Tamīm b. Murr

Tamīm b. Murr (2,536 words) (or Tamīm bt. Murr, when the tribe or ḳabīla is referred to), a very large “Northern” tribe which before Islam and in its early days lived in central and eastern Arabia. Its nasab is: Tamīm b. Murr b. Udd b. Ṭābik̲h̲a b. Ilyās b. Muḍar b. Nizār b. Maʿadd b. ʿAdnān. 1. Source material. The literary output about the Tamīm in the form of monographs is now lost. For example, Abu ’l-Yaḳẓān (d. 190/806), a mawlā of the Tamīm, compiled a monograph Ak̲h̲bār Tamīm, and also a K. Ḥilf Tamīm baʿḍihā baʿḍan ; Ibn al-Kalbī wrote K. ʿAdī b. Zayd [q.v.] al-ʿIbādī and Ḥilf Kalb wa-Tamīm ; and Abū ʿUbayda [q.v.] compiled K. Ayyām Banī Māzin wa-ak̲h̲bārihim which he dedicated to the pre-Islamic battles of one of Tamīm’s subdivisions. Before reaching the literary stage, the materials included in these and other early monographs were preserved by tribal informants, e.g. al-Kalbī (who is quoted by his son, Ibn al-Kalbī, in his Ḏjamharat al-nasab) had a Tamīmī informant, S̲h̲abba b. Iyās b. S̲h̲abba b. ̲ ʿIḳāl b. Ṣaʿṣaʿa b. Nād̲jiya... b. Mud̲jās̲ ̲ ̲ h̲iʿ b. Dārim, whose father was an indirect source of Abū ʿUbayda (who quoted from him, via another Tamīmī, a report regarding al-Farazdaḳ’s [q.v.] father, G̲ h̲ālib b. Ṣaʿṣaʿa [q.v.] b. Nād̲jiya). ̲ Indeed, most of what we know about Tamīm’s genealogy, and much of what we know about their history, is based on materials transmitted by informants who were either members of the Tamīm or their mawālī, and the clash between them and non-Tamīmī (or rather anti- Tamīmī) informants was inevitable. Was al-Aḳraʿ b. Ḥābis [q.v.] (Mud̲jās̲ ̲ h̲iʿ b. Dārim) really “the arbiter of the Arabs (ḥakam al-ʿarab)” before Islam— in other words, was he the holder of an inherited arbiter’s office at the market of ʿUkāẓ? Abū G̲ h̲assān Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā al- Kinānī was of the opinion that he was not: he only arbitrated one case, following which the Tamīm gave him this epithet. Was Ḥanẓala b. al-Rabīʿ al-Usayyidī one of the Prophet’s scribes, and did he write down Ḳurʾān verses? According to al-Wāḳidī [q.v.] (who no doubt based himself on an earlier source), Ḥanẓala received the epithet al-kātib (“the scribe”) having written for the Prophet one single letter, “because literacy (al-kitāba) among the Arabs was limited”. The place of honour in Tamīm’s pre-Islamic glory is given to Ḥād̲jib ̲ b. Zurāra’s [q.v.] bow (ḳaws Ḥād̲ jib). ̲ During severe drought Ḥād̲jib ̲ asked for Kisrā’s [q.v.] permission to graze his tribe’s herds at the fringes of the sown land. As a guarantee of good conduct he pledged his bow, a humble item which, however, acquired great value through the prestige and authority of its owner. No wonder that the Tamīm (or rather the Dārim) were very proud of this story in which the Persian emperor allegedly showed great respect to traditional tribal values, whereas Tamīm’s adversaries in their turn attempted to belittle the importance of the emperor’s gesture. 2. Genealogy. The Tamīm were divided into three branches the eponyms of which were Tamīm’s three sons, Zayd Manāt, ʿAmr and al-Ḥārit̲h̲. In the Zayd Manāt b. Tamīm branch, the Saʿd b. Zayd Manāt (Saʿd Tamīm, “Saʿd al-Akt̲h̲arīn”, “Saʿd al-Suʿūd”) were said to have equalled in number the whole of Muḍar; one of these Saʿd was al-Aḥnaf b. Ḳays [q.v.]