The Great Arab Conquests (17 page)
Read The Great Arab Conquests Online
Authors: Hugh Kennedy
The most vigorous resistance the Muslims encountered was in the cities of the Syrian and Palestinian coasts. These had always been the areas in which Greek civilization was most firmly established and most deeply entrenched. It was also because the Byzantines were able to resupply and reinforce these towns from the sea. The Byzantine forces in Palestine had largely withdrawn to Egypt, but Gaza and Caesarea still held out. Gaza had been the scene of the first encounter between Amr b. al-Ās and the Byzantines at the very beginning of the conquest, and it seems that he now returned to the city and succeeded in taking it. It was natural from that position that his thoughts should turn to Egypt, with which Gaza had such close connections.
Further up the coast, the strongest resistance was in the city of Caesarea. While Gaza has been continuously inhabited and built over so that very few traces of its classical past have survived, Caesarea is largely deserted and the outlines of the ancient city, founded by Herod the Great (73-4 BC) as a window on the Mediterranean world, can still be seen. The city remained prosperous into the sixth century, with new residential quarters laid out between the great monuments of the classical period. Down by the harbour, an elegant octagonal church overlooked the quays and docks. It seems that the city held out for some years, possibly as late as 641, five years after the defeat of the Byzantine forces at the battle of Yarmūk, and we are told that it fell only when one of the Jewish inhabitants showed the Muslims how to enter through a concealed water channel. It is said that the man who led the conquering army was Mu
c
āwiya b. Abī Sufyān. If so, it was a first military triumph for the man who was to become, twenty years later, the first Umayyad caliph and who was to rule the entire Muslim world from his base in Damascus. Because they had resisted so long and the city had been taken by storm, many of the inhabitants were enslaved and taken to the Hijaz where, we are told, they worked as secretaries and labourers for the Muslims (
fi’l-kuttb wa’l-a
c
ml li’l-Muslimīn
).
46
Perhaps we see here the beginnings of the Muslim appropriation of Greek culture, so characteristic of the early Islamic period.
c
āwiya b. Abī Sufyān. If so, it was a first military triumph for the man who was to become, twenty years later, the first Umayyad caliph and who was to rule the entire Muslim world from his base in Damascus. Because they had resisted so long and the city had been taken by storm, many of the inhabitants were enslaved and taken to the Hijaz where, we are told, they worked as secretaries and labourers for the Muslims (
fi’l-kuttb wa’l-a
c
ml li’l-Muslimīn
).
46
Perhaps we see here the beginnings of the Muslim appropriation of Greek culture, so characteristic of the early Islamic period.
In Latakia, modern Syria’s largest port, the inhabitants closed the great gate of their city walls against the invaders. The Arabs are said to have made a great effort and dug ditches deep enough to conceal a man and a horse. Then they pretended to be retiring to Homs. When night fell, they returned to their hiding places. In the morning the inhabitants opened the gate to drive their cattle out to the pastures; this was obviously a very agricultural town. The Arabs emerged suddenly from their hiding places and forced the gate, taking possession of the city. Here the inhabitants were allowed to keep the whole of their church and the Muslims built a new mosque for themselves.
47
The cities of Lebanon, Beirut, Tyre and Sidon put up no resistance. Only at Tripoli did the Byzantines hold out for a long time and, supplied from the sea, the city was defended until the beginning of the reign of the caliph Uthmān in 644. The Muslims built a small fortress outside the walls to keep watch on the inhabitants and finally they woke up one day to find that the defenders had all been evacuated overnight in Byzantine ships.
48
Its fall meant the final end of Byzantine control of any part of the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean.
47
The cities of Lebanon, Beirut, Tyre and Sidon put up no resistance. Only at Tripoli did the Byzantines hold out for a long time and, supplied from the sea, the city was defended until the beginning of the reign of the caliph Uthmān in 644. The Muslims built a small fortress outside the walls to keep watch on the inhabitants and finally they woke up one day to find that the defenders had all been evacuated overnight in Byzantine ships.
48
Its fall meant the final end of Byzantine control of any part of the eastern seaboard of the Mediterranean.
There was one city whose conquest was more of symbolic than military importance, and that was Jerusalem. The city had great significance for the early Muslims, as the first focus for their prayers and later as the site from which Muhammad is said to have begun the famous night journey on which the secrets of the heavens were revealed to him. Jerusalem at the end of the sixth century was a thriving centre of pilgrimage and ecclesiastical administration. The walls enclosed roughly the same area as the Old City today. We have an unusual insight into the appearance of the cityscape because of a document known as the Madaba map.
49
This is a mosaic map of the Holy Land laid on the floor of a church in the little Jordanian town of Madaba, probably at the end of the sixth century. The city of Jerusalem figures prominently in it. We can see the classical colonnaded streets, which follow the same route as the main streets of the Old City do today. We can see the walls and tower and the great church of the Holy Sepulchre, marking the site where Christ was crucified, buried and rose again. We can also see the great New Church, the Nea, built by the emperor Justinian as part of his campaign to beautify the city. Excavation since 1967 has recovered the foundations of the church and the new street that led to it, confirming the accuracy of the map. There is one area of the city which the map does not tell us about, the Temple Mount. This is the vast platform where Herod’s temple had stood and which had probably been empty since the Romans destroyed the temple in AD 70. Sixty years after the Muslim conquest, the Umayyad caliph Abd al-Malik was to build the Dome of the Rock on the spot, generally regarded as the third most holy place in Sunni Islam after Mecca and Medina. It would be fascinating to know what, if anything, Umar found on the site but, tantalizingly, the mosaic has been destroyed just at the point where the temple platform should be: if the accident of survival had spared another few centimetres of the ancient tesserae, we might have an answer to this question.
