1 As for the various motives that lay behind the establishment of waqfs, see Amīn, M.M., Al-Awqāf wa-l-Ḥayāt al-Ijtimāʿiyya fī Miṣr 648–923 a.h./1250–1517 a.d. (Cairo: Dār al-Nahḍa al-ʿArabiyya, 1980), 70–98Google Scholar; Singer, A., Constructing Ottoman Beneficence: An Imperial Soup Kitchen in Jerusalem (Suny Series in Near Eastern Studies, Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002), 25–32Google Scholar; Singer, A., Charity in Islamic Society (Themes in Islamic History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 100–10Google Scholar.

2 Waqf deeds (ḥujaj), Cairo, Wizārat al-Awqāf (WA), jadīd (j) 670–74, 677, 679, 682–7, 689–93, 695, 735; Dayr Sānt Katrīn (SK), 272. For the documents, see Appendix, supplementary material online.

3 For his biography, see al-Sakhāwī, al-Ḍawʾ al-Lāmiʿ li-Ahl al-Qarn al-Tāsiʿ (Cairo: Maktabat al-Quds, 1934–37), 6: 213–4; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ al-Ḥanafī, Nayl al-Amal fī Dhayl al-Duwal (Sidon and Beirut: al-Maktaba al-ʿAṣriyya, 2002), 8: 80.

4 In 842/1439, 847–8/1444, and 853/1449. Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, Inbāʾ al-Ghumr bi-Abnāʾ al-ʿUmr (Cairo: al-Majlis al-Aʿlāʾ li-l-Shuʾūn al-Islāmiyya, 1969–98), 4: 116, 224; al-ʿAynī, ʿIqd al-Jumān fī Taʾrīkh Ahl al-Zamān (Cairo: al-Zahrāʾ lil-Iʿlām al-ʿArabī, 1989), 619; al-Sayrafī, al-Tibr al-Masbūk fī Dhayl al-Sulūk (Cairo: Maktabat al-Kulliyyāt al-Azhariyya, n.d.), 76, 87, 253–4; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith al-Duhūr fī madā al-Ayyām wa-l-Shuhūr (Cairo: Lajnat Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-Islāmī, 1990), 1: 71, 152, 155; idem, al-Nujūm al-Zāhira fī Mulūk Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira (Cairo: Wizārat al-Thaqāfa, 1963–72), 15: 389, 392; al-Ṣayrafī, Nuzhat al-Nufūs wa-l-Abdān fī Tawārīkh al-Zamān (Cairo: Maṭbaʿat Dār al-Kutub, al-Hayʾa al-Miṣriyya al-ʿĀmma li-l-Kitāb, 1970–94), 4: 298. Jaqmaq's four sons, two daughters, sister, and wife were killed by the plague. See al-Sakhāwī, Tibr, 275, 283, 287, 293–4, 298–9; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith (1990), 1: 152–5.

5 Sabra, A., Poverty and Charity in Medieval Islam: Mamluk Egypt, 1250–1517 (Cambridge Studies in Islamic Civilization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 158–61Google Scholar.

6 Igarashi, D., Land Tenure, Fiscal Policy, and Imperial Power in Medieval Syro-Egypt (Chicago Studies on the Middle East, 10, Chicago: Middle East Documentation Center, the University of Chicago, 2015), 67Google Scholar. Eight protests of this kind (in Rabīʿ II and Rajab of 842/1438–9, 846/1442–3, 850/1446, 852/1448, 854/1450, and Ṣafar and Shaʿbān of 855/1451) are on record. Al-Maqrīzī, Kitāb al-Sulūk li-Maʿrifat Duwal al-Mulūk (Cairo: Lajnat al-Taʾlīf wa-l-Tarjama wa-l-Nashr, 1939–73), 4: 1091–5, 1103; Ibn Ḥajar, Inbāʾ al-Ghumr, 4: 96–7; al-Ṣayrafī, Nuzha, 4: 29–37, 54; al-Sakhāwī, Tibr, 217, 346, 352; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, 15: 264, 279–80, 352, 435; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith (1990), 1: 42–4, 97, 135–7, 213–6, 273; al-ʿAynī, ʿIqd, 656; Ibn Iyās, Badāʾiʿ al-Zuhūr fī Waqāʾiʿ al-Duhūr (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1960–75), 2: 279, 289, 291.

7 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, 16: 87–91.

