Download the full version of the ebook at ebookfinal.

com

Foundation Fieldbus 4th Edition Ian Verhappen

https://ebookfinal.com/download/foundation-fieldbus-4th-
edition-ian-verhappen/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD EBOOK

Download more ebook instantly today at https://ebookfinal.com

Instant digital products (PDF, ePub, MOBI) available
Download now and explore formats that suit you...

Diseases Of Sheep 4th Edition Ian Aitken

https://ebookfinal.com/download/diseases-of-sheep-4th-edition-ian-
aitken/

ebookfinal.com

The New British Politics 4th Edition Ian Budge

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-new-british-politics-4th-edition-
ian-budge/

ebookfinal.com

The Psychology of Aging An Introduction 4th Edition Ian

Stuart-Hamilton

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-psychology-of-aging-an-
introduction-4th-edition-ian-stuart-hamilton/

ebookfinal.com

Innate Immunity to Pulmonary Infection Novartis Foundation

Symposia 1st Edition Novartis Foundation

https://ebookfinal.com/download/innate-immunity-to-pulmonary-
infection-novartis-foundation-symposia-1st-edition-novartis-
foundation/
ebookfinal.com
Mathematics in Action An Introduction to Algebraic
Graphical and Numerical Problem Solving 4th Edition
Consortium For Foundation Mathematics
https://ebookfinal.com/download/mathematics-in-action-an-introduction-
to-algebraic-graphical-and-numerical-problem-solving-4th-edition-
consortium-for-foundation-mathematics/
ebookfinal.com

Generation and Effector Functions of Regulatory

Lymphocytes Novartis Foundation Symposia 1st Edition
Novartis Foundation
https://ebookfinal.com/download/generation-and-effector-functions-of-
regulatory-lymphocytes-novartis-foundation-symposia-1st-edition-
novartis-foundation/
ebookfinal.com

Dental Foundation Training The Essential Handbook for

Foundation Dentists 1st Edition Amit Rai (Author)

https://ebookfinal.com/download/dental-foundation-training-the-
essential-handbook-for-foundation-dentists-1st-edition-amit-rai-
author/
ebookfinal.com

Tissue Engineering of Cartilage and Bone Novartis

Foundation Symposium 249 1st Edition Novartis Foundation

https://ebookfinal.com/download/tissue-engineering-of-cartilage-and-
bone-novartis-foundation-symposium-249-1st-edition-novartis-
foundation/
ebookfinal.com

Mammalian TRP Channels as Molecular Targets Novartis

Foundation Symposium 258 1st Edition Novartis Foundation

https://ebookfinal.com/download/mammalian-trp-channels-as-molecular-
targets-novartis-foundation-symposium-258-1st-edition-novartis-
foundation/
ebookfinal.com
Foundation Fieldbus
Fourth Edition
Foundation Fieldbus
Fourth Edition

by Ian Verhappen
and Augusto Pereira
Notice
The information presented in this publication is for the general education of the reader.
Because neither the author nor the publisher has any control over the use of the information
by the reader, both the author and the publisher disclaim any and all liability of any kind
arising out of such use. The reader is expected to exercise sound professional judgment in
using any of the information presented in a particular application.
Additionally, neither the author nor the publisher has investigated or considered the
effect of any patents on the ability of the reader to use any of the information in a particular
application. The reader is responsible for reviewing any possible patents that may affect any
particular use of the information presented.
Any references to commercial products in the work are cited as examples only. Neither
the author nor the publisher endorses any referenced commercial product. Any trademarks
or tradenames referenced belong to the respective owner of the mark or name. Neither the
author nor the publisher makes any representation regarding the availability of any refer-
enced commercial product at any time. The manufacturer’s instructions on use of any com-
mercial product must be followed at all times, even if in conflict with the information in this
publication.

Copyright © 2012
ISA—The International Society of Automation
All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2

ISBN: 978-1-934394-76-2

Ebook ISBN: 978-1-937560-40-9

PDF ISBN: 978-1-937560-81-2

No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, with-
out the prior written permission of the publisher.

ISA
67 Alexander Drive
P.O. Box 12277
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
www.isa.org

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data in process.

For my wife Michele, who has supported me throughout my career and through the
original development of this book and its revisions, while also raising our daughters
Ashley and Madeline. You are the glue that keeps it together.
Thank you also to everyone who has supported me during my Fieldbus development
and continued growth, providing opportunities to expand my knowledge and apply
what I have learned. You have made it possible to be able to share this knowledge.
—Ian Verhappen

For my wife Margareth and my sons Sergio and Fabio, who gave me the support to
write this book and helped me during the revisions.
Thanks to everyone who taught me the Fieldbus concepts since the early years and all
the people who, during the several projects that I have been involved in, followed my
suggestions for getting their projects working successfully.
—Augusto Pereira
Table of Contents
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xi
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xvii
Ian Verhappen, P. Eng., CAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix
Augusto Pereira, Eng. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxi

Chapter 1 — Fieldbus Layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.1 Application Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.2 User Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.1.3 Testing and Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.1.4 Interoperability Test System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.1.5 Physical Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.1.6 Topologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1.2 Communications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1.3 Parameter Classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
1.3.1 EDDL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1.3.2 FDT/DTM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
1.3.3 Field Device Interface (FDI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Chapter 2 — Fieldbus Cabling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

2.1 Segment Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
2.2 High-Speed Ethernet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.3 Grounding/Earthing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.4 Surge Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
2.5 Cable Installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Chapter 3 — Fieldbus Power Supplies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

3.1 Intrinsic Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
3.2 Fieldbus Intrinsically Safe Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
3.2.1 Architecture with FISCO installed in
the DCS cabinet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.2.2 Redundant FISCO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
3.3 Fieldbus Non-Incendive Concept
(FNICO/FISCO Ex ic) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
3.4 High Energy Trunk – Fieldbus Barrier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.5 DART (Dynamic Arc Recognition and Termination) . . . 85
3.6 Selecting the Right Power Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

Chapter 4 — Documentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
4.1 Segment Loading Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Chapter 5 — System Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

5.1 Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5.1.1 Client-Server VCR Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
5.1.2 Report Distribution VCR Type . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.1.3 Publisher–Subscriber VCR Type . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.1.4 “Fail Over” Strategies and Design
Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
5.2 Scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Chapter 6 — Commissioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

6.1 Physical Layer Checks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
6.1.1 Cable Testing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
6.1.2 Electronic Commissioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
6.1.3 Configuration Commissioning . . . . . . . . . . . 133
6.1.4 FOUNDATION Fieldbus Digital
Communication Certification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
6.1.5 Typical Installation Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
6.2 Device Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
6.2.1 Configuration of the Resource Block . . . . . . 148
6.2.2 Configuration of the Transducer Block . . . . . 148
6.2.3 Configuration of the Analog Input
Function Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Chapter 7 — Troubleshooting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

7.1 Optimization Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
7.1.1 Physical Fault Symptoms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
7.2 Communications and Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
7.3 Tuning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

Chapter 8 — Operations & Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

8.1 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
8.2 Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162

Chapter 9 — New Developments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

9.1 Fieldbus Safety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
9.2 Wireless & Remote I/O (WIO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172

viii TABLE OF CONTENTS

 9.3 Wireless . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
9.4 Host System Interoperability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

Appendix A — Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181

Appendix B — Fieldbus Foundation Specification List . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

Appendix C — Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

Appendix D — Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

Appendix E — FF Segment Design Example Exercise. . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217

TABLE OF CONTENTS ix
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Digital control system architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Figure 1-2a OSI model compared with Fieldbus model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Figure 1-2b Fieldbus data transfer packets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 1-3 Manchester encoding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Figure 1-4 Device description hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Figure 1-4a Analog Input Block (AI). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Figure 1-4b Analog Output Block (AO) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 1-4c PID Block (PID) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Figure 1-5 Fieldbus bridge capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 1-6 Maximum length of Fieldbus network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Figure 1-7 Fieldbus network with repeaters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Figure 1-8a Physical layouts – Single combined segment . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Figure 1-8b Wiring practices – Cable efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Figure 1-9 FOUNDATION Fieldbus node addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Figure 1-10a Function block scheduling and macrocycle . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Figure 1-10b LAS algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Figure 1-11 SCADA layer Fieldbus traffic management . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Figure 1-12 Radar level gauge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Figure 1-13 Valve signature with best fit line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Figure 1-14 Field device interface communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Figure 1-15 FDI Flow Device and Host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Figure 1-16 Device Package showing documents to be updated . . . . . . 38
Figure 2-1 Short circuit protection “sizing” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Figure 2-2 Spur overcurrent failure indication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

LIST OF FIGURES xi
Figure 2-3 Fieldbus connector blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Figure 2-4 Fieldbus wiring with conventional terminal blocks . . . . . . 51
Figure 2-5 Terminator inside junction box . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure 2-6 Termination guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Figure 2-7 HSE profile functional areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Figure 2-8 Ethernet wiring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Figure 2-9 Wiring H1 devices to a linking device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Figure 2-10 Integrated fieldbus system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Figure 2-11 Continuity of ground. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Figure 2-12 Plant ground and instrument ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Figure 2-13 Cable shield grounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Figure 2-14 Recommended fieldbus grounding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Figure 2-15 High frequency capacitive ground . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Figure 2-16 Equipotential bond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Figure 2-17 Segregation of cable classes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Figure 2-18 Segregating cables in trays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Figure 2-19 General cable installation guideline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Figure 3-1 Protective systems incendive limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
Figure 3-2 Typical FISCO network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Figure 3-3 FISCO calculation for area classification IIC. . . . . . . . . . . 79
Figure 3-4 FISCO calculation for area classification IIB . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Figure 3-5 FISCO repeater wiring to field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Figure 3-6 Typical fieldbus power conditioner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Figure 3-7 Typical fieldbus barrier installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Figure 3-8 High-energy trunk calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Figure 3-9 Typical spark behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

xii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3-10 DART extinguished spark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Figure 3-11 Power supply selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Figure 4-1 Network diagram with repeater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Figure 4-2 Fieldbus data sheet: individual device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Figure 4-3 Fieldbus data sheet for multiple devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Figure 4-4 Digital communication signal symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Figure 4-5 Multivariable Device Representation on P&ID . . . . . . . . . 96
Figure 5-1 Fieldbus VCR communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Figure 5-2 Host configuration screen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Figure 5-3 Loop configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Figure 5-4 Multiple loop function block scheduling . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Figure 5-5 Segment bandwidth calculation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Figure 5-6 Typical fieldbus architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Figure 5-7 Fieldbus Foundation Network with control in the field . 119
Figure 5-8 Macrocycle – control in valve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Figure 5-9 Fieldbus Foundation Network with control in the DCS . 121
Figure 5-10 Macrocycle – control in host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
Figure 5-11 Control in output device . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
Figure 5-12 Control in input and output device. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Figure 5-13 Control in Host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
Figure 5-14 Control in the DCS – when there are delays . . . . . . . . . . 127
Figure 6-1 H1 network analysis tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Figure 6-2 Electrical cable test meters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Figure 6-3 Reel of Fieldbus cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Figure 6-4 Correct H1 packet waveform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Figure 6-5 Change in base frequency and amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . 135

