battuta 1/214.

[23] Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Sorra: The Luminous Durra in the Dhahirah State, p. 6.

[24] Ibn Aja: The Battle between the Mamluks and the Ottoman Turks, p. 240.