Though the Tabula Rogerianais incredibly accurate for the time period, mapping ibn Fadlan’s journey onto it has significantly altered the visual representation of his journey. On the modern map, ibn Fadlan’s path takes him much further North that it does East. His journey takes an abrupt turn at Bukhara where the main direction of travel transition from East to North. In the medieval map, however, ibn Fadlan’s journey takes him farther East than it does North, completely altering the perspective of the viewer as to which direction was more applicable. On the medieval map, ibn Fadlan’s travels are more aptly described as his travels East, whereas on the modern map, he mostly traveled North.
As such, in the medieval map, the Caspian Sea, or bahr al hozaras it is labeled on the Tabula Rogeriana, appears to be a significantly more relevant landmark for ibn Fadlan as his journey appears to more closely circumvent the body of water. Ibn Fadlan appears far closer to the Caspian Sea at the Northern most point of his travels, having passed more or less around the circumference of the Caspian Sea. In the modern map, however, the Caspian Sea has no impact on his actual path and is much further West and South of his journey than it appears in the medieval map.
Finally, the proper South-up orientation of the Tabula Rogerianadepicts ibn Fadlan’s travels as going down around the Caspian Sea instead of up into the treacherous mountains and rivers of what is now called Russia, relatively close to Moscow. Not only does this shift the visualization of his journey, but the end of the Northern side of the medieval map cuts off the top of that northern Eurasian landmass, about halfway through what is today’s Russia. Ibn Fadlan’s final destination, Bulghar, is incredibly close to this northern edge of the map, making it appear as though he traveled nearly to the most northern, or bottom, edge of the world. This greatly contrasts with the modern map, which reveals that he made it just about half way through Russia at the western edge, far from the Barents Sea. As such, ibn Fadlan’s journey appears to take him to the edge of the known world on the Tabula Rogeriana, while on the modern map, his travels take him significantly north, but well within the confines of the Eurasian landmass.
Ibn Fadlan does not decisively say precisely when he enters Bulghar, but he does relate the crossing of many rivers on his journey there, after which he tells of how he interacts with the King of the X. He recounts his failure to deliver the money his journey was intended to do, reminding the reader that he had “warned [his companions] about this [situation]” (29).
Ibn Fadlan also describes the northern lights, which he counts as one of “uncounted marvels”(31). He is also struck by the people’s relationship with the vast number of snakes in the area, which he recounts as “twisted about…tree[s]” but emphasizes that they “do no harm” (33). Ibn Fadlan also describes evergreen trees, saying how they are “narrow leaves like palms, but grouped together,” commenting on how the “trunk is leafless.” (34).
Most troublesome to him, however, is the shortness of the nights, which make for a difficult prayer routine. He relates the tale of the muezzin, who says that “a month earlier, he had not slept at night, for fear of missing the dawn prayer” (32). The varying lengths of day and night create an obvious strain on the Muslim prayer rituals, which is reflected in this passage of ibn Fadlan’s travel narrative.
In Bulghar, ibn Fadlan also encounters the Rūs, or, as we know them today, the Vikings, who travel down the River Itil for trading purposes. Interestingly, ibn Fadlan says that he has “never seen bodies more perfect than theirs” while also describing them as the “filthiest of God’s creatures” (45, 46). This apparent contradiction of beauty within filthy disgustingness indicates that hygiene and appearance are utterly distinct and separated from the idea of the “perfect body.” Unlike today, beauty and cleanliness were not nearly as closely associated in ibn Fadlan’s time as this description on the Rūs demonstrates.
In addition to describing their lack of hygienic habits, mainly the absence of ritual washing, ibn Fadlan juxtaposes the “filthi[ness]” of the Rūs with their habit of public sex with slave girls. Ibn Fadlan writes that when “slave girls’ are on sale for the merchants at Bulghar, “each of the men has sex with his slave, while his companions look on. Sometimes a whole group of them gather together in this way, in full view of one another. If a merchange enters at this moment to buy a young slave girl from one of the men and finds him having sex with her, the man does not get up off her until he has satisfied himself” (47). This passage immediately follows ibn Fadlan’s observations around the filthiness of the Rūs, implying that their public sex is a part of or, at the very least, related to their filthiness.