. The children of Saʿd b. Zayd Manāt except Kaʿb and ʿAmr—these two were referred to as al-buṭūn —formed a group called al-abnāʾ (nisba: al-Abnāwī). Most Saʿdīs belonged to the line of Kaʿb b. Saʿd. Two of Kaʿb’s sons (probably ʿAmr and ʿAwf) were called al-mazrūʿān i “because of their large number and their numerous herds”, while the rest of his sons were called al-ad̲ jārib (“the scabby ones”). ʿAmr b. Kaʿb’s son Muḳāʿis was ̲ the father of several tribal groups. The Ṣuraym b. Muḳāʿis were the group of the founders (or alleged founders) of two sects of the K̲ h̲ārid̲jites [q.v.], the Ṣufriyya [q.v.] and the Ibāḍiyya ̲ [q.v.]. Among Muḳāʿis’s offspring, the ʿUbayd b. Muḳāʿis line was the most significant one. All of ʿUbayd’s children but Minḳar were called al-lubad (or al-libad), their central component being the Murra b. ʿUbayd, the group of al-Aḥnaf b. Ḳays. The two most famous Minḳarīs were the Companions Ḳays b. ʿĀṣim and ʿAmr b. al-Ahtam [q.vv.], who was the great-grandfather of the orator K̲ h̲ālid b. Ṣafwān [q.v.]. The other strong subdivision of the Kaʿb b. Saʿd was the ʿAwf b. Kaʿb. Among ʿAwf’s children, the offspring of Ḳurayʿ b. ʿAwf included the Banū Anf al-Nāḳa; four other children of ʿAwf formed a group called al-ad̲ jd̲̲ h̲āʿ (or al-d̲ jid̲ ̲ h̲āʿ). A family of one of the ad̲ jd̲̲ h̲āʿ groups held an office related to the Meccan pilgrimage which in later times was considered one of the greatest merits of the Tamīm (Ibn Abi ’l-Ḥadīd, S̲h̲arḥ Nahd̲ j ̲ al-balāg̲h̲ a 2, ed. Ibrāhīm, Cairo 1378/1959 f., xv, 126-7). The main group among the Mālik b. Zayd Manāt was the Ḥanẓala b. Mālik [q.v.] (Ḥanẓalat Tamīm, “Ḥanẓala al-Akramīn”). Five (or six, or four) components of the Ḥanẓala—the less numerous ones—formed the barād̲ jim or “knuckle”) against their ̲ group (pl. of burd̲ juma ̲ brothers, Yarbūʿ, Mālik and Rabīʿa, sons of Ḥanẓala. The most prominent figures among the Yarbūʿ b. Ḥanẓala at the time of the Prophet were Mālik b. Nuwayra [q.v.], “the ʿarīf [q.v.] of the T̲ h̲aʿlaba b. Yarbūʿ“ (a subdivision of the Yarbūʿ) and his brother, Mutammim b. Nuwayra [q.v.]. The Yarbūʿ were one of the d̲ jamarāt al-ʿarab or “the burning coals of the Arabs”, i.e. tribes ̲ which were able to defend themselves without allying themselves with other tribes. The main component of the Yarbūʿ was Riyāḥ b. Yarbūʿ. The Riyāḥ did not attach themselves to Yarbūʿ’s other sons. Four of these sons born by the same mother formed a group called al- aḥmāl, while three other sons formed a group called al-ʿuḳad (or al-ʿuḳadāʾ). Separate groups among the ʿUḳad were the G̲ h̲udāna b. Yarbūʿ, Ṣubayr b. Yarbūʿ, Kulayb b. Yarbūʿ (one of whom was the poet D̲ jarīr [q.v.]) and the ʿUḳfān who descended from al-ʿAnbar b. Yarbūʿ. ̲ The dominant group among the Mālik b. Ḥanẓala (according to some, among the Tamīm as a whole) was the Dārim b. Mālik, or rather the ʿAbd Allāh b. Dārim. The offspring of Mālik’s other sons formed three groups: the children of Ṭuhayya. The two most commonly mentioned are ʿAwf and Abū Sūd (or Abū Sawd), but some add D̲ jus̲ ̲ h̲ays̲h̲ or Ḥus̲h̲ays̲h̲ or K̲ h̲us̲h̲ays̲h̲ and (al-)Ṣudayy. Most genealogists, however, include (al-)Ṣudayy in another group of Mālik’s