The Classical Revival i39 religious authority."' The foreign dynasties, on the other hand, being of non-Arab origin and often with shallow roots with respect to their acculturation to Islam, relied far more on ‘ulama ’ to procure the allegiance and compliance of the ruled. In spite of the power commanded by ‘ulama ’, they were vulnerable. The ruling elite could confiscate property, impose taxes, and imprison or exile ‘ulama ’ who opposed their policies. In his analysis of social practices among the ‘ulama ’ of Damascus (1190-1350 CE), Michael Chamberlain notes that medieval Muslim scholarly elites lacked the privileges and rights available to their counterparts in other parts of the world. For example, European institutions such as hereditary charters, deeds, immunities, and titles of office, which could be used to ensure household survival, were absent from the medieval Muslim context. The fragmentation of ‘Abbasid authority and ensuing battles for regional control of competing dynasties exacerbated the vulnerability of the ‘ulama ’, exposing them even more to predatory practices. With respect to the scholarly elite of Nishapur, Richard Bulliet details some of the ways in which the Samanids, Slmjurids, Ghaznavids, and Seljuqs alternately coerced and cajoled the HanafI and Shah ‘I ‘ulama’, and how their policies exacerbated preexisting legal and theological tensions between these factions front the fourth/tenth to the sixth/twelfth century. The draconian policies of ‘Amid al-Mulk al-Kundurl, a vizier of the Seljuq leader Tughril Beg (d. 455/1063), illustrate how the ruling elite exerted pressure on the ‘ulama ’ in the hopes of suppressing opposition. AlKundurl, favoring the Hanafl-Mu‘tazill leaders of Nishapur, ordered that their rivals, the Shafi‘TAsh‘arIs, be condemned during Friday sermons. Additionally, Shafi‘i-Ash‘arls were excluded from religious and educational posts, were subject to arrests and mob action, and came under pressure to leave Nishapur. Fatima’s husband, al-Qushayrl, was one of several ‘ulama ' leaders who faced imprisonment and exile during this period. His support of Ash‘arl theology, which he expressed through his classes and writings, landed him in prison in 446/1054. To secure his release, it took the intervention of his supporters who threatened civil 96 See Muhammad Qasim Zaman, Religion and Politics under the Early ‘Ahbasids: The Emergence of the Proto-Sunni Elite (New York: Brill, 1997), for a detailed analysis of the division of religious authority between the ‘Abbasid caliphs and the ‘ulama ’. 97 Chamberlain, Knowledge and Social Practice , 4. 98 Bulliet, Patricians , 71-72. 99 See, in particular, al-Qushayri’s work entitled Sbikayat ahl al-sunna bi-ma nala-hum min al-mihna, which is included in the following collection of his writings: al-Rasa’il alQushayriyya (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-‘Asriyya, 1970), 1-49.