This perception is very much in line with ibn Fadlan’s previous observations and outrage at women bearing their genitals, however, in describing the Rūs, the Arabic traveller takes on a more neutral, objective tone. Perhaps the habits and customs of the Rūs are so astonishing that ibn Fadlan feels that the facts alone speak for themselves, in the eyes of a Muslim audience, or perhaps ibn Fadlan respects the Rūs for their strength and beauty, counteracting his previous judgmental writing on other non-Muslim communities. Either way, there is something about the Rūs that captivates ibn Fadlan and consumes a significant portion of his travel narrative, reflecting his interest in other cultures and people.
When Ibn Fadlan reaches Khwarazm, he first describes the weather. It is incredibly cold because of winter, which he admits to being warned about, and yet he still travels to the city of Khawarzm via boat. In fact, he writes, “it was impossible to travel all day because of the intense cold,” (6).
Once he arrives in Khwarazm, Ibn Fadlan goes directly to see the ruler of the “town, the Khwarazm Shah Muhammad ibn ‘Iraq,” who lodges him in a house (7). Three days later, Ibn Fadlan is “summoned” to discuss his intent to visit the land of the Turks, which Ibn ‘Iraq is strictly against and refuses Ibn Fadlan permission. He claims that “this is all a trick” and that “between the country of which you speak and where you are now, there are a thousand tribes of unbelievers,” (7). Ibn Fadlan continues to request permission to continue, which eventually, Ibn ‘Iraq grants, however reluctantly.
While still on the topic of Khwarazm, Ibn Fadlan briefly mentions the monetary systems of the city as well as the language, which he describes as sounding like “the cries of starlings” as well as the language of a nearby village in which ‘their speech sounds exactly like the croaking of frogs,” (8). Ibn Fadlan also finds it prudent to mention that these people “deny the legitimacy of the Commander of the Faithful…at the end of each prayer” (8).
The tie between religion and safety is evident in this passage, particularly in the statement of Ibn ‘Iraq when he warns Ibn Fadlan of the “thousand tribes of unbelievers” he would have to travail in order to continue his journey. The juxtaposition of Ibn Fadlan’s journey as a “trick” paired with the statement and reasoning that he cannot continue because of these “unbelievers” suggests that there is danger in passing through a territory of non-Muslims, especially for a Muslim traveler such as Ibn Fadlan. This also implies that there is an assumed level of safety guaranteed by passing through Muslim territory. Not only does this statement on behalf of the ruler of Khwarazm signify unity and cohesion within the Islamic Empire, but it also illustrates the fear of other, non-Muslim religions. The view of the “unbelievers” is rooted in both a fear of those not like themselves as well as a degraded, prejudiced view of those who are not Muslim. Though we later learn that Ibn Fadlan fares well in the land of the Turks, both Ghuzz and Bashghird, there is the underlying sense of fear and judgment that he carries with him, based almost exclusively on religious practices and cultural differences that directly or indirectly oppose those of Islam.
Ironically, though, Ibn Fadlan likens the language of the Khwarazm people to the sounds of animals, both starlings and frogs, displaying a degree of disrespect for them, despite the presumed alliance between himself and their ruler. He describes them as “the most barbarous of people, both in speech and customs,” and although we do get a description of what he finds so “barbarous” in their speech, he gives us no hints towards customs, so one can only imagine that he is referring to their denial of “the legitimacy of the Commander of the Faithful…at the end of each prayer,” (7, 8). This perception would fall in line with Ibn Fadlan’s trend of disregarding people who do not practice the same rites that he hold dear, and even a small difference such as this leads him to label them as “barbarous.”