49
This is a mosaic map of the Holy Land laid on the floor of a church in the little Jordanian town of Madaba, probably at the end of the sixth century. The city of Jerusalem figures prominently in it. We can see the classical colonnaded streets, which follow the same route as the main streets of the Old City do today. We can see the walls and tower and the great church of the Holy Sepulchre, marking the site where Christ was crucified, buried and rose again. We can also see the great New Church, the Nea, built by the emperor Justinian as part of his campaign to beautify the city. Excavation since 1967 has recovered the foundations of the church and the new street that led to it, confirming the accuracy of the map. There is one area of the city which the map does not tell us about, the Temple Mount. This is the vast platform where Herod’s temple had stood and which had probably been empty since the Romans destroyed the temple in AD 70. Sixty years after the Muslim conquest, the Umayyad caliph Abd al-Malik was to build the Dome of the Rock on the spot, generally regarded as the third most holy place in Sunni Islam after Mecca and Medina. It would be fascinating to know what, if anything, Umar found on the site but, tantalizingly, the mosaic has been destroyed just at the point where the temple platform should be: if the accident of survival had spared another few centimetres of the ancient tesserae, we might have an answer to this question.
The man in charge of Jerusalem was the newly appointed patriarch, Sophronius. He was a Greek churchman, educated and sophisticated, with a lively contempt for the rude Bedouin. For Sophronius, the appearance of the Arabs was a sign of God’s anger at the sins of the Christian people. In a fiery sermon he berated them: ‘Whence occur wars against us? Whence multiply barbarian invasions? Whence rise up the ranks of the Saracens against us? Whence increases so much destruction and plundering? Whence comes the unceasing shedding of human blood? Whence the birds of the heavens devour human bodies? Whence is the cross mocked? Whence is Christ Himself, the giver of all good things and our provider of light, blasphemed by barbarian mouths?’ ‘The Saracens’, he went on, ‘have risen up unexpectedly against us because of our sins and ravaged everything with violent and beastly impulse and with impious and ungodly boldness.’
50
This is the authentic voice of high Greek culture, appalled and dismayed about the Muslim conquest of Syria.
50
This is the authentic voice of high Greek culture, appalled and dismayed about the Muslim conquest of Syria.
Despite his contempt and loathing for the Arabs, the military circumstances meant that Sophronius had no alternative but to negotiate with them. He did insist, however, that he would surrender the city only to the caliph Umar himself. The surrender of Jerusalem became the subject of history and legend, and a quarry of examples for those who wanted to argue points about Muslim-Christian relations.
The opportunity came when Umar visited Syria. As usual with the Arabic sources there is considerable confusion about when he did this and, indeed, whether there was one visit or several.
51
The most likely scenario is that the caliph came to Jābiya in 637 or 638 and while he was staying there, dealing with a wide range of administrative matters, a delegation from the city arrived to make terms. They came on horseback, wielding swords, and some in the Muslim camp assumed they were hostile raiders. But the caliph, preternaturally wise as always, was able to reassure them that they were only coming to negotiate. The purported text of the agreement that was reached has come down to us:
51
The most likely scenario is that the caliph came to Jābiya in 637 or 638 and while he was staying there, dealing with a wide range of administrative matters, a delegation from the city arrived to make terms. They came on horseback, wielding swords, and some in the Muslim camp assumed they were hostile raiders. But the caliph, preternaturally wise as always, was able to reassure them that they were only coming to negotiate. The purported text of the agreement that was reached has come down to us:
In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate. This is the assurance of safety [
amn
] which the servant of God Umar, the Com mander of the Faithful, has given to the people of Jerusalem. He has given them an assurance of safety for themselves, for their property, their churches, their crosses, the sick and healthy of the city and for all the rituals which belong to their religion. Their churches will not be inhabited by Muslims and will not be destroyed. Neither they, nor the land on which they stand, nor their cross, nor their property will be damaged. They will not be forcibly converted. No Jew will live with them in Jerusalem.The people of Jerusalem must pay the taxes (
jizya
) like the people of other cities and must expel the Byzantines and the robbers. Those of the people of Jerusalem who want to leave with the Byzantines, take their property and abandon their churches and crosses will be safe until the reach their place of refuge. The villagers [
ahl al-ard
, who had taken refuge in the city at the time of the conquest] may remain in the city if they wish but must pay taxes like the citizens. Those who wish may go with the Byzantines and those who wish may return to their families. Nothing is to be taken from them before their harvest is reaped.If they pay their taxes according to their obligations, then the conditions laid out in this letter are under the covenant of God, are the responsibility of His Prophet, of the caliphs and of the faithful.
52
There then follows a list of witnesses including Khālid b. al-