8 In 858/1454, 859/1454–55, and 864/1459–60. Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith (1990), 1: 417, 443, 452; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith al-Duhūr fī madā al-Ayyām wa-l-Shuhūr (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1930–42), 331, 333–8; Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm: 16, 136–47; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 5: 431, 434; 6: 74–7, 79–83; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 2: 322, 356–60.

9 D. Ayalon, “The plague and its effects upon the Mamlūk army”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1946, 69–70.

10 Ayalon, “The plague and its effect”, 71.

11 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith al-Duhūr (1930–42), 551–2.

12 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, 16: 303; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 6: 275; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 2: 453.

13 al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213. Little, D.P., “Khaznadār, Khāzindār”, in Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd. ed. vol. 4 (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978), 1186–7Google Scholar.

14 Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 2: 453.

15 al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213.

16 Although Qāytbāy was originally purchased by Sultan Barsbāy as a slave, he was regarded as a member of the Ẓāhiriyya because Barsbāy died without emancipating him and Sultan Jaqmaq retained him as a khāṣṣakī after his emancipation.

17 Al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-Haṣr bi-Abnāʾ al-ʿAṣr (Cairo: Dār al-Fikr al-ʿArabī, 1970), 230; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 55.

18 Ayalon, D., “Mamlūk: military slavery in Egypt and Syria”, in Islam and the Abode of War (Aldershot: Variorum, 1994), 14Google Scholar.

19 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213.

20 Al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-Haṣr, 230, 233; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 6: 433–4; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 55. Qijmās was probably given an amirate of forty at that time because the former amīr khāzindār had the rank of amir of forty.

21 Al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-Haṣr, 243; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 6: 435–6; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 56.

22 Y. Horii, “The Mamlūk Sultan Qānṣūh al-Ghawrī (1501–16) and the Venetians in Alexandria”, Orient 38, 2003, 180.

23 Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 80; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 7: 51.

24 Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 109–10; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 7: 138.

25 Horii, “The Mamlūk Sultan Qānṣūh al-Ghawrī”, 180.

26 Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 130–2.

27 Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 146, 149; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 7: 210, 220.

28 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 7: 272, 280, 286; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 175; al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-Haṣr, 507, 511; Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākahat al-Khillān fī Ḥawādith al-Zamān (Cairo: al-Muʾassasa al-Miṣriyya al-ʿĀmma, 1962–4), 1: 38; Ibn Ṭūlūn, Iʿlām al-Warā bi-Man Wulliya Nāʾiban min al-Atrāk bi-Dimashq al-Shām al-Kubrā (Damascus: Wizārat al-Thaqāfa wa-l-Irshād al-Qawmī, 1964), 93; Ibn Ṭawq, Al-Taʿlīq: Yawmīyāt Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad ibn Ṭawq (Damascus: Institut Français d’Études Arabes de Damas, 2000–07), 52; Ibn al-Ḥimṣī, Ḥawādith al-Zamān wa-Wafayāt al-Shuyūkh wa-l-Aqrān (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-ʿAṣriyya, 1999), 1: 258.

29 For further details on Mamluk military conflicts with the Dulkadir and the Ottomans in the late fifteenth century, see Har-El, Shai, Struggle for Domination in the Middle East: The Ottoman-Mamluk War, 1485–1491 (The Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage, 4, Leiden, New York and Cologne: Brill, 1995)Google Scholar.

30 Miura, T., “Urban society in Damascus as the Mamluk era was ending”, Mamlūk Studies Review 10/1, 2006, 170–4Google Scholar.

31 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Iʿlām, 98; Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, 1: 76–9; Ibn Ṭawq, Taʿlīq, 718.

32 Al-Buṣrawī, Taʾrīkh al-Buṣrawī (Damascus: Dār al-Maʾmūn li-l-Turāth, 1988), 126, 141, 193, 222; Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, 1: 90, 120–1, 123–4, 132, 160, 182, 197, 215, 218, 239, 244, 258–60; Ibn Ṭawq, Taʿlīq, 766, 940, 972, 1440; Ibn al-Ḥimṣī, Ḥawādith al-Zamān, 1: 334.

33 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213–4; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 8: 80.

