Black on Buff ware, which characterizes the cultural entity "Bakun", was accepted in the beginning of the 5th millennium BC of Fars, southwest Iran, and this phenomenon coincides with the shift from Neolithic to Chalcolithic in this area. Two issues remain unclarified as to this phenomenon. First, the precise timing of the acceptance of the Black on Buff ware is unclear. Secondly, the process of the acceptance of the Black on Buff ware should also be further elucidated. This paper deals with these issues by referring to potsherds from Tall-i Jari A, square C, which is kept in the University Museum, the University of Tokyo. This site, excavated by Namio Egami and Seiichi Masuda, has cultural periods from Late Pottery Neolithic (Jari and Shamsabad) to Chalcolithic (Early Bakun). The square C, which consists of five layers according to the author's stratigraphic analysis, contains a transitional period between the Shamsabad and the Bakun. A quantitative analysis of potsherds from this square shows that Black on Buff ware occupies only 20％ of all wares even in the most upper layer. In addition, the analysis points out that Black on Buff potsherds in the lower layers differ from those in the upper layers (Early Bakun) in terms of decoration and form. This paper will discuss the timing and the process of the introduction of Black on Buff ware in Fars by using these results. It also addresses a new radiocarbon date from Tall-i Jari A, Square C.
This study considers the increase and decrease in īmān (belief) in Māturīdism and illustrates the structure and concept of īmān within this school. It is commonly understood that, contrary to the majority of Ash‘arītes and ahl al-ḥadīth (people of ḥadīth), who admit the increase and decrease in īmān, a vast majority of Māturīdītes deny this because, according to their theory, work is not a constituent of īmān, and īmān is composed of only taṣdīq (assent) by the heart, or by another perspective, taṣdīq by the heart and iqrār (confession) by the tongue. Even among the Māturīdītes, who deny the increase and decrease in īmān, a changeable aspect related to this concept is perceived, but it is believed that the core structure of īmān is unchangeable. The changeable aspect is referred to as nūr (light), ḍiyā’ (brilliance), or thamara (fruit) of īmān. These changeable aspects of īmān are not components of īmān, even though they originate from īmān. However, a group of Māturīdītes, all of whom are scholars from the Ottoman era, believe that īmān is unchangeable only when it refers to mu’man bi-hi (what should be believed), and it accepts the increase and decrease in īmān when it refers to assent. The author focuses on the following two results of the study. First, those scholars among the Māturīdītes who admit the increase and decrease in īmān are all from the Ottoman era. This perspective could be interpreted as the later Ottoman Māturīdītes' approach to the Ashartes theories on īmān-related issues. Second, the Māturīdītes who admit that there is something changeable, separate these mutable concepts cautiously from the structure of īmān, which are immutable. By doing so, this school succeeds in describing the precise relationship between the concept of īmān and its related concepts.
In Medieval Arabic medical texts, a specific property (khāṣṣa) is thought to be one of the effects of a medicine, and effective in a specific humor or organ. This property is mainly mentioned to explain two phenomena, purgative medicines' attraction of a certain humor and theriacas strengthening of human innate heat. Galen had advocated the theory that the faculty of attracting a specific material inheres in a medical substance as its nature (referred to as the theory of inherence). The same view can be seen in the texts of Islamic philosopher-physicians such as Ibn Sīnā (d. 1037). On the other hand, Ibn Rushd (d. 1198) perceived the defects of this theory and criticised it. This article examines his criticism of the theory of inherence in his discussions about purgative medicines and theriacas. Ibn Rushd says that using the theory of inheritance, we cannot explain the phenomenon that when someone takes more than one dose of purgative medicine, it attracts not only the specific humor, but all of the humors. He then proposes the alternative theory that the specific property originates in the proportions of the qualities in the attracting and the attracted materials. From this perspective, he insists that the object of attraction varies according to the amount of the heat in the medicine. As for theriaca, Ibn Rushd criticises the theory of inherence as seen in the writings of Ibn Sīnā Ibn Sīnā claims that theriaca's specific property is generated from its substance, i.e. the combination of form with matter, not the mixture of the four qualities. But according to Ibn Rushd, with this explanation, it is impossible to explain the body's various responses to theriaca. Therefore he maintains that one must explain its specific property in terms of the four qualities. To conclude, Ibn Rushd considers his theory to be more capable of explaining various phenomena than the theory of inherence is.
The Būsa‘īd dynasty based at Muscat expanded over the Western Indian Ocean and maintained amicable terms with the British home and Indian governments during the early 19th century. This paper reconsiders the relationships between Būsa‘īdī and British polities by investigating not only their diplomatic contacts but also the Būsa‘īdī sovereign's commercial-cum-naval fleet, the essential but unexamined source of his maritime power. At the end of the 18th century, the British government recognised the Būsa‘īd dynasty as an equal polity. In 1806, the sovereign Sayyid Sa‘īd succeeded to his father's relationships with Britain, yet he had not the power and influence of his father. Therefore, he actively cooperated with Britain against Qawāsim, Būsa‘īd's nearest rival polity, thereby increasing his influence in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Although Qawāsim's power diminished in 1820, Sayyid Sa‘īd continued acting in concert with Britain's policy, from which he occasionally suffered. Consequently, British officials came to believe that he had always been their 'faithful and cordial ally'. The classical works affected by such naïve views have considered Būsa‘īd and Britain as firm allies at all times. In spite of such views, their interests actually avoided serious conflicts through Sayyid Sa‘īd's concessions. In contrast, the Omani scholar M. R. Bhacker, criticising the classical views, emphasised the discordances between British and Būsa‘īdī interests and even British oppression of Būsa‘īdī interests. In fact, many of the vessels that belonged to the Būsa‘īdī sovereign were built in Bombay or Cochin with the British authorities' approval and support, and as a result, his fleet rapidly expanded in the early 19th century. In other words, friendly terms with Britain laid the foundation for Būsa‘īd's growth as a maritime power in the Gulfs and the Western Indian Ocean−the very reason for Sayyid Sa‘īd's appeasement.
This paper discusses the “group ijāza,” a special kind of ijāza (permission) of transmission sent from a group to a person or to another group without a direct contact between the conferring and conferred parties, and examines its meanings and social background. This group ijāza is referred to as "ijāzajāmi‘a" in the Majma‘ al-ādāb fī mu‘jam al-alqāb, an Arabic biographical dictionary written in early 14th-century Baghdad by the Baghdadi scholar, Ibn al-Fuwaṭī (1244-1322). Ibn al-Fuwaṭī refers to the requests and conferments of group ijāzas that took place between Mecca and Baghdad and between Damascus and Baghdad. Meccan scholars sent a group ijāza from Mecca to Ibn al-Fuwaṭī in 1280/81 through an intermediary, a Baghdadi friend of Ibn al-Fuwaṭī. The conferrers included a member of the famous Meccan Ṭabarī family. Groups of Damascene scholars and notables repeatedly sent group ijāza requests to Baghdad between 1288 and 1299. In these requests, they asked not only Ibn al-Fuwaṭī but also probably other Baghdadi scholars to confer ijāzas on their children. The names of 150 Damascene children were written in a group ijāza request dated 1296/97. The group ijāza was an effective means of collecting ijāzas from distant cities. Although the ulama had ceased to travel widely in pursuit of knowledge by the late 13th century, they maintained their intention to get ijāzas from ulama in distant scholarly centers. The group ijāza could be substituted for a studying trip. It contributed to the formation and perpetuation of the intellectual elite class of a city since only some specific ulama families had access to it. The exchange of ijāzas between Baghdad and Damascus in the late 13th century indicates that a close social connection existed between the two cities.