Turbā at-Takritīyyā, in the bazaar of aṣ-Ṣāliḥīyyā, is the turbā of Šayẖ Taqīī ad-Dīn son of aṣ-Ṣāḥib (1) ʾabu al-Bakāʾ ibn Muhāǧir at-Takritī (2). And dār al-Ḥadïṯ al-ʾAšrafīyyā, opposite the turbā of the ṣāḥib Taqīī ad-Dīnat-Takritī (an-Nuʿaymī).
This location proves, as the Monuments historiques (3) accepts, the anepigraphic building to be at-Takritīyyā, but not at all that it ought to be dated according to the first paragraph of an-Nuʿaymī: “ Ibn Muhāǧir ... at-Takritī ... buried there in 698 (4), at the age of about seventy-eight years.” For an-Nuʿaymī goes on, quoting first Naǧm ad-Dīn son of as-Sābiq:
"Ibn Muhāǧir came to Damascus (5) and settled in a house at the ʿAqabat al-Kittān (6) .... he gave many alms and began buying estates for waqfs .... he had agreed with my father to pave that street, and said: Come tomorrow and get the money for it! In the evening, al-ʾAšraf sent him a bunch of violets; he took it and smelled it — that was his death. The next morning he was dead. With a thousand dirham, to the account of the estate, they bought a turbā for him at the sūq of aṣ-Ṣāliḥīyyā".
"The vizier Kamāl ad-Dīn, son of šarīf Muʿīn ad-Dīn, was one of the illustrious sayyids of his time; his great wealth permitted him not to seek pecuniary rewards from the government. ... He died on a Friday, while prostrating himself at the morning prayer. (al-Qūṣī)".
Then, Šayẖ Šams ad-Dīn says: "A certain time after, the vizier Taqīī ad-Dīn son of ʿAlī ibn Muhāǧir at-Takrītī built five shops in the walls of the turbā; he pretended to be his cousin-german". Apparently, the passage is taken out of the original context and ought to follow the next passage: “According to ʾabu al-Muẓaffar ibn al-Ǧawzī the estate of the sāḥib Kamāl ad-Dīn was evaluated at 300,000 dinars. Al-Ašraf showed me a chaplet of a hundred pearls, each the size of a pigeonʾs egg, from his estate. He died 1 Ǧumādā II 634 (7)".
"The vizier Kamāl ad-Dīn, son of šarīf Muʿīn ad-Dīn, was one of the illustrious sayyids of his time; his great wealth permitted him not to seek pecuniary rewards from the government. ... He died on a Friday, while prostrating himself at the morning prayer. (al-Qūṣī)".
Evidently, the ibn Muhāǧir of Naǧm ad-Dīn is the Kamāl ad-Dīn of ibn al-Ǧawzī, his proper name was not ʿAlī, else Taqīī ad-Dīn would be his son and could not pretend to be his cousin. Evidently, too, there are two ibn Muhāǧirs, Kamāl and Taqīī ad-Dīn, the second a shady figure. He was born in 620 and died in 698 (8), his long life being a continued change between premiership and prison, typical for the Mamlūk period. But since Sibṭ ibn al-Ǧawzī died in 654 (9), the date 634 of the death of Kamāl ad-Dīn is right, and al-malik al-ʾAšraf has to be the ʾAyyūbid Mūsā (10). It would have been unnecessary for al-ʾAšraf to poison a man seventy-eight years old. And the turbā was bought, not built, for Kamāl ad-Dīn. The fact that the building has no inscription again confirms the story. “To the account of the estate” seems to imply that he had no direct heirs, and, combined, the notes seem to impute legacy hunting to Taqīī ad-Dīn.
Thus, the building must have existed before 1236 without being used, for reasons unknown; in 1298 Taqīī ad-Dīn, the vizier, was also buried in it. But the name at-Takrītīyyā refers to Kamāl ad-Dīn. The construction permits two periods to be distinguished, demanding these dates: first third and very end of the seventh century. Aṣ-Ṣaqqāʿī adds that the turbā was burned during the occupation of Damascus by the Tatars in 1299 CE (11).
5. From Tikrit, like Saladin.
6. ʿAqaba is a road with a high gradient.
7. January 30, 1237.
8. 1223-1298 CE.
9. 1256-1257 CE.
10. Reigned 1229-1237 CE.
11. Sauvaire p. 278.
Photo credit: K.A.C Creswell.
