Stirring the Stagnation of Sudanese History 12

Stirring the Stagnation of Sudanese History 12: Some names of the Beja country inhabitants in Arabic sources. Dr. Ahmed Elyas Hussein (ahmed.elyas@gmail.com). The Khasa tribe and the Kingdom of Suakin in the 9th–15th centuries AD. A number of early Arabic sources dealt with the Khasa tribe and the Kingdom of Suakin, though the information provided is brief and sometimes conflicting. Below, we review what was stated by Al-Masudi, Ibn Hawqal, Ibn Said, Yaqut al-Hamawi, Al-Dimashqi, Al-Umari, Al-Nuwayri, and Al-Maqrizi. Texts on the Khasa tribe: Al-Masudi (d. 957 AD) - quoted by Al-Maqrizi (Al-Mawa'iz, p. 553): "Suakin... its people are a group of Beja called the Khasa, and they are Muslims, and they have a kingdom there." Ibn Hawqal (977 AD): "In the districts of Barka are the clans of Kudaim... and adjacent to it from the direction of the sea shores are the Khasa, numerous clans in the plain and the mountain." (Ibn Hawqal, p. 59). Ibn Said (1286 AD): "To the north of Saharta, from the Nile to the sea, are the lands of the Khasa... It is famously known about them that they castrate those who fall into their hands." (Ibn Said, p. 98). Al-Dimashqi (1338 AD): "The city of Aydhab is the port for merchants from Yemen and Egypt. Adjacent to them is a group of Sudanese called the Lower Khasa, who are infidels, and the Upper Khasa, who are Muslims, and they are the least jealous and protective of women. Most of them do not wear stitched clothing and do not live in cities." (Al-Dimashqi, p. 239). Al-Nuwayri (d. 732 AH/1332 AD): "Suakin... its people are a group of Beja called the Khasa, and they are Muslims, and they have a kingdom there." (Al-Nuwayri, Vol. 1, p. 66). The Khasa Tribe: The Khasa are one of the large and ancient Beja tribes in the region. They were mentioned in the Ezana inscription in the fourth century AD, stating that he went to fight the Noba who had raided a number of tribes, including the Khasa. (Arkell, p. 112). Ibn Hawqal mentioned that the Khasa tribe consisted of many clans spread between the plain and the mountain, connected to the clans of the Kudaim tribe. Ibn Hawqal identified the habitat of Kudaim as being in the districts of Wadi Barka. Consequently, the habitat of the Khasa tribe is located east of Wadi Barka between Kudaim and the Red Sea coast. It seems this is also what Ibn Said (p. 98) mentioned regarding the location of the Khasa tribe, as he defined their location "from the Nile to the sea." Some Arab geographers apply the name "the Nile" to Wadi Barka due to their incomplete knowledge of the region's geography. Ibn Said speaks of a "Nile" in the "north of Saharta" region, which is located south of present-day Asmara. He says (p. 117) about the land of Taka: "And to the west of Suakin on the Nile of Abyssinia is the land of the Baka [Taka], who are brothers of the Abyssinians who are on this Nile." Naturally, there is no Nile in that region, but rather Wadi Barka. The Nile here refers to Wadi Barka, which flows—as Ibn Hawqal (p. 62) mentions—into the Red Sea between Badi' and Suakin. Thus, the habitat of the Khasa tribe according to Ibn Said is located between Wadi Barka and the Red Sea. Al-Dimashqi (p. 239) suggested that the Khasa were spread as far as the port of Aydhab in the north, perhaps meaning Suakin, which sources linked to the Khasa tribe. Al-Dimashqi divided the Khasa into two sections: Lower Khasa (infidels) and Upper Khasa (Muslims). The "lower" refers to the northern part of the region. Wadi Barka flows from south to north, so its lower part is in the north and the upper part is in the south. Al-Dimashqi made the northern Khasa infidels, and Yaqut al-Hamawi (d. 1229 AD) had previously suggested this, mentioning that the inhabitants of Suakin were "black Beja Christians" (Yaqut, p. 164). This does not agree with what Al-Masudi, Al-Nuwayri, and Al-Umari (p. 245) mentioned. Al-Umari said about Suakin: "Its people are Muslims who uphold Islam." It seems that what Al-Masudi, Al-Nuwayri, and