É. Apor , I. Ormos (ed.): Goldziher Memorial Conference, June 21–22, 2000, Budapest.

LARSSON, Göran: Ignaz Goldziher on the Shuübiyya Movement

IGNAZ GOLDZIHER ON THE SHLCÜBIYYA M

OVEMENT Gibb also claims that Goldziher overemphasised the support which the shü'übiyya received from the 'Abbasid caliphs and the Persian viziers. The example of Abu TJbayda Ma

cmar b. Al-Muthannä, used by Goldziher as a true representative of the shu'übiyya cause,

2

1 is not convincing according to Gibb. Even though this man was a distinguished philologist who sought to find foreign elements in Arab culture, for Gibb it is difficult to see Abü 'Ubayda as a typical example of the whole class of shü'übiyya philologists and genealogists, since he was actually a follower of khärijite ideas and a supporter of Arab culture, not a promoter of the shü'übiyya cause.

2

2 But in defence of Goldziher it should be pointed out that it is difficult to analyse and interpret the sayings of Abü 'TJbayda in a clear and satisfying manner. Despite Gibb's critique, it is still possible to find indications that this writer could have been a supporter of the non-Arabs. Secondly, it is difficult to make a clear distinction between the opinions of the followers of the khärijitism and shü' übiyya. Both movements were used to oppose the Umayyad dynasty, and both denied privileges to any race. And thirdly, many works related to the shü'übiyya are written in a satirical style (often arranged according to a dualistic scheme comprising negative and positive statements), which makes it difficult to decide whether they are supporting the non-Arabs or arc in favour of the Arabs. The Kitäb fak.hr assüdän of al-Jähiz, a work often viewed as a satire not in favour of the non-Arabs, even though in form it appears to support them, exemplifies the problem. Irrespective of its paradoxical nature, al-Jähiz's text should rather be seen as an attack on, and criticism of, the followers of the shu übiyya. The Arabist Bernard Lewis writes: "His [i.e. al-Jähiz] defense of the blacks, though in parts no doubt intended seriously, must be understood as a parody of shü'übiyya tracts, intended to throw ridicule on Persian pretensions by advancing similar arguments on behalf of the lowly and despised Zanj".

2

3 Like Gibb, Roy P. Mottahedeh argues that Goldziher's analysis of the shuübiyya was primarily influenced by the tensions of his time between the growth in Hungarian nationalism and the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the end of the nineteenth century. Being a Jew, Goldziher belonged to the group that had gained most from this development, burgeoning economy and social climate. However, the very same development also created tensions in Hungary, especially between the urban population, to which many Jews belonged, and the rural population, in which anti-Semitism began to increase from the end of the nineteenth century . 4 Because of this specific historical context, Goldziher may have been motivated to overemphasize the nationalist and ethnic pride that prevailed among the followers of the shü'übiyya J

2 For Gibb and Mottahedeh, however, it would be anachronistic to 2

1 Goldziher 1889-1890, 195-206. 2

2 Gibb 1962, 67-68. 2

3 Bernard Lewis, Race and Color in Islam

, New York 1971, 18. 2

4 Jörg Hoensch, A History of Modern Hungary 1867-1994, London 1996, 28-36. 2

5 Mottahedeh 1976, 163. 155