Fatimid conquest of Egypt

The Fatimid conquest of Egypt took place in 969, as the troops of the Fatimid Caliphate under the general Jawhar captured Egypt, then ruled by the autonomous Ikhshidid dynasty in the name of the Abbasid Caliphate.

The Fatimids launched repeated invasions of Egypt soon after coming to power in Ifriqiya (modern Tunisia and eastern Algeria) in 909, but failed against the still-strong Abbasid Caliphate. By the 960s, however, while the Fatimids had consolidated their rule and grown stronger, the Abbasid Caliphate had collapsed, and the Ikhshidid regime was facing prolonged crisis: foreign raids and a severe famine were compounded by the death in 968 of the strongman Abu al-Misk Kafur. The resulting power vacuum led to open infighting among the various factions in Fustat, the capital of Egypt. The atmosphere of crisis was deepened by the simultaneous advances of the Byzantine Empire against the Muslim states of the Eastern Mediterranean. Meanwhile, Fatimid agents operated openly in Egypt, and the local elites increasingly came to accept and even welcome the prospect of a Fatimid takeover in hopes of ending the instability and insecurity.

Faced with this favourable situation, the Fatimid caliph al-Mu'izz li-Din Allah organized a large expedition to conquer Egypt. Led by Jawhar, the expedition set off from Raqqada in Ifriqiya on 6 February 969, and entered the Nile Delta two months later. The Ikhshidid elites preferred to negotiate a peaceful surrender, and Jawhar issued a writ of safe-conduct (amān), promising to respect the rights of the Egyptian notables and populace and take up the jihād against the Byzantines. The Fatimid army overcame the attempts of the Ikhshidid soldiery to prevent its crossing of the Nile river between 29 June and 3 July, while in the chaos pro-Fatimid agents took control of Fustat and declared its submission to al-Mu'izz. Jawhar renewed his amān and took possession of the city on 6 July, with the Friday prayer read in the name of al-Mu'izz on 9 July.

For the next four years Jawhar served as viceroy of Egypt, quelling rebellions and beginning the construction of a new capital, Cairo. His attempts to expand into the former Ikhshidid domains in Syria, and even attack the Byzantines, backfired: after swift initial progress, the Fatimid armies were destroyed, and Egypt itself faced a Qarmatian invasion that was fought off just north of Cairo. Al-Mu'izz arrived in Egypt in 973, and took up residence in Cairo, which became the seat of the Fatimid Caliphate for the remainder of its existence, until the abolition of the Fatimid regime by Saladin in 1171.

## Background: initial Fatimid attempts to capture Egypt

The Fatimid dynasty came to power in Ifriqiya (modern Tunisia and northeastern Algeria) in 909. The Fatimids had fled their home in Syria a few years before, and made for the Maghreb, where their agents had made considerable headway in converting the Kutama Berbers. While the Fatimids remained hidden, the Isma'ili missionary Abu Abdallah al-Shi'i led the Kutama to overthrow the reigning Aghlabid dynasty, allowing the Fatimid leader to reveal himself publicly and declare himself caliph with the regnal name of al-Mahdi Billah (r. 909–934). In contrast to their predecessors, who were content to remain a regional dynasty on the western fringes of the Abbasid Caliphate, the Fatimids held ecumenical pretensions: claiming descent from Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad and wife of Ali, the Fatimid caliphs were simultaneously the leaders of the Isma'ili Shi'a sect, whose followers accorded them semi-divine status as imams, the lawful vicegerents of God on earth. Consequently, the Fatimids regarded their rise to power as the first step in the restoration of their rightful place as leaders of the entire Muslim world against the usurping, pro-Sunni Abbasids, whom they were determined to overthrow and replace.

In line with this imperial vision, following the establishment of their rule in Ifriqiya, the next objective was Egypt, the gateway to the Levant and Iraq, the seat of their Abbasid rivals. In 914, a first invasion under the Fatimid heir-apparent al-Qa'im bi-Amr Allah was launched eastwards. It captured Cyrenaica (Barqa), Alexandria and the Fayyum Oasis, but failed to take the Egyptian capital, Fustat, and was driven back in 915, following the arrival of Abbasid reinforcements from Syria and Iraq. A second invasion was undertaken in 919–921. Alexandria was again captured, but the Fatimids were repelled in front of Fustat and their navy was destroyed. Al-Qa'im moved to the Fayyum Oasis, but was forced to abandon it in the face of fresh Abbasid troops and to retreat over the desert to Ifriqiya.

The failure of these early invasion attempts was chiefly due to the overextension of Fatimid logistics, and the concomitant failure to achieve decisive success before the arrival of Abbasid reinforcements. Nevertheless, Barqa was left in Fatimid hands as a forward base from which to threaten Egypt. As the Abbasid Caliphate entered a severe and general crisis in the 930s, the Fatimids once more tried to take advantage of the ensuing conflicts between the military factions in Egypt in 935–936. Fatimid forces briefly occupied Alexandria, but the actual victor of this affair was Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid, a Turkish commander who established himself as the ruler of Egypt and southern Syria—ostensibly on the Abbasids' behalf but for all practical purposes independent—and founded the Ikhshidid dynasty. During his subsequent disputes with Baghdad, al-Ikhshid did not hesitate to seek Fatimid support, even suggesting a marriage alliance between one of his sons and a daughter of al-Qa'im, but after the Abbasid court recognized his rule and titles, he dropped this proposal.

On the Fatimid side, by the late 930s the initial revolutionary élan that had brought the Fatimids to power had faded, and although the claims to universal sovereignty were not forgotten, they were put on hold due to the outbreak of the large-scale revolt of the Khariji Berber preacher Abu Yazid (943–947). This rebellion almost brought the Fatimid regime to collapse, and even after its suppression, the Fatimids were for some time preoccupied with restoring their position in the western Mediterranean. During this time, Egypt was left in relative peace. Following the death of al-Ikhshid in 946, power passed to the strongman Abu al-Misk Kafur, a black eunuch slave whom al-Ikhshid had appointed as commander-in-chief of the army. For twenty years, Kafur was content to be the power behind the throne, as al-Ikhshid's sons ruled as emirs, but in 966 he assumed the throne in his own right.

## Changing circumstances: Egypt in the 960s

During the second third of the 10th century, the balance of power shifted in the Fatimids' favour: while the Fatimids consolidated their regime, the Abbasid Caliphate was weakened by constant power struggles between rival bureaucratic, courtly, and military factions. Gradually deprived of its outlying provinces by ambitious local dynasts and reduced to Iraq, after 946, the Abbasid caliphs themselves were reduced to powerless pawns of the Buyids.

By the 960s, the Ikhshidids were also facing a crisis, a combination of domestic tensions and external pressures. The Christian Nubian kingdom of Makuria launched invasions of Egypt from the south, while in the west, the Lawata Berbers occupied the region around Alexandria, and allied themselves with local Bedouin tribes of the Western Desert to confront the Ikhshidid troops. In Syria, increasing Bedouin restiveness challenged Ikhshidid rule, especially as it coincided with an invasion of Syria by the Qarmatians, an Isma'ili sect based in Bahrayn (Eastern Arabia). Frequently allied with the Bedouin, the Qarmatians raided the caravans of merchants and Hajj pilgrims alike, with the Ikhshidids unable to counter their attacks. The situation was such that the overland routes from Egypt to Iraq were practically cut. Modern scholars have suspected the hand of the Fatimids behind at least some of these events: according to the French Orientalist Thierry Bianquis, the Makurian raid of 956, which pillaged the area of Aswan, was "probably supported covertly by the Fatimids", and a Fatimid collusion in the Bedouin and Qarmatian attacks in Syria has been "usually supposed", but, as the historian Michael Brett cautions, there is "no real evidence" to that effect.

The domestic situation in Egypt was worsened by a series of low Nile floods beginning in 962. In 967, the flood reached the lowest level recorded during the entire early Islamic period, followed by three years when the level of the river remained well below normal. Hot winds and locust swarms also did much to destroy crops, ushering in the worst famine in living memory, aggravated further by the outbreak of a rat-borne plague. Consequently, food prices rose rapidly: by 968, a chicken was to be had at 25 times its pre-famine price, and an egg at fifty times. The capital, Fustat, suffered most heavily. The most populous city in the Islamic world after Baghdad, it was ravaged by famine and outbreaks of epidemics (which continued into the early years of Fatimid rule). The poor harvests also reduced the revenue flowing into the treasury, leading to cuts in spending. This directly affected the influential religious circles; not only were their salaries left unpaid, but the money for the upkeep of the mosques vanished, and the inability to provide the men and money necessary to guarantee their security meant that after 965, the Hajj caravans ceased altogether.

