A Broad Assessment
**It may be possible to argue that the Imamıs did, in fact, emerge in the mid- or even late 2nd/8th century **and then purged problematic traditions, creating the impression that they had differentiated from the larger Kufan population in a much earlier period. This process, however, would either (1) require a broad consensus on early-2nd/8th-century transmitters who could unambiguously be appropriated by the Imamıs without opposition from other groups or (2) produce a significant category of transmitters claimed by rival communities. In the second scenario, we would likely encounter numerous individuals who were claimed by different communities as one of their own. The actual number of such contested transmitters, however, is minimal. The Imamıs share only 9 transmitters with the Sunnıs (Nu‘man b. Bashır (d. 64/683), ‘Abd Allah b. Ma‘qil b. Muqarrin (d. 80/699), Sa‘ıd b. al-Musayyab (d. 94/713), ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Aswad b. Yazıd (d. 100/718), ‘Āmir b. Sharahıl (d. 107/725), Jabir b. Yazıd al-Ju‘fı (d. 128/746), Habıb b. Qays b. Dınar (d. 122/740), Ibrahım b. ‘Abd al-‘Ala’ (d. 120/738), and Sulayman b. Mihran al-A‘mash), and 6 with the Zaydıs (Nu‘man b. Bashır (d. 64/683), Sarı b. Isma‘ıl (d. 107/725?), ‘Āmir b. Sharahıl (d. 107/725), Sa‘d b. Tarıf (d. mid 2nd/8th century), ‘Amr b. Shimr (d. 157/774), and Sulayman b. Mihran al-A‘mash), out of a grand total of the more than 1,400 transmitters distributed over 1,388 traditions. The simplest and most logical explanation of the data is that the Imamıs were an insular and distinctive community at the start of the 2nd/8th century.
In general, if the classical origin narrative of early Zaydism is correct, our data should reflect one of the following:
- A pattern in which Zaydı traditions include equal (or relatively equal) distributions of texts that share features with those of the Sunnıs (the Batrı component) and the Imamıs (the Jarudı component).
- A corpus of Zaydı traditions dominated by a Jarudı tendency as reflected in significant intersections with Imamı texts and minimal similarities with Sunnı accounts.
Our results, however, are not indicative of either of these hypotheticals. Rather, we find that the earliest layer of Zaydı traditions are overwhelmingly Batrı in that they resemble Sunnı accounts in their use of authorities, transmitters, and style. In fact, there is a near-complete lack of traditions of a Jarudı mold in the early 2nd/8th century. It is only in the course of the mid- to late 2nd/8th and early 3rd/9th centuries that Jarudı accounts begin to appear concurrent with a precipitous decline in Batrı traditions.
The Tipping Point (145–68/763–85)
The first signs of a change in Zaydism materialized in the twenty years following al-Nafs al-Zakiyya’s death. The ‘Abbasids instituted a massive wave of repressive measures that forced the Zaydıs underground. In this period, the titular head of the movement in Iraq was Zayd’s eldest living son, ‘Isa (see Débuts, 61; DIQ, 52), who spent the last few decades of his life (following Ibrahım’s defeat in 145/763) under the protection of his Kufan followers. ‘I sa had commanded the right flank of al-Nafs al-Zakiyya’s army in his final stand against al-Mansur (Maqatil, 344; MasabıhII, 487) before fleeing to Basra where he became one of Ibrahım’s closest political and military advisors (MasabıhII, 487–8).
The Emergence of Jafari Zaydism (169/786)
The next major Zaydı military rebellion erupted in Medina in 169/786 under the leadership of Sah ib Fakhkh al-H usayn b. ‘Alı b. al-Hasan b. al-Hasan b. al-H asan b. ‘Alı b. Abı T a lib (d. 169/786) (al-Ya‘qubı, Tarıkh, 2:348–9). During the reign of al-Mahdı, al-H usayn had enjoyed a degree of influence and prestige as the caliph routinely granted him large sums of money and even acceded to his amnesty requests for prominent imprisoned ‘Alids (Débuts, 62–3; EI2, s.v. al-Husayn b. ‘Alı Sahib Fakhkh). The political landscape changed dramatically in 168/785 with the deaths of both ‘Īsa b. Zayd and al-Mahdı . The new caliph, al-Ha dı (rl. 169–70/785–6), was much more aggressive in his dealing with the ‘Alids, and the Iraqı Zaydıs were spoiling for a fight after a long period of political quiescence. When al-Hadı heard whispers of a possible Ku fan insurrection, he ordered al-Husayn b. ‘Alı and other prominent ‘Alids residing in Iraq to Medina, where they could be kept under the watchful eye of the newly appointed governor of the Hija z, ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azı z b. ‘Abd Alla h al-‘Umarı (d. after 169/786) (Maqatil, 371; MasabıhII, 465 and 468; Ifada, 93–4; Akhbar, 132 and, for more on this important source, Jarrar. “Arba‘u,” 267–8; Débuts, 62).
Leave a Reply