LIST OF FIGURES xiii

Figure 6-6 Effects of inductive components on waveform . . . . . . . . 136
Figure 6-7 Complete signal distortion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Figure 6-8 Check sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
Figure 6-9 Correct transmitter installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Figure 6-10 Correct installation of Fieldbus junction boxes . . . . . . . . 140
Figure 6-11 Field device grounding error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Figure 6-12 Cable cross-section exceeds 40% of conduit area. . . . . . . 141
Figure 6-13 Failure to maintain required mechanical separation . . . . 142
Figure 6-14 Coiled signal cables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
Figure 6-15 Corrosion caused by liquid entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Figure 6-16 Corrosion in a junction box. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Figure 6-17 Excess cable length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Figure 6-18 Two installation errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Figure 6-19 Device display on first connection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Figure 7-1 MTL diagnostic system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Figure 7-2 P+F on-line diagnostics solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Figure 7-3 Turck on-line diagnostic solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
Figure 7-4 R. Stahl diagnostic module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
Figure 7-5 PID Function Block internal functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
Figure 8-1 Emerson handheld communicator. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Figure 8-2 Beamex Fieldbus calibrator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Figure 8-3 Fieldbus signal jitter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Figure 9-1 SIS (Safety Instrumented System) user layer extensions . . 170
Figure 9-2 Example SIS application analog 2 out of 3 voter . . . . . . . 172
Figure 9-3 Device Mapping Diagram (Channel Mapping
of other Protocols to FF Flexible Function Block) . . . . . . 174

xiv LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 9-4 National Instruments USB H1 modem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Figure E-1 Simplified P&ID of a distillation tower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
Figure E-2 Fieldbus system design – plot plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
Figure E-3 Instrument location drawing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Figure E-4 Fieldbus system design – area classification . . . . . . . . . . . 201
Figure E-5 Junction box location drawing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Figure E-6 Instrument Segment Drawing 01-Seg-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
Figure E-7 Instrument Segment Drawing 01-Seg-2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
Figure E-8 Instrument Segment Drawing 01-Seg-3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
Figure E-9 Segment 1 macrocycle calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

LIST OF FIGURES xv
List of Tables
Table 1-1 Fieldbus Function Blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Table 2-1 Fieldbus cable characteristics. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Table 2-2 Cable type specifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Table 2-3 HSE class summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Table 3-1 Characteristics of network-energized devices . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Table 3-2 Networks’ power supply requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Table 3-3 Equipment classification guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Table 3-4 Default function block information for all designs . . . . . . . 74
Table 3-5 FISCO parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Table 3-6 Characteristics of FISCO and FNICL networks . . . . . . . . . 78
Table 4-1 System decision analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Table 4-2 Network decision analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Table 4-3 Device criticality decision matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Table 4-4 Connector decision analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Table 4-5 FISCO installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Table 4-6 IS/NIS installation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Table 4-7 Configuration worksheet/checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Table 5-1 VCR types and their uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Table 5-2 Configuring a network for safety vs. availability . . . . . . . . 108
Table 5-3 Fieldbus operating mode priorities.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Table 5-4 Fieldbus alarm levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Table 5-5 Macrocycle requirements for different configurations . . . 124
Table 6-1 Examples of identifying signal and block type . . . . . . . . . 148
Table 7-1 IF communication errors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171

LIST OF TABLES xvii

Table 8-1 Instrument Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
Table 8-2 Device characteristics summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206

xviii LIST OF TABLES

Ian Verhappen, P. Eng., CAP

B.Sc. Environmental Science and B.Sc. Chemical

Engineering
Certificate in Oil Sands Technology
FF Certified Professional and Certified FF Instructor
ISA Certified Specialist in Analytical Technology
ISA Certified Automation Professional

Ian Verhappen is an ISA Fellow and a Professional Engineer, and is Director

of Industrial Automation Networks Inc., a global consulting firm focused
on “Making Industrial Networks Easy.” Prior to starting Industrial Automa-
tion Networks, Verhappen worked as the Director of Industrial Networks for
Measurement Technology Limited (MTL) where he was responsible for their
global digital communications product line. He has been working in the
automation industry since 1987 and has been actively involved in FOUNDA-
TION Fieldbus technology since 1995, when he led the first Host Interopera-
bility demonstration project at Syncrude Canada Ltd., where he worked for
20 years.

Verhappen is an acknowledged expert in FOUNDATION Fieldbus technology

and is an active member of the global standards community. He has
authored numerous technical papers on Fieldbus and is a regular columnist
for several industry trade journals including Manufacturing Automation,
Industrial Networking, Offshore, and Process West. He is co-author with
Augusto Pereira of ISA’s popular book Foundation Fieldbus. Verhappen also
wrote the chapters on Industrial Networking for the 4th Edition of the
Instrument Engineer’s Handbook, published by Taylor and Francis Group, and
the Fieldbus chapter for ISA’s book, A Guide to the Automation Body of
Knowledge.

He has been the keynote speaker at numerous conferences around the

globe, where he has shared his knowledge of industrial networking and field
level networks. Verhappen is also an FF Certified instructor and the devel-
oper of the FOUNDATION Fieldbus Certified courses at the Southern Alberta

IAN VERHAPPEN, P. ENG., CAP xix

(Canada) Institute of Technology (FF Certified Training Center) as well as
an instructor in IDC Technology’s on-line diploma program.

In addition to serving as chairman of the Western Canada End User Coun-

cil, Verhappen was chairman of the Fieldbus Foundation Global End User
Advisory Council from 2002 to 2006, reporting directly to the Board of
Directors twice per year and in the process helping set the direction of
Fieldbus technology. Under his guidance, the End User Advisory Council
prepared the “Engineering Design Guide, FOUNDATION Fieldbus Document
AG-181” for which he was the editor. AG-181, now in Revision 2, has been
translated into German, Japanese, Chinese, and Russian and is widely used
as the basis for many corporate and project Fieldbus specifications.

Verhappen has been active on a number of Fieldbus specifications commit-

tees, including being an outside expert reviewer for the Safety Fieldbus
Committee and Program Manager of the HSE Remote I/O development
team. Verhappen is a past Vice-President Standards & Practices, a Managing
Director on ISA’s Standards & Practices Board, Chair of ISA-103 (FDT),
and is past Vice-President Strategic Planning for ISA. He is the 2011–2012
Director of the ISA Communications Division. In addition, he is the Cana-
dian Chair of IEC 65E, 65B and the TC65 Committee as well as a partici-
pating member of Canada’s IEC 65A and 65C and ISO TC1 WG7
subcommittees.

In addition to his expertise in industrial network technology, Verhappen is

also a trained HAZOP and Risk Assessment facilitator, having conducted
such investigations for several billion-dollar projects.

Verhappen has served as project lead, engineer/designer or external review

consultant for a number of companies in industries around the world,
including pulp and paper, mining, food processing, water and wastewater,
oil sands processing, petrochemicals, and refining.

xx IAN VERHAPPEN, P. ENG., CAP

Augusto Pereira, Eng.

• B.Sc. Electronical Engineer by FEI – Faculdade de

Engenharia Industrial (1975).
• Degree in Mathematics and Physics by Universidade
Católica de Santos.
• Many courses, in Brazil and in the United States, of Automation and
Hardware.
• Since 1994, he has been involved in more than 241 automation projects
with digital protocols in Brazil, Canada, Argentina, Chile, Colombia,
Venezuela, Cuba and Peru.
• He worked at Dow Chemical, at Smar, at Emerson Process, at Yokogawa
South America and as the Technical and Marketing Director in Pep-
perl+Fuchs South America.
• He worked as the Professor of Automation Techniques of the Course of
Electronic Engineering of the Engineering College of the city of Soro-
caba – São Paulo State.
• He was the Professor of Projects with FOUNDATION Fieldbus of the
Course of Post-Graduation in Process Control of UNIUBE (University
of the city of Uberaba – Minas Gerais State, Brazil).
• He was President of District 4 (South America) of ISA (International
Society of Automation) from 1998 to 2000.
• In October 2011 he was elevated to the distinguished grade of ISA Fel-
low in recognition of his improvements in Fieldbus instruments and
automation design. The grade of ISA Fellow is granted to acknowledge
outstanding achievements in scientific and engineering fields.
• Nowadays, he works as an MBA Professor of IT and Advanced Admin-
istration course of the college Fatec, in the city of Sorocaba – São Paulo
State, Brazil. Professor of the Post-Graduation Courses of the Brazilian
Universities: Professor of Mauá, from the city of São Caetano do Sul –
São Paulo State, Professor of Federal of Espírito Santo State, Professor
of Universidade Santa Cecília (Prominp), from the city of Santos – São

AUGUSTO PEREIRA, ENG. xxi

 Paulo State, and from ISA District 4 and also Consultant of the LEAD
Project, from Petrobras, in the city of Rio de Janeiro.
• Currently, he is the ISA District 4 Director of Events and Exhibitions.

xxii AUGUSTO PEREIRA, ENG.

1 — Fieldbus Layers
FOUNDATIONTM Fieldbus has several different “layers.” This chapter discusses
three of these layers:

1. Physical Layer: The various topologies and types of data blocks used
by FOUNDATION Fieldbus.
2. Communication Layer: How Fieldbus uses and assigns device regis-
ters.
3. Parameter Classes: The function or role of the information generated
on the network.

This chapter provides the background on the how and what of Fieldbus. So
let’s start. What is Fieldbus?

Fieldbus is a bi-directional digital communication network that enables the

connection of multiple field instruments and processes and operator sta-
tions (HMI: Human-Machine Interfaces). They carry out control functions
and enable monitoring by means of supervision software. Figure 1-1 shows
how these three layers (Field, Fieldbus, and Supervisory System) interrelate.

The FOUNDATION Fieldbus protocol was based on the ISO/OSI seven-layer

communications model, although it does not include all layers. It can be
divided into the Physical Layer (dealing with instrument connection tech-
niques) and the Communication Stack (dealing with the digital communi-
cation among the devices). These are the OSI layers used by FOUNDATION
Fieldbus. Figure 1-2a represents how the different components of the FOUN-
DATION Fieldbus protocol maps to the OSI seven-layer model.

The Physical Layer is OSI layer 1, the Data Link Layer is OSI layer 2, and
because FOUNDATION Fieldbus is a relatively simple network protocol with
little cross-network communication, OSI layers 3 through 6 are not used.
The Fieldbus Message Specification and Fieldbus Access Sublayer are part
of OSI layer 7, and the Application Layer and the User Layer in which
Function Blocks are defined reside above this. The Fieldbus Communica-
tion Stack is comprised of layers 2 through 7 of the OSI model.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 1
 Figure 1-1 — Digital control system architecture

LOCAL AREA NETWORK

SUPERVISORY
SYSTEM

FIELDBUS

FIELD

Figure 1-2a — OSI model compared with Fieldbus model

OSI MODEL FIELDBUS MODEL

USER USER
LAYER LAYER

FIELDBUS MESSAGE
SPECIFICATION
APPLICATION LAYER
FIELDBUS ACCESS
SUBLAYER
PRESENTATION LAYER
COMMUNICATION
SESSION LAYER
“STACK”
TRANSPORT LAYER

NETWORK LAYER

DATA LINK LAYER DATA LINK LAYER

PHYSICAL LAYER PHYSICAL LAYER PHYSICAL LAYER

As a message is transmitted from one device to another on the network, it

must pass through all of the OSI layers, and in the process, the data packet

2 FIELDBUS LAYERS
is developed, as shown in Figure 1-2b, where the numbers in the figure rep-
resent the approximate number of 8-bit octets used to transfer the user data
up and down the stack.

Figure 1-2b — Fieldbus data transfer packets

3&, 3URWRFRO&RQWURO,QIRUPDWLRQ
3'8 3URWRFRO'DWD8QLW

8VHU/D\HU 8VHU'DWD

)06
)LHOGEXV0HVVDJH 8VHU(QFRGHG'DWD
3&,
6SHFLILFDWLRQ  WR

)$6
)LHOGEXV$FFHVV )063'8
3&,
6XEOD\HU  WR

'// )UDPH&KHFN
'DWD/LQN/D\HU )$63'8
3&, 6HTXHQFH

WR WR 

3K\VLFDO/D\HU 6WDUW (QG

3UHDPEOH '//3URWRFRO'DWD8QLW
'HOLPLWHU 'HOLPLWHU

   
7KHUHPD\EHPRUHWKDQRFWHWRISUHDPEOHLIUHSHDWHUVDUHXVHG

Figure 1-3 represents Manchester encoding, which is how the actual data is
encoded in the H1 FOUNDATION Fieldbus network. Manchester encoding
adds a time reference signal to the data signal to determine the signal
boundaries. One way the protocol increases the level of noise immunity
versus other communication techniques is that it looks for a transition
every 32 ±10% microseconds to see if there is a change in state, up or down.
If there is no change within this “gate,” then there is no communication on
the network. Because FF only looks for a transition during this short time
period, the amplitude of the signal itself is not the critical element in deter-
mining if there is a message to send.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 3
 Figure 1-3 — Manchester encoding

Data 1 0 1 1 0 0 1

Clock

Encoded
Data
1 0 1 1 0 0 1

“9
WR“9 YROWV
WRYROWV

“P$ P$
WR“P$
SHDNWRSHDN

The Data Link Layer (DLL) is a mechanism to transfer data from a node to
the other nodes that need the data. The Data Link Layer also manages the
priority and order of such transfer requests, as well as data, address, priority,
medium control, and other parameters, all related to message transfer.