34 As for the currency used in the waqf deeds of Qijmās, the “dīnār” (gold coin) is also referred to as “the Ashrafī and the Ẓāhirī gold coin” (al-dhahab al-Ashrafī wa-l-Ẓāhirī). The Ashrafī dīnār was the gold coin minted by the order of Sultan al-Ashraf Barsbāy. The dīnār introduced a new weight standard derived from the weight of the Venetian ducat. The Ẓāhirī dīnār, which was implemented by Sultan al-Ẓāhir Jaqmaq, had the same weight as the Ashrafī dīnār. The “dirham min al-fulūs” (lit. dirham of copper coins) is a term for a money of account in which everything was calculated in fifteenth-century Egypt. See W. Popper, Egypt and Syria under the Circassian Sultans 1382–1468 a.d.: Systematic Notes to Ibn Taghrî Birdî’s Chronicle of Egypt (Continued) (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1957), 49–50, 60–7; W. Schultz, “The monetary history of Egypt, 642–1517”, in The Cambridge History of Egypt 1: Islamic Egypt, 640–1517, ed. C.F. Petry (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), 333–8. In this article I call these currencies “dinar” and “copper dirham”.

35 Igarashi, Land Tenure, 94, 121, 144.

36 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Iʿlām, 98.

37 According to Ibn al-Jīʿān, the annual revenue (ʿibra) from Bayramūt (no. 3 in Table 1) was 400 jayshī dinars, and that from Kawm al-Raml (no. 18) was 1,100 jayshī dinars. Ibn al-Jīʻān, Kitāb al-Tuḥfa al-Saniyya bi-Asmāʾ al-Bilād al-Miṣriyya (Cairo: Maktabat al-Kulliyyāt al-Azhariyyah, 1974), 51, 88. The jayshī dinar (d ī nā r jayshī; lit. army dinar) is a money of account that was used to measure the value of the annual revenues of n āḥ iyas. W. Schultz, “The mechanisms of commerce”, in R. Irwin (ed.), The New Cambridge History of Islam 4: Islamic Cultures and Societies to the End of the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 345–8.

38 Ibn al-Jīʻān, Tuḥfa, 12, 15, 52, 54, 61, 96, 105, 116, 119, 138, 155, 186, 194.

39 Petry, C.F., “Fractionalized estates in a centralized regime: the holdings of al-Ashraf Qāytbāy and Qānṣūh al-Ghawrī according to their waqf deeds”, Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient (JESHO) 41/1, 1998, 96–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Sato, T., Sugar in the Social Life of Medieval Islam (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 63–4Google Scholar.

41 Igarashi, Land Tenure, 98–9.

42 This is an example of the privatization of waqf property by the administrator himself. It is known that administrators sometimes diverted waqf-endowed properties to themselves in the Mamluk period. Igarashi, Land Tenure, 189–90.

43 Igarashi, Land Tenure, 51–5, 182–8.

44 For the three members of the ʿAbbasī family, see al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 4: 195–6; 5: 107; 9: 25–6.

45 WA, j679. According to the document, Qijmās was a member of the khāzindāriyya at that time.

46 Igarashi, D., “Religious endowments of the Mamluk Amir Qijmās al-Isḥāqī: a preliminary study”, in Egypt and Syria in the Fatimid, Ayyubid, and Mamluk Eras VIII: Proceedings of the 19th, 20th, 21st and 22nd International Colloquium Organized at Ghent University in May 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, ed. Vermeulen, U., D'hulster, K., and Van Steenbergen, J. (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, 244, Leuven: Peeters, 2016), 423–34Google Scholar.

47 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith al-Duhūr (1930–42), 334–6; idem, Nujūm, 16: 142–3.

48 Igarashi, Land Tenure, 183–4.

49 Igarashi, Land Tenure, 149–53.

50 Al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-Haṣr, 46, 53–4, 57–61; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 6: 357, 361–70; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 28, 30–1.

51 The exact date is unknown but, judging from the title (al-Janāb al-Karīm) given to Qijmās in the deed, it was clearly after his promotion to amir of the ten. Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad al-Asyūṭī, Jawāhir al-ʿUqūd wa-Muʿīn al-Quḍāt wa-l-Muwaqqiʿīn wa-l-Shuhūd (Cairo: Maṭbaʿat al-Sunna al-Muḥammadiyya, 1955), 2: 590.

52 Al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-Haṣr, 60; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 6: 366; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 30.

53 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213.

54 Sabra, Poverty and Charity, 88–94.

55 Sabra, Poverty and Charity, 92–3.

56 Sabra, Poverty and Charity, 161–2.

57 Ohtoshi, T., “Cairene cemeteries as public loci in Mamluk Egypt”, Mamlūk Studies Review 10/1, 2006, 103–6Google Scholar.