Al-Umari mentioned is closer to the truth, as Al-Masudi gathered his material about the Beja in Egypt, as did Al-Umari and Al-Nuwayri, who were heads of the Diwan al-Insha (Chancery) in Egypt. Crawford believes the Khasa habitat was near Keren, while Munzinger places them south of Asmara based on Ibn Said's mention that the Khasa were north of Saharta. If we take into account what Ibn Hawqal said about the Khasa being many clans between the sea and the mountain, and what Al-Masudi, Yaqut al-Hamawi, Al-Umari, and Al-Nuwayri mentioned about the connection of the Khasa tribe to Suakin, I believe that the Khasa areas are located in the northern part of Wadi Barka and extend east to the Red Sea and north to Suakin. Kingdom of Suakin between the 9th–15th Centuries: Brief references were made in Arabic sources to Suakin before it fell under the rule of the Mamluks in 664 AH/1265 AD. Therefore, information about Suakin before the thirteenth century does not help much in identifying its kingdom. Based on information from Arabic sources, the following stages in the history of the Kingdom of Suakin can be observed: The Khasa stage (10th–12th centuries AD), the Sharif Alam al-Din stage (13th century AD), the Sharif Zayj bin Numay stage (14th century AD), the Hadarba stage (15th century AD), and the Ottoman stage (16th century AD). Al-Hamdani (Vol. 1, p. 220) and Ibn Hawqal in the fourth century AH (tenth century AD) mentioned Suakin as one of the cities of the Red Sea but did not mention its kingdom. The oldest reference I found regarding the Kingdom of Suakin is in Al-Maqrizi, in the text he quoted from Al-Masudi in the fourth century AH (tenth century AD) about Suakin, which states: "And its people are a group of Beja called the Khasa, and they have a kingdom there" (in Al-Maqrizi, Madbouli, Vol. 1, p. 553). The same text appears in Al-Nuwayri (Al-Nuwayri, p. 195), likely also quoted from Al-Masudi. Thus, the Khasa kingdom in Suakin existed in the tenth century AD as stated by Al-Masudi. It is noteworthy that Al-Yaqubi (d. 284 AH/897 AD), who lived in the ninth century AD, did not mention the Kingdom of Suakin among the five Beja kingdoms he wrote about. Both writers—Al-Yaqubi and Al-Masudi—visited Egypt when gathering material for their books, noting that information became available about the northern Beja country in the first half of the third century AH (9th century AD) with the beginning of Muslim involvement in mining in the northern Beja country, i.e., before Al-Yaqubi authored his books on history and geography. Was the Khasa kingdom in Suakin small and did not attract the attention of Al-Yaqubi's narrators, or was Suakin under the authority of the Hadarba kingdom, especially since one of the clauses of the agreement signed in 216 AH/831 AD by Kanun bin Abd al-Aziz, the agent or representative of the Hadarba kingdom "Naqis" with the Abbasid Caliphate, states: "The plain of your country and its mountain, from the end of the Aswan border of the land of Egypt to the limit between Dahlak and Badi', shall be a possession of Al-Ma'mun Abdullah bin Harun, Commander of the Faithful." It is noted that Al-Yaqubi (History, p. 22) placed the fourth kingdom of the Beja kingdoms in the region located "between a country called Badi', which is the coast of the Great Sea, to the limit of Barakat," which is the same region that sources mentioned for the Khasa kingdom. Were the two kingdoms adjacent? Or is the neighbor the Kingdom of Khasa? The answer requires further research. Sharif Alam al-Din stage (13th century AD): There is no information about the Kingdom of Suakin after the tenth century until the thirteenth century AD, when some references to the Kingdom of Suakin appeared at the beginning of the Mamluk era. Al-Maqrizi mentioned in the events of 662 AH/1263 AD that news arrived that the ruler of Suakin was seizing the property of merchants who had died, and that the Egyptian authorities sent to him urging him to stop. (Al-Maqrizi, Al-Suluk, Vol. 2, p. 5). Then, Arabic