Only one device on a link is allowed to use the medium (Physical Layer) at
a time. The Link Active Scheduler (LAS) controls medium access.

1.1 Topology

1.1.1 Application Layer

The Application Layer provides an interface for the device’s application

software. This layer defines how to read, write, or start a task in a remote
node. The main task of this layer is to define syntax for the messages.

4 FIELDBUS LAYERS
The main components of the Application Layer are the Fieldbus Access
Sublayer (FAS) and the Fieldbus Message Specification (FMS).

The FAS uses the scheduled and unscheduled features of the Data Link
Layer to provide a service for the Fieldbus Message Specification (FMS).
The types of FAS services are described by Virtual Communication Rela-
tionships (VCR).

The VCR is like the speed dial feature on your memory telephone. There
are many digits to dial for an international call—an international access
code, country code, city code, exchange code, and the specific telephone
number. This information only needs to be entered once and then a “speed
dial number” is assigned. After setup, only the speed dial number needs to
be entered for dialing to occur.

In a similar fashion, after configuration, only the VCR number is needed to

communicate with another Fieldbus device.

Just as there are different types of telephone calls, such as person-to-person,

collect, or conference calls, there are different types of VCRs. VCRs and
their management are covered in more detail in Chapter 5.

Fieldbus Message Specification (FMS) services allow user applications to

send messages to each other across the Fieldbus using a standard set of mes-
sage formats.

FMS describes the communication services, message formats, and protocol

behavior needed to build messages for the User Application.

Data that is communicated over the Fieldbus is described by an “object

description.” Object descriptions are collected together in a structure called
an object dictionary (OD).

The object description is identified by its index in the OD. Index 0, called
the object dictionary header, provides a description of the dictionary itself
and defines the first index for the object descriptions of the User Applica-
tion. The User Application object descriptions can start at any index above
255.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 5
Index 255 and below define standard data types such as Boolean, integer,
float, bitstring, and data structures that are used to build all other object
descriptions.

A Virtual Field Device (VFD) is used to remotely view local device data
described in the object dictionary. A typical device will have at least two
VFDs: a Network and System Management VFD and a User Application
VFD.

Network Management is part of the Network and System Management

Application. It provides for the configuration of the communication stack.
The Virtual Field Device (VFD) used for Network Management is also used
for System Management, and provides access to the Network Management
Information Base (NMIB) and to the System Management Information
Base (SMIB). NMIB data includes Virtual Communication Relationships
(VCR), dynamic variables, statistics, and Link Active Scheduler (LAS)
schedules (if the device is a Link Master). SMIB data includes device tag
and address information and schedules for Function Block execution.

1.1.2 User Layer

The User Layer defines the way of accessing information within Fieldbus
devices so that such information may be distributed to other devices or
nodes in the Fieldbus network. This is a fundamental attribute for process
control applications.

The architecture of a Fieldbus device is based on blocks, with the Function

Block, which as the name implies is an object-based function designed to
execute a range of control functions that are responsible for performing the
tasks required for the current applications, such as data acquisition, feed-
back and cascade loop control, calculations, and actuation. Every Function
Block contains an algorithm, a database (inputs and outputs), and a user-
defined name, typically the loop or tag name since the Function Block tag
number must be unique in the user’s plant). Function Block parameters are
addressed on the Fieldbus by means of their TAG.PARAMETER-NAME.

A Fieldbus device includes a defined quantity of Function Blocks of which

at least one block must be instantiated or defined.

6 FIELDBUS LAYERS
Function Block. The FOUNDATION Fieldbus Function Block, especially its
models and parameters—through which you can configure, maintain, and
customize your applications—is a key concept of Fieldbus technology.

What is a Function Block? A Function Block is a generalized concept of the

functionality in field instruments and control systems, such as analog input
and output as well as PID (Proportional-Integral-Derivative) control. The
FOUNDATION Fieldbus specification, FF-890, “Function Block Application
Process—Part 1,” gives fundamental concepts, while Part 2 and later parts
give various Function Block details.

The Function Block Virtual Field Device (VFD) contains three classes of
blocks: Resource Block, Function Block, and Transducer Block.

Resource Block. A Resource Block shows what is in the VFD by providing

the manufacturer’s name, device name, Device Description (DD), and so
on.

The Resource Block controls the overall device hardware and Function
Blocks within the VFD, including hardware status.

Tip 1 — The mode of the Resource Block controls the mode of all
other blocks in the device.

Transducer Block. A Function Block is a general idea while the Transducer

Block is dependent on its hardware and principles of measurement. For
example, a pressure transmitter and magnetic flow meter use different mea-
surement principles but provide an analog measured value. The common
part is modeled as an AI (Analog Input) Block. The difference is modeled as
Transducer Blocks, which provide the information on the measurement
principle. A Transducer Block is linked to a Function Block through the
CHANNEL parameter of the Function Block.

In addition to converting the signal between a digital number and a physi-

cal signal (milliVolts, capacitance, frequency etc.) or output (pressure, cur-
rent, etc.), Transducer Blocks are becoming ever more important because
they are also the blocks used to capture and store all the diagnostic and
maintenance-related data for a device. A number of Standard Transducer

FIELDBUS LAYERS 7
Blocks have been defined, including the Common Block (to define the
minimum requirements for all Transducer Blocks) and Temperature, Pres-
sure, and Advanced Positioner Blocks. The Advanced Positioner Block is a
requirement for partial stroke testing, which is needed for Safety Instru-
mented Fieldbus applications. The Flow Transducer Block is likely to be
released in 2012.

It is end-user demand and economics that are driving the need for Standard
Transducer Blocks since, without a standard interface to the maintenance
data contained within each device, it is a cumbersome task to take full
advantage of the diagnostic capabilities of a digital transmitter, using mod-
ern software and asset management systems.

Transducer specifications are generally defined by the device developers.

The transducer specifications establish the base scope of transducer func-
tions. A device may have additional functions, but it must contain the
functions specified in the specification to be interoperable within the given
specification.

Function Block. A Function Block is a generalized model of measurement

and control. The three Function Block classes are:

1. Standard Block, as specified by the Fieldbus Foundation.

2. Enhanced Block, a Standard Block with additional parameters and
algorithms but still fully defined by the appropriate FF specifications
3. Extended, Open Block or a Vendor-Specific Block, designed by indi-
vidual vendors with parameters not defined by the FF specifications
but rather by the device DD file. Extended blocks must contain the
Standard Block parameters so basic connectivity and communications
will always be possible.

The Function Blocks MAI (Multiple Analog Input), MAO (Multiple Analog
Output), MDI (Multiple Discrete Input), MDO (Multiple Discrete Out-
put), and FFB (Fully Flexible Function Block), defined in Parts 4 and 5 of
the Function Block Application Process specifications, were developed as
part of the High-Speed Ethernet (HSE) process. The “M-series” of blocks
are able to transfer a group of eight PV (process variable) signals as a single
message on the Fieldbus Network and because HSE is fully backwards com-

8 FIELDBUS LAYERS
patible with H1, a number of H1 devices, such as temperature multiplexers,
are taking advantage of the MAI block.

The most novel of the new blocks, however, is the Fully Flexible Function
Block (FFB), as it is able to be fully programmed by the end user, using any
of the IEC 61131-1 programming languages.

Like all object-based Fieldbus Function Blocks, the FFB is a “wrapper” for
the actual functions that reside and execute inside of it. The Fieldbus speci-
fications define a set of parameters that must be common to all Function
Blocks to ensure interoperability and communications between the various
blocks, devices, and host system. Since each component of the Fieldbus
specification is treated as an object and is, to some extent, similar to a sub-
routine or function call in a computer program, it is possible for each man-
ufacturer to write its own code for the object to execute, as long as the
results are presented in the predefined format. It is this lack of definition for
the function itself that makes the FFB possible.

The FFB can be configured by the end user with any of the IEC 61131-1
languages to whichever function is required. Thus, a device supporting the
FFB can be configured or programmed for a variety of purposes, from pro-
tocol converter to a nano-PLC that performs batch/recipe operations or
complex multivariate control calculations, such as artificial neural networks
or fuzzy logic.

The FFB specification contains many useful Function Blocks; however, the
one developed to help Fieldbus in the manufacturing industry, where dis-
crete control is more prevalent, is the device controller (DC) block, which is
intended to control any two- or three-state physical device. The device con-
troller accepts a set point and causes the device to drive to that set point.
Time is allowed for the transition, but alarms are generated if the physical
device fails to reach the desired state or loses that state after the transition is
complete. The DC block has inputs for control of the set point by external
logic or commands from a host, as well as permissive, interlock, and shut-
down logic functions. An operator may temporarily bypass a faulty limit
switch after visual confirmation of the state of the physical device. The
parameter DC_STATE displays one of 14 states that describe the current
control condition, while the parameter FAIL gives specific reasons for fail-
ures.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 9
Unfortunately, the interfaces to program FFB are not yet fully interopera-
ble. This means that an FFB from Manufacturer A must be programmed
and configured by the host and software tools of Manufacturer B, and vice
versa. However, once the FFB has been prepared and compiled through
DD Services (the binary file that is used by field devices and hosts to exe-
cute the information from the DD file), it can be executed by any system
supporting the FFB block type.

FFB technology was successfully demonstrated at the International Spe-

cialty Products facility in Lima, Ohio, in May 2005. The demonstration
consisted of converting one of the three filter beds in the process from con-
trol in the host to field-based control, using linking devices containing FFBs
from two manufacturers. The first FFB controlled the 10 quick opening/
closing valves (250 milliseconds) on one side of the filter, and then control
was transferred to the second linking device and its FFB to control the sec-
ond bank of 10 valves. After that, control was passed back to the host to
control the third filter bed’s operation.

Figure 1-4 shows not only how the various function blocks work together
but also the different parameters that are used in each of the Standard,
Enhanced, and Extended Blocks available in a device. Simplistically, the
Universal parameters define the basis for the Standard Blocks, Enhanced
Blocks build on this concept, and then manufacturers can further expand
on the Enhanced Blocks with their own enhancements.

Tip 2 — The Function Block extensions provided by manufactur-

ers are not defined by the Foundation, so they may not be the
same between two different manufacturers.

10 FIELDBUS LAYERS
 Figure 1-4 — Device description hierarchy

Universal
Parameters
'HILQHGE\
)LHOGEXV
)RXQGDWLRQ
6SHFLILFDWLRQ

Function
Block 5HVRXUFH $, 3,' $2
Parameters

Transducer
Block
Parameters
7HPS 3UHVV

Manufacturer 'HILQHGE\
Specific 0DQXIDFWXUHU
Parameters ([WHQGHG
%ORFNV
Resource
Transducer Blocks Function Blocks
Blocks

Despite the fact that the enhancements are not defined by the Fieldbus
Foundation, they will be supported by all host systems capable of reading
the associated DD and Capabilities Files.

A block has a series of parameters, which have continuous indexes. It is

because these indexes are continuous that the DD revisions for devices
must match between a field device and its associated Host system. If a
newer DD revision device is associated with an older DD revision in the
Host, the links between where the Host thinks a parameter resides in mem-
ory and the actual device memory address no longer match. For example if
the AO Block in DD revision 01 starts at memory address 600 when revi-
sion 02 is published, the AO Block may now start at memory address 645
meaning that if the Host system is looking for the parameter at address 600,
it is likely to get a data type mismatch as a minimum and certainly the
incorrect data.

