Last updated: April 30th, 2025 at 12:38 pm · Est. Reading Time: 2 minutes
Tribes had their leaders called shaykh (شَيخ). The shaykh had two administrative tools at his disposal to manage his tribe. One was muru’ah – the general Arab code of conduct, and the other was sunnah – the code of conduct of that particular tribe.
There was no official chief of tribe, let alone a hierarchy. Still, no social organization can work effectively without a leader, and the pre-Islamic Arab tribe was no exception. Tribes did have their informal leaders called shaykh (شَيخ). A shaykh was only primus inter pares. There is not a single historic source recording a tribal gathering held for the sole purpose of selecting a tribal chief. He had to win his authority by his charisma. Tribesmen started following a person in whom they saw qualities they perceived as necessary of being a leader.1
As the shaykh was not selected but rather gained leadership by convincing others, the rules of succession regarding the shaykh’s office in pre-Islamic Arabia were not of primogeniture but those of qu’dūd. According to this patrilineal rule, the heir was generally chosen from the agnates who descended from a common ancestor, based on his seniority. Strabo (d. 24 CE) has documented this point in his Geography.2 Basis of seniority could be contribution towards war, efforts for peace, excessive wealth or ripe age. As the shaykh was ‘one of the tribesmen’ he was expected to give support and to set an example, but not to compel. It is clear from the laments of pre-Islamic poet Abu Layla al-Muhallel narrated on the death of Kulayb, shaykh of the northeast Arabian tribe of Taghlib:
Who now will help the indigent when they cry out?
And who will strain the tips of supple spears with blood?
Who will cast lots for the slaughter came when the morning wind cuts through the knotted ropes?
Who will come forward with blood monies and gather them?
And who will succour us when calamities befall?3
Occasionally a shaykh got affirmed or confirmed in his position by a non-Bedouin power. Such arrangement provided an administrative characteristic to his role. Qu’dūd rule did not apply to succession of such offices. The non-Bedouin power usually made this arrangement hereditary. Such non-Bedouin powers were neighbouring states like Sassanian Iran or Byzantine Rome.4
Further Reading
History of Islam, Social Structure of Pre-Islamic Arabs, https://historyofislam.org/social-structure-of-pre-islamic-arabs/
Footnotes
- Warner Caskel, “The Bedouinization of Arabia.” American Anthropologist 52, no. 2, part 2, memoir no. 76 (1954): 37.
- Strabo, The Geography of Strabo Vol. III, ed. and trans. H. C. Hamilton, (London, Henry G. Bohn, 1857), P 215; paragraph 26; chapter IV; Book XVI. See comments of Dostal: Walter A. Dostal, “Mecca before the Time of the Prophet – Attempt of an Anthropological interpretation.” Der Islam: Journal of the History and Culture of the Middle East 68, no. 2 (1991): 115.
- Louis Cheikh, Kitāb Shu’arh’ al-Nasrāniyya vol. I, (Beirut: Jesuit Fathers, 1890), 162. For English translation see: Suzanne P. Stetkevych. The Mute Immortals Speak: Pre-Islamic Poetry and the Poetics of Ritual, (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1993), 206 – 238.
- Warner Caskel, “The Bedouinization of Arabia.” American Anthropologist 52, no. 2, part 2, memoir no. 76 (1954): 37.