Skip to content
Ishraq US — April 2026

Ancient Genealogies and Traditions – 2

Dr. Khurhshid Rizwi English

ARAB ARIBAH

 As stated above, by Arab ʿĀribah or Mutaʿarribah are meant the tribes of Yemeni origin. A brief mention of Yemen has already passed. This southern part of the Peninsula is the burial-place of an ancient civilization. As a result of the strenuous labours of Western travellers such as Glaser, Halevy, Niebuhr, and Arnaud, a large number of ancient inscriptions have been recovered from this land, whose date reaches back to 800 BCE. 27 Subsequent research extended this date to 1200 BCE. 28 The language of these inscriptions is the ancient South Arabian, which has now become extinct, and which was entirely different from North Arabian, that is, present-day Arabic.29 The script of these inscriptions is called, in Arabic terminology, Al-Musnad. Besides the inscriptions, the discovery of ancient coins has also shed light on Yemen’s ancient history. 30 From all these remains one finds traces of highly organized and civilized governments, the details of whose language, culture, and religion constitute the subject of a separate study, and are for the present outside our scope of discussion. What concerns us, more than these scholarly and archaeological investigations, are those traditions, tales, and genealogies which, in their origin, possess a semi-historical, semi-mythical character, yet have had a profound effect upon the Arabs’ collective unconscious and their literature. According to these traditions, Qaḥṭān31 was the progenitor of the people of Yemen and their first king. After him, his son Yaʿrub ibn Qaḥṭān ruled for thirty-three years; and it is this person who, in the company of the Arab ʿĀribah (i.e., Bāʾidah)32, adopted the Arabic language, and thereafter the ʿAdnānī tribes of North Arabia derived it from him.33 After that, his son or grandson ʿAbd Shams Sabaʾ ruled for thirty-five years. This person is regarded as the founder of the famous dam, Sadd Maʾrib.34 Sabaʾ had two sons, Ḥimyar35 and Kahlān.36 Ḥimyar succeeded his father and became the founder of the Ḥimyarite state. The Ḥimyarite state is considered to have been divided into two classes:

1. Kings (Muluk)

2. Tubba (Tabābiʿah)

Its details are stated as follows: the descendants of Ḥimyar continued to rule Yemen in uninterrupted succession. All these people were called “kings”, until the throne and crown reached Al-Ḥārith Al-Rāʾish. He is the first person who was called “Tubba”. Regarding the reason for this appellation, one report is that before al-Ḥārith the Ḥimyarite state was divided into two parts: Sabaʾ, and Ḥaḍramawt. Al-Ḥārith brought both regions under his control and made them one, and all followed him. In this connection he was called Tubba37, and thereafter this title became fixed for all the kings. Thus, collectively, they were called “The Tubba kings of Yemen.” Some other titles of the rulers of ancient Yemen are also worthy of mention: before kings and Tabābiʿah, in the early period of Sabaʾ there existed the concept of a religious king or priest-king, for whom the title Mukārib or Mukarrib was specific. Many kings were titled with this appellation. Their capital was Ṣirwāḥ. The pre-Islamic poet ʿAlqamah says:38

Who can feel secure from the vicissitudes of time after the kings of Ṣirwāḥ and Maʾrib?

After the rulers of Ṣirwāḥ and Maʾrib, who indeed is there that can remain safe from the turning of time?

At one time the rulers of Ḥaḍramawt were known by the title ʿAbāhil or ʿAbāhilah, and in fame and renown they were not less than the Tubba kings.39 In addition, the titles “Adhwāʾ al-Yaman” and “Aqyāl al-Yaman” are also well known. Adhwāʾ is the plural of Dhū, which means “possessor and owner.” Those nobles whose names begin with Dhū fall under Adhwāʾ, for example: “Dhū Nuwās,” “Dhū Jadan,” and so forth. According to some reports, Dhū al-Qarnayn is also counted among the Tabābiʿah, and is identified with the Qurʾānic Dhū al-Qarnayn. In the administrative arrangement of the kingdom of Sabaʾ, a fort and the surrounding villages as a whole were called a Mikhlaf, and the chief or castellan of each Maḥfid was called Dhū in relation to the name of that fort; for example: “Dhū Ghumdān,” “Dhū Thaʿlabān,” and so forth. 40 “Aqyāl” is the plural of “Qil,” which is also used in Arabic. In the verse of ʿAmr ibn Kulthūm: By what will of ʿAmr ibn Hind Will your qayl become among us a resident?