Table 1-1 shows these various blocks as defined by the Fieldbus Foundation
in the indicated part of the specification.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 11
 Table 1-1 — Fieldbus Function Blocks
Part-2 Blocks Standard Blocks
AI Analog Input Block
DI Discrete Input Block
ML Manual Loader Block
BG Bias/Gain Station Block
CS Control Selector Block
PD P, PD Controller Block
PID PID, PI, I Controller Block
RA RATIO Station Block
AO Analog Output Block
DO Discrete Output Block
Part 3 Enhanced Blocks
DC Device Control Block
OS Output Splitter Block
SC Signal Characterizer Block
LL Lead Lag Block
DT Dead Time Block
IT Integrator (Totalizer) Block
(More blocks are under development)
Part 4 Multiple I/O Blocks
MDI Multiple Discrete Input Block
MDO Multiple Discrete Output Block
MAI Multiple Analog Input Block
MAO Multiple Analog Output Block
Part 5
FFB – Flexible Func- IEC 61131 Blocks
tion Blocks

As Figures 1-4a through 1-4c show, a Function Block has input, output, and
contained parameters. Figure 1-4a is a typical Analog Input (AI) Block, 1-4b
is an Analog Output (AO) Block, and 1-4c is a PID Block. Data generated in
a block is made available from an output parameter, which can be linked to
the input parameter of other Function Blocks. The Fieldbus Foundation
does not define how each manufacturer is to implement the algorithms to
complete the functions shown in these figures, but rather defines the func-

12 FIELDBUS LAYERS
tionality, parameters, and “connections,” such as channel out, etc., between
each of the Function Blocks. This allows each manufacturer to differentiate
their product from their competitors’ through increased efficiency and fea-
tures, such as improved signal conditioning and diagnostics.

Floating-point parameters have a valid range of ±1.2 × 1038 to ±3.4 × 1038,

as well as (in some cases) the values -Inf or +Inf.

Discrete Blocks have 256 valid enumerated states, which means that in addi-
tion to simple logic 0 or 1, they can also be used to represent specific states,
such as open, closed, true, false, start, stop, running, etc.

In the case of an AO Block, if the actual device reaches either of its open or
closed limits, the block will set the corresponding limit in the status ele-
ment of the associated back-calculation output parameter.

This tells the PID Block to not push the output further in that direction,
thus preventing reset windup in the loop.

The operator normally sets the PID loop mode from the Block mode
parameter in the PID Block. Control is stopped by setting this parameter to
MAN. However, if the operator wishes to “hand operate” the AO Block, it
is better to remain in AUTO mode and enter the set point instead.

Figure 1-4a — Analog Input Block (AI)

FIELDBUS LAYERS 13
 Figure 1-4b — Analog Output Block (AO)

Figure 1-4c — PID Block (PID)

1.1.3 Testing and Registration

All FOUNDATION Fieldbus devices that have a DD file need to pass two sepa-
rate suites of tests before they can achieve the Fieldbus “check mark” of the
Fieldbus logo with a check mark in the lower right-hand corner, which con-
firms compliance with the relevant suite of test specifications. One of the
FF “check mark” tests is for the Communications Stack, while the other
tests for device interoperability. Although it is not an exact indication of

14 FIELDBUS LAYERS
what each of these test suites checks, a simplified way of thinking of the two
test suites is that the Conformance test checks for media access/control OSI
Layers 2-7, while the Device Interoperability Test or ITK checks device con-
formance to the User Layer.

The Fieldbus Foundation has partnered with the Fraunhofer Institute, based
in Karlsruhe, Germany, for completion of the Conformance Test System
that checks the Communications Stack, which does not change much over
time. Every manufacturer then uses an approved stack to build their Field-
bus device, which is then sent to the Fieldbus Foundation for interoperabil-
ity testing.

1.1.4 Interoperability Test System

The ITK is conducted at the Foundation offices in Austin, Texas, where the
device is connected to the test suite so that approximately 500 different
tests can be run. The pass rate for these tests is 100%, so if just one test fails,
the manufacturer, after making any modifications to correct the problem(s),
needs to repeat all the tests. Devices that successfully complete the tests are
given the FF “Check Mark” and are then listed on the Fieldbus web site as
such, along with the DD file that was used for the test. A device that passes
ITK 5.1 and supports the Field Diagnostics Profile to support enhanced
Device Description and graphics will have this feature separately listed on
the registration certificate.

The ITK is normally revised approximately every 18 months and as of late

2011 is on revision 6. Prior to any FF product receiving a “check mark” it
must go through a rigorous quality assurance process to verify that any
products getting this approval are truly interoperable.

The Fieldbus Foundation test procedure must pass through all the steps
below before the specification is approved:

1. A need for the specification is identified from a request by industry,

and once the Board of Directors agrees that this is a worthwhile activ-
ity, a call for participants is distributed to all Foundation members.
This call for volunteers also includes a request for volunteers to lead
the activity as Editor, Project Leader, etc.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 15
2. Once the new standard development committee has been formed, the
committee meets and agrees on the project scope, the project leader
prepares a project plan, outlining the deliverables and estimated time-
line for the project to the Technical Steering Committee for review
and approval.
3. The first step in the actual development process is for the develop-
ment team to create a set of Use Cases to clearly define the problem
or problems that are going to be solved by the new standard.
4. From these Use Cases the team develops a Draft specification that
fully describes how the products can be built to solve the Use Cases.
5. The Foundation issues a “Call for Prototypes” to request that at least
two independent suppliers build products in compliance with the new
Draft Preliminary Specification.
6. The prototypes and the Foundation’s test kit are then brought
together to test against this specification to make sure that everyone
interprets the specification in the same way, and once they have done
so, with any resulting questions being resolved by the development
team, it is accepted that the theory described in the specification will
actually work. It is this step in the specification approval process that
is key in verifying device interoperability because it confirms by three
separate sources that they have all interpreted the specifications in the
same way and met the requirements as defined in the original Use
Cases.
7. A Preliminary Specification is then made ready for distribution to
members and the Technical Steering Committee for review and final
approval.
8. The Technical Steering Committee (TSC) (Fieldbus Foundation’s
Standards Board) reviews any comments received, and after all the
Fieldbus Foundation members have a final chance to comment, the
TSC then approves the document as a Final Specification.

This entire process typically takes more than two years.

16 FIELDBUS LAYERS
1.1.5 Physical Layer

This is the Fieldbus layer connected with instrument devices in the field.
The standardized data transmission speed of the H1 network is 31.25 Kbps;
as stated by the standard, all other speeds shall be used for high-speed inter-
connection of bridges and gateways (see Figure 1-5).

Figure 1-5 — Fieldbus bridge capability

BRIDGE CAPABILITY

USER
LAYER

COMMUNICATION

100 Mbps Fieldbus “STACK”

PHYSICAL LAYER

Bridge

31.25 Kbps Fieldbus

Devices

The standard determines the following rules (among others) for the speed of
31.25 Kbps:

1. A Fieldbus instrument shall be able to communicate with the follow-

ing number of instruments:
• From 2 to 32 instruments in a non-intrinsically safe connection and
power supply separated from the communication wiring.
• From 2 to 16 instruments receiving power by the same communica-
tion wiring in an intrinsically safe connection.
• From 1 to 24 instruments receiving power by the same communica-
tion wiring in a non-intrinsically safe connection.

Note: Most host systems are restricted to 16 devices per network (64 devices per 4
port card) or are otherwise restricted by the number of parameters they can manage
per port. The result is that physical power is not always the limiting factor in the

FIELDBUS LAYERS 17
number of devices that can be added to a network. More often the limiting factor for
fast macrocycle installations is bandwidth.

Tip 3 — This rule does not forbid the connection of more instru-
ments than the specified number. Such limits have been estab-
lished, considering a consumption of 9 mA ± 1 mA, with a
power supply of 24 VDC, intrinsic safety barriers with an output
of 11–21 VDC, and a maximum current of 80 mA for the instruments
located within the hazardous area.

2. The length of the entire bus segment with the maximum number of
instruments operating at a speed of 31.25 Kbps shall not exceed
1900 m in the section of the trunk plus all spurs (Figure 1-6).

Figure 1-6 — Maximum length of Fieldbus network

1900 m max.

Fieldbus Segment BUS

Terminator Terminator

+
Signal Control or
Isolation Monitoring
Circuit Device
-

Field Devices
Fieldbus
Power Supply

Tip 4 — This rule does not forbid the use of longer lengths, pro-
vided that the electrical characteristics of the instruments are
observed.

3. The maximum number of repeaters for regenerating the waveform

between two instruments cannot exceed four (Figure 1-7).

18 FIELDBUS LAYERS
Repeaters are used to expand a Fieldbus network. Repeaters can be either
energized or de-energized. When four repeaters are used, the maximum dis-
tance between any two devices in a segment is 9500 m.

Figure 1-7 — Fieldbus network with repeaters

1900 m 1900 m 1900 m 1900 m 1900 m

REP1 REP2 REP3 REP4 Terminator

DISTANCE CAN BE INCREASED WITH REPEATERS

MAXIMUM NUMBER OF REPEATERS = 4

4. A Fieldbus system must be able to remain in operation while a device

is being connected to it or disconnected from it.
5. Failure in any communication element (except for short-circuit or low
impedance) shall not affect communication for more than 1 ms.
6. The polarity of systems using twisted pairs shall be respected, their
wires shall be identified, and the polarity shall be observed in all con-
nection points. According to the Fieldbus standard, devices them-
selves are not to be polarity-sensitive, but this is not always the case.
7. For systems with a redundant physical medium:
• Each channel must comply with the network configuration rules.
• A non-redundant segment cannot be between two redundant seg-
ments.
• Repeaters must also be redundant.
• The identification number of the channels must be maintained in
the Fieldbus, that is, the Fieldbus channels must have the same
numbers as the physical channels.
8. Cable shields shall not be used to conduct power.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 19
1.1.6 Topologies

Several topologies may be used in Fieldbus design. Figure 1-8 shows the
topologies that will be detailed below. Power supplies and terminators are
not shown so that the figures can be more easily understood.

Bus with Spurs Topology. The Bus with Spurs topology uses a single bus to
which devices and spurs are directly connected. Several devices may be con-
nected to each spur. The total spur length is limited according to the num-
ber of spurs and the number of devices per spur. This is summarized in
Table 1-2. This spur length table is not absolute. It merely serves as a guide-
line for designing networks.

Figure 1-8a — Physical layouts – Single combined segment

Control Highway

Input/Output JB T
Boards
T JB
Host

Combine multiple
drops off single
Fieldbus cable from
interface room

20 FIELDBUS LAYERS
 Figure 1-8b — Wiring practices – Cable efficiency
Multiconductor
Cable

H1 Port
JB FF
JB

FF FF
JB JB
Multi-pair cable to
conventional JB at location
in Field Operating unit then
trunk continues to each FF
FF
JB and associated spurs
JB

Point-to-Point Topology. In the Point-to-Point or Daisy Chain topology, all

devices used in the application are connected in series. The Fieldbus trunk
is routed from one device to the next, being interconnected to the terminals
of each Fieldbus device.

Table 1-2 — Maximum spur lengths

Total One Two Three Four Maximum
devices device per devices devices devices total
per spur, m per spur, per spur, per spur, length,
network (ft) m (ft) m (ft) m (ft) m (ft)

1–12 120 (394) 90 (295) 60 (197) 30 (98) 439 (1440)

13–14 90 (295) 60 (197) 30 (98) 1 (3) 384 (1260)

15–18 60 (197) 30 (98) 1 (3) 1 (3) 329 (1080)

19–24 30 (98) 1 (3) 1 (3) 1 (3) 220 (720)

25–32 1 (3) 1 (3) 1 (3) 1 (3) 10 (32)

FIELDBUS LAYERS 21
 Caution: Point-to-Point topology is rarely used since the failure of one
device in the network will result in total network failure.

Tree Topology. Tree topology concentrates the connection of several field

devices to couplers/junction boxes. Because of its distribution, the Tree
topology is also known as a “Chickenfoot” or Star configuration.

End-to-End Topology. End-to-End topology is used to directly connect two

devices. The connection may be entirely located at the field (a transmitter
and a valve with no other devices connected) or to connect a field device (a
transmitter) to the Host device.