descendants whose members were called, again after their mother, Banu ’lʿAdawiyya (or Balʿadawiyya). The Banū Ṭuhayya and Banu ’l-ʿAdawiyya formed the d̲ jimār ̲ group and “were with the Yarbūʿ”. Yet another group of Mālik b. Ḥanẓala’s descendants, alk̲h̲is̲h̲āb (or al-k̲h̲as̲h̲abāt), included the offspring of Mālik’s sons, Rabīʿa, Rizām and Kaʿb. Among the Dārim b. Mālik b. Ḥanẓala independent tribal groups can be discerned through their nisbas: Nahs̲h̲al, Manāf, Sadūs, Abān and Mud̲jās̲ ̲ h̲iʿ b. Dārim. A biographical dictionary, with reference to a certain muḥaddit̲h̲ or traditionist, uses four nisbas while moving from the general to the particular: al-Tamīmī, t̲h̲umma al-Ḥanẓalī, t̲h̲umma al-Dārimī, t̲h̲umma alMud̲jās̲ ̲ h̲iʿī. The three best known Mud̲jās̲ ̲ h̲iʿīs were al-Aḳraʿ (“the bald”) b. Ḥābis, alFarazdaḳ and al-Ḥārit̲h̲ b. Surayd̲j ̲ [q.v.]. The dominant line among the ʿAbd Allāh b. Dārim was Zayd b. ʿAbd Allāh. All but one of Zayd’s descendants formed a group called al-aḥlāf ; the pedigree of al-Mund̲h̲ir b. Sāwā [q.v.], the governor of Had̲jar ̲ [see al-ḥasā ] at the time of the Prophet, goes back to one of the aḥlāf groups, the ʿAbd Allāh b. Zayd b. ʿAbd Allāh b. Dārim. The ʿAmr b. Tamīm branch (“ʿAmr al-As̲h̲addīn”) included several subdivisions, the most important one being Banu ’l-ʿAnbar (or Balʿanbar) b. ʿAmr. Al-Ḥārit̲h̲ b. ʿAmr was given the nickname al-Ḥabiṭ (which was probably pejorative) and his offspring were known as alḤabiṭāt (nisba: al-Ḥabaṭī); ʿAbbādān near Baṣra was called after one of them, the murābiṭ [see ribāṭ ] ʿAbbād b. al-Ḥuṣayn. The main component of the Mālik b. ʿAmr b. Tamīm was the Māzin b. Mālik. Other groups were the Ḥirmāz b. Mālik and the G̲h̲aylān b. Mālik. The least important branch of Tamīm was al-Ḥārit̲h̲ b. Tamīm and its members were the clients of the Nahs̲h̲al b. Dārim. Rather than referring to the members of this branch by the nisba al-Ḥārit̲h̲ī, the more distinctive nisba al-S̲h̲aḳarī or al-S̲h̲aḳirī was preferred, al-S̲h̲aḳira being the nickname of al-Ḥārit̲h̲’s son, Muʿāwiya. (A BASIC GENEALOGICAL CHART OF THE TAMĪM b. MURR) 3. History. Tamīm’s territory before Islam was in Nad̲jd̲ around al-Yamāma [q.v.] and it stretched to the Gulf, Baṣra, and al-ʿUd̲h̲ayb near Kūfa (for detailed evidence see al-Ḥasan b. ʿAbd Allāh al- Iṣfahānī [Lugh̲ and Ṣ.A. al-ʿAlī, Riyāḍ 1968, passim ; see also ̲ da], Bilād al-ʿarab, ed. H. al-D̲ jāsir ̲ the relevant entries and maps in U. Thilo, Die Ortsnamen in der altarabischen Poesie, Wiesbaden 1958). They owned several rich grazing areas such as Ḥazn Banī Yarbūʿ, al-Fald̲j ̲ and al-Dahnāʾ [q.v.] Not all Tamīmīs were nomadic before Islam. Many of them were semi-nomads or sedentaries inhabiting the oases and villages of al-Was̲h̲m and eastern Arabia. In the early Islamic period, more Tamīmīs became sedentary and settled in permanent settlements and villages while other tribes gradually claimed parts of their territory. But many, perhaps most Tamīmīs remained pastoral (or semi-nomadic), reluctant to abandon their fine grazing grounds and watering-places; hence the frequent mention in the genealogical literature of the nomadic sections of the tribe. The Tamīmīs who settled in ʿIrāḳ were not cut off from their nomadic brothers who were a kind of