Furthermore, the 960s saw the Byzantine Empire under Nikephoros II Phokas (r. 963–969) expand at the expense of the Islamic world, capturing Crete, Cyprus, and Cilicia, and advancing into northern Syria. The Ikhshidid regime's response to this advance was hesitant and ineffective: after doing nothing to help Crete, the fleet sent in response to the fall of Cyprus was destroyed by the Byzantine navy, leaving the coasts of Egypt and Syria defenceless. The Egyptian Muslims clamoured for jihād and launched anti-Christian pogroms that were suppressed with difficulty. Fatimid propaganda was quick to exploit the Byzantine offensive, contrasting the ineffectiveness of the Ikhshidids and their Abbasid suzerains with the Fatimids, who at the time were successfully fighting with the Byzantines in southern Italy, as vigorous champions of Islam. The Byzantine advance, coupled with the contemporaneous depredations of the Bedouin and Qarmatians in central Syria, also served to deprive Egypt of Syrian wheat, its usual resort during famines.

Against this backdrop of internal problems and external threats, and following the permanent decline of their former imperial overlords, the possibility of a Fatimid takeover became an increasingly more attractive prospect to the Egyptians.

## Collapse of the Ikhshidid regime

The death of Abu al-Misk Kafur in April 968, without leaving an heir, paralyzed the Ikhshidid regime. Kafur's vizier, Ja'far ibn al-Furat, who was married to an Ikhshidid princess and may have entertained hopes for their son to sit on the throne, tried to control the government, but lacked a power-base outside the bureaucracy; while the army was divided into mutually antagonistic factions (chiefly the Ikhshidiyya, recruited by al-Ikhshid, and the Kafuriyya, recruited by Kafur). The military leaders would have preferred that one of their own succeed Kafur, but were forced to back down in the face of the Ikhshidid family and the opposition of the civilian and religious establishments.

The various factions initially agreed on a pact to share power under the nominal rule of al-Ikhshid's 11-year-old grandson, Abu'l-Fawaris Ahmad ibn Ali, with his uncle al-Hasan ibn Ubayd Allah, the governor of Palestine, as regent, Ibn al-Furat as vizier, and the slave-soldier (ghulmām) Shamul al-Ikhshidi as commander-in-chief. The pact quickly unravelled, as the personal and factional rivalries of the Ikhshidid elites came to the fore. Shamul lacked any real authority over the army, so that the Ikhshidiyya clashed with and expelled the Kafuriyya from Egypt. At the same time, Ibn al-Furat began arresting his rivals in the administration, thereby effectively bringing government and, crucially, the flow of tax revenue, to a halt. The regent al-Hasan ibn Ubayd Allah arrived from Palestine in November and occupied Fustat, imprisoning Ibn al-Furat; but his efforts to establish his authority failed, and in early 969 he abandoned the capital and returned to Palestine, leaving Egypt effectively without government.

The historian Yaacov Lev writes that faced with this impasse, the Egyptian elites were left only "with the choice of seeking outside intervention". Given the international situation at the time, this could only mean the Fatimids. The medieval sources report that letters from civilian and military leaders alike were sent to the Fatimid caliph al-Mu'izz li-Din Allah (r. 953–975) in Ifriqiya, where preparations for a new invasion of Egypt were already in full swing.

## Fatimid preparations

The first years of the reign of al-Mu'izz were dedicated to expanding his rule over the western Maghreb and in the conflict with the Byzantines in Sicily and southern Italy, but it is clear, according to historian Paul E. Walker, that al-Mu'izz "intended the conquest of Egypt from early in his reign". Already in 965/6, al-Mu'izz began storing provisions and making preparations for a new invasion of Egypt. By 965, his armies under Jawhar had triumphed over the Umayyads of the Caliphate of Córdoba, reversing their gains and restoring Fatimid authority over what is now western Algeria and Morocco, territories that had been originally conquered by Fatimid generals in the 910s and 920s. In Sicily, the Fatimid governors captured the last Byzantine strongholds, thereby completing the Muslim conquest of the island, and defeated a Byzantine expedition sent in response. Following these successes, a truce was concluded with Constantinople in 967, leaving both powers free to pursue their designs in the East: the Byzantines against the Hamdanid Emirate of Aleppo, and the Fatimids against Egypt. The Fatimid caliph made no secret of his ambition, even boasting to the Byzantine ambassador during the negotiations that the next time they met would be in Egypt.

### Military preparations

Unlike the rashly undertaken expeditions of his predecessors, al-Mu'izz carefully prepared for his Egyptian venture, investing time and enormous resources. According to the 15th-century Egyptian historian al-Maqrizi, the Caliph spent 24 million gold dinars for the purpose. Lev points out that the figure "should perhaps not be taken literally", but nevertheless "gives an idea of the resources available to the Fatimids" for the enterprise. The fact that al-Mu'izz was able to amass such enormous sums is an indicator of the Fatimid state's flourishing finances during this period, boosted by taxes levied on the trans-Saharan trade—some 400,000 dinars, half the Fatimids' annual revenue, derived from the Sijilmasa trade terminus in 951/2 alone—and the massive importation of high-quality gold from sub-Saharan Africa. These funds were augmented in 968 by special taxes levied for the imminent expedition.

In 966 Jawhar, fresh from his triumph in the Maghreb, was sent to the Kutama homeland in Lesser Kabylia to recruit men and raise funds: he returned to the Fatimid capital in December 968 with fresh Berber troops and half a million dinars. The governor of Barqa was ordered to prepare the route to Egypt, with new wells being dug along it at regular intervals. This meticulous preparation also reflects the increased strength and stability of the Fatimid regime. As Lev points out, "their first armies dispatched against Egypt lacked discipline and terrorized the population", while the army assembled by al-Mu'izz was "very large, well paid and disciplined". The venture was entrusted to Jawhar, who was given supreme authority for the expedition: the Caliph decreed that the governors of the towns along his route had to dismount in his presence and kiss his hand.

### Fatimid propaganda in Egypt

Anti-Abbasid and pro-Fatimid Isma'ili propaganda was widespread in the Islamic world during the early 10th century, with Isma'ili sympathizers even in the Abbasid court. In 904, the eventual first Fatimid caliph had sought refuge in Egypt, then ruled by the autonomous Tulunid dynasty, and had remained in hiding with sympathizers in Fustat for about a year, until the Abbasids recovered control of the province in early 905. While the Fatimid leader fled west to Sijilmasa, the brother of Abu Abdallah al-Shi'i was left behind to maintain contact with other parts of the Fatimid missionary propaganda network (the daʿwa).

The activity of Fatimid agents-provocateurs and sympathizers in Egypt is attested in the sources in 917/8, in the lead-up to the second invasion. In 919, the local governor arrested several people who were in correspondence with the invading Fatimid army. Following the failure of the initial invasion attempts, the Fatimids turned even more to propaganda and subversion. As a major commercial centre with an ethnically and confessionally diverse population, Fustat was easily infiltrated by agents of the Fatimid daʿwa. The activity of the daʿwa is shown in a marked rise in pro-Shi'a, or specifically Isma'ili, inscriptions among Egyptian tombstones in the decades after c. 912.

Remarkably, a delegation of Fatimid missionaries was publicly received by Kafur, and the daʿwa was allowed to establish itself and operate openly at Fustat, its agents stressing that "the Fatimid rule would commence only upon Kafur's death". The leader of the daʿwa, the wealthy merchant Abu Ja'far Ahmad ibn Nasr, maintained friendly relations with the local elites, including the vizier Ibn al-Furat, and had possibly bribed several of them. The city's merchants, who had a special interest in having stability, and thus normal trade, restored, were particularly susceptible to Ibn Nasr's arguments. In addition, some sources claim that the regent al-Hasan ibn Ubayd Allah was under Ibn Nasr's influence; when the troops rioted in Fustat, Ibn Nasr counselled al-Hasan to appeal to al-Mu'izz, and personally delivered a letter to that effect to the Caliph. Meanwhile, his lieutenant Jabir ibn Muhammad organized the daʿwa in the residential quarters of the city, distributing Fatimid banners to display upon the expected arrival of the Fatimid army. The Fatimids also received the aid of the Jewish convert Ya'qub ibn Killis, who had harboured ambitions to become vizier himself before being persecuted by his rival Ibn al-Furat. Ibn Killis fled to Ifriqiya in September 968, where he converted to Isma'ilism and assisted the Fatimids with his knowledge of Egyptian affairs. The Ikhshidid establishment was thoroughly penetrated; some Turkish commanders are reported to have written to al-Mu'izz inviting him to conquer Egypt, while even Ibn al-Furat is suspected by some modern historians to have joined the pro-Fatimid party.

Modern accounts of the events stress the importance of the Fatimids' "skilful political propaganda" (Marius Canard) that preceded the actual invasion. Coupled with the famine affecting Egypt and the political crisis of the Ikhshidid regime, this "intensive period of psychological and political preparation" (Thierry Bianquis) proved more decisive than military strength, and allowed the conquest to be carried out quickly and without much difficulty. The Fatimid cause was further helped by the terror inspired by news of the continuation of the Byzantine advance into northern Syria in 968: the Byzantines raided the area at will, and captured large numbers of Muslim prisoners, without facing serious opposition by the Abbasid-aligned Muslim rulers of the region.

