Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid

He had a turbulent early career: he was imprisoned along with his father by the Abbasids in 905, was released in 906, participated in the murder of the vizier al-Abbas ibn al-Hasan al-Jarjara'i in 908, and fled Iraq to enter the service of the governor of Egypt, Takin al-Khazari.

In 933, he was briefly named governor of Egypt, but this order was revoked after the death of Mu'nis, and Ibn Tughj had to fight to preserve even his governorship of Damascus.

Throughout his governorship, al-Ikhshid was engaged in conflicts with other regional strongmen for control over Syria, without which Egypt was vulnerable to invasion from the east, but unlike many other Egyptian leaders, notably the Tulunids themselves, he was prepared to bide his time and compromise with his rivals.

[3][4] Muhammad's grandfather Juff left Farghana to enter military service in the Abbasid court at Samarra, as did the father of Ibn Tulun, the founder of the Tulunid dynasty.

[6] After the death of Ibn Tulun's son Khumarawayh in 896, the Tulunid state quickly began crumbling from within, and failed to put up any serious resistance when the Abbasids moved to re-establish direct control over Syria and Egypt in 905.

[11] Eventually, he gained the attention of the local governor, Takin al-Khazari, who sent him to govern the lands beyond the Jordan River, with his seat at Amman.

[11] Two years later, Ibn Tughj gained an influential patron when he briefly served under the powerful Abbasid commander-in-chief Mu'nis al-Muzaffar, when he came to help defend Egypt from a Fatimid invasion.

[25][27][28] During the campaign, Ibn Tughj notably prohibited his troops from looting, which, according to J. L. Bacharach, was indicative of his "long-term view towards his stay in Egypt".

[29] Writing to Caliph al-Radi (r. 934–940) in 936, Muhammad ibn Tughj could present a commendable record: the Fatimid invasion was defeated and first measures for improving the financial situation in the province had been undertaken.

[31] As Hugh N. Kennedy writes, "in some ways the Fatimid threat actually helped Ibn Tughj" since, as long as he supported the Abbasids, "the caliphs were prepared to give their approval to his rule in return".

[32] His standing in the Abbasid court was sufficient for him to ask in 938 for the honorific title (laqab) of al-Ikhshid, originally held by the kings of his ancestral homeland Farghana.

[29] According to the biographical dictionary of Ibn Khallikan, he was "a resolute prince, displaying great foresight in war, and a close attention to the prosperity of his empire; he treated the military class with honour and governed with ability and justice".

His conflict with Ahmad ibn Kayghalagh was indicative of his approach: instead of a direct clash, the truce between the two gave al-Ikhshid the time to reconnoitre the situation in Egypt before acting.

Ibn Tulun before and Saladin after al-Ikhshid were two typical examples of Egyptian rulers who spent much of their reigns securing control of Syria, and indeed used Egypt mostly as a source of revenue and resources to accomplish this goal.

[36] His goals were limited but clear: his main concern was Egypt proper and the establishment of his family as a hereditary dynasty over it, while Syria remained a secondary objective.

[39][44][45] From Raqqa, Ibn Ra'iq's troops swiftly took over the districts of northern Syria, where al-Ikhshid's brother Ubayd Allah was governor, while the Egyptian forces retreated south.

Unable to stop the advance of another strongman, Abu'l-Husayn al-Baridi of Basra, both Ibn Ra'iq and the caliph were forced to abandon Baghdad and seek the help of the Hamdanid ruler of Mosul.

[39][48] In the meantime, al-Muttaqi with Sayf al-Dawla had fled to Raqqa before Tuzun's advance, but the caliph grew increasingly suspicious of the Hamdanids, and wrote to al-Ikhshid (perhaps as early as the winter of 943), asking for aid.

[49][50] The meeting was not entirely fruitless, as al-Ikhshid secured an agreement that virtually repeated the terms of a similar treaty between the Tulunid Khumarawayh and Caliph al-Mu'tamid in 886.

[46] Nevertheless, as Michael Brett comments, the territories conferred were "mixed blessings", as the holy cities were exposed to Qarmatian raids, while the marches of the thughur were increasingly menaced by the Byzantines, and Aleppo (with northern Syria) was coveted by the Hamdanids.

[26] As it happened, al-Muttaqi was persuaded by the emissaries of Tuzun, who protested his loyalty, to return to Iraq, only to be seized, blinded and deposed on 12 October and replaced by al-Mustakfi.

According to J. L. Bacharach, although the 13th-century historian Ibn Sa'id al-Maghribi reports that al-Ikhshid immediately took the bay'a and read the Friday prayer in the new caliph's name, based on the available numismatic evidence, he appears to have delayed recognition of both al-Mustakfi and his Buyid-installed successor al-Muti (r. 946–974) for several months by refraining from including them in his coinage, in an act that was a deliberate and clear statement of his de facto independence from Baghdad.

[52] This independence was also acknowledged by others; the contemporary De Ceremoniis records that in the correspondence of the Byzantine court, the "Emir of Egypt" was accorded a golden seal worth four solidi, the same as the caliph in Baghdad.

The Ikhshidid forces left behind in Syria were relatively weak, and the Hamdanid leader, having gained the support of the Banu Kilab, had little difficulty in capturing Aleppo on 29 October 944.

[56] Nevertheless, in October the two sides came to an agreement, broadly on the lines of the earlier Ikhshidid proposal: al-Ikhshid acknowledged Hamdanid control over northern Syria and even consented to sending an annual tribute in exchange for Sayf al-Dawla's renunciation of all claims on Damascus.

The Egyptian ruler knew that he would have difficulty in asserting and maintaining control over northern Syria and Cilicia, which had traditionally been influenced more by Upper Mesopotamia and Iraq.

By abandoning its claims on these distant provinces, not only would Egypt be spared the cost of maintaining a large army there, but the Hamdanid emirate would also fulfil the useful role of a buffer state against incursions from both Iraq and a resurgent Byzantine Empire.

[39] Unlike Ibn Tulun, who built an entire new capital at al-Qatta'i and a famous mosque, al-Ikhshid was neither a patron of artists and poets nor a major builder.

[64] According to historian Thierry Bianquis, he was described by medieval chroniclers as "a choleric and gluttonous man, yet shrewd and inclined toward avarice", but with a fondness for luxuries imported from the east, and especially perfumes.

His love of eastern luxuries soon spread among the upper classes of Fustat as well and influenced the style and fashion of local Egyptian products in turn, which began to imitate them.