sources agreed on the entry of the city of Suakin under the authority of the Mamluks in 664 AH/1265 AD. The Mamluks sent a military campaign to Suakin, and its ruler, Sharif Alam al-Din, fled, but returned after the Mamluk army took control of the city. Sharif Alam al-Din then entered into obedience to the Mamluks, and Suakin became dependent on the Egyptian authorities (Al-Umari, Masalik, p. 246; Ibn Khaldun, Vol. 5, p. 481; Al-Maqrizi, Al-Suluk, Vol. 2, p. 5). The name of Sharif Alam al-Din also appeared in the events of 680 AH/1281 AD, where Al-Maqrizi (Al-Suluk, Vol. 3, p. 152) mentioned that the Egyptian authorities asked the ruler of Suakin, Sharif Alam al-Din, to mediate between the Juhayna and Rifa'a tribes in a war that had broken out between them. The ruler of Suakin's name appears in Al-Nuwayri (Vol. 8, p. 242) as Sharif Alam al-Din Asbaghani. Sharif Alam al-Din was the ruler of Suakin in 1263 AD. Who is Sharif Alam al-Din? How did he become the ruler of Suakin? When did that happen? Sources do not provide us with information to answer these questions. Al-Masudi (in Al-Maqrizi, Mawa'iz, p. 553) dealt with the Khasa kingdom in Suakin without mentioning its king, and so did Al-Nuwayri. Ibn Said (p. 117) mentioned that the King of Suakin was a Muslim without identifying him. I have not found a biography of Sharif Alam al-Din in history or biographical books, perhaps further research will shed light on this. There is a narrative in Beja tradition—for which I have not found a source—that made Sharif Alam al-Din a local leader, the son of Ahmed bin Ali bin Abdullah al-Da'i, appointed by the Mamluks in 664 AH/1265 AD as governor of Suakin. This narrative conflicts with what comes from Arabic sources (Al-Umari, Masalik, p. 246; Ibn Khaldun, Vol. 5, p. 481; Al-Maqrizi, Al-Suluk, Vol. 2, p. 5) that the Mamluks fought the ruler of Suakin, Sharif Alam al-Din, and after his defeat, they left him as governor of Suakin. As for how Sharif Alam al-Din attained the rule of Suakin, it seems acceptable that this happened through marriage into the Beja ruling family in Suakin. The sources (Al-Masudi, Al-Nuwayri, and Al-Maqrizi) made it clear that the Khasa tribe was the one ruling Suakin at that time. It can be said that one of the Sharifs came to Suakin. The Fatimid Sharifs at that time ruled the eastern Red Sea coast of Yemen and Hejaz, and were also spread in remote areas to avoid the Abbasids since the establishment of their caliphate. The presence of one of the Sharifs in the Islamic Kingdom of Suakin at that time is a likely possibility. That Sharif may have married a princess from the ruling Khasa family and fathered Alam al-Din, who inherited the rule of Suakin from his grandfather. There is no information about the situation in Suakin during the reign of Sharif Alam al-Din. It seems that the port of Suakin began to flourish in the Mamluk era. Al-Ayni (d. 1451 AD) mentioned that the Mamluks securing land and sea trade routes, and encouraging Karimi merchants to frequent the port of Suakin, helped in the prosperity of the port of Suakin (Al-Ayni, Al-Warraq, Vol. 1, p. 110). Sharif Alam al-Din's rule ended after 1281 AD, which is the last report about him in Arabic sources. Sharif Zayd bin Abi Numay stage (14th century AD): About fifty years after the last news of Sharif Alam al-Din in 1281 AD, Ibn Battuta passed through Suakin in 1330 AD on his return from Hejaz and said: "The Sultan of the island of Suakin at the time of my arrival was Sharif Zayd bin Abi Numay, and his father was the Emir of Mecca... It came to him from the Beja, for they are his maternal uncles, and with him was an army of Beja, and the sons of Kahil and the Arab tribe of Juhayna" (Ibn Battuta, p. 254). The circulating narrative says that there was a solid friendship between the Sharif of Mecca and ruler of Hejaz, Sharif Muhammad Najm al-Din Abu Numay I (died 1301 AD), and Sharif Alam al-Din, the ruler of Suakin. That friendship was crowned by the marriage of Sharif Abu Numay to the daughter of