## Invasion and conquest of Egypt

Jawhar set up his tent at Raqqada on 26 December 968, and the expedition began to assemble under his supervision. Caliph al-Mu'izz came almost daily to the growing camp from the nearby palace city of Mansuriya. The army assembled was reported by Arab sources to have numbered over a hundred thousand men, and was to be accompanied by a strong naval squadron, and a war treasury of over 1,000 chests filled with gold. On 6 February 969, the army set out, following a formal ceremony presided over by the Caliph in person, during which he bestowed full plenipotentiary powers on Jawhar. As a sign of this, only he and Jawhar were allowed to remain on their horses during the ceremony; all other dignitaries, including the Caliph's sons and brothers, were ordered to dismount and do Jawhar homage. To further underscore the authority bestowed on his new viceroy, al-Mu'izz accompanied the army on horseback for a while, and then sent the luxurious clothing he wore on that day to Jawhar. The army marched to Barqa, where Ibn Killis joined the army.

In May 969, the Fatimid army entered the Nile Delta. Jawhar occupied Alexandria without resistance and erected a fortified camp at Tarruja, on the western edge of the Delta, close to Alexandria, while his vanguard advanced towards the Fayyum oasis. Jawhar's troops did not meet any resistance as they entered the country, and the Fatimid general quickly became master of the west bank of the Nile, from the sea to the Fayyum. Then he stopped, awaiting the reaction of Fustat.

### Jawhar's amān

As the administrative centre and largest city of the country, Fustat was the key to controlling Egypt. The Fatimids' own experience made them well aware of this. In their previous invasions, although they had managed to occupy much of the country, their failure to capture Fustat determined the outcome of the campaign. Conversely, Lev points to the career of Muhammad ibn Tughj al-Ikhshid, and Jawhar's own success in 969, as evidence that "the conquest of the centre determined the fate of the country, although the provinces were not totally subjugated".

In early June, the ruling circles of Fustat sent a delegation to Jawhar with a list of demands, notably assurances for their personal safety and a guarantee of their properties and positions. The leader of the Ikhshidiyya, Nihrir al-Shuwayzan, being in command of the only sizeable military body, requested in addition that he be nominated as governor of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, a demand that Lev dismisses as "unrealistic" and revealing a "complete lack of understanding for the Fatimid particular religious sensitivities." The delegation comprised the leaders of the ashrāf families—the Husaynid Abu Ja'far Muslim, the Hasanid Abu Isma'il al-Rassi, and the Abbasid Abu'l-Tayyib—the chief qāḍī of Fustat, Abu Tahir al-Dhuhli, and the chief Fatimid agent, Ibn Nasr.

In exchange for the peaceful submission of the country, Jawhar, as the representative of al-Mu'izz, issued a writ of safe-conduct (amān) and a list of promises to the Egyptian population. As Lev points out, the amān was "a manifesto setting forth the political programme of the new regime and a piece of propaganda". Thus the amān opened by trying to justify the invasion by the need to protect the Muslims in the eastern parts of the Islamic world from their enemies—implying, but not explicitly naming, the Byzantines. The letter proposed a number of concrete improvements to be undertaken by the new regime, which revealed the detailed knowledge of Egyptian affairs provided to the Fatimids by their agents in the country, such as restoring order and securing the pilgrimage routes, or ending illegal taxes and improving the coinage. The pledge to defend the pilgrims was, in the words of the Orientalist Wilferd Madelung, "an open declaration of war" on the Qarmatians, whom Jawhar explicitly named and cursed in his letter. The Islamic religious classes (preachers, jurists, etc.) were placated by promises to pay them salaries, restore existing mosques and build new ones.

Most importantly, the letter ended by emphasizing the unity of Islam and the return to the "true sunna" of the Prophet and the early generations of Islam, thereby claiming a common ground espoused by the Sunni and Shi'a alike. Its phrasing concealed the Fatimids' true intentions, since according to Isma'ili doctrine, it was the Fatimid imam–caliph who was the true heir and interpreter of the "true sunna". It would quickly become apparent that, in the all-important topic of public rites and jurisprudence (fiqh), the Fatimids were intent on granting precedence to Ismai'ili doctrine. For the time being, the letter achieved its purpose: "on the whole", writes Lev, "it was a persuasive document appealing to wide sections of the Egyptian society".

### Occupation of Fustat

The delegation returned to Fustat on 26 June, bearing Jawhar's letter. Even before the envoys arrived, rumours spread that the military refused to accept it, and had resolved to fight and bar passage over the Nile. When the letter was publicly read, the officers in particular vociferously opposed it, and not even the intervention of the vizier Ibn al-Furat could persuade them to submit. Jawhar then declared his expedition a jihād against the Byzantines, and had the chief qāḍī confirm that anyone who barred his way was an enemy of the faith and could be killed. On the Egyptian side, Nihrir was chosen as common commander of the Ikhshidiyya and the Kafuriyya, who on 28 June occupied Rawda Island, which controlled passage over the pontoon bridge that connected Fustat with Giza on the western shore of the Nile, where Jawhar had set up camp.

The course of the subsequent conflict is unclear, as the sources report different details. The first engagement came on the 29th, but Jawhar was forced to withdraw. After that, Jawhar decided to cross the river elsewhere. Depending on the source, this was done with boats either provided by a group of defecting Ikhshidid ghilmān, or captured by Ja'far ibn Fallah from an Ikhshidid fleet sent from Lower Egypt to assist the garrison of Fustat. Using these boats, Ibn Fallah led a part of the Fatimid army across, although the exact site is unknown. According to al-Maqrizi, four Ikhshidid commanders had been sent with their troops to reinforce the possible landing points, but the Fatimid troops managed to cross the river. On 3 July, the two armies clashed, and the Fatimids prevailed. No details are known, but the entire Ikhshidid force sent from Giza to oppose the Fatimids was destroyed. The rest of the Ikhshidid troops then abandoned Rawda and dispersed, leaving Fustat and fleeing as far as Syria to seek safety.

Fustat was left in chaos by these events, but at that moment the Fatimid daʿwa came forth, made contact with the chief of police, and hung white Fatimid banners over the city in token of submission, while the police chief marched through the streets ringing a bell and carrying a banner proclaiming al-Mu'izz as caliph. The resistance of the troops had broken Jawhar's amān and made the city licit for plunder according to custom. Jawhar consented to renew the amān, charging Abu Ja'far Muslim with its upkeep, while Ibn al-Furat was tasked with confiscating the houses of the officers who had fled.

On 6 July, Ibn al-Furat and Abu Ja'far Muslim, accompanied by the leading merchants, led a crowd over the pontoon bridge to pay homage to Jawhar at Giza. On the same evening, the Fatimid army began crossing the bridge, and set up camp some 5 kilometres (3 mi) north of the city. On the next day, the distribution of alms was announced, financed by the treasure that Jawhar had borne with him: money was distributed to the poor by the army's qāḍī, Ali ibn al-Walid al-Ishbili. On 9 July, Jawhar led the Friday prayer in the Mosque of Amr in Fustat, where the Sunni preacher, dressed in Alid white and reading the unfamiliar phrases from a note, recited the khuṭba in the name of al-Mu'izz.

## Consolidation of Fatimid rule

### Pursuit of the Ikhshidid remnants and attempted expansion into Syria

The Ikhshidid remnants gathered in Palestine under al-Hasan ibn Ubayd Allah, while further north, the Byzantines captured Antioch after a long siege and forced the Hamdanids of Aleppo into vassalage. Jawhar therefore sent an army under Ja'far ibn Fallah to subdue the last Ikhshidid forces and, in the spirit of the promises to recommence the jihād, confront the Byzantines.

The Fatimid troops defeated and captured al-Hasan ibn Ubayd Allah in May 970, but the inhabitants of Damascus were enraged by the unruliness of the Kutama soldiers and resisted until November 970, when the city capitulated and was pillaged. From Damascus a Fatimid army moved north to besiege Antioch, only to be defeated by the Byzantines. At the same time, Ibn Fallah faced the attack of the Qarmatians, who allied themselves with the Arab Bedouin tribes of the region. Ibn Fallah was defeated and killed in battle in August 971, and Fatimid rule in Syria and Palestine collapsed, leaving the road to Egypt open.

