al-Hafiz
al-Hafiz li-Din Allah | |
---|---|
Imam–Caliph of the Fatimid Caliphate | |
Reign | 23 January 1132 – 10 October 1149 |
Predecessor | al-Amir bi-Ahkam Allah |
Successor | al-Zafir bi-Amr Allah |
Born | 1074/5 or 1075/6 Ascalon |
Died | 10 October 1149 (aged 72-75) Cairo |
Issue | |
Dynasty | Fatimid |
Father | Abu'l-Qasim Muhammad ibn al-Mustansir Billah |
Religion | Isma'ilism |
Abūʾl-Maymūn ʿAbd al-Majīd ibn Muḥammad ibn al-Mustanṣir, better known by his
Al-Hafiz first rose to power as regent after the death of his cousin,
On 23 January 1132, al-Hafiz proclaimed himself as the legitimate Isma'ili imam and caliph. While necessary in view of the lack of another heir, the succession was highly irregular, as the
As ruler, al-Hafiz tried to rein in his over-mighty
Origin
The future al-Hafiz was born as Abd al-Majid at
Regency and imprisonment
On 7 October 1130, Caliph al-Amir bi-Ahkam Allah (r. 1101–1130) was assassinated. He left only a six-month-old son, Abu'l-Qasim al-Tayyib, to succeed him, with no designated regent or serving vizier, as al-Amir had resumed the personal direction of government affairs, instead of entrusting the administration to a potentially dangerously powerful vizier.[3][7][8] Al-Amir's murder put a premature end to his attempts to once again concentrate power in the hands of the caliph instead of over-mighty generals and ministers. Given the fragility of succession, it furthermore endangered the very survival of the Fatimid dynasty.[7]
At this time, Abd al-Majid was the oldest surviving male of the dynasty.[3][2] What happened next appears to have effectively been a coup: two of al-Amir's favourites, Hizar al-Mulk Hazarmard (or Jawarmard) and Barghash, who had influence over the army, allied themselves with Abd al-Majid, to control the government. Abd al-Majid was to become regent, while Hazarmard (winning out over Barghash) would become vizier, and the Armenian Abu'l-Fath Yanis the commander-in-chief and chamberlain to the regent.[4][9][10] Hazarmard evidently hoped to establish himself as a quasi-sultan in the style of the all-powerful Armenian vizier Badr al-Jamali and his son al-Afdal Shahanshah[a] while Abd al-Majid may have supported him with the aim of gaining the throne for himself.[10][14]
As de facto head of state, Abd al-Majid used the title of
Whatever the ambitions and intentions of the leaders of the new regime were, they were cut short within a fortnight of al-Amir's death. At the ceremony of the new vizier's investiture, the army, assembled at the
Rise to the throne and the Hafizi–Tayyibi schism
The Fatimid elites refused to accept these changes. Members of al-Amir's bodyguard assassinated Kutayfat in a counter-coup on 8 December 1131 and released Abd al-Majid from his prison.[2][37][38] This restoration of the dynasty was thereafter commemorated annually, up until the end of the Fatimid Caliphate, as the 'Feast of Victory' (ʿĪd al-Naṣr).[2][37]
Given his lack of legitimation, as he was not in the line of succession to al-Amir, Abd al-Majid initially continued ruling as a regent. The first coins of his reign were struck with him still bearing the title of walī ʿahd al-muslimīn.
Al-Hafiz's highly irregular accession and claims to the imamate were largely accepted by the Isma'ili faithful in the Fatimid domains in Egypt, Nubia, and the Levant, but rebuffed by some communities. Most notably, this was the case in the only other major Isma'ili realm, Yemen, where the hitherto staunchly pro-Fatimid Sulayhid dynasty broke up. The Sulayhid queen, Arwa, upheld the rights of al-Tayyib, whose birth had been announced to her in a letter by al-Amir, while the regional dynasties of the Hamdanids and the Zurayids recognized al-Hafiz's claims.[44][45]
The issue was not merely political, but, given the pivotal role of the imam in the Isma'ili faith, also intensely religious. In the words of Stern, "on it depended the continuity of institutional religion as well as the personal salvation of the believer".