Alam al-Din, who bore him a son named Zayd the Younger, who became the ruler of Suakin. This narrative is based on what Ibn Battuta mentioned (above) and what Al-Dawudi (p. 118) mentioned that "Suakin belonged to his maternal grandfather," for Zayd's mother was a Beja woman, and it is most likely that Zayd's mother was a princess from the Khasa tribe, the maternal uncles of Sharif Alam al-Din. Sharif Zayd's name appears in Shiite biographical books: Izz al-Din Zayd the Younger bin Najm al-Din Muhammad Abu Numay bin Abi Saad al-Hasan bin Ali bin Qatada al-Hasani, and his lineage reaches Hassan bin Ali bin Abi Talib. Sayyid Ahmed bin Ali al-Dawudi (Ibn Anba), the mayor of genealogists—as confirmed on the cover of his book "Umdat al-Talib fi Ansab Al Abi Talib," who died in 828 AH/1424 AD—wrote a biography for Zayd, his father Najm al-Din Muhammad, and his grandfather Abu Saad. Al-Dawudi (p. 116–117) mentioned that Abu Saad's mother was an Abyssinian umm al-walad (concubine who bore a child), and mentioned that she said to him as he was heading to fight a battle: "You have stood in a position that if you win or are killed, people will say: The son of the Messenger of God has won or the son of the Messenger of God has been killed. And if you flee, people will say the son of a black woman has fled. So consider which of the two is more beloved to you." Among the sons of Abu Saad was Najm al-Din Muhammad Abu Numay. Ibn al-Tiqtaqa (p. 106) mentioned that the mother of Abu Numay was Hasani, the daughter of his father's paternal uncle, and mentioned the names of seven of his children whose mother(s) was Abyssinian, and mentioned that Zayd the First's mother was Radawiyya, and mentioned Izz al-Din Zayd as one of Abu Numay's children but did not mention his mother. Al-Dawudi (p. 117) describes Abu Numay as being "at the height of valor and the end of courage; he participated with his father in the Emirate of Mecca as a boy... and he had thirty sons." Al-Maqrizi (Al-Suluk, Vol. 21, p. 351) said about him: "It is said that if he were not a Zaydi, he would have been fit for the caliphate due to his good qualities." Al-Dawudi mentioned that "Sayyid Izz al-Din Zayd the Younger bin Abi Numay ruled Suakin, and it belonged to his maternal grandfather, and he was of the descendants of Al-Ghamr bin Al-Hassan Al-Muthanna, then he was poisoned there. He was expelled from Suakin and came to Iraq, and he had come to it once before before ruling Suakin. He took charge of the Tahiriyya office in Iraq. Zayd was generous, munificent, and prestigious. He died in Al-Hilla and was buried in the honorable shrine of Al-Ghari in the back of Najaf. Zayd bin Abi Numay has no descendants." (Al-Dawudi, p. 118). Sources did not indicate the time when Zayd inherited the rule of Suakin, but it is clear from what Ibn Battuta mentioned that he took power in or before 1330 AD, the year Ibn Battuta visited Suakin. Nor is the end date of his rule clear, as Al-Dawudi mentioned that he left Suakin for Baghdad poisoned, which indicates that a conflict occurred in Suakin that ended his rule. The entry of Suakin under the rule of the Banu Numay led to an increase in its ties with the ports of the western Red Sea and a revival of its commercial movement. Zayd's reign witnessed the end of work in the mining areas in the northern Beja country and the deterioration of the port of Aydhab. This led to the Hadarba tribe losing the most important source of its income, which was concentrated in the port of Aydhab, as one-third of the city's income, as Ibn Battuta (p. 254) mentioned, was "for the Sultan Al-Nasir and two-thirds for the King of the Beja, who is known as the Hadarbi." The Hadarba stage: It seems that the influence of the Hadarba increased in the mid-fourteenth century, as Al-Umari (d. 1348 AD) mentioned the activity of the Hadarba and their expansion towards the south under the leadership of Samura bin Malik, saying: "The Sheikh of the Hadarba, Samura bin Malik, is one of great number and solid power, attacking