Mixed Topology. Mixed topology, as the name implies, mixes the three most
commonly used topologies connected to one another. However, the maxi-
mum length of a segment, including the spurs to the total length, shall be
observed. Figure 1-8a shows how this topology might be configured by
combining individual spurs with several multiple drop field device cou-
plers.

Many installations are also taking this one step further by running multi-
conductor H1 cables to a conventional junction box at a convenient loca-
tion, either on the edge or centrally located within a unit operation area,
and then extending individual trunk cables to one or more Fieldbus device
coupler assemblies/enclosures strategically located in closer proximity to
the devices themselves, thus minimizing total installed cable cost. This is
shown in figure 1-8b.

Bridges are used to connect Fieldbus segments operating at different speeds

(and/or physical layers such as wires, fiber optics, radio, etc.) in order to
obtain a large network. A bridge is shown in Figure 1-5, connecting the H1
and High-Speed Ethernet (HSE) networks.

A gateway depending on the manufacturer can be used to connect one or

more H1 segments to other types of communication protocols, such as Eth-
ernet, RS-232, MODBUS, Modbus/TCP, Profibus, etc.

22 FIELDBUS LAYERS
1.2 Communications
Figure 1-9 shows how the registers in a Fieldbus device are assigned.

Figure 1-9 — FOUNDATION Fieldbus node addresses

0x10 — V(FUN) Address for Link Master Class devices

0xF7 — V(FUN)
Address for Basic Class devices
+ V(NUN)
0xF8 — 0xFC Default address for devices with cleared address
0xFD — 0xFF Address for temporary devices such as a handheld communicator

Not used
LM Class Devices
V(FUN)

Not Used V(NUN)

V(FUN) + V(NUN)

BASIC Class Devices

0xF7
0xF8
0xFC
Default Address
0xFD
Temporary Devices
0xFF

Every Fieldbus device has a unique 32-bit hardware address identifier made
up of a 6-byte manufacturer code, a 4-byte device code, and a serial num-
ber. This makes it possible to uniquely distinguish each device from the oth-
ers. The Fieldbus Foundation assigns the manufacturer codes, while the
manufacturer assigns the device type code and sequential serial number.

A temporary device, such as a handheld communicator, has a node address

in the temporary range. The Link Active Scheduler (LAS) has a node address
of 0x04 or the series of lowest addresses. If a device has an address in the
gap V (NUM), it will never be able to join the network. The V (FUN) and V
(NUN) parameters are accessible through Network Management.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 23
Several Data Link (DL) addresses are reserved for specific purposes. For
example, devices can share the same system-wide Data Link Service Access
Point (DLSAP) for alarm reception.

Foundation devices are classified into device classes: BASIC, Link Master
(LM), and Bridge. An LM class device has the ability to be the LAS, while
BASIC class devices do not have this functionality. In addition to LM capa-
bility, a Bridge class device has the functionality to connect networks.

One and only one device in a network can be the LAS at any one time;
therefore, at least one LM (or Bridge) class device is needed in a link. LM
devices will try to acquire the LAS role when no LAS exists on start-up or
when the current LAS fails.

Tip 5 — The LM device with the lowest node address becomes

the new LAS for the network.

Other secondary or Backup LM devices observe the LAS activity and can
assume the primary or Master LAS role if the operating LAS fails.

The LAS manages the scheduled communication part of the synchronized

data transfer between Function Blocks.

A Function Block output parameter is a Publisher of data, and other Func-

tion Blocks that receive this data are called Subscribers. The LAS controls
periodic data transfer from a Publisher to Subscribers using the Network
Schedule.

Other network communications take place in an asynchronous way. The

LAS is responsible for giving all nodes on a link a chance to send messages.

The third role of the LAS is to maintain network communications. The LAS
does this by giving the token to all devices detected by the LAS. When a
new device is added to the network, it must be recognized by the LAS and
added to the token rotation list, which is called the Live List.

24 FIELDBUS LAYERS
A Fieldbus device may have user applications that are independent from
each other and do not interact. A Fieldbus device consists of Virtual Field
Devices (VFD) for such individual applications.

A Fieldbus device has at least two VFDs. One is the Management VFD,
where network and system management applications reside. It is used to
configure network parameters, including VCRs, as well as to manage
devices in a Fieldbus system. The other is a Function Block VFD, where
Function Blocks exist. Most field devices have more than two Function
Block VFDs.

A measurement or control application consists of Function Blocks con-

nected to each other. Function Blocks are connected through Link Objects
in the Function Block VFD. A Link Object connects two Function Blocks
within a device, or a Function Block to a VCR for Publisher or Subscriber.

A Function Block must get input parameters before its algorithm can be
executed. Its output parameters must be published after algorithm execu-
tion. Therefore, algorithm execution and Publisher-Subscriber communica-
tion must be orchestrated when blocks are distributed among devices. The
System Management and Data Link Layer cooperate to achieve this by
using the Link Scheduling (LS) time that is distributed and synchronized by
the Link Active Scheduler (LAS).

Other network communications take place in an asynchronous way. The

LAS is responsible for giving all nodes on a link a chance to send messages.
This asynchronous or acyclic communication should constitute the major-
ity of the macrocycle time on a network. Figure 1-10a shows a typical net-
work with two independent loops.

Note that any device that is either not performing an internal calculation or
participating in a publish/subscribe communication, which means it is part
of the control loop and must either publish (share) its process variable or
subscribe (read) the process variable from another device in its loop, is able
to receive the Pass Token and participate in a client server communication.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 25
 Figure 1-10a — Function block scheduling and macrocycle

Scheduled Function Scheduled Cyclic

Communication Unscheduled
Block Execution
(DLL) Communication
(SM)
AI110

PID110

AO110
DI101
DO101

loop 110 period of execution

Cyclic Acyclic
Alarms/Events
Function Block Execution Maintenance/Diagnostic Information
Cyclic Communication - Publish Program Invocation
Acyclic Communication Permissives/Interlocks
Display Information
Trend Information
Configuration

Figure 1-10b represents the algorithm used by the LAS to determine the
next action it needs to take while ensuring that all deterministic communi-
cations happen at their assigned time.

Figure 1-10b — LAS algorithm

:DLWXQWLOLWLV
WLPHWRLVVXHWKH
,VWKHUHWLPHWR
1R &'
GRVRPHWKLQJ ,VVXH
EHIRUHQH[W &'
6HQGLGOH
&RPSHO'DWD"
PHVVDJHVZKLOH
ZDLWLQJ
<HV

,VVXH3UREH1RGH7LPH
'LVWULEXWLRQRU3DVV7RNHQ

26 FIELDBUS LAYERS
1.3 Parameter Classes
Block parameters are classified into three classes: input, output, and con-
tained parameters. Function Blocks can have all of these classes, while the
Resource Block and Transducer Blocks have only contained parameters.

An input parameter is an input of a Function Block and can accept one out-
put parameter of another Function Block. Its data type must be the same as
the output parameter.

An output parameter is a record consisting of a value (analog or discrete) and

its status.

A contained parameter is neither input nor output. It is accessible only

through an on-demand Read or Write request. Its data type can be any of
those defined by the Fieldbus Foundation.

Input parameters, output parameters, and some contained parameters are

records with an associated status. Status shows whether the value of this
parameter is useful or not. If the value is useful, the status is GOOD. If the
value is not useful, the status is BAD. The status can be UNCERTAIN
when the block is not 100% confident that the value is useful. Blocks have
an option to interpret UNCERTAIN as GOOD or BAD.

The acyclical traffic time may be user-defined and configured by means of

the configuration software (typical macrocycle times are 250 ms).

The above discussion concentrates on communications at the device or H1

level. However, all this data must be shared with other parts of the corpora-
tion, including the Distributed Control System1 (DCS), panel operators via
the Human-Machine Interface (HMI), and other parts of the corporation as
appropriate. However, the security and integrity of the Supervisory Control
and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Layer must be ensured and a variety of

1. Historically, DCS has meant Distributed Control System. However, in

the new era of digital communications made possible with Fieldbus
technology, the more appropriate term is Digital Control System, and
this term will be used hereafter in this text.

FIELDBUS LAYERS 27
Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
The Project Gutenberg eBook of A Short
History of the Fatimid Khalifate
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.

Title: A Short History of the Fatimid Khalifate

Author: De Lacy O'Leary

Release date: October 6, 2020 [eBook #63391]

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Tim Lindell and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive/American Libraries.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A SHORT

HISTORY OF THE FATIMID KHALIFATE ***
 Transcriber’s Note: The original printing of this book had numerous errors, including
basic mistakes like misnumbering the chapters, and the occasional transposition of lines
of text. Efforts have been made to fix these but it is possible some may remain.

TRUBNER’S ORIENTAL SERIES

TRUBNER’S ORIENTAL SERIES

POPULAR RE-ISSUE AT A UNIFORM PRICE
Demy 8vo, dark green cloth, gilt.
ALBERUNI: India. An Account of the Religion, Philosophy,
Literature, Geography, Chronology, Astronomy, Customs, Laws,
and Astrology of India, about a.d. 1030. By Dr. Edward C. Sachau.
ARNOLD (Sir E.): Indian Poetry and Indian Idylls. Containing
‘The Indian Song of Songs,’ from the Sanskrit of the Gita
Govinda of Jayadeva; Two Books from the ‘Iliad of India’
(Mahabharata); ‘Proverbial Wisdom,’ from the Shlokas of the
Hitopadesa, and other Oriental Poems.
BARTH (Dr. A.): The Religions of India. Authorised Translation by
Rev. J. Wood.
BIGANDET (B. P.): Life or Legend of Gaudama, the Buddha of
the Burmese; With Annotations, the Ways to Neibban, and
Notice on the Phongyies or Burmese Monks.
BEAL (Prof. S.): Life of Hiuen-Tsiang. By the Shamans Hwui Li and
Yen-Tsung. With a Preface containing an Account of the Works of
 I-Tsing.
BEAL (Prof. S.): Si-Yu-Ki: Buddhist Records of the Western World.
Translated from the Chinese of Hiuen-Tsiang.
BOULTING (Dr. W.): Four Pilgrims: I., Hiuen Tsiang; II., Sæwulf;
III., Mohammed ibn abd Allah; IV., Ludovico Varthema of
Bologna.
COWELL (Prof. E. B.): Sarva-Darsana-Samgraha; or, Review of
the Different Systems of Hindu Philosophy. By Madhava Acharya.
Translated by Prof. E. B. Cowell, M.A., and Prof. A. E. Gough,
M.A.
DOWSON (Prof. J.): Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology
and Religion, Geography, History, and Literature.
EDKINS (Dr. J.): Chinese Buddhism: A Volume of Sketches,
Historical, and Critical. New and Revised Edition.
ROCKHILL (W. W.): The Life of the Buddha and the Early
History of his Order. Derived from Tibetan works in the
Bkahhgyur and Bstan-hgyur. Followed by notices on the early
history of Tibet and Khoten.
HAUG (Dr. M.): Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings, and
Religion of the Parsis.
WEBER (Dr. A.): History of Indian Literature. Translated by John
Mann, M.A., and Theodore Zachariae, Ph.D. Fourth Edition.
O’LEARY (De Lacy): Arabic Thought and its Place in History.
Other Volumes to follow.
LONDON
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Ltd.
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE
FATIMID KHALIFATE

BY
DE LACY O’LEARY, D.D.
Lecturer in Aramaic and Syriac, Bristol University
Author of “Arabic Thought and its Place in History”

LONDON:
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., LTD.
NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO.
1923