The Fatimids were more successful in the Hejaz and the two Muslim holy cities of Mecca and Medina, thanks in large part to liberal gifts of gold sent by al-Mu'izz. In Medina, where the Husaynids were ascendant, Abu Ja'far Muslim held great influence, and the khuṭba was proclaimed for the first time in the Fatimid Caliph's name in 969, or according to Ibn al-Jawzi and Ibn al-Athir, 970. The Hasanid Ja'far ibn Muhammad al-Hasani, who had just established himself as ruler of Mecca in c. 968, is said to have proclaimed the khuṭba in al-Mu'izz's name as soon as news of the conquest of Egypt reached him, but Najm al-Din Umar reports of the dispatch of a joint Fatimid–Medinan expedition in 972 to force Ja'far to pronounce the khuṭba on behalf of the Fatimid Caliph; Ibn al-Jawzi and Ibn al-Athir put the recitation of the Friday prayer as late as 974, while al-Maqrizi, relying on lost Fatimid documents, in 975. Recognition of Fatimid overlordship by the Hejazi ashrāf, expressed through the naming of the Fatimid caliph in the khuṭba, and the resumption of the Hajj caravans from 974/5 on, were major boosts to the Fatimid dynasty's claims to legitimacy.

### Jawhar as viceroy of Egypt

While the capture of Fustat, the most important settlement and the seat of the administration, was of critical importance, Egypt was not yet wholly under Fatimid control. While Ja'far ibn Fallah moved into Syria, Jawhar remained in Egypt to consolidate Fatimid authority as viceroy or proconsul. His tasks were to restore an orderly government, stabilize the new regime, confront the remnants of the defeated Ikhshidid troops, and extend Fatimid rule to the north (the Nile Delta area) and south (Upper Egypt).

#### Treatment of the Ikhshidid troops

Already in 969, Jawhar accepted the submission of fourteen leaders of the Ikhshidiyya and the Kafuriyya, with some 5,000–6,000 of their men; the commanders were arrested and the troops disarmed. The properties of the Ikhshidid troops, commanders and rank-and-file alike, were also systematically confiscated by the new regime.

The Fatimids distrusted the loyalty of the former Ikhshidid troops and refused to incorporate them as regulars into their army. Exceptionally, some former Ikhshidid commanders were employed in the early years of the new regime to suppress revolts in Egypt due to their superior local knowledge. The disbanded rank-and-file soldiers on the other hand were exploited as a "reservoir of fighting manpower" (Lev) for emergencies, especially since they were deprived of any other means of livelihood. Many were recruited to confront the Qarmatian invasion in 971, but after the Qarmatian invasion was repulsed, Jawhar arrested 900 of them, who were not released until they were recruited against a second Qarmatian invasion in 974. Former Ikhshidid troops were recruited to shore up the Fatimid military following heavy defeats as late as 981. Many more Ikhshidid troops, who had fled Egypt, joined the Qarmatians instead.

#### Domestic administration and reforms

In his domestic policies, Jawhar had to be careful to avoid creating resentment among the local elites, and to ensure the continuation of an orderly administration. As a result, he largely left the experienced personnel from the previous regime in place: Ibn al-Furat remained in office as vizier, as did the chief qāḍī and the chief preacher, as well as the heads of the administrative bureaux; Jawhar merely appointed a Kutama supervisor to keep them in line. Jawhar also set up weekly sessions to hear grievances (maẓālim), certain taxes were abolished, and properties illegally confiscated by the treasury were returned to their owners.

In religious matters, Jawhar trod carefully, and Isma'ili rites were only gradually introduced. At the Mosque of Amr, the Sunni rites were retained for the moment, and only at the Mosque of Ibn Tulun, which served as a congregational mosque for the Fatimid army's encampment, was the Fatimid call to prayer (the adhān) introduced in March 970. Nevertheless, tensions erupted in October 969, when the Fatimid army's qāḍī ended the Ramadan fast a day earlier than the Sunni chief qāḍī. The Fatimid regime also imposed a stricter moral code, reflecting both by the Fatimids' own puritanism, as well as a deliberate attempt to reverse the supposed libertinism of the Ikhshidids. These measures contributed to the regime's popularity among the Sunni religious classes, but also provoked some resistance.

Jawhar also began erecting a new capital (that would become Cairo) for his master at the site of his encampment. Like its Ifriqiyan counterpart, it was originally named al-Mansuriya; even the names of certain gates and city quarters were copied. Its centrepiece, the al-Azhar Mosque, was begun by Jawhar on 4 April 970, and completed in the summer of 972.

#### Pacification of the provinces and the Qarmatian invasion

As early as November/December 969, Jawhar sent troops under a former Ikhshidid commander, Ali ibn Muhammad al-Khazin, to combat brigandage in Upper Egypt. In the Delta, the situation was more volatile. The marshy terrain and the complex social and religious divisions in the local population were unfamiliar to his Kutama, so that Jawhar initially entrusted former Ikhshidid officers with operations as well. Muzahim ibn Ra'iq, who with his men had submitted to the Fatimids, was appointed governor of Farama, and the former Ikhshidid commander Tibr was sent against Tinnis, where a revolt against heavy taxation had broken out. Soon, however, Tibr joined the rebels and became their leader, encouraging the locals to refuse payment of their taxes. After generous blandishments failed to make him return to the fold, Jawhar sent another army against Tinnis. Tibr fled to Syria, but was captured and executed by the Fatimids.

In September 971, Jawhar had to confront the Qarmatians, who, after their victory over Ibn Fallah, invaded Egypt. Instead of advancing directly on Fustat, however, the Qarmatians turned to the eastern Delta. Their approach rekindled the rebellion in Tinnis, and the entire region rose in revolt. A Fatimid army briefly retook Farama, but in the face of the uprising it had to withdraw to Fustat, with the Qarmatians in pursuit. Nevertheless, this delayed the Qarmatian attack on Fustat for two months, and gave Jawhar time to prepare a line of fortifications and a trench at Ayn Shams, north of the capital, stretching for 10 kilometres (6 mi) from the Nile to the Muqattam hills. The Fatimid general called almost the entire male population of Fustat to arms, and in two fierce battles on 22 and 24 December 971, despite heavy losses, managed to defeat his opponents. The Qarmatians broke and retreated back into Palestine, many being killed during their retreat for the bounty set on them by Jawhar. Two days after the battle, reinforcements arrived from Ifriqiya under al-Hasan ibn Ammar, securing the Fatimids' grip over the country.

The Qarmatian invasion not only breathed new life into the revolt at Tinnis and the Delta, but led to a general surge in anti-Fatimid activity. In Upper Egypt, the Kilabi leader Abd al-Aziz ibn Ibrahim, formerly an ally, now rose in revolt in the name of the Abbasid caliph. An expedition under the Nubian commander Bishara was sent against him, and he was captured and brought to Cairo in a cage in early 973.

The revolt in the Delta persisted for a few years, especially as Jawhar could not spare the necessary resources to confront it. It was only in the summer of 972 that troops under Ibn Ammar began a brutal suppression campaign. The Qarmatians sent a fleet to assist Tinnis, but in September/October 972 seven Qarmatian ships and 500 crew were captured by the Fatimid forces. Al-Maqrizi puts this a year later, in June/July 973, so there may have been two Qarmatian naval expeditions against Tinnis, which accords with Ibn Zulaq's claim that al-Mu'izz scored two naval victories against them. Tinnis eventually submitted, paying a million silver dirhams as a ransom to avoid reprisals.

#### Assessment

Jawhar's rule was more or less successful in securing control of Egypt, and made important headway in having the new regime accepted by the local population, chiefly by the prudence and restraint shown in imposing Isma'ili doctrine (an area in which Jawhar's practice contrasted sharply with that followed by al-Mu'izz, once the caliph arrived in Egypt). However, the disastrous campaign into Syria, the repulse of the Qarmatian invasion, the continued process of pacifying Egypt, and the construction of a new capital, entailed an enormous expenditure of manpower and financial resources. The tumults of these years also disrupted the ongoing recovery of Egyptian agriculture, and the administration's ability to tax it. As a result, in the words of Michael Brett, "three years after the triumphal entry of Jawhar into Fustat, the expectation, or hope, of a conquest spreading as far as Baghdad had been dashed".

Apart from Ramla, which was reoccupied in May 972, the bulk of Syria remained outside Fatimid control. Indeed, the Fatimids had to confront a second Qarmatian invasion of Egypt in 974. Once again the Delta was captured by the Qarmatians, while a second force, led by none other than Abu Ja'far Muslim's brother Akhu Muslim, bypassed Cairo and encamped between Asyut and Akhmim. Many scions of the most prominent ashrāf families flocked to join him. Once more the populace of the capital was called to arms, and the Qarmatians fought off in a battle just north of Ayn Shams. Only under al-Mu'izz's successor, al-Aziz Billah (r. 975–996), did the Fatimids manage to capture Damascus and extend their control to most of Syria.