58 Based on the following calculations: 1 jayshī dinar = 4/5 dinar; 1 dinar = 300 copper dirhams. Cf. Popper, Egypt and Syria, 77; Petry, Protectors or Praetorians?, 212–3 n.

59 The regular monthly salary (jāmakiyya) for a sultanic mamluk was 2,000 copper dirhams. Igarashi, Land Tenure, 156.

60 The first scholar to pay much attention to the discrepancy between revenues from waqf assets, and sums actually spent on stated waqf charities, was C.F. Petry. See Petry, Protectors or Praetorians? 199–200, 202–3.

61 Miura, T., “Administrative networks in the Mamlūk period: taxation, legal execution, and bribery”, in Islamic Urbanism in Human History: Political Power and Social Networks, ed. Sato, T. (London and New York: Kegan Paul International, 1997), 42–51Google Scholar; Martel-Thoumian, B. “The sale of office and its economic consequences during the rule of the last Circassians (872–922/1468–1516)”, Mamlūk Studies Review 9/2, 2005, 49–83Google Scholar.

62 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213.

63 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213; ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Sālim, Tārīkh al-Iskandariyya wa-Ḥaḍārathā fī al-ʿAṣr al-Islāmī. 2nd. ed. (Alexandria: Dār al-Maʿārif), 476, 483.

64 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 3: 40–1.

65 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213.

66 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Nujūm, 16: 388.

67 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 7: 138, 162; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 109–10.

68 ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 7: 158, 165, 167–74, 177–8, 184–5, 187; Ibn Iyās, Badā’i‘, 3: 122–4; al-Buṣrawī, Taʾrīkh, 80–1.

69 On the basis of their examination of the waqf deeds of Jawhar al-Lālā, Garcin and Taher conclude that he could purchase agricultural lands at low prices after the prevalence of plague. Garcin, J.-C. and Taher, M.A., “Enquête sur le financement d'un waqf égyptien du XVe siècle: Les comptes de Jawhar al-lālā”, JESHO 38, 1995, 272–80Google Scholar, 301.

70 The exact date on which Qijmās set off with the ḥajj pilgrims is unknown, but the pilgrims usually left Cairo between the 16th and 19th of Shawwāl. ʿAnkawi, A., “The pilgrimage to Mecca in Mamlūk times”, Arabian Studies 1, 1974, 148Google Scholar.

71 As for the institution, see ʿAlī Mubārak, Al-Khiṭaṭ al-Tawfīqiyya al-Jadīda li-Miṣr al-Qāhira wa-Mudunihā wa-Bilādihā al-Qadīma al-Shahīra (Būlāq: al-Maṭbaʿa al-Kubrā al-Amīriyya, 1304–06h), 4: 48–50; G. El-Hamamsy, “The mosque of Qijmas al-Ishaqi” (MA thesis, American University in Cairo, 2010); Ḥasan ʿAbd al-Wahhāb, Tārīkh al-Masājid al-Athariyya fī al-Qāhira (Beirut: Awrāq Sharqiyya, 1994): 1: 261–6; Behrens-Abouseif, D., Cairo of the Mamluks: A History of the Architecture and Its Culture (London: I.B. Tauris, 2007), 286–90Google Scholar; Behrens-Abouseif, D., Islamic Architecture in Cairo: An Introduction (Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press, 1989), 151–2Google Scholar.

72 Rabbat, N., “The urban character of al-Darb al-Ahmar”, in Living in Historic Cairo: Past and Present in an Islamic City, ed. Daftary, F., Fernea, E., and Nanji, A. (London: Azimuth Edition in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies and University of Washington Press, 2010), 31Google Scholar.

73 Berchem, M. Van, Matériaux pour un corpus inscriptionum arabicarumre, Première partie, Égypte (Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1979), 1: 509–13Google Scholar.

74 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 6: 213.

75 Al-Sakhāwī, Ḍawʾ, 7: 213; 8: 215–6; 264–5; 10: 211–2.

76 Cf. Y. Frenkel, “Awqāf in Mamluk Bilād al-Shām”, Mamlūk Studies Review, 13/1, 2009, 153; Sabra, A., “Public policy or private charity? The ambivalent character of Islamic charitable endowments”, in Stiftungen in Christentum, Judentum und Islam vor der Moderne. Auf der Suche nach ihren Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschieden in religiösen Grundlagen, praktischen Zwecken und historischen Transformationen, ed. Borgolte, M. (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2005), 98–9Google Scholar.