Thus, by 1132 the once unified Isma'ili movement had split into three branches: the Hafizi, which now became the official doctrine of the Fatimid realm, the Tayyibi, which mostly survived in the mountains of Yemen, and the Nizari.
denotes ruling
ISBN 978-0-521-61636-2 . |
Reign
The accession of al-Hafiz signalled the restoration of the Fatimid dynasty and the figure of the caliph, but the preceding events had shaken the regime's foundations. The new caliph enjoyed little authority over the army, and al-Hafiz's reign was marred by chronic instability, having to fend off rebellions and challenges to his legitimacy from ambitious warlords, and even from within his own family.[60] To bolster his legitimacy, al-Hafiz resorted, among other things, to converting the Shi'a festival of Ghadir Khumm into a festival celebrating the Fatimids.[61] Despite his weak position, al-Hafiz succeeded in remaining on the throne for almost two decades.[62]
Al-Hafiz continued the practice of appointing viziers to run the government in his name,[2] but the power concentrated into the office's hands since the days of Badr al-Jamali made it a danger even to the caliph, and al-Hafiz paid particular attention to his viziers' activities.[45] Indeed, for the last decade of his reign, he did not appoint any viziers, but instead relied on high-ranking clerks as ad hoc directors of government affairs.[2]
Vizierate of Yanis and first personal regime, 1132–1134
His first vizier was the Armenian Yanis, a former military slave of al-Afdal and thus a prominent member of the same army factions that had raised Kutayfat to power. Yanis had already occupied high offices under al-Amir, including chamberlain (ṣāḥib al-bāb), a post almost as powerful as the vizierate.[63][64] To enforce his own authority, he executed half of al-Amir's bodyguard and formed a private army, the Yānisiyya. His growing power alarmed the Caliph. When Yanis died in late 1132, after nine months in office, it was rumoured that the Caliph had had him poisoned.[63][65][66]
After Yanis' death, the powerful position of vizier was deliberately left vacant.
At the same time, the Caliph sought to bolster Fatimid credentials in the eyes of the Muslim world by once again taking up the mantle of champions of the
Vizierates of al-Hafiz's sons, 1134–1135
In 1134, al-Hafiz appointed his own son and designated heir, Sulayman, as vizier. A move designed to further strengthen the dynasty, it backfired disastrously when Sulayman died two months later,[73][63][74] thereby once more throwing doubt on the supposed infallibility of the caliph-imam.[75] Sulayman's younger brother Haydara was immediately appointed as heir and vizier, but this provoked the jealousy of another of al-Hafiz's sons, Hasan.[73][74][76]
Hasan won the backing of the Juyūshiyya, a regiment of apparently Armenian origin established by Badr and al-Afdal that had been the pillar of their power and that had also supported Kutayfat. The Caliph and Haydara were backed by the
To secure his position, Hasan organized a private militia, the ṣibyān al-zarad, with which he terrorized the elites.[74][6] Al-Hafiz instigated the Black African garrison of Upper Egypt to try and depose his son, but again Hasan's men emerged victorious.[77] In the end, it was Hasan's tyrannical rule that caused his downfall. His brutal treatment of his enemies, the executions of prominent men and the confiscation of property, cost him whatever support he may have had.[76][78] It was said that as many as 15,000 people were killed in the turmoils caused by Hasan's rule.[6]
Following the murder of several senior commanders, the army rose in revolt in March 1135. Hasan fled to the caliphal palace, where al-Hafiz placed him under arrest. The troops then assembled at the square before the palace and demanded his execution, otherwise threatening to set fire to the palace. Al-Hafiz called to his rescue the governor of the Gharbiyya province (the western Nile Delta), Bahram al-Armani. Before Bahram could arrive in the capital, the Caliph bowed to the soldiers' demands and had his son poisoned by his Jewish physician.[73][76][78]
Vizierate of Bahram, 1135–1137
Part of a series on Islam Isma'ilism |