### Transfer of the Fatimid court to Egypt

Following the repulsion of the Qarmatian attack, and despite the continuing local unrest, Jawhar judged Egypt to be sufficiently pacified to invite his master, al-Mu'izz, to come to Egypt. The Fatimid caliph began preparations to move with his entire court, treasure, and even the coffins of his ancestors from Ifriqiya to Egypt. After long preparations, the Fatimid ruler and his entourage left Ifriqiyan al-Mansuriya on 5 August 972 for Sardaniya near Aïn Djeloula, where, for the next four months, those Fatimid followers who wanted to follow their leader came to join him. There, on 2 October, al-Mu'izz appointed Buluggin ibn Ziri as his viceroy in Ifriqiya. On 14 November, the huge column of men and animals set off for Egypt, arriving at Alexandria on 30 May 973, and Giza on 7 June. On the way, he was met by a delegation of notables headed by Abu Ja'far Muslim, who accompanied him on the final stage of his journey. On 10 June, al-Mu'izz crossed the Nile. Ignoring Fustat and the festive reception organized for him there, he went straight for his new capital, which he renamed as al-Qāhira al-Muʿizzīya ("the Victorious City of al-Mu'izz"), a name which in English was corrupted to Cairo.

The arrival of the Fatimid caliph and his court was a major turning point in Egyptian history. Already during the preceding Tulunid and Ikhshidid regimes, the country had become, for the first time since the Ptolemies, the seat of an independent polity, and had emerged as an autonomous regional power. Nevertheless, the ambitions of these regimes were regional and tied to the personalities of their rulers, who remained in the orbit of the Abbasid court; whereas the Fatimid regime represented a power at once imperial and revolutionary, with a religious mandate that gave them ecumenical pretensions in direct opposition to the Abbasids. This event also had repercussions for the development of Twelver Shi'ism and Sunnism alike in the eastern Islamic lands: with the Fatimids emerging as a serious claimant to the leadership of the Islamic world, the other Shi'a sects—most notably the Twelvers—were compelled to differentiate themselves from the Isma'ili Fatimids, thus accelerating the ongoing process of their separation into a distinct community, marked by its own doctrine, ritual and festivals. In turn, this led to a similar process among the Sunnis (the so-called "Sunni Revival"), culminating in the codification of Sunni doctrine and the anti-Shi'ite manifestos of the Abbasid caliph al-Qadir (r. 991–1031). The result was a hardening of the Shi'a–Sunni divide into mutually exclusive groups. As the historian Hugh Kennedy writes, "it was no longer possible to be simply a Muslim: one was either Sunni or Shi'ite". Even though the Fatimids ultimately failed in their ambitions—their rule was ended by Saladin in 1171, who restored Sunnism and Abbasid suzerainty to Egypt—they transformed Egypt, and their capital, Cairo, founded to be the seat of a universal empire, has since then been one of the main centres of the Islamic world.

969 CE overthrow of the Ikhshidid dynasty

Military history of the Fatimid Caliphate

Military history of the Ikhshidid dynasty


2015 Giro d'Italia

The 2015 Giro d'Italia (English: Tour of Italy) was a three-week Grand Tour cycling stage race that took place in May 2015. It was the 98th running of the Giro d'Italia and took place principally in Italy, although some stages visited France and Switzerland. The 3,481.8-kilometre (2,163.5 mi) race included 21 stages, beginning in San Lorenzo al Mare on 9 May and concluding in Milan on 31 May. It was the fifteenth race of the 2015 UCI World Tour. The Giro was won by Alberto Contador (), with Fabio Aru () second and Aru's teammate Mikel Landa third.

Contador first took the lead after stage 5, the race's first uphill finish. His defence of the pink jersey (given to the leader in the General classification in the Giro d'Italia) was put in doubt when he injured his left shoulder in a crash in the sixth stage. He held his lead through several stages stage but was caught up in another crash in stage 13, which caused him to lose the lead. He took the lead back the following day in the 59.4-kilometre (36.9 mi) Individual time trial, where he gained a lead of several minutes over all his rivals. Despite aggressive riding from Aru and Landa in the final week, Contador was able to defend his lead to the finish of the race. This was his third Giro d'Italia title, after the 2008 race.

As well as finishing second overall, Aru won the white jersey as the best young rider in the week. Giacomo Nizzolo () won the points competition and Giovanni Visconti (Movistar) won the mountains classification. Astana finished first in both the team ranking by time and the team ranking by points. Contador, Visconti and Nizzolo all won their classifications without winning any stage victories.

## Teams

As the Giro d'Italia was a UCI World Tour event, all seventeen UCI WorldTeams were automatically invited and obliged to send a squad. Five UCI Professional Continental teams were given wildcard places in the race by RCS Sport, the race organisers. Four of these were Italian-based teams: , , and . Southeast's entry in the race was earned by their victory in the 2014 Coppa Italia, when they competed as ; they were invited despite three recent doping cases in the team. The final wildcard place was awarded to , a Polish-based team. CCC-Sprandi-Polkowice's invitation immediately received attention because the team's roster included two prominent riders who has previously served bans for doping: Stefan Schumacher and Davide Rebellin. The day after the announcement, Cycling Weekly reported that the team might omit the riders from its squad for the race.

Several prominent teams applied for wildcard places but were unsuccessful. These were , , and .

The team presentation took place in San Remo on the evening before the first stage. As each team sent nine riders to the race, the startlist contained 198 riders. George Bennett () was withdrawn from the startlist on the night before the race, however, as a blood test had revealed low cortisol levels. As his team was part of the Movement for Credible Cycling (MPCC), he was not allowed to start the Giro. therefore began the race with eight riders and there were 197 riders in the peloton at the beginning of the race. This included riders from 36 different countries, with the largest numbers coming from Italy (59), France (15), Belgium (12) and the Netherlands (12). The average age of riders in the Giro was 28.95; they ranged from the 21-year-old Rick Zabel () to the 41-year-old Alessandro Petacchi (Southeast).

## Pre-race favourites

The winner of the 2014 Giro d'Italia, Nairo Quintana (), chose not to defend his title in order to focus on the Tour de France. The principal favourite for the race was Alberto Contador (), especially as Chris Froome () and Vincenzo Nibali (), two of the most successful active Grand Tour riders, also chose to focus on the Tour and to skip the Giro. Contador, who had won the 2014 Vuelta a España, was attempting to win both the Giro and the Tour in the same season. No rider had achieved this double since Marco Pantani in 1998; Contador described his ambition to do "something that people will remember forever". Contador's last attempt to win both the Giro and the Tour – in the 2011 season – ended in failure. Although he finished first in the Giro, he only managed fifth place in the Tour; both results were subsequently removed because of a ban due to a doping case from 2010.

The rider considered most likely to challenge Contador for the general classification was Richie Porte (Sky). Porte had already achieved nine race victories in 2015, including the overall victories in Paris–Nice, the Volta a Catalunya and the Giro del Trentino. Porte was expected to be particularly strong in the individual time trial, as well as in the mountains. Porte had not shown consistent form in a Grand Tour in recent years, however, and there were doubts about his ability to maintain his form over a three-week race.

Rigoberto Urán () – who had finished second in 2013 and 2014 – was also among the favourites, with the long individual time trial expected to suit him. Fabio Aru (Astana) – who had finished third in 2014 – was also expected to perform well; VeloNews described him as "perhaps the best pure climber in the race". Other riders expected to challenge for the higher places included Ilnur Zakarin (), who had just won the Tour de Romandie, Domenico Pozzovivo (), Jurgen Van den Broeck (), Damiano Caruso (BMC) and Ryder Hesjedal (), the winner of the 2012 Giro d'Italia. Four former winners of the Giro started the 2015 edition: Contador, Hesjedal, Ivan Basso (Tinkoff–Saxo) and Damiano Cunego ().

Other prominent riders to start the race included a large number of prominent sprinters, including André Greipel (Lotto–Soudal) and Michael Matthews (). Greipel was expected to perform well in the few flat stages. Matthews had the ability to win hillier stages; his team's strength in the team time trial was expected to put him into the pink jersey as leader of the general classification during the first week; he had also worn the jersey in the first week of the 2014 Giro. Tom Boonen (), a former world champion, participated in the Giro for the first time in his career.

## Route and stages

The first announcement of the route for the 2015 Giro came in July 2014, when RCS Sport announced that it would begin with a team time trial from San Lorenzo al Mare along the coast to San Remo. The route would use the Riviera dei Fiori cycle path and would start at the foot of the Cipressa climb made famous by its inclusion in the Milan–San Remo classic. The route used neither the climb of the Cipressa nor that of the Poggio di San Remo; it kept to the coastline and was entirely flat. The stage would end on the Lungomare Italo Calvino in San Remo. The following two stages were announced at the same time. The second stage – the first mass-start stage of the race – would suit the sprinters, while the third stage would take the riders to La Spezia, where the small climb of the Biassa would come towards the end of the stage. A further route announcement was made in mid-September. Mauro Vegni, the race director, announced that the Giro would return to the climb of the Madonna di Campiglio for the first time since 1999. In the 1999 Giro, Marco Pantani won the stage that finished on the climb and was in the race lead; he failed a test for EPO use, however, and was expelled from the race. The full route announcement was made in Milan on 6 October at an event attended by many riders expected to participate in the Giro.

