Ahmad Ghabin's monograph investigates the classical Islamic institution known as ḥisba and its relationship to artistic production. A quick review of the article on this institution in the standard reference work, the Encyclopaedia of Islam, shows why such a study is needed, for virtually everything about it is unclear.Footnote ¹ The term itself refers on the one hand to the obligation incumbent on all Muslims to “promote good and forbid evil” (itself a topic of recent study by Michael CookFootnote ²) and on the other to the function of the muḥtasib, the townsperson entrusted with applying this rule in the supervision of moral behaviour, particularly in the marketplace, in other words a sort of censor. The term ḥisba is not found in the Qur'an, and no other text states explicitly either the reason for its choice or how such meanings might have arisen from the idea of “calculation” or “sufficiency” expressed by the Arabic root ḥ-s-b. Most written accounts deal either with a general overview of the merits of the institution or with the practical and technical duties of the muḥtasib. The former date only from the fifth/eleventh century, two centuries after the appearance of the institution. The latter, while several centuries older, do not explain the origins of the office. In short, the article shows that there is much room for research.

This book is an outgrowth of Ghabin's PhD dissertation presented to Hebrew University in 1993 on the religious and social aspects of crafts and artisans in the Islamic lands. Here, he has broadened the scope of the material investigated from ḥisba manuals to other sources in order to examine the origins and development of the institution during the Islamic caliphate, by which he means geographically the traditional heartlands of Islam from Spain to India and chronologically the period up to ca. 1500. His study falls into three parts. The first third of the book (pp. 15–118) is an historical overview, basically arranged chronologically. In the first two chapters, he speculates on the possible origins of the practice in pre-Islamic times and the period of Muhammad and Rashidiyyun, arguing that the idea developed at this time, if not the actual name or terminology for it. Chapter 3, about 80 per cent of this first section (pp. 40–118), treats the evolution of the institution under various dynasties or in various regions (successively the Umayyads, Abbasids, Fatimids, Ayyubids, Maghrib, and Mamluks).

This chronological overview is followed by two slightly shorter parts on the impact of the institution of ḥisba on the arts and crafts. Part 2 (pp. 119–188) surveys the Muslim sources, ranging from Qur'an, hadith, jurisprudence or fiqh, and religio-political and philosophical treatises to the ḥisba manuals themselves. It ends with a brief discussion of two technical terms: Chapter 9 on the role of the ‘arīf, a supervisor often appointed by the muḥtasib to control the various crafts and trades and a term that appears repeatedly in the third part of the book, and Chapter 10 on the relationship of ḥisba to the privileged class (khāṣṣa), which in reality was often exempt from such oversight. Part 3 (pp. 189–262), basically one long chapter (11), gives examples of ḥisba practices in six media mentioned in the literature: architecture, figural arts, textiles (the largest subsection), ceramics, glass and metal.

To judge from the preface, the current book is a revised version, for the preface apparently belongs to an earlier one with two (rather than the current three) parts in a slightly different order and covered only five (rather than the current six) media. Such a mix-up is but one problem with the book's production. There are a few grammatical infelicities, typos and misspellings (I was amused to find my name sometimes but not consistently misspelled in footnotes and bibliography as Blaire). Technical terms and art historical processes are sometimes misconstrued. To give but one example, ghaḍa'ir is not porcelain, but ceramics, for porcelain was never made in Islamic lands as potters lacked the essential ingredient, kaolin, and the section on potters and porcelain makers (pp. 245–249) is therefore misnamed.

Far more serious is the lack of an index, and Harrassowitz should be faulted for publishing the monograph without one. For a book with almost 1,400 footnotes and a bibliography that stretches to 24 single-spaced pages with some 500 entries, and furthermore a work, particularly the second half of which is arranged, as the author himself says (p. 9), “without being confined to any specific geographic or chronological order”, an index is a basic requirement to locate all the nuggets of information. These individual bits of information and their documentation in the sources represent one of the most valuable assets of the book, because, as the author repeatedly states, the information is scattered. Furthermore, the terms often change or evolve in meaning, so it is necessary to situate them within relationship to their immediate chronological and geographical framework.

The most important general conclusion to be drawn from Ghabin's extensive documentation is that what was written was not necessarily – or even usually – carried out in practice, for extant buildings and objects repeatedly show that what was condemned in the sources was allowed on the ground. Most prohibitions were not strictly enforced, particularly in the upper class, and while the muḥtasib may have affected the quality of some crafts in the bazaar, he was unable to control the production of luxury goods, most of what we today call ‘Islamic art’. This is not entirely a negative conclusion. Some historians of Islamic art are increasingly turning to the sources to explain their field, but this monograph is one more example showing that what is written is not necessarily what happened. Or, to put it more positively, this study of the institution of ḥisba and its relationship to the arts shows that works of art often paint a different picture than that described in the written sources.