---|
Islam portal |
Arriving in Cairo soon after the murder of Hasan, Bahram al-Armani, although a Christian, was named vizier on 4 April 1135 and received the title of 'Sword of Islam' (Sayf al-Islām).[2][73][79] The appointment of a Christian to the post of vizier provoked much opposition among the Muslims, as the office was seen as the representative of the imam-caliph, and entailed ritual roles in Islamic ceremonies and precedence over Muslim clerics. Al-Hafiz persisted with his appointment, but gave Bahram a dispensation to absent himself from ritual ceremonies, in which the vizier's role was taken by the chief qāḍī. He also did not receive those customary titles of the Fatimid viziers that implied control over the Muslim religious establishment (qāḍī al-quḍāt and dāʿī al-duʿāt).[80][81]
The Muslim population continued to oppose Bahram because he showed favour to Christians of all denominations, permitted the conferment of privileges on churches and the construction of new ones, and encouraged Armenian immigration, which in a short time is said by medieval sources to have reached 30,000 people. His brother, Vasak, was appointed governor of Qus in Upper Egypt, and his government was blamed by contemporaries for being tyrannical towards the local population.[82]
In foreign policy, Bahram's tenure inaugurated a period of peace, since the Crusader states of the Levant were occupied with the growing threat of Zengi, the Turkish atabeg of Mosul. Bahram even presided over the release of 300 captives held since the Battle of Ramla in 1102.[81][82] The vizier appears to have entertained good relations, and possibly formed an alliance, with King Roger II of Sicily.[g][82][84]
In the meantime, the Muslim backlash against Bahram grew. His post as vizier was already considered an insult, but the favour shown to Christians, the Armenian immigration, and his close relations with Christian powers further inflamed passions.[81] Ridwan ibn Walakhshi, the Caliph's former gaoler, emerged as the movement's leader. Ridwan was a Sunni who had risen to be one of the leading military commanders under al-Amir, and now held the position of ṣāḥib al-bāb. Bahram tried to dispose of him by sending him to govern Ascalon in May 1135, but there Ridwan busied himself with blocking Armenian immigration, earning plaudits from the Muslim public opinion in Cairo. As a result, Bahram recalled him in November 1136 and sent him to govern his own former province at Gharbiyya. The move backfired, as Ridwan was now placed in possession of an independent power base. Leading Cairene officials began making contact with him, and Ridwan did not hesitate to preach jihād against Bahram from the pulpit of the mosque. Finally, in early 1137 Ridwan raised an army from the local Bedouin and marched on Cairo. Bahram's Muslim soldiers deserted him, and on 3 February he fled Cairo with 2,000 Armenian soldiers, making for Qus.[81][85] After his departure, an anti-Armenian pogrom broke out in the capital, and even the vizieral palace was plundered.[85]
At Qus, Bahram found his brother killed and defiled by the local townfolk. In revenge, Bahram plundered the city, but resisted calls to torch it so as not to fully alienate the caliph. He then made for Aswan on the southern border of the Fatimid realm—some sources claim that he had intended to found a new realm allied with the Christian kingdoms of Nubia to the south—but the local governor barred his gates to him, and Bahram was forced to retreat to Akhmim.[81][86] There a letter from al-Hafiz reached him, offering lenient terms: he could choose either a governorship at Qus, Akhmim, or Asyut, but could keep only a fraction of his followers, or he could enter a monastery near Akhmim, with a letter of protection (amān) for himself and his relatives. Bahram chose the latter.[81][87]
Regime of Ridwan, 1137–1139
The Caliph's leniency towards Bahram is not surprising, as the Christian vizier was not nearly as threatening to his own position as the Sunni
Now vizier, Ridwan launched an anti-Christian persecution. Christian officials were replaced with Muslims, their properties confiscated, and some were executed.