An additional stage in Liguria was included in the route. This was the new third stage, with the stage to La Spezia now stage 4. The additional stage was hilly but had a long flat section towards the finish. The first summit finish of the race came on the second-category climb of the Abetone at the end of stage 5. There was then one flat stage, which was followed by the hilly stage 7, which was the longest stage in any Giro d'Italia since 2000 at 263 kilometres (163 mi). These took the riders south along the Tyrrhenian coast and into Campania and then inland towards the southern Apennines. The race then entered the mountains for stages 8 and 9. Stage 8 had a summit finish on the Campitello Matese; stage 9 included mountains and hills throughout. This was followed by the race's first rest day.

The rest day included a transfer to Civitanova Marche on the Adriatic coast. The subsequent stages took the riders along the coast and then into the Dolomites. Immediately after the rest day, there were four relatively flat stages, although two of them included hills towards the end. These were followed by the race's only individual time trial. This was 59.2 kilometres (36.8 mi) in length and was one of the longest time trials in the Giro in recent years. It began with 30 kilometres (19 mi) of flat roads, which were followed by rolling roads towards the finish line in Valdobbiadene. After the time trial came the stage to Madonna di Campiglio, which included several other difficult climbs. This was followed by the second rest day.

The final week of the race began with a stage that crossed the very difficult Passo di Mortirolo on the way to a finish on a third-category climb in Aprica. Cycling Weekly described this as "this year's blockbuster stage". This was followed by one of the flattest stages of the race, which took the Giro out of Italy for the first time in 2015 as it crossed into Switzerland for a finish in Lugano. There were then three consecutive days with high mountains. The eighteenth stage of the race started in Melide, Switzerland in Switzerland and took the riders across the difficult Monte Ologno before a difficult descent to the finish. There were then two consecutive summit finishes on the Cervinia and on Sestriere. The final stage was a largely ceremonial flat stage towards a finish in Milan.

The highest climb of the 2015 Giro – known as the Cima Coppi – was the Colle delle Finestre on the penultimate stage. This was 2,178 metres (7,146 ft) above sea level. In general, the climbs were lower than in previous years, following controversy in the 2014 Giro over the crossing of the Stelvio Pass. The race organisers also tried to make the transfers between stages shorter.

## Race overview

Stage 1, the team time trial, was won by . Simon Gerrans was the first rider to cross the line, so he became the first leader of the race. Tinkoff–Saxo were second, seven seconds slower, which made Contador the best-placed rider among the general classification favourites. He gained six seconds on Aru and twenty seconds on Porte. Elia Viviani won the sprint on stage 2; he therefore took the lead in the points classification. Michael Matthews finished seventh on the stage and moved into the pink jersey. Matthews extended his lead by winning stage 3 in a sprint from a reduced group. There was particular concern during the stage after Domenico Pozzovivo () crashed on a descent; he abandoned the race and was taken to hospital. The fourth stage was won by Davide Formolo () from an early breakaway. Astana raced aggressively in the second part of the stage and put significant pressure on the other general classification riders; Rigoberto Urán lost more than 40 seconds, while Tinkoff–Saxo appeared weak in support of Contador. Matthews lost around 20 minutes; Simon Clarke took over the lead of the race. Clarke was the third Australian rider for the team to lead the 2015 Giro.

Stage 5, with its summit finish at Abetone, was also won by a rider from a breakaway, this time Jan Polanc (), who attacked on the final climb and won by more than a minute. The general classification favourites attacked on the final climb; Contador was the first to attack and was followed by Aru and Porte. They were then joined by Mikel Landa, Aru's teammate, and gained time over all the other riders. Clarke lost over two minutes to Contador, Aru and Porte; he therefore lost the lead in the general classification and Contador became the new leader of the race, two seconds ahead of Aru and twenty ahead of Porte. Contador's lead came under threat the following day. The stage was won by Greipel in a sprint finish, but there was a large crash in the final metres. This was caused by a spectator who was leaning over the crash barriers with a camera; Daniele Colli () collided with him and caused a large number of riders to crash behind him. Contador was among the riders to crash; although he finished the stage on the same time as Greipel, he was treated for a shoulder injury by his team doctor and was unable to put on the leader's jersey on the podium. Despite suffering from the injury, Contador started and finished the following day's stage. This was won in a sprint finish by Diego Ulissi (Lampre–Mérida), while Contador retained the race lead.

Contador continued to be troubled by his injury during stage 8, which finished on the climb of the Campitello Matese. The stage was won by Beñat Intxausti (Movistar), who was in the day's early breakaway and attacked on the final climb. Astana again rode hard to put pressure on the other riders; eventually a group formed of Contador, Aru, Porte and Landa. Landa then attacked and finished second on the stage, 15 seconds ahead of the other three riders. He therefore moved up into fifth place overall, while Contador increased his lead over Aru by winning bonus seconds at an intermediate sprint. Stage 9 was also won by a rider from a breakaway: Paolo Tiralongo (Astana) took a solo victory. Aru, Contador, Porte and Landa were again alone in a group towards the end of the stage; although they came to the finish together, Aru took a second out of the others in the sprint. This moved him to three seconds behind Contador. The following day was the first rest day of the race.

After the rest day, stage 10 was once again won by a rider from a breakaway: Nicola Boem () sprinted to the victory from a small group. A large group – including Contador, Aru and Landa – finished together. Porte, however, suffered a mechanical problem in the final 10 kilometres (6.2 mi) and he was unable to regain contact with the main group, despite assistance from his teammates and from Michael Matthews, Porte's fellow Australian. Porte lost over 40 seconds to the other general classification favourites. After the stage, it was revealed that Porte had been given assistance by another Australian rider, Simon Clarke. Clarke had seen Porte waiting for assistance and had given him one of his own wheels. This was illegal under UCI rules that prohibit "non-regulation assistance to a rider from another team"; Porte was therefore given a two-minute time penalty and dropped to twelfth place, over three minutes behind Contador, with Landa moving up to third place.

Stage 11 was won by Ilnur Zakarin, who attacked from an all-day breakaway 23 kilometres (14 mi) from the finish line and rode solo to the finish. The general classification favourites all finished together. Stage 12 finished with a short, steep climb. It was won by Philippe Gilbert (BMC). Contador finished second to win six bonus seconds; his lead was further extended as Aru and Landa both lost several seconds on the climb. Contador lost the lead the following day, however. The stage was won in a bunch sprint by Sacha Modolo (); just over 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) before the finish line, however, there was a large crash that delayed a large number of riders. Contador was one of the riders delayed in the crash; he lost 36 seconds to Aru, who therefore took over the race lead. Porte was also caught up in the crash and lost another two minutes.

Stage 14 was the individual time trial, which was won by Vasil Kiryienka (Sky). Contador finished third on the stage, nearly three minutes ahead of Aru. Contador therefore moved back into the race lead. Contador passed Landa on the road, despite starting three minutes after him; Landa lost over four minutes and fell to seventh place overall. Movistar's Andrey Amador moved up into third. Stage 15 was the final stage of the second week and was the climb to Madonna di Campiglio. Landa won the stage after Astana rode hard on the final climb; he finished five seconds ahead of Contador and moved back up to fourth place. Contador finished a second ahead of Aru and extended his lead further due to bonus seconds for his third-place finish. Porte, who had lost over 30 minutes during the weekend following the crash in stage 13, withdrew from the race after the stage.

After the rest day, Landa won a second consecutive stage. Contador had suffered a puncture at the foot of the penultimate climb – the Mortirolo – and at one point was nearly a minute behind Landa and Aru. Contador caught Landa and Aru, however, then attacked them. Although Landa was able to follow Contador's attack, Aru was not. On the final climb to Aprica, Landa attacked and won the stage, 38 seconds ahead of Contador. Aru, meanwhile, lost nearly three minutes to Landa. Landa moved up into second place, although he was still over four minutes behind Contador, with Aru now third. Sacha Modolo won his second stage the following day, in a sprint finish, with Giacomo Nizzolo () moving into the lead of the points classification. Philippe Gilbert also won a second stage of the 2015 Giro on stage 18, escaping in a breakaway early in the day and attacking 19 kilometres (12 mi) from the finish to take a solo victory. Contador again increased his lead, however: after Aru and Landa were caught behind a crash, Contador ordered his team to attack. Cyclingnews.com suggested this was revenge for Astana's attack on stage 16. Contador then attacked alone and, after cooperation with Ryder Hesjedal, gained more than a minute on his rivals. Landa was second, over five minutes behind, with Aru a further 50 seconds back.

Stage 19 was the first of two consecutive summit finishes. The stage was won by Aru, who attacked early in the final climb. Contador was content to let the other riders dictate the pace in the chasing group, which finished over a minute behind Aru. Landa finished in the same group; Aru therefore moved back ahead of him into second place overall. Aru won again on stage 20, the final difficult stage of the Giro. Contador was isolated from his teammates early in the first of the day's two climbs. The roads towards the top of the climb – the Colle delle Finestre – were gravel. Landa attacked around this point and Contador was unable to follow. With Contador struggling, the other riders in the group attacked. Contador was a minute behind them at the summit, with Landa further ahead. At the foot of the final climb, Landa was ordered by his team to wait for Aru with the hope that, by working together, the two riders could put enough time into Contador to win the Giro. Aru attacked in the final kilometres of the final climb to Sestriere and won the stage. Landa was 24 seconds behind. Despite losing over two minutes, Contador retained his race lead.