77 Al-Sakhāwī, Wajīz, 918. The inscription on the monument at the main gate, which survives to today, says that it was completed in Muḥarram 886/March 1481. Van Berchem, Matériaux pour un corpus inscriptionum arabicarumre, 1: 509.

78 Al-Ṣayrafī, Inbāʾ al-Haṣr, 511–2; ʿAbd al-Bāsiṭ, Nayl, 7: 280.

79 Al-Sakhāwī, Wajīz, 1025.

80 Van Berchem, Matériaux pour un corpus inscriptionum arabicarumre, 1: 512.

81 Behrens-Abouseif, Islamic Architecture, 151.

82 Ibn al-Ḥimṣī, Ḥawādith al-Zamān, 1: 303; Akram Ḥasan al-ʿUlabī, Khiṭaṭ Dimashq (Damascus: Dār al-Ṭabbāʿ, 1989), 523.

83 Ibn Ṭawq, Taʿlīq, 539.

84 Al-Nuʿaymī, Al-Dāris fā Taʾrīkh al-Madāris (Damascus: Maktabat al-Thaqāfa al-Dīniyya, 1988), 1: 564–5; al-ʿUlabī, Khiṭaṭ Dimashq, 208–10.

85 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Iʿlām, 94.

86 Har-El, Struggle for Domination, 125–7.

87 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, 1: 65; al-Buṣrawī, Taʾrīkh, 101.

88 Al-Buṣrawī, Taʾrīkh, 102, 106; Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, 1: 67; Ibn Ṭawq, Taʿlīq, 464–5; Ibn al-Ḥimṣī, Ḥawādith al-Zamān, 1: 297.

89 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Iʿlām, 95–6; Ibn Ṭawq, Taʿlīq, 548; Har-El, Struggle for Domination, 138–40.

90 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, 1: 79; Ibn Ṭawq, Taʿlīq, 718. Afterwards, his mamluk Timurāz al-Asmar al-Qijmāsī was buried in the tomb along with his master (Mufākaha, 1: 371).

91 Amir Qaṣrūh, who was later promoted to the atābak al-ʿasākir (commander-in-chief) of Egypt from the viceroy of Damascus, was buried at the tomb in 908/1503 (Ibn Ṭūlūn, Iʿlām: 148; Mufākaha, 1:231).

92 The tomb attached to the madrasa in Cairo continued to be vacant until 1268/1852 when Shaykh Abū Ḥarība, who was believed to be a sufi saint, was buried there (ʿAlī Mubārak, al-Khiṭaṭ al-Tawfīqiyya, 4: 48–50).

93 Igarashi, Land Tenure, 191–2.

94 Ibn Taghrībirdī, Ḥawādith, 1930–42, 551.

95 Waqf deed, WA, q912.

96 ʿAbd al-Laṭīf Ibrāhīm, “Wathīqat al-Sulṭān Qāytbāy (Dirāsa wa-Taḥlīt): al-Madrasa bi-l-Quds wa-l-Jāmiʿ bi-Ghazza”, Dirāsāt fī al-Āthār al-Islāmiyya (Cairo: al-Munaẓẓama al-ʿArabiyya lil-Tarbiya wa-l-Thaqāfa wa-l-ʿUlūm, 1979), 506–7. As for Jānibak, see al-Sakhāwī, Ḑawʾ, 3: 55.

97 As for their positions in Qāytbāy's regime, see C.F. Petry, Twilight of Majesty: The Reigns of the Mamlūk Sultans al-Ashraf Qāytbāy and Qānṣūh al-Ghawrī in Egypt (Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1993), 43–50.

98 As for his biography, see al-Sakhāwī, Ḑawʾ, 3: 36–8.

99 Mayer, L.A., The Buildings of Qāytbāy as Described in His Endowment Deed, I: Text and Index (London: Arthur Probsthain, 1938), 84–5Google Scholar.

100 Ibn al-Jīʿān, Tuḥfa, 61.

101 Ibn Ṭūlūn, Mufākaha, 1: 34; Ibn Ṭawq, Taʿlīq, 47.

102 Al-Buṣrawī, Taʾrīkh, 94.

103 Cf. Lev, Y., Charity, Endowments, and Charitable Institutions in Medieval Islam (Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2005), 1, 54, 159–60Google Scholar.