military, political and economic hinterland. Beside the battles described in the ayyām literature, Tamīm’s historiography of the pre- Islamic period is dominated by two crucial relationships, with the Sāsānids [q.v.] and Ḥīra and with Mecca. We turn first to the Sāsānid/Ḥīran connection. The Tamīm, among other tribes, were instrumental in the transportation and defence of Sāsānid and Ḥīran trade. Trade interests were presumably behind at least some of Tamīm’s long-range expeditions to the Yemen. For example, al-Aḳraʿ b. Ḥābis (Mud̲jās̲ ̲ h̲iʿ b. Dārim) attacked, after the second battle of al-Kulāb (which took place after 620), the Ḥārit̲h̲ b. Kaʿb [q.v.] in Nad̲jrān ̲ [q.v.]. The institution of ridāfa or viceroyship to the king of Ḥīra in which the Tamīm and other tribes participated was essential in establishing Ḥīra’s control over the Bedouin. The privileges associated with it, some ceremonial and some material, served to buy off potentially dangerous tribes. Tamīm could offer the Sāsānids a strong military potential. Obviously, the cooperation was not one between equals, since the Bedouin depended on food supplies from settlements controlled by the Sāsānids. Had̲jar, ̲ for example, was the largest date-producing oasis of Northern Arabia and access to its market was vital for the Bedouin roaming its vicinity. Had̲jar ̲ was an important venue of Tamīmī-Persian cooperation. Al-Mund̲h̲ir b. Sāwā (of ʿAbd Allāh b. Zayd b. ʿAbdallah b. Dārim), in his capacity as the governor of al-Baḥrayn [q.v.] or of Had̲jar, ̲ only had authority over the Arabs. In Baḥrayn, precisely as in Ḥīra, ʿUmān and Yemen (after the Sāsānid conquest of ca. 575), there was also a superior Persian governor. All this changed with the advent of Islam, when al-Mund̲h̲ir became the Prophet’s governor in al-Baḥrayn or in Had̲jar. ̲ Tamīm’s Meccan connection is less obvious than the Sāsānid/Ḥīran one. It is true that the pre-Islamic history of Mecca was recorded during the Islamic period, when the name Ḳurays̲h̲ [q.v.] stood for power and wealth, but Tamīm’s relationship with pre-Islamic Mecca is no doubt a solid historical fact (see M.J. Kister’s articles in the Bibl.; the first, or the second, husband of K̲ h̲adīd̲ja̲ [q.v.] before she married the Prophet had been a Tamīmī; see Kister, The sons of Khadīja, in JSAI, xvi [1993], 59-95, at 59-66; on this and other Tamīmīs who settled in Mecca in the D̲ jāhiliyya, see idem, On strangers and allies in Mecca, in JSAI, xiii ̲ [1990], 113-54, at 113-26). The evidence about Tamīm’s connection with the Prophet is a plethora of confused and contradictory reports because every trivial detail acquired in due course immense importance. What is more, the evidence was further obscured by a process of redaction (cf. E. Landau-Tasseron, Process of redaction: the case of the Tamīmite delegation to the Prophet Muḥammad, in BSOAS, xlix [1986], 253-270, esp. 256-7, 270). Both Baṣra and Kūfa were extensions of Tamīm’s Arabian territories and there were large Tamīmī groups in both. The Tamīmīs in Baṣra belonged to the Saʿd, the Ḥanẓala and the ʿAmr; members of the same groups were among the early settlers in Kūfa as well. Many Tamīmīs settled in the regions of Persia conquered by Baṣran and Kūfan troops. Tamīm’s weight in the tribal