The final stage of the Giro was a flat stage ending with several laps of a circuit in Milan. It was not expected to affect the general classification, with a bunch sprint the likely conclusion. There was an attack on the finishing circuit, however, by Iljo Keisse () and Luke Durbridge (). Although they never had more than a minute's lead, they were able to stay away from the peloton to the finish. Keisse won the sprint between the pair for the stage victory. Contador finished in the leading group to secure the overall victory, just under two minutes ahead of Aru. Contador thus won the overall 2015 Giro d'Italia without winning any stage victories.

## Classification leadership

In the 2015 Giro d'Italia, four different jerseys were awarded. The first and most important is the general classification, calculated by adding each rider's finishing times on each stage. Riders received time bonuses for finishing in the first three places on each stage (excluding the team time trial and individual time trial). The rider with the lowest cumulative time was awarded the pink jersey (the maglia rosa) and was considered the winner of the Giro d'Italia.

Additionally, there was a points classification. Riders won points for finishing in the top 15 on each stage. Flat stages award more points that mountainous stages, meaning that this classification tends to favour sprinters. In addition, points can be won in intermediate sprints. The winner of the points classification won the red jersey.

There was also a mountains classification. Points were awarded for reaching the top of a climb towards the front of the race. Each climb will be categorized as either first, second, third, or fourth-category, with more points available for the higher-categorized climbs. The Cima Coppi, the race's highest point of elevation, awards more points than the other first-category climbs. At 2,178 metres (7,146 ft), the Cima Coppi for the 2015 Giro d'Italia was the unpaved Colle delle Finestre.

The fourth jersey represented the young rider classification. This was decided the same way as the general classification, but only riders born after 1 January 1990 were eligible. The winner of the classification was awarded a white jersey.

There were also two classifications for teams. In the Trofeo Fast Team classification, the times of the best three cyclists per team on each stage were added up; the leading team was the team with the lowest total time. The Trofeo Super Team was a team points classification, with the top 20 placed riders on each stage earning points (20 for first place, 19 for second place and so on, down to a single point for 20th) for their team.

Notes:

- In stage 3, Esteban Chaves, who was second in the young riders classification, wore the white jersey, because Michael Matthews (in first place) wore the pink jersey as leader of the general classification during that stage.
- In stage 14, Davide Formolo, who was second in the young riders classification, wore the white jersey, because Fabio Aru (in first place) wore the pink jersey as leader of the general classification during that stage.

## Final standings

### General classification

### Mountains classification

### Points classification

### Young riders classification

### Trofeo Fast Team classification

### Trofeo Super Team classification

### Minor classifications

Several other minor classifications were awarded. The first of these was the intermediate sprint classification (Italian: Traguardi Volanti). Each road stage had two sprints during the stage. The first five riders across the intermediate sprint line were awarded points; the rider with the most points at the end of the race won the classification. This classification was won by Marco Bandiera (). A similar classification, the Azzuri d'Italia prize, was decided by points awarded to the top three riders on each stage. It was similar to the points classification, but with fewer riders awarded points. The classification was won by Mikel Landa. Another classification – the combativity prize (Italian: Premio Combattivita) – involved points awarded to the first riders at the stage finishes, at intermediate sprints and at the summits of categorised climbs. It was won by Philippe Gilbert.

There was also a breakaway award (Italian: Premio della Fuga). For this, points were awarded to each rider in any breakaway smaller than 10 riders that escaped for at least 5 kilometres (3.1 mi). Each rider was awarded a point for each kilometre that he was away from the peloton. The rider with the most points at the end of the Giro won the award. The classification was also won by Bandiera. The final individual classification was the "energy classification" (Italian: Premio Energy). In each stage, the fastest three riders in the final 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) of the stage were awarded points. The rider with the most points at the end of the Giro won the classification. The award was won by Fabio Aru.

The final classification was a "fair play" ranking for each team. Teams were given penalty points for infringing various rules. These ranged from a half-point penalty for offences that merited a warning from the race officials to a 2000-point penalty for a positive doping test. The team that had the lowest points total at the end of the Giro won the classification. It was won by , who did not receive any penalty points during the Giro.


University Street station

University Street station is a light rail station that is part of the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel in Seattle, Washington, United States. The station is located under 3rd Avenue at University Street, near Benaroya Hall, and is served by Sound Transit's 1 Line. It is located between Westlake and Pioneer Square stations and has surface connections to buses operated by King County Metro and other providers.

The station consists of two side platforms situated under street level, with two mezzanines connecting to the surface. It was designed in the style of high-tech architecture and includes several pieces of public art added during construction and later additions. Trains serve the station twenty hours a day on most days and the headway between light rail trains is six minutes during peak periods, with less frequent service at other times.

The transit tunnel opened on September 15, 1990, and was used exclusively by buses until 2009. Along with all other stations in the transit tunnel, University Street station was closed from 2005 to 2007 for a major renovation to accommodate light rail. Link light rail service to the station began on July 18, 2009, and bus service ceased on March 23, 2019. It is planned to be renamed to Symphony station in 2023, ahead of the opening of the 2 Line.

## Location

University Street station is located under 3rd Avenue between Union and Seneca streets in Downtown Seattle; the area is part of the Metropolitan Tract, an area of downtown that is owned by, and was originally home to, the University of Washington. The area surrounding the station primarily consists of high-rise office buildings and some mixed-use development, providing 102,194 jobs and housing a population of 13,813 within a 1⁄2 mile (0.8 km) of 3rd Avenue and University Street. Major buildings in the immediate vicinity of University Street station include Benaroya Hall and 1201 Third Avenue (formerly Washington Mutual Tower) on the west side of the station and the historic Seattle Tower and Cobb Building on the east side. The Seattle Art Museum and the Harbor Steps are located two blocks west of the station at the intersection near 1st Avenue, above the Seattle Waterfront and Seattle Aquarium. The 5th Avenue Theatre, Seattle Central Library, Rainier Square shopping center, and Union Square are all located east of the station along 5th Avenue.

## History

### Early proposals

The Metropolitan Tract, historically the northern boundary of downtown Seattle during its early decades, was offered for development shortly after the University of Washington moved its campus to the north side of Portage Bay (modern day University District) in 1895. The university's Board of Regents voted to lease the land to private developers in 1902, beginning a construction boom in the area under the direction of the Metropolitan Building Company. In 1911, Virgil Bogue presented a comprehensive plan for the city of Seattle, including a rapid transit system centered around a "trunk" subway under 3rd Avenue, passing through Downtown and the Metropolitan Tract, towards a new civic center in modern-day Belltown. The plan was rejected by voters on March 5, 1912, and the 3rd Avenue subway was unsuccessfully proposed twice in the 1920s.

In the late 1960s, the Forward Thrust Committee put forward a ballot measure to fund a rapid transit system in the Seattle metropolitan area, including a downtown subway under 3rd Avenue with a station between Seneca and Spring streets. The ballot measure, requiring a supermajority to support bonding to augment \$385 million in local funding with \$765 million from the Urban Mass Transportation Administration, failed to reach the 60 percent threshold in 1968 and again during a second vote in 1970. The failure of the Forward Thrust ballot measures led to the creation of Metro Transit in 1972, operating bus service across King County.

### Bus tunnel

Metro Transit began planning a bus tunnel through downtown Seattle in the 1970s, to be eventually converted to use by light rail trains. Metro approved the construction of a bus tunnel under 3rd Avenue in 1983, and chose the intersection of 3rd Avenue and University Street as the site of one of the tunnel's five stations. The station at University Street, replacing two separate stations at Union and Madison streets, would be excavated cut-and-cover and be completed by late 1989.

Excavation of the downtown bus tunnel began in early 1987, and construction reached the University Street area later that year. The twin tunnel boring machines used to excavate the tunnel reached University Street in October 1987, and continued north towards Westlake station. In December, Metro agreed to pay \$2.4 million to real estate developer Marathon Company for use of a city block they owned adjacent to the station for equipment staging and storage, delaying the planned construction of office buildings on the site. During excavation and construction of the University Street tunnel station, cracks and minor settling were found in the historic Seattle Tower, located nearby. The ground around the tower was later stabilized to prevent additional settlement, and was renovated with private funding in 1990.

In March 1989, the first buses were tested in the tunnel; University Street station was only 75 percent complete, and buses had to drive under scaffolding and construction equipment while passing through the station. Tunnel construction was completed in June 1990, and a soft opening for University Street station was held on August 9, 1990. Bus service in the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel began on September 15, 1990, with several Metro bus routes moved into the tunnel from surface streets. All service on routes using the tunnel was operated by dual-mode buses, which operated as diesel buses outside the tunnel and electrically, as trolleybuses, when inside the tunnel. During its early months, University Street and other stations were affected by serious water leaks, which splashed water onto walkways during the tunnel's first winter in operation. The leaks were later fixed by Metro contractors.