Abyssinia and the nations of the Sudan, and [the Sultan] wrote to the governors of the Upper Region without exception and all the Bedouins to assist him, support him, and ride to fight with him whenever he wanted. And he wrote him a proclamation of what lands will be opened, and a delegation for the Emirate of the Bedouins of the South from what is near Qus to where his goal reaches and his flag is centered." (Al-Umari, Al-Ta'rif, p. 247). The Hadarba were able at the beginning of the fifteenth century AD to reach the rule of Suakin. Al-Qalqashandi (d. 1418 AD) mentioned that "the Beja, their base is Suakin, and its master now is one of the Arabs known as the Hadarba... and he has correspondence from the Sultanic doors in the Egyptian lands, and it is said in his definition, the Hadarbi..." (Subh al-A'sha, p. 283). The concept of 'urban (Bedouins) and 'Arab (Arabs) at that time was discussed in topic No. 10 of this series, and it became clear that the word 'urban was applied to multiple groups of Arab and non-Arab tribes. What was mentioned about the Arabism of the Hadarba was discussed in the third chapter of the fourth part of the book "Sudan: Self-Awareness and Rooting Identity," and it is known that the Hadarba belong to the Beja tribe group, which Arabic sources classified from the Hamitic lineage. The takeover of Suakin by the Hadarba led to the strengthening of their influence in the region, but information about the Hadarba in this period is not available. It seems that their relationship with the Mamluks was tense, as a Mamluk campaign in 1426 destroyed the port of Aydhab, where the Mamluks were participating with the Hadarba in its management and tax collection. A few years later, the Mamluks sent a military campaign in 1439 AD to Suakin. Al-Maqrizi (Al-Suluk, Vol. 7, p. 434) mentioned: "The Kashif Muhammad al-Saghir and a group with him headed to take Suakin." Al-Maqrizi did not clarify the results of the campaign, but it seems it led to the Mamluks participating with the Hadarba in ruling Suakin as was the situation before in Aydhab. The Mamluk sultans took Aydhab as a place for exiling those who had fallen out of favor, as is evident from what Ibn Iyas (Vol. 3, p. 259 and Vol. 4, p. 80) mentioned in the events of the year 894 AH (1499 AD) and the events of the year 911 AH (1505 AD). Sources do not provide us with information about the situation in Suakin until the beginning of the sixteenth century AD, where the Mamluks sent a campaign in 1505 AD about which Ibn Iyas (Vol. 4, p. 96) said: "When the army arrived in Suakin, they took it under amnesty and took possession of what was in it of bahar and others, and dispersed its people from it." This means the Mamluks took sole control of the rule of Suakin. Twelve years after this campaign, the Ottomans occupied Egypt in 1517 AD and ended the Mamluk rule, and their fleet entered the Red Sea. It seems that the end of Mamluk rule in Egypt led to the emergence of local leaders in Suakin and the regions adjacent to it, because when the Ottomans entered Suakin—as their documents clarified—they found a number of emirs in Suakin and declared their entry under the obedience of the Ottomans (An'am, p. 199). Through the above, it is clear that the history of the Khasa tribe and the Kingdom of Suakin did not find the required attention from researchers. Assuming that the mothers of the rulers of Suakin, Alam al-Din and Zayd bin Abi Numay, belong to the Khasa tribe, the Khasa tribe would have been linked to the rule of Suakin from the tenth to the fourteenth century AD. It is also clear that there is a scarcity of information about the history of the Khasa tribe and the Kingdom of Suakin, which led to reliance on oral narratives and local heritage recorded by references. Of course, heritage and oral narratives are important in studying history, but they should not be relied upon alone, but rather it is necessary to search for sources that support or contradict them. We continue: The Halanga tribe and the Kingdom of Taka.