population of ʿIrāḳ and the eastern provinces meant that they were involved in every major event of early Islam which took place in these regions. Five ], in hundred of them are said to have been killed in the Battle of the Camel [see d̲jamal ̲ which the Saʿd did not participate. Shortly afterwards, the Saʿd were part of ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib’s [q.v.] army at Ṣiffīn [q.v.], together with many fellow tribesmen from Baṣra and Kūfa. There were no Tamīmī units on Muʿāwiya’s side. Tamīm’s strong support for ʿAlī at Ṣiffīn was not the best prelude for a prosperous relationship with the Umayyads; but no government could control ʿIrāḳ and the eastern provinces without Tamīm’s participation and support. The many Tamīmīs who held government positions under the Umayyads and ʿAbbāsids reflect their tribe’s influence in ʿIrāḳ (especially in the south), ʿUmān, al-Baḥrayn and throughout the east; few Tamīmīs officiated as governors elsewhere. Bibliography (in addition to references given in the article): 1. Sources. Ag̲h̲ ānī 1, index Bag̲h̲dādī, K̲ h̲izānat al-adab, ed. Hārūn, Cairo 1387-1406/ 1967-86, index Ibn Ḥabīb, Muḥabbar, ed. I. Lichten-staedter, Ḥaydarābād 1361/1942, index Ibn al-Kalbī, Ḏjamharat al-nasab, ed. Ḥasan, Beirut 1407/ 1986, 191-277 ̲ Ibn Ḥazm, D̲ jamharat ansāb al-ʿarab, ed. Hārūn, Cairo 1382/1962, 206-33 ̲ Abū ʿUbayd al-Ḳāsim b. Sallām, K. al-Nasab, ed. M.M. K̲ h̲ayr al-Darʿ, Damascus 1410/1989, 231-41 al-Wazīr al-Mag̲h̲ ribī, al-Īnās fī ʿilm al-ansāb, bound with Ibn Ḥabīb, Muk̲h̲talif al-ḳabāʾil wa- muʾtalifuhā, ed.Ḥ. al-D̲ jāsir, Riyāḍ 1400/1980, passim ̲ Balād̲h̲urī, Ansāb al-as̲h̲rāf ms. Reisülküttap Mustafa Efendi, ii, fols. 957b-1077b Ibn Durayd, al-Is̲h̲tiḳāḳ, ed. Hārūn, Cairo 1378/1958, 201-62 Aḥmad b. Muḥammad al-Ḳurṭubī, al-Taʿrīf fi ’l-ansāb, ed. Ẓalām, Cairo n.d. [1407/1986], 66-74 Ibn Saʿīd al-Andalusī, Nas̲h̲wat al-ṭarab bi-taʾrīk̲h̲ d̲ jāhiliyyat al-ʿarab, ed. N. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, ̲ ʿAmman 1982, i, 415-66 Naḳāʾiḍ D̲ jarīr wa ’l-Farazdaḳ, passim ̲ the relevant entries in Samʿānī, al-Ansāb, ed. al-Bārūdī, Beirut 1408/1988 and Ibn al-At̲h̲īr, al-Lubāb fī tahd̲ h̲īb al-ansāb, Beirut n.d. D̲ jāḥiẓ, al-Bayān wa ’l-tabyīn, ed. Hārūn, Cairo 1395/1975, index ̲ Bakrī, Faṣl al-maḳāl fī s̲h̲arḥ kitāb al-amt̲h̲āl, ed. I. ʿAbbās and ʿA. al-M. ʿĀbidīn, Beirut 1401/1981, passim. 2. Studies. Max Freiherr von Oppenheim, Die Beduinen, iv, index, s.v. Tamīm W. Caskel and G. Strenziok, Ǧamharat an-Nasab, Leiden 1966, ii, 7-10, 544 M.J. Kister, Mecca and Tamīm (aspects of their tribal relations), in JESHO, viii (1965), 63-113 (repr. in his Studies in Jāhiliyya and early Islam, Variorum, London 1980, no. I) idem, al-Ḥīra: some notes on its relations with Arabia, in Arabica, xv (1968), 143-69 (repr. in Studies in Jāhiliyya and early Islam, no. III) P. Crone, Slaves on horses, Cambridge 1980, passim. (M. Lecker) Cite this page Lecker, M., “Tamīm b. Murr”, in: Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, Edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs. Consulted online on 01 March 2022 <http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1573-3912_islam_COM_1165> First published online: 2012 First print edition: ISBN: 9789004161214, 1960-2007