In 1994, the Seattle Symphony selected a city block adjacent to University Street station, used during tunnel construction for equipment staging and storage, as the site of their new concert hall. The building, later named Benaroya Hall, required the two-year closure of the station's 2nd Avenue entrance beginning in 1996. The entrance was re-opened in 1998, at the same time the new hall was inaugurated.

### Light rail

In the early 1990s, a regional transit authority (RTA) was formed to plan and construct a light rail system for the Seattle area. After an unsuccessful attempt in 1995, regional voters passed a \$3.9 billion plan to build light rail under the RTA in 1996. The downtown transit tunnel had already been planned for eventual light rail use and was built with tracks that would be incorporated into the initial system. The RTA, later renamed Sound Transit, approved the tunnel as part of the route of its initial light rail line in 1999. Ownership of the tunnel, including its stations, was transferred to Sound Transit in 2000 but returned two years later to King County Metro under a joint-operations agreement.

The downtown transit tunnel closed on September 23, 2005, for a two-year, \$82.7 million renovation to accommodate light rail vehicles. The renovation included the installation of new rails, a lowered roadbed at stations for level boarding, new signalling systems and emergency ventilation. The tunnel reopened on September 24, 2007, and Link light rail service began on July 18, 2009, from Westlake station to Tukwila International Boulevard station.

Bus service within the downtown transit tunnel ended on March 23, 2019, due to the expansion of the Washington State Convention Center at the site of Convention Place station, which includes demolition of the north portal. The tunnel became exclusively served by light rail trains, while the remaining seven bus routes were relocated to surface streets and nearby bus stops on 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th avenues. Ownership of the tunnel and University Street station was transferred to Sound Transit in 2022.

### Naming

University Street station is named after University Street, itself named for the original campus of the University of Washington before it moved in 1895. Metro discussed renaming the station for the Seattle Art Museum after it moved to the area in 1991, but took no action.

In 2012, Sound Transit adopted names for light rail stations in the University District, near the current University of Washington campus, including "University of Washington" and "U District" stations. The similarity between the three stations' names has led to public confusion, and calls to rename University Street station after Benaroya Hall or the Seattle Symphony. In September 2019, Sound Transit opened an online survey with six options to replace the University Street name—Seneca Street, Midtown, Arts District, Downtown Arts District, Symphony, and Benaroya Hall.

The Sound Transit Board adopted "Union Street/Symphony" as the station's new name in January 2020, after it had been recommended by a committee despite Union Street having no entrances to the station. The name was suggested as a cost-saving measure to match the existing acronym of the station (USS) in internal documents and software, which would cut the cost of changing the station's name from \$5.3 million to \$1 million. The name change was planned to take effect with the opening of the Northgate Link Extension, but the Sound Transit Board rescinded its decision a month later. A separate board action to rename the station to "Symphony" was passed in October 2021 and is scheduled to be implemented before Line 2 opens in 2025.

## Station layout

University Street station was designed in a high-tech motif to complement the modernist architecture found among the 1980s-era office buildings in the adjacent Financial District; architectural elements were used to create the desired atmosphere in the station, including linear stainless steel light fixtures over the platforms, glass railings on the mezzanines, and colorful granite to highlight platform benches and information signs. The station has two side platforms located below two mezzanines at the north and south ends of the station box: the north mezzanine is accessible through the parking garage of the Cobb Building at 3rd Avenue and University Street (Exit A1), an elevator in the lobby of Benaroya Hall (Exit A2), as well as a level walkway under Benaroya Hall to 2nd Avenue and University Street (Exit B); the south mezzanine is accessible from a single entrance located inside the 1201 Third Avenue building near 3rd Avenue and Seneca Street (Exit C). University Street station is approximately 570 feet (170 m) long, 70 feet (21 m) wide, and 60 to 70 feet (18 to 21 m) deep.

The station is situated above the Great Northern Tunnel, a century-old rail tunnel, which passes under with a clearance of approximately 15 feet (4.6 m). Both tunnels factored into the architecture of nearby Benaroya Hall, which has an auditorium that rests on rubber bearings to insulate from vibrations and a 6-foot-thick (1.8 m) concrete slab to minimize sound.

### Art

University Street station, like other stations in the downtown transit tunnel, is furnished with several pieces of public art integrated into its design by architect Mark Spitzer and lead artist Vicki Scuri.

"The Beltline", designed by Scuri, runs along the platform and consists of colored granite arranged in patterns that highlight passenger amenities, including information panels and benches. The benches have computer-generated dot matrix patterns sandblasted into the seats. Some of the granite originally purchased for use in "The Beltline" originated in South Africa, then under a Metro-sanctioned boycott over its Apartheid policies; the discovery fueled a minor scandal that resulted in the resignation of Metro's executive director, while the granite would be replaced with another type.

At the south mezzanine is Robert Teeple's "The Southern Lights", a series of fourteen LED screens that show animated symbols and phrases in a commentary on the increasing influence of computers in human life. The symbols range from human faces to animals and astrological signs; the phrases, displayed in both English and Spanish, are randomly generated from using sets of four words that allow for 1.2 million possible combinations. The north mezzanine has "The Northern Lights" by Bill Bell, a series of 24 embedded lights that form patterns when the eyes of viewers move rapidly from side to side. The patterns include images related to transportation and finance, including trolleys, airplanes, coins and the dollar sign.

Two of the station's entrances and stairways are home to the silhouettes of and sentence-long quotes from Abraham H. Albertson, architect of the nearby Seattle Tower, and humanitarian activist Flo Ware. At the corner of 3rd Avenue and University Street is a 14-foot-tall (4.3 m) pendulum clock known as "Hickory-Dickory Dock Clock", designed by Heather Ramsay with references to the nursery rhyme "Hickory Dickory Dock", including a brass mouse running up its side.

The Benaroya Hall entrance to University Street station, built in 1998 for the new venue, is decorated with a series of art pieces by Erin Shie Palmer known collectively as the "Temple of Music". The walkway's walls are sandblasted with images that begin as an abstract musical score derived from Robert Fludd's "Temple of Music" and morph into pixellated patterns as it approaches the station mezzanine. The walkway's handrails are etched with Braille text and voiceprints, and end in sculpted depictions of a violin and a microphone.

The station's pictogram, a pair of theater spectacles, represents the neighborhood's connections to the arts. It was created in 2009 by Christian French as part of the Stellar Connections series and its points represent nearby destinations, including Benaroya Hall, the Seattle Art Museum, the Central Library, and the 5th Avenue Theatre.

## Services

University Street station is part of the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel, which is served by the 1 Line of Sound Transit's Link light rail network. It runs from Northgate to the University of Washington campus, Downtown Seattle, the Rainier Valley, and Seattle–Tacoma International Airport. University Street is the twelfth northbound station from Angle Lake and sixth southbound station from Northgate, the line's two termini, and is situated between Pioneer Square and Westlake stations. Link trains serve University Street twenty hours a day on weekdays and Saturdays, from 5:00 am to 1:00 am, and eighteen hours on Sundays, from 6:00 am to 12:00 am; during regular weekday service, trains operate roughly every eight to ten minutes during rush hour and midday operation, respectively, with longer headways of fifteen minutes in the early morning and twenty minutes at night. During weekends, Link trains arrive at University Street station every ten minutes during midday hours and every fifteen minutes during mornings and evenings. The station is approximately 35 minutes from SeaTac/Airport station and three minutes from Westlake station. In 2019, an average of 6,167 passengers boarded Link trains at University Street station on weekdays.

In addition to light rail service, University Street station is adjacent to four surface bus stops on 3rd Avenue near its entrances, served by several King County Metro routes and three RapidRide lines: the C Line to West Seattle and South Lake Union, the D Line to Ballard and the E Line on Aurora Avenue North to Shoreline. The area is also served by two east–west routes (routes 2 and 12) that travel towards First Hill and eastern Seattle. During light rail disruptions, King County Metro also runs a special route between light rail stations that stops on 3rd Avenue between University and Union streets to serve University Street station.

From 2009 to 2019, several bus routes also ran in the tunnel alongside Link light rail. The final set of bus routes in the tunnel were divided into three bays by their outbound direction: Bay A was served by three routes heading north toward Northgate and the University District and east towards Kirkland (routes 41, 74, and 255); Bay C was served by three routes heading south through the SODO Busway toward Kent and Renton (routes 101, 102, and 150); and Bay D was served by one route heading east via Interstate 90 to Bellevue (Sound Transit Express route 550). The bus routes were relocated in March 2019 to new stops on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th avenues to serve the University Street station area.

Light rail station in Seattle, Washington

1990 establishments in Washington (state)

Railway stations in the United States opened in 2009

Railway stations located underground in Seattle