In 1138 Ridwan attempted to remove al-Hafiz from power altogether by consulting a Sunni (the head of the Alexandria madrasa, Ibn Awf), a Twelver (Ibn Abi Kamil), and an Isma'ili jurist (the chief dāʿī Isma'il ibn Salama) on the possibility of deposing al-Hafiz. Their answers were fairly predictable: Ibn Abi Kamil argued that the claim to the imamate by al-Hafiz and his ancestors was false, Ibn Salama supported the Caliph, and Ibn Awf took a more cautious stance and advised that the deposition should be handled in accordance with religious law.[96][97] Ridwan began arresting and executing members of the Caliph's entourage,[96] while al-Hafiz demonstratively recalled Bahram from exile and allowed him to settle in the palace. Ridwan in turn appeared in public on the Eid al-Fitr on 31 May wearing a robe in a style normally reserved for monarchs.[98]
Matters came to a head on 8 June, as al-Hafiz, enthroned atop the Golden Gate of the palace, engaged in a heated exchange with Ridwan below. The vizier then ordered the palaces surrounded by troops, and presented one of the Caliph's sons, aiming to place him on the throne. This failed as the palace remained closed to him, and due to the resistance of Ibn Salama, who insisted that only the imam could sanction his successor by conferring naṣṣ upon him.
Aided by the Bedouin in his employ, Ridwan fled to Ascalon and thence to the Burid domains. The Burid governor of
Return to personal rule, 1139–1149
After Ridwan's downfall, al-Hafiz offered to reappoint Bahram as vizier, but the latter refused. He remained al-Hafiz's closest aide, however, and on his death in November 1140, al-Hafiz participated in the funeral cortège in person.
The first of these secretaries was the Egyptian Christian
In foreign affairs, al-Hafiz's final decade was largely peaceful. Both the Fatimids and the Kingdom of Jerusalem were focused on internal troubles, and the Crusaders were preoccupied with Zengi.[109] In April/May 1141, Crusader knights appeared before Ascalon, but were chased away by the Fatimid garrison.[110] In 1142/3, Fatimid envoys visited the court of Roger II of Sicily. Roger pursued expansionist plans against the former Fatimid domains in Ifriqiya, now ruled by the Zirid dynasty, and his fleet had recently captured the old Fatimid capital of al-Mahdiya there. Despite the possible danger posed by the Christian expansion into North Africa, and incidents where Norman warships captured Egyptian merchant vessels, relations remained cordial. The chronicler Romuald of Salerno even records the conclusion of a commercial treaty between Egypt and Sicily in 1143. According to Halm, Roger's decision to abstain from the Second Crusade (1147–1150) may have played a role in maintaining friendly relations until both monarchs died.[111] The historian Jeremy Johns points out that while the Fatimids had long lost the ability to intervene directly in Ifriqiya, they adopted a "laissez-faire" attitude towards Norman expansion since the kings of Sicily, a "trading partner of proven worth", promised "restoration of law and order along the North African coast", which would be of benefit to Egyptian commerce. Johns also points out that even many of the trade networks linking the Indian Ocean and Red Sea to Egypt and the Mediterranean appear to have been in the hands of Sicilian and Ifriqiyan merchants at this time, which may further explain Cairo's interest in the Norman venture.[112]
In 1139/40, al-Hafiz sent envoys to the Zurayid ruler of Aden,
The last years of al-Hafiz's reign were dominated by domestic challenges that laid bare the unstable foundations of his authority.