For the interpretation of the word “qil”, al-Zawzanī has explained it: “al-malik dūna al-malik al-aʿẓam,” that is, “a king inferior to the supreme king.”41 In ancient Yemen, too, it had this very meaning. A few forts, or “Maḥāfid,” together fell under a “Mikhlāf,” which should be regarded as synonymous with a “province.” The governor of a Mikhlāf was called a “Qayl,” who, evidently, was superior to a “Dhū” and inferior to a “Malik” or “Tubbʿ.” However, at times the great king, too, would append before his name the title “Dhū” in relation to one of his forts; for example: the king of Sabaʾ residing in the fort of “Raydān” became known by the name “Malik Sabaʾ Dhū Raydān.”42 The fundamental sources of the Arab traditions and myths relating to the ancient history of Yemen are these: Kitāb al-Mulūk wa Akhbār al-Māḍīn43 by ʿUbayd ibn Sharyah al-Jurhumī (d. 686 CE);44 Wahb ibn Munabbih (d. 732 CE), al-Tījān fī Mulūk Ḥimyar;45 Ibn al-Ḥāʾik al-Hamdānī (d. 945 CE), al-Iklīl; Ḥamzah al-Iṣfahānī (d. 970 CE), Tārīkh Mulūk al-Arḍ;46 and Nashwān ibn Saʿīd al-Ḥimyarī (d. 1178 CE), Shams al-ʿUlūm,47 and al- Qaṣīdah al-Ḥimyarīyyah, which is also known by the name “al-Nathwānīyyah.” However, a detailed tracing of these traditions lies outside our subject. We shall confine ourselves only to a brief presentation of a few such traditions which possess some importance in the background of Arabic literature.

[To be Continued]