Printed in Great Britain by

John Roberts Press Limited, London.
 INTRODUCTORY NOTE
The following pages present a brief outline of the history of the
Fatimid Khalifs who were ruling in Egypt at the time of the First and
Second Crusades. Too often the student of European history gleans
his knowledge of the oriental powers with which the West was
brought into contact by the Crusades from western Christian writers,
who do not fairly or truly describe those powers, and do not set
forth clearly the strong and weak points which are so important in
interpreting the actual forces with which the Crusaders were brought
into contact. These pages are drawn from the Arabic and Persian
historians so as to present a picture which, though inaccurate in
some points, nevertheless shows the other side not perceived by the
historians who wrote the narrative of the Crusades from a western
standpoint. Directly, therefore, they supplement the western history,
but are still more important in their indirect bearing as an effort has
been made to show the rise and development of the Fatimid
Khalifate and sect as a rival to the orthodox Abbasid Khalifate of
Baghdad, which is most essential to the right understanding of the
world into which the Crusaders penetrated, whilst at the same time
it shows a curious and important phase of Muslim tendencies which
are not without a bearing on the later history of Islam. The present
essay does not claim to be an original study in a field hitherto
unexplored, but simply aims at bringing together in an accessible
form material which will be of service to the student of mediaeval
western history and to those who are interested in the development
of Islam, and to do so with such comments as will enable it to be co-
ordinated with contemporary European history.
 CONTENTS
CHAP. PAGE
I The Shiʿites or Schismatics of Islam 1
II The Ismaʿilian Sect 12
III The Qarmatians 39
IV The Establishment of the Fatimids in North Africa 51
V The Fatimid Khalifs of Kairawan 74
VI The Second Fatimid Khalif, Al-Qaʾim 88
VII The Third Fatimid Khalif, Al-Mansur 91
VIII The Fourth Fatimid Khalif, Al-Moʿizz 93
IX The Fifth Fatimid Khalif, Al-ʿAziz 115
X The Sixth Fatimid Khalif, Al-Hakim 123
XI The Seventh Fatimid Khalif, Az-Zahir 189
XII The Eighth Fatimid Khalif, Al-Mustansir 193
XIII The Ninth Fatimid Khalif, Al-Mustali 211
XIV The Tenth Fatimid Khalif, Al-Amir 218
XV The Eleventh Fatimid Khalif, Al-Hafiz 222
XVI The Twelfth Fatimid Khalif, Az-Zafir 227
XVII The Thirteenth Fatimid Khalif, Al-Faʿiz 233
XVIII The Fourteenth Fatimid Khalif, Al-ʿAdid 235
XIX The Fatimid Khalifate in its Relation to General History 246
XX The Later History of the Ismaʿilian Sect 257
Bibliography 262
Index 266
 I
THE SHIʿITES OR SCHISMATICS OF ISLAM

Islam appears first on the page of history as a purely Arab

religion: indeed it is perfectly clear that the Prophet Mohammed,
whilst intending it to be the one and only religion of the whole Arab
race, did not contemplate its extension to foreign communities.
“Throughout the land there shall be no second creed” was the
Prophet’s message from his death-bed, and this was the guiding
principle in the policy of the early Khalifs. The Prophet died in a.h.
11, and within the next ten years the Arabs, united under the
leadership of his successors, extended their rule over Egypt, Syria,
Mesopotamia, and Persia. To a large extent it was merely an
accident that this rapid expansion of Arab rule was associated with
the rise of Islam. The expanding movement had already commenced
before the Prophet’s ministry, and was due to purely secular causes
to the age long tendency of the Arabs,—as of every race at a similar
stage of economic and social development,—to over-spread and
plunder the cultured territories in their vicinity. The Arabs were
nomadic dwellers in a comparatively unproductive area, and had
been gradually pressed back into that area by the development of
settled communities of cultivators in the better irrigated land upon
its borders. These settled communities evolved an intensive
agriculture, and thus achieved great wealth and an advanced state
of civilization which was a perpetual temptation to the ruder nomads
who, able to move over great distances with considerable rapidity,
were always inclined to make plundering incursions into the
territories of the prosperous agricultural and city states near at hand.
The only restraint on these incursions was the military power of the
settled communities which always had as its first task the raising of
a barrier against the wild men of the desert: whenever the dyke
gave way, the flood poured out. In the seventh century a.d. the
restraining powers were the Roman Empire and the Kingdom of
Persia, and both of these, almost simultaneously, showed a sudden
military collapse from which, in the natural course of events they
would, no doubt, have recovered after a short interval; but the Arabs
poured in at this moment of weakness, just as the Teutonic and
other groups of central Europe had broken through the barriers of
the western half of the Roman Empire; and at that moment, in the
course of their incursion, they received a new coherence by the rise
of the religion of Islam and, by the racial unity thus artificially
produced, became more formidable.
In their outspread over Egypt and Western Asia the Arabs adopted
the policy, partly deduced from the Qurʾan and partly based on the
tradition of the first Khalif’s conduct in Arabia, of uncompromising
warfare against all “polytheists,”—the creed of Islam was a pure
unitarianism, and could contemplate no toleration of polytheism,—
but of accommodation with those possessed of the divine revelation,
even in the imperfect and corrupt form known to Christians and
Jews. These “People of the Book” were not pressed to embrace
Islam, but might remain as tribute-paying subjects of the Muslim
rulers, with their own rights very fully secured. In all the conquered
lands the progress of the Muslim religion was very gradual, and in all
of them Christian and Jewish communities have maintained an
independent continuous existence to the present day. Yet for all this
there were very many conversions to the religion of the ruling race,
and these were so numerous that within the first century of the Hijra
the Arabs themselves were in a numerical minority in the Church of
Islam. The alien converts, socially and intellectually developed in the
culture of the Hellenistic world or of semi-Hellenistic Persia, were
very far in advance of the ruling Arabs who were little better than
half savages at the commencement of their career of conquest: and
the unexpected inclusion of this more cultured element acted as a
leaven in the Islamic community, and forced it to a rapid and
somewhat violent evolution. It is wonderful that Islam had sufficient
vigour and elasticity to be able to absorb such fresh elements and
phases of thought, but that elasticity had its limits, and at a very
early date sects began to form whose members the orthodox felt
themselves unable to recognise as fellow Muslims.
These early sects which were generally regarded as heretical
were, in most cases, reproductions of older pre-Islamic Persian and
Mesopotamian religious systems, with a thin veneer of Muslim
doctrine, and, in the second century of the Hijra, when they became
most prominent, they were strongly tinctured with Hellenistic
philosophical speculations which had already exercised a potent
influence in Mesopotamia and Persia. In theory these sects were
“legitimist” in their adherence to the principle of hereditary descent.
Orthodox Islam accepted as a constitutional principle the leadership
of an elected khalif or “successor,” a natural development of the
tribal chieftainship familiar to the pre-Islamic Arabs. Amongst them
the chief was elected in a tribal council, in which great weight was
given to the tried warriors and aged men of experience, but in which
all had a voice, and choice was made on what we should describe as
democratic lines, and this remained the practice in the earlier age of
Islam. Such a constitutional theory was no great novelty to those
who had lived under the Roman Empire, but was entirely repugnant
to those educated in Persian ideas, and who had learned to regard
the kingship as hereditary in the sense that the semi-divine kingly
soul passed by transmigration at the death of one sovereign to the
body of his divinely appointed successor. This had been the Persian
belief with regard to the Sasanid kings, and the Persians fully
accepted Yazdegird, the last of these, as a re-incarnation of the
princes of the semi-mythical Kayani dynasty to which they attributed
their racial origin and their culture. Yazdegird died in a.h. 31 (= a.d.
652), and his death terminated the male line of the Persian royal
family, but it was generally believed that his daughter, Shahr-banu,
was married to Husayn, the son of the fourth Khalif ʿAli, so that in
his descendants by this Persian princess the claims of Islam and of
the ancient Persian deified kings were combined. Historically the
evidence for this marriage seems to be questionable, but it is
commonly accepted as an article of faith by the Persian Shiʿites.
 At a quite early date the house of ʿAli began to receive the
devoted adherence of the Persian converts. That ʿAli himself had
been prominent as a champion of the rights of alien converts to
equality in the brotherhood of Islam, and still more his harsh
treatment by Muʿawiya, the founder of the ʿUmayyad dynasty,
caused his name to serve as a rallying point for all those who were
disaffected towards the official Khalifate. It is now the general
Shiʿite belief that ʿAli, the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet,
was his chief companion and chosen successor, the three preceding
Khalifs being no more than usurpers who had kept him out of his
just rights, and whose wrong doing he had borne with exemplary
patience. ʿAli himself does not seem to have taken so pronounced a
view, but he certainly regarded himself as injured by his exclusion
from the Khalifate. It is not true to say with Muir (Caliphate, p. 301),
that the idea of a divine Imamate or “leadership” was entirely the
invention of later times because, as early as a.h. 32, in the reign of
ʿUthman, the Jewish convert ʿAbdu b. Saba of Yemen,—a district
which had been conquered by the Persian king Nushirwan, and
settled by Persians for nearly a century before the coming of Islam,
and so thoroughly impregnated with Persian ideas,—preached the
divine right of ʿAli. This view he maintained afterwards when ʿAli
was Khalif, in spite of ʿAli’s own disapproval, and at ʿAli’s murder in
a.h. 40, he reiterated it in a more pronounced form: the martyred
Khalif’s soul, he said, was in the clouds, his voice was heard in the
thunder, his presence was revealed in the lightning: in due course he
would descend to earth again, and meanwhile his spirit, a divine
emanation, was passed on by re-birth to the imams his successors.
Certainly the tragedy of Kerbela, which centred in the pathetic
sufferings and death of ʿAli’s son, Husayn, as he was on his way to
claim the Khalifate, produced a tremendous wave of pro-ʿAlid
feeling: indeed a popular martyr was the one thing needed to raise
devotion to the house of ʿAli to the level of an emotional religion,
though many, no doubt, supported the ʿAlid claims simply because
they formed the most convenient pretext for opposing the official
Khalifate, and yet remaining outwardly within the fold of Islam.
 After the death of Husayn there were three different lines of ʿAlids
which competed for the allegiance of the legitimist faction, those
descended from (i.) Hasan, and (ii.) Husayn, the two sons of ʿAli by
his wife Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet, and both therefore
representing the next of kin to the Prophet who left no son, and (iii.)
the house of Muhammad, the son of ʿAli, by another wife known as
the Hanifite. Of these three we may disregard the descendants of (i.)
Hasan, who ultimately migrated to Maghrab (Morocco), and became
the progenitors of the Idrisid dynasty and of the Sharifs of Morocco:
they formed a very moderate branch of the Shiʿite faction, adopted
many practices of the orthodox or Sunni party, and had no part in
the peculiarly Persian developments of the Asiatic Shiʿites. The first
ʿAlid faction to become prominent was (iii.) the partisans of
Muhammad, the son of the Hanifite, who were formed into a society
by Kaysan, a freedman of ʿAli, for the purpose of avenging Hasan
and Husayn. They recognised a succession of four Imams or valid