Death and legacy
Al-Hafiz died on 10 October 1149,[118] of a severe intestinal colic.[74] His survival on the throne through all the threats he had faced was remarkable, and he had managed to restore the caliph's personal control over the administration to an extent unseen for a century.[119] But on his death he left behind a severely shaken regime, which survived mostly thanks to inertia and the vested interest of large sections of society in keeping it running. The Isma'ili mission, which had animated the early Fatimid expansion, had lost its drive, and the dynasty's legitimacy was increasingly challenged.[120] The Fatimid empire during his reign had shrunk to Egypt, and the parts of Yemen and Makuria that recognized its overlordship. While the Fatimid cause flagged, beyond Egypt's borders, Zengi and Nur al-Din were building a militantly Sunni regime in Syria whose ideological zeal was making itself felt across the region. Enfeebled, Egypt would soon become the prize in the conflict between the Nur al-Din and the Crusaders, leading to the final collapse of the Fatimid dynasty.[121]
Al-Hafiz was succeeded by the youngest and only surviving of his five sons, the 16-year-old Abu Mansur Isma'il, with the regnal name
Footnotes
- ^ Called to Cairo in 1073 to save the tottering dynasty that was being threatened with overthrow by Nasir al-Dawla ibn Hamdan, Badr established a regime that modern scholars have termed a de facto military dictatorship. Contemporaries defined Badr and his successors as 'Viziers of the Sword', in effect plenipotentiary viceroys with complete control over all aspects of the government: the vizier was now commander-in-chief of the army as well as supreme head of the civilian, judicial and religious administrations.[11][12][13]
- Tayyibi leader and historian Idris Imad al-Din, who reports that Abd al-Majid took office as regent for al-Tayyib. Imad al-Din's account is in line with Tayyibi tradition, which blames Kutayfat for the infant's ousting, and is explicitly rejected by all other, particularly contemporary, sources.[16]
- ^ As a result of this silence in official sources, al-Tayyib's existence was doubted by some early scholars of Isma'ilism in the 20th century.[17] His historicity is now considered as established, based on several points: surviving reports of festivities ordered by al-Amir to celebrate his birth survive, scattered references to him in 12th-century historians, and a surviving example, sent to the Yemeni queen Arwa al-Sulayhi, of the letters sent to friendly rulers to announce the event.[3][8][18]
- ^ The concept of naṣṣ is central to the early Shi'a, and particularly the Isma'ili, conception of the imamate, but it also produced practical complications: as the imam was held to possess God's infallibility (ʿiṣma), he could not possibly err, especially in a matter as weighty as the selection of his heir and future imam. Appointed heirs predeceasing their fathers was a source of considerable embarrassment, and therefore, while an heir might be clearly favoured during his father's reign, naṣṣ was often withheld until shortly before the ruling imam's death, proclaimed in the latter's testament, or left as a bequest with a third party.[22]
- Isma'il ibn Jafar through a continuous sequence of both public and hidden imams, including the Fatimid imam-caliphs, to the present day.[32]
- ^ The Tayyibis hold that al-Tayyib had been entrusted by al-Amir to a certain Ibn Madyan, and that the infant had been hidden by Ibn Madyan and his helpers when Kutayfat came to power. Ibn Madyan was killed by Kutayfat, but his brother-in-law escaped with al-Tayyib, who now went into occultation. Al-Tayyib is held to have died while still in occultation, but to have had descendants, who have provided a series of hidden imams to the present day. The public leadership of the Tayyibi community, up until the present day, was instead assumed by a succession of 'absolute missionaries' (Dāʿī al-Muṭlaq).[52][53]
- Zirids, to the Crusader Principality of Antioch. The Fatimids mediated between the Zirids and Roger, and the Sicilian court modelled much of its administration and titulature after Fatimid practices. The Fatimids even appear to have considered Roger a vassal monarch, addressing him in a style appropriate to a junior ruler.[83]
References
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 250–251, 508.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j Walker 2017.
- ^ a b c d Daftary 2007, p. 246.
- ^ a b c Magued 1971, p. 54.
- ^ a b Güner 1997, p. 108.
- ^ a b c d e f g Güner 1997, p. 109.
- ^ a b Brett 2017, p. 261.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, pp. 177–178.
- ^ Stern 1951, pp. 202–203.
- ^ a b c Brett 2017, p. 262.
- ^ Canard 1965, pp. 857–858.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 194–195, 211, 241.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 207–208, 228ff..
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 178.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 179, 182.
- ^ Stern 1951, p. 203 (note 1).
- ^ Stern 1951, p. 196.
- ^ Stern 1951, pp. 196–198.
- ^ Stern 1951, p. 204.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 246, 261.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 262–263.
- ^ Walker 1995, pp. 240–242.
- ^ Stern 1951, pp. 203–204.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 179.
- ^ a b Brett 2017, p. 263.
- ^ Madelung 1971, p. 1163.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 36–38.
- ^ Madelung 1971, pp. 1163–1164.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 1, 39–86.
- ^ Madelung 1971, pp. 1166–1167.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 38, 88–89.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 89–98, 99–100, 507ff..
- ^ Stern 1951, pp. 204–206.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 263–264.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 180–181.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 180.