  1. Hitti, 50–52.
  2. Enc. Arabic Civilization, 474; “Script”.
  3. This disagreement is fundamental and essential, of which the Arab scholars were aware from ancient times. Thus, the well-known statement of Abū ʿAmr ibn al-ʿAlāʾ is: “Neither is the language of Ḥimyar our language, nor is their dialect our dialect.” The resemblance or commonality between the two languages was only to the extent that both were Semitic.
  4. Hitti, 56–58. Also: Doughty, 1/188–89; Note by Barclay.
  5. In the Bible [Book of Genesis, 10/30–25] he is called “Joktan” (Yaqṭān).
  6. Here, ʿĀribah has been used in the sense of bāʾidah [i.e., extinct]. Compare: p. 46, n. 1.
  7. Accordingly, Ḥassān ibn Thābit (may God be pleased with him), who is of Qaḥṭānī origin, says boastfully in contrast to the people of ʿAdnān: “You learned from the speech of the venerable Shaykh Yaʿrub, our forefather, and thus became eloquent and possessed of a following; whereas your condition, all of you, was that dumbness itself was your language, and you were like beasts in the wilderness.” However, in connection with the evolution of language, these notions cannot be regarded as academically reliable. These ideas appear rather to be a reflection of that ancient cultural rivalry which had long existed between the people of the South and the people of the North, and which continued into later times in the form of “Qaysī” and “Yamanī,” as well as “Azdī” and “Nizārī” or “Maʿaddī,” factional groupings. (See: Hitti, 280.)
  8. Arab transmitters such as al-Hamdānī, al-Masʿūdī, al-Aṣfahānī, and Yāqūt have attributed the construction of the [سد‬‫ مأرب ‬ Sadd Maʾrib ] to Luqmān ibn ʿĀd. (Nicholson, 14; Hitti, 54.) However, among the inscriptions found on the ruins of the Sadd Maʾrib, the most prominent names in the category of founders are those of the eighth-century BCE mukārib of Sabaʾ, Yathaʿ Amar Bayyin, and his father Samahʿalī Yanūf. (See: Arḍ al-Qurʾān, 1/251; Hitti, 54.)
  9. By attribution to “Sabaʾ” and “Ḥimyar,” the terms “Sabaean” and “Ḥimyarite” are also sometimes used for Yemeni civilization, language, and culture. “Sabaʾ” is mentioned in the Noble Qurʾān as a tribe or kingdom (27:22; 34:15), from which their power and splendor, prosperity and ease, and then their being punished due to ingratitude become known. The incident that occurred to Prophet Sulaymān with their queen (Queen of Sheba) is mentioned in the Torah (1 Kings, ch. 10; 2 Chronicles, ch. 9), the Gospel (the Queen of the South: Matthew 12:24; Luke 11:31), and the Noble Qurʾān (27:20–44), but her name is not given anywhere. According to common reports, her name was Bilqīs bint Sharaḥbīl, or Bilqīs bint al- Hud-hud ibn Sharaḥbīl. Ḥamzah al-Iṣfahānī counted her among the “tabābiʿat al-Yaman.” She is generally considered to be the same Queen of Sabaʾ mentioned in the Noble Qurʾān. In this context, the hudhud mentioned in the Qurʾān also assumed the form of a literary allusion.
  10. Al-Suhaylī wrote in al-Rawḍ al-Unuf (1/23): “wa maʿnā tubbaʿ fī lughat al-Yaman al-malik al-matbūʿ; wa qāla al-Masʿūdī: lā yuqālu li-l-malik tubbaʿ ḥattā yaghliba al-Yaman wa-l-Shiḥr wa Ḥaḍramawt.” Syed Sulaymān Nadwī’s position (Arḍ al- Qurʾān, 1/287) is that the pattern “fiʿl” in the singular with the meaning of “maf ʿūl” is not used in the Arabic language. Moreover, according to Arabic grammatical principles, there is no reason for the definite article alif-lām not to enter upon it; therefore, seeking an Arabic derivation for it does not appear appropriate. In the Abyssinian language, “tubbaʿ” means “capable,” “tyrannical,” and “possessor of power,” i.e., an exact synonym of the word “sulṭān.” Syed Sulaymān Nadwī prefers this meaning. However, in his view, this word should not be considered of Abyssinian origin either; rather, it should be regarded as Sabaean and Ḥimyarite, because this word occurs even in the most ancient inscriptions. In the Noble Qurʾān, in two places (44:37; 50:14), “the people of Tubbaʿ” are mentioned among those nations that denied the message of truth and became subject to divine punishment. But, in Nicholson’s words (p. 17, fn. 3): “The words Himyar and Tubba do not occur at all in the older inscriptions and very seldom even in those of a more recent date.”
  11. See further: Arḍ al-Qurʾān, 1/241–242.
  12. Likewise, 1/228; according to the statement of Abū ʿUbayd: “al-ʿabāhilah hum alladhīna uqirrū ʿalā mulkihim lā yazālūna ʿanhu” (Asās al-Balāghah), i.e., “the ʿabāhilah are those kings who are established upon their dominion and remain secure from decline.” (See also: Lisān al-ʿArab, s.v. “ʿbhl”.)
  13. Arḍ al-Qurʾān, 1/245. Details of the fortresses of Yemen may be found in al-Hamdānī’s “al-Iklīl.” Among these fortresses, “Ghaymān” and “Ghumdān” are more widely known. Ghumdān was the fortress of Ṣanʿāʾ, which, from the standpoint of architecture, was counted among the wonders. It is said to have had twenty storeys. Each storey was ten cubits high. In its construction, hard stone, sumāq stone, and marble were used. On every side, the façade of the building was made, with stones of different colours—white, black, green, and red. The amīr’s seat was on the upper storey, whose marble windows had ebony frames fitted upon them, and the roof was laid with a slab of such transparent stone that it was possible to distinguish between a kite and a crow passing above. At the four corners, one brass lion stood upright at each corner. When the wind passed through their hollows, a sound like the roaring of a lion was produced. It is said that the structure of Ghumdān remained until the early period of Islam, whereas by the time of al-Hamdānī and Yāqūt it had already assumed the form of a massive ruin. (See: Nicholson, 51, 24–25; Hitti,)
  14. Sharḥ al-Muʿallaqāt, al-Zawzanī. The Muʿallaqah of ʿAmr ibn Kulthūm, verse 54.
  15. Arḍ al-Qurʾān, 1/245.
  16. “ʿUbayd” has also been read on the pattern of “Rashīd,” and also on the pattern of “Junayd.” Likewise, “Shariyah” is [read] on the pattern of “Qaryah” as well, and with gemination, on the pattern of “Bariyyah” as well. (Compare: Hitti, 227, 244; Nicholson, 13, 19, 247; al-Aʿlām 4/189; Muʿjam al-Muʾallifīn, 6/234)
  17. After having remained rare for a time, this book has now been published under the title “Akhbār ʿUbayd ibn Shariyah fī Akhbār al-Yaman wa-Ashʿārihā wa-Ansābihā.” (Compare: Nicholson 13; al-Aʿlām 4/189)
  18. Most likely this is the very book which Ibn Khallikān had seen under the title “Dhikr al-Mulūk al-Mutawwajah min Ḥimyar wa-Akhbāruhum wa-Qiṣaṣuhum wa-Qubūruhum wa-Ashʿāruhum.” (al-Wafayāt, 5/88, under the entry of Wahb)
  19. Gotwald published it under the full name “Tārīkh Sinī Mulūk al-Arḍ wa-l-Anbiyāʾ.” (See al-Aʿlām 2/277)
  20. The full name is “Shams al-ʿUlūm wa-Dawāʾ Kalām al-ʿArab min al-Kulūm.” (See Muʿjam al-Muʾallifīn, 13/86)
  21. See: al-Aʿlām 18/20.