commanders, ʿAli, Hasan, Husayn, and Muhammad, the son of the
Hanifite, and maintained that, at Husayn’s death, Muhammad
became de jure the Khalif and the divinely appointed head of the
Church of Islam. Muhammad himself entirely disowned these
partisans, but that was a detail to which they paid no attention. At
Muhammad’s death in a.h. 81 this party, “the Kaysanites” as they
were called, recognised his son Abu Hashim as the fifth Imam until
a.h. 98, when he died childless after bequeathing his claims to
Muhammad b. ʿAli b. ʿAbdullah (d. a.h. 126), who was not of the
house of ʿAli at all, and who became the founder of the ʿAbbasid
dynasty which obtained the Khalifate in a.h. 132. It was under Abu
Hashim that the party, now changed in name from Kaysanites to
Hashimites, became an admirably organised conspiracy which
contributed more than anything else to the overthrow of the
ʿUmayyad Khalifs. Throughout the Muslim dominions there was
deep and ever-increasing dissatisfaction with the ʿUmayyads, who
represented an arrogant parvenu Arab aristocracy, ruling over races
who enjoyed an older and richer culture, and were by no means
effete. The Hashimites seized hold of this discontent and sent out
their missionaries (daʿi, plur. duʿat) in all directions disguised as
merchants and pilgrims who relied upon private conversations and
informal intercourse rather than public preaching, and thus began
that unostentatious but effective propaganda, which has ever since
been the chief missionary method of Islam. Hashimite teaching
centered in the doctrines of tawakkuf or the theory of a divinely
appointed Imam, who alone was the rightful Commander of the
faithful and their authoritative teacher, of hulul or the incarnation of
the Divine Spirit in the Imam, and of tenasukhu l-Arwah or the
transmigration of that Spirit from each Imam to his valid successor,
doctrines alien to Islam proper. With the death of the Abu Hashim
this party passed over to the service of the ʿAbbasids to whom it
was a source of great strength, and at their accession to the
Khalifate it ceased to exist as a sect.
The most important sect, or group of sects, of the Shiʿites was
(ii.) the faction which recognised Husayn as the third Imam, and his
son, ʿAli Zayn al-Abidin (d. 94 a.h.) as his successor, the son of the
Imam and of the royal princess of Persia. But at al-Abidin’s death
this party split into two, some following his son Zayd (d. 121), others
his son Muhammad al-Bakir (d. 113). The former or Zaydite party
established itself for a considerable period in North Persia, and still
maintains itself in South Arabia. Zayd himself was the friend and
pupil of the Muʿtazilite or rationalist leader Wasil ibn ʿAta, and the
Zaydites have generally been regarded as more or less free thinkers.
The majority of the Shiʿites, however, recognised Muhammad al-
Bakir as the fifth Imam, and after his death Jaʿfar as-Sadiq (d. 148)
as the sixth, though here again there was a schism, some regarding
Abu Mansur, another son of Muhammad al-Bakir, as the sixth Imam.
Abu Mansur seems to have been one of the first ʿAlids to endorse
the divine rights claimed for them by their followers, and did so in an
extreme form, asserting that he had ascended to heaven and
obtained supernatural illumination. At this time all the extremer
Shiʿites regarded the Imam as an incarnation of the Divine Spirit
passed on from ʿAli, and many believed that ʿAli was the true
prophet of God whose office had been fraudulently intercepted by
Muhammad.
 The Mansuris, however, were a minor sect, the majority of the
Shiʿites followed Jaʿfar who was Imam at the time of the ʿAbbasid
revolution. He was one of those who were deeply influenced by the
traditions of Hellenistic philosophy and science, and was the author
of works on chemistry, augury, and omens: he is usually credited
with being the founder, or at least the chief exponent, of what are
known as batinite views, that is to say, the allegorical interpretation
of the Qurʾan as having an esoteric meaning, which can only be
learned from the Imam who is illuminated by divine wisdom, and
who alone is able to reveal its true sense. The inner meaning thus
revealed was usually a more or less imperfect reproduction of
Aristotelian doctrine as it had been handed down by the Syriac
writers. Like his brother, Abu Mansur Jaʿfar fully endorsed the
doctrine of a divine Imamate and the transmigration of the Divine
Spirit, then tabernacled in himself, and it seems probable that Van
Vloten (Recherches sur la domination arabe, 1894, pp. 44-45) is
right in suggesting that the general promulgation of these beliefs
amongst the Shiʿites was largely due to the labours of the Hashimite
missionaries.
The contemporary establishment of the ʿAbbasids made a far-
reaching change in the conditions of Islam. The Arabs began to take
a secondary place, and Persian influences became predominant. In
135 the noble Persian family of the Barmecides began to furnish
wazirs or Prime Ministers to the Khalifate, and controlled its policy
for a period of fifty-four years. Nearly all important offices were
given to Persians, and a distinct anti-Arab party was formed, known
as the Shuʿubiyya, which produced a prolific controversial literature
which expressed the hatred stored up under generations of
ʿUmayyad misrule: the Arab was held up to derision, his pretensions
to aristocratic descent were contrasted with the much more ancient
genealogies of the Persian nobles, and he was portrayed as little
better than an illiterate savage. In literature, in science, in Muslim
jurisprudence and theology, and even in the scientific treatment of
Arabic grammar, the Persians altogether surpassed the Arabs, so
that we must be careful not to talk of Arab philosophy, Arab science,
etc., in the history of Muslim civilization, but always of Arabic
philosophy, etc., remembering that it was not the science and
philosophy of the Arabs, but that of the Arabic speaking people,
amongst whom only a small minority were actually of Arab race: and
this applies to the “golden age” of Arabic literature (a.h. 132-232).
On the other hand it must be remembered that, indirectly and
unintentionally, the ʿUmayyads had helped towards this result. It
was under their rule that the Arabic language had been introduced
into the public administration, and in due course replaced Greek and
Persian in all public business, so that it became the common speech
of all Western Asia, or at least a common medium of intercourse
between those who used various languages in their private life, and
thus the brilliant intellectual and literary renascence was rendered
possible by a wide exchange of thought.
We may rightly refer to this period as a renascence, for it meant
quickening into new and other life the embers of the later Hellenistic
culture, and especially of the Aristotelian philosophy and medical and
natural science, which had never quite died away in Western Asia,
but had been checked by its passage into Syriac-speaking and
Persian-speaking communities, amongst whom the language in
which the original authorities were written was only imperfectly
known. Thus Hellenism suffered a phase of provincialism, which
came to an end when Arabic appeared as a more or less
cosmopolitan language, and thought began to be exchanged by
different races and social groups. Under the early ʿAbbasids, and
especially under the Khalif al-Maʾmun (a.h. 198-218), there was a
vast amount of translation from Greek into Arabic until the greater
part of Aristotle, of the neo-Platonic commentators on Aristotle, of
Galen, some parts of Plato, and other material, were freely
accessible to the Muslim world: whilst at the same time translations
were made from Indian writers on mathematics, medicine, and
astronomy, some directly from the Sanskrit, and others from old
Persian versions.
As a result the philosophical speculations of the Greeks began to
act as a solvent upon Islamic theology, and from this doctrinal
discussions and controversies arose which, on the one side,
produced a series of rationalistic heresies, and on the other side laid
the foundations of an orthodox Muslim scholasticism. Long before
this Hellenistic influences had permeated Persia and Mesopotamia,
and these now revived and resulted in a philosophical presentation
of religion which, under the veil of allegorical explanations of the
Qurʾan, was really undermining orthodox doctrine, and heading
towards either pantheism or simple agnosticism. With these
tendencies the pro-Persian party was particularly associated. The
Khalifs who, in spite of Arab birth, were most devoted to Persian
ideas, largely because the Persians were subtle courtiers and were
the champions of absolutism, were amongst those most ardent in
promoting the study of Greek philosophy; and the Imams, such as
Jaʿfar and his brother Zayd, were even more devotedly attached to
this type of philosophical speculation which was acting as a powerful
solvent on the traditional beliefs of orthodox Islam.
At Jaʿfar’s death another schism took place, indeed the perpetual
sub-division into new sects has always been a salient characteristic
of the Shiʿiya. Jaʿfar had nominated his son Ismaʿil as his
successor, but afterwards disinherited him because he had been
found in a state of intoxication and chose as heir his second son,
Musa al-Qazam. There were some, however, who still adhered to
Ismaʿil, and refused to admit that his father had power to transfer
the divinely ordained succession at will; they asserted indeed that
the son’s drunkenness was itself a sign of his superior illumination as
showing that he knew that the ritual laws of the Qurʾan were not to
be taken literally, but had an esoteric meaning which did not appear
on the surface. Musa, the seventh Imam as generally reckoned, and
his son, ʿAli ar-Rida (p. 202), the “two patient ones,” suffered harsh
treatment at the hands of the contemporary ʿAbbasid rulers; they
were brought from Madina by Harun ar-Rashid so as to be under the
observation of the court, and in 148 Musa was poisoned by the wazir
Ibn Khalid. His son ʿAli married the daughter of the Khalif Maʾmun,
and was intended to be the heir to the throne. But Maʾmun very
nearly provoked civil war by his strong Shiʿite sympathies, and when
he perceived how dangerous a storm the projected accession of ʿAli
was beginning to arouse, he extricated himself from the difficulty by
procuring the Imam’s death. ʿAli al-Qazim was usually reckoned as
the eighth Imam, the ninth was Muhammad al-Jawad (d. 220), the
tenth ʿAli al-Hadi (d. 254), and the eleventh al-Hasan (d. 260),
these two latter being buried at Samarra, which replaced Baghdad
as the ʿAbbasid capital from a.h. 222 to 279. The town afterwards
fell into decay, but has been colonised by Shiʿites, and is one of the
places of Shiʿite pilgrimage. The twelfth Imam was Muhammad al-
Muntazir, who in a.h. 260 “disappeared.” The mosque at Samarra is
said to cover an underground vault into which he went and was no
more seen. The “twelvers,” or Ithna ʿashariya, who to-day form the
main body of the Shiʿites, and whose belief is the official religion of
modern Persia, suppose that he is still living, and the place where he
is to re-appear when he emerges from concealment is one of the
sacred spots visited by the Shiʿites.
But, as we have already noted, some of the Shiʿites did not
accept Jaʿfar’s transference of the Imamate from his son Ismaʿil to
his second son Musa, but recognised Ismaʿil still as heir. Ismaʿil
died in 145 whilst his father was still alive, leaving a son named
Muhammad. Although Ismaʿil’s body was publicly shown before its
burial at al-Bakiʿ, many persisted in believing that he was not dead,
and asserted that he had been seen in Basra after his supposed
funeral; others admitted his death, but believed that his Imamate
had passed to his son Muhammad; others again believed that his
soul had migrated to Muhammad, so that they were in reality one
person. These adherents of Ismaʿil, or of his son Muhammad, or of
Ismaʿil-Muhammad, formed the sect known as the Ismaʿilians or
the Sabʿiya, i.e., “seveners,” accepting the six Imams to Jaʿfar as-
Sadiq, and adding his son or grandson as the seventh and last.
These “seveners” seem to have been a comparatively minor sect
of the extremer Shiʿites. Some members of the sect are still to be
found in the neighbourhood of Bombay and Surat. But, about 250
this comparatively obscure sect was taken in hand and organised by
a singularly able leader, and became for a time one of the most
powerful forces in Islam.

GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF ʿALI

(1) ʿAli d. 41.

+-----------------------------+
| |
marr. (i) Fatima (ii) al-
Hanifiya
+---------------------+ |
| | |
(3) Hasan d. 50. (3) Husayn d. 61.
Muhammad
| |
Hasan |
+-------------+ |
| | |
Muhammad Abd Allah (4) ʿAli Zayn d. 94.
| | +-------------------+
| | | |
(Sherifs of Idris Zayd (5)
Muhammad
Morocco) | | al-
Bakir d. 113.
(Idrisids (Zaydites |
of N. Africa) of N. Persia (6) Jaʿfar
as-Sadiq
and S. Arabia) d.
148.
+-----------
-------+
|
|
(7)* Ismaʿil
(7) Musa
|
d. 183.
Muhammad
|
|
(8) ʿAli ar-Rida
(alleged
d. 202.
descent of
|
Fatimids) (9)
Muhammad al-Jawad

d. 220.

(10) ʿAli al-Hadi

d. 254.

(11) al Hasan al

Askari d. 260.

|
(12) Muhammad

al-Muntazar

“disappeared”

A. H. 260.
 II
THE ISMAʿILIAN SECT

From the beginning the neo-Ismaʿilian sect showed all the

characteristics of the ultra Shiʿite bodies: it accepted the ʿalim l-
batin, or the principle of allegorical interpretation which is especially
associated with Jaʿfar as-Sadiq, the doctrine of incarnation, and of
the transmigration of the Imam’s soul. But underneath all this,
borrowed from current Shiʿite ideas, it had a strong element of
agnosticism, a heritage of the philosophical ideas borrowed from
Greek scientists, and developed in certain directions by the
Muʿtazilites. As organised by its leader, whose name was Abdullah b.
Maymun, it was arranged in seven grades to which members were
admitted by successive initiations, and which diverged more and
more from orthodox Islam until its final and highest stages were
simply agnostic. According to Stanley Lane-Poole “in its inner
essence Shiʿism, the religion of the Fatimids is not Mohammedanism
at all. It merely took advantage of an old schism in Islam to graft
upon it a totally new and largely political movement” (Lane-Poole:
Story of Cairo, Lond., 1906, p. 113). In this passage “Shiʿism” is
taken as denoting the sect of the “Seveners,” and the “political
movement” is simply disaffection towards the Khalifate. Similarly
Prof. Nicholson considers that “Filled with a fierce contempt of the
Arabs and with a free-thinker’s contempt for Islam, Abdullah b.
Maymun conceived the idea of a vast secret society which should be
all things to all men, and which, by playing on the strongest passions
and tempting the inmost weaknesses of human nature, should unite
malcontents of every description in a conspiracy to overthrow the
existing régime” (Nicholson: Literary History of the Arabs, pp. 271-
272).
 Undoubtedly the ideas involved in the Ismaʿilian doctrines were
totally subversive of the teachings of Islam, but so were those of the
“philosophers,” and in exactly the same way. The views of Ibn Tufayl
(d. 531 a.h.) and of Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 595 a.h.) were purely
Aristotelian in basis, and on this foundation was built up an agnostic-
pantheistic superstructure. Ibn Tufayl particularly makes it quite
clear that his teaching is not consistent with the Qurʾan which he
treats as setting forth a system of doctrines and ritual precepts
suitable for the unlearned who ought not to be disturbed in their
simple faith, but quite inadequate for the satisfaction of the more
intelligent: the mysteries of the universe, revealed through Aristotle
and his followers, furnish a sounder religion, but it is expedient that
this be reserved for the enlightened and not divulged to the illiterate
who are unable to appreciate or understand its bearing. Such
teaching is subversive of orthodox Islam, and consciously so: in the
case of ʿAbdullah it may, perhaps, be described as a conspiracy
against religion. In one sense it was the final product of the
rationalism of the Muʿtazilites.
Admittedly the Ismaʿiliya worked as a political conspiracy against
the ʿAbbasids, but this was true of every Shiʿite sect: the ʿAbbasids
had used the Shiʿites in seating themselves on the throne, and then
discarded them. Still it seems that we have no reason to question
the perfect sincerity of the Ismaʿilians in their agnostic principles:
those principles were the product of the solvent influence of Greek
philosophy upon the religion of Islam: Islamic thought was too
simple and primitive to be able to adapt itself to that philosophy in
its entirety, hence some such position as that of Ibn Tufayl, or of Ibn
Rushd, or of the Ismaʿilians, was inevitable. It was equally a
necessary result of the time and circumstances that these
rationalists tended towards the Shiʿites. In spite of weird
superstitions, especially current in Khurasan, the Shiʿites represent
the Muslim element most kindly disposed towards freedom of
thought. This seems a bold statement to those familiar with Shiʿites
of the present day, but it must be noted that the Shiʿites whom the
European most frequently meets are either the devotees who have
settled in places like Samarra, or those who seem to be more
exclusive than the orthodox Muslims, chiefly because they have as
yet had much less intercourse with foreigners. In 2-3rd cent. Islam it
was the Shiʿite princes who invariably did their best to foster
philosophical and scientific research, whilst, after a.h. 232, the
orthodox party, as it gets in the ascendent, becomes distinctly
reactionary, and tends to repressive persecution.
The most difficult task for us is to appreciate the strong appeal
which the doctrines of incarnation and transmigration made to the
Persian and Mesopotamian mind. Both these doctrines had figured
prominently in pre-Islamic religions in Western Asia; and both recur
in most religious movements from the coming of Islam to the
present day in that particular area. We may note a few instances to
illustrate this, and show incidentally the strong attraction these
doctrines had for the Persian mind.
Abu Muslim was the general who more than any other helped to
seat the ʿAbbasids on the throne, and suffered death at the hands
of the first ʿAbbasid Khalif, who was jealous,—with good cause, it
would appear,—of his excessive power. But Abu Muslim had
exercised an extraordinary influence over men during life, and was
treated as a quasi-divine hero after death, his admirers regarding
him as not really dead but as having passed into “concealment,”
some other having been miraculously substituted for him at the
moment of execution. This resembles the theory which the pre-
Islamic Persian teacher Mani held as to Christ. Mani fully accepted
Christ as a religious teacher, side by side with Zoroaster and Buddha,
but he could not admit the reality of his death, for a material body
capable of death was in his view unworthy of one purely good. He
supposed, therefore, that at the crucifixion Simon of Cyrene was at
the last moment substituted for Christ, and this Persian idea has
actually obtained a place in the Qurʾan (cf. Sura 4, 156).
Not long after Abu Muslim we hear of a pseudo-prophet named
Bih-afaridh, a Zoroastrian who had travelled in the far East, and
afterwards accepted Islam at the hands of two duʿat who were
preaching the cult of Abu Muslim. Very little is known of his
teaching, but he certainly maintained the doctrine that the Imam is
an incarnation of the Deity, and seems to have attached a
particularly sacred signification to the numeral seven. This
superstitious reverence for particular numbers was a common
feature in the pre-Islamic religions of Mesopotamia, and we shall
meet it again in the doctrines of the Ismaʿilians.
Another sect, of similarly pre-Islamic origin, was that known as the
Rawandiyya from its origin at Rawand near Isfahan. Its members
were king-worshippers in the old Persian sense, and a body of them
travelled to Hashimiyya, where the Khalifs then had their residence,
and tried to acclaim the Khalif al-Mansur as a god. He not only
rejected the proffered adoration, but cast the leaders into prison.
This was followed by an attempt to attack the palace, the Rawandis
considering that, as the prince had disclaimed deity, he could be no
valid ruler. For some centuries the sect, strongly disaffected towards
the Khalifate, lingered on in Persia and had many sympathisers.
Under the next Khalif al-Mahdi, came the still more serious
rebellion of al-Muqannaʿ, the “veiled prophet of Khurasan,” who
asserted his own deity. He was killed in a.h. 169, but his followers, as
usual, believed that he had not really suffered in person, but had
passed into concealment and would in due course return again: they
continued to form a distinct sect for some three hundred years.
Another pseudo-prophet of the same type was Babak al-Khurrami,
who was executed in a.h. 222 or 223. He also declared himself to be
an incarnation of the Divine Spirit, and asserted that the soul within
him had already dwelt in his master Jawidan.
We might continue to extend the series very considerably by
enumerating the various prophets and sects which reproduce these
same general characteristics. The latest example occurs in the Babi
movement, which still flourishes and has many converts in this
country and in America. The first teacher of the Babists, Mirza ʿAli
Muhammad (a.d. 1820-1851) claimed only to be a Mahdi or fore-
runner of One who was to come, but his successor, Mirza Husayn
ʿAli, declared himself to be the expected One, the incarnation of the
Divine Spirit, which is an emanation of the Deity and is fairly
equivalent to the Reason, Word, or Spirit of the Plotinian philosophy.
In later times this doctrine has rather fallen into the background,
perhaps as the result of western influences, but the earlier phase
shows a repetition of the traditional Persian position. All these sects
show common matter in the doctrines of incarnation, of
transmigration, and of an esoteric teaching to be revealed only to
the elect. Such were the extremer Shiʿite sects of mediaeval times,
and such are their descendants of modern times. Even in Persia to-
day, side by side with the more orthodox “Twelvers” of the state
church and off-shoots such as the Babists, the latest of a long series
of mystical developments from the Shiʿite stock, are the ʿAli Allahis
who believe in the deity of the Imam ʿAli, and combine with this
belief many elements from the ancient Zoroastrian religion, a
survival of the older mediaeval Shiʿism which caused so much
trouble to the Khalifate of Baghdad.
In the teaching of most of the Shiʿites it is believed that some
deceased Imam was an incarnation of deity, and it is he who, not
really dead as men suppose, has passed into concealment, to return
again in the fulness of time, when this evil age in which the true
Khalifate no longer exists has passed away. Meanwhile there is no
valid Khalif or Imam upon earth, but only some Shah or king who
acts as vicegerent of the hidden Imam until his return.
This digression serves to show us how strongly Persian thought
always has inclined towards the idea of a divine incarnation in the
honoured religious teacher, and towards that of transmigration of the
soul from one such teacher to his successor. In the 3rd century a.h.
probably no sect which did not hold such theories could have
obtained a favourable hearing amongst the Persians who found
Islam of the Arab type unsatisfying, and every radical religious
movement was necessarily compelled to assume at least the
externals of Shiʿism.
 The Shiʿite party organised by ʿAbdullah is known by various
names. It is called Ismaʿilian as representing the party adhering to
Ismaʿil, the son of Jaʿfar as-Sadiq, and his son Muhammad, as
against those who continued the succession of the Imamate through
Musa; but the name is not strictly accurate as it seems that there
was an Ismaʿilian sect proper existing before ʿAbdullah, and that his
re-organisation was so drastic that we may regard the continuity as
being severed; and it seems certain that some part of the earlier
sect continued to exist independent of his reforms. It was, no doubt,
its attachment to a deceased or “hidden” Imam which made it a
more promising field for the advocates of a speculative philosophy
than any sect whose Imam was living and might dissociate himself
from the doctrines held. It was also called the Sabʿiya or “Seveners”
because it accepted seven Imams, and also because it attached a
sacred significance to the numeral seven; there were seven
prophets, seven Imams, seven Mahdis, seven grades of initiation
(afterwards changed to nine), etc. In many respects Sabʿiya is the
most accurate name, but it is open to the same objection as
Ismaʿilian. More commonly its members are called Fatimites as
recognising Fatimid Imams who claimed descent from ʿAli and
Fatima: but this, although convenient because of its frequent use
amongst mediaeval Arabic writers, is peculiarly inaccurate. The Ithna
ʿashariya or sect of “Twelvers” was equally Fatimite, and so were
the Zaydites, indeed these last were the true Fatimites as holding
that any person descended from ʿAli and Fatima might be a valid
Imam: but common usage allows the use of “Fatimites” for the sect
organised by ʿAbdullah. Another name is Batinites or advocates of
an allegorical interpretation, but this also applies to other Shiʿite
groups. Sometimes they are called Qarmatians, but this name is only
applicable to one branch of the sect which originated in the district
of Sawad between Basra and Kufa, and should be reserved for that
branch which at a later period became alienated from the main
Ismaʿilian body.
The new sect carried out its propaganda by means of missionaries
(daʿi) on the lines developed by the Hashimites. In this, as in most
of its external features, it reproduces the characteristics usual
amongst the mediaeval Shiʿites.
The organiser of the sect or masonic fraternity was ʿAbdullah,
who is stated to have been the son of one Maymun. Sometimes
ʿAbdullah is surnamed al-laddah (“the oculist”), as is done by Abu l-
Feda, but more often this surname is given to his father Maymun.
Maqrizi, referring to the Fatimids, says, “this family was traced to al-
Husayn, the son of ʿAli ibn Abi Talib, but men are divided in the
matter between two opinions: some treat it as true, but others deny
that they are descendants of the Prophet and treat them as
pretenders descended from Daysan the Dualist, who has given his
name to the Dualists, and (say) that Daysan had a son whose name
was Maymun al-Qaddah, and that he had a sect of extreme views.
And Maymun had a son ʿAbdullah, and ʿAbdullah was learned in all
the canon law and customs and sects” (Maqrizi, i. 348).
The reference to “Daysan the Dualist” is pure fable. This Daysan
appears frequently in Arabic history as the legendary founder of the
Zindiqs, a name given to the followers of the pre-Islamic cults of
Mesopotamia and Persia, who found it convenient to make external
profession of Islam. Thus Masʿudi (Muruj adh-Dhahab, viii. 293)
says that “many heresies arose after the publication of the books of
Mani, Ibn Daysan, and Marcion, translated from Persian and Pahlawi
by ʿAbdullah ibn al-Muqaffaʿ and others.” Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ was a
converted Zoroastrian who took a leading part in translating Persian
and Syrian works into Arabic under the first two ʿAbbasids, and was
generally regarded as privately adhering to his earlier religious
views.
It will be noted that Zindiqism is mentioned as propagated by Ibn
al-Muqaffaʿ, and is traced to Ibn Daysan amongst others, and this is
precisely the same as the one whom Maqrizi names as the reputed
progenitor of Maymun. Evidently the charge which lay at the bottom
of this latter statement originally meant that Maymun was a Zindiq,
and so could be described as a follower of Ibn Daysan, not that he
actually was Ibn Daysan’s son, which would be an absurd