- ^ a b c Daftary 2007, p. 247.
- ^ a b c Brett 2017, p. 265.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 182.
- ^ Stern 1951, pp. 207–208.
- ^ Stern 1951, pp. 207–209.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 182–183.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 247–248.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 265–266.
- ^ a b c Daftary 2007, p. 248.
- ^ a b c Stern 1951, p. 194.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 241–242.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 242–243.
- ^ Brett 2017, p. 252.
- ^ a b Daftary 2007, p. 244.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 233–234, 261.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 261ff..
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 184, 185.
- ^ Brett 2017, p. 266.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 241–243, 248.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 183.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 184.
- ^ Daftary 2007, p. 253.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 255–260.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 267, 277.
- ^ a b c d e Brett 2017, p. 277.
- ^ Dedoyan 1997, p. 143.
- ^ a b c d e Brett 2017, p. 267.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 186.
- ^ Dedoyan 1997, pp. 143–144.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 248–249.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 238, 267.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 186–187.
- ^ Walker 1995, pp. 255–256.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 199–200.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 278–279, 281–282.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 229–232.
- ^ a b c d e Daftary 2007, p. 249.
- ^ a b c d Magued 1971, p. 55.
- ^ a b c d Halm 2014, p. 187.
- ^ a b c d e Brett 2017, p. 268.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 187–188.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 188.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 188–190.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 190.
- ^ a b c d e f Brett 2017, p. 272.
- ^ a b c Halm 2014, p. 191.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 270–272.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 270–271.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 192.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 192–193.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 193–194.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 272–273.
- ^ a b c d Halm 2014, p. 194.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 273–274.
- ^ a b c Brett 2017, p. 274.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 194–195.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 274–275.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 198.
- ^ Williams 2018, p. 204.
- ^ a b c d Brett 2017, p. 275.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 195.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 196.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 196–197.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 275–276.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 197–198.
- ^ a b c d Brett 2017, p. 276.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 216–217.
- ^ Canard 1971, p. 868.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 223.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 218.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 217.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 217–218.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 198, 218.
- ^ Halm 2014, p. 200.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 219–220.
- ^ Johns 1987, p. 99.
- ^ Daftary 2007, p. 257.
- ^ a b c d Halm 2014, p. 220.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 220–221.
- ^ a b Halm 2014, p. 221.
- ^ Halm 2014, pp. 221–222.
- ^ a b c d Halm 2014, p. 222.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 279–280.
- ^ Brett 2017, pp. 277, 280.
- ^ Brett 2017, p. 280.
- ^ Bianquis 2002, p. 382.
- ^ Daftary 2007, pp. 249–250.
Sources
- ISBN 978-90-04-12756-2.
- Brett, Michael (2017). The Fatimid Empire. The Edinburgh History of the Islamic Empires. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 978-0-7486-4076-8.
- OCLC 495469475.
- OCLC 495469525.
- ISBN 978-0-521-61636-2.
- ISBN 90-04-10816-5.
- Güner, Ahmet (1997). "Hâfız-Lidînillâh". TDV Encyclopedia of Islam, Vol. 15 (Hades – Hanefî Mehmed) (in Turkish). Istanbul: ISBN 978-975-389-442-5.
- ISBN 978-3-406-66163-1.
- Johns, Jeremy (1987). "Malik Ifrīqiya: The Norman Kingdom of Africa and the Fāṭimids". Libyan Studies. 18: 89–101. S2CID 163054015.
- OCLC 495469525.
- Magued, A. M. (1971). "al-Ḥāfiẓ". In OCLC 495469525.
- JSTOR 1579511.
- Walker, Paul E. (1995). "Succession to Rule in the Shiite Caliphate". Journal of the American Research Center in Egypt. 32: 239–264. JSTOR 40000841.
- Walker, Paul E. (2017). "al-Ḥāfiẓ li-Dīn Allāh". In Fleet, Kate; ISSN 1873-9830.
- Williams, Caroline (2018). Islamic Monuments in Cairo: The Practical Guide (Seventh ed.). Cairo and New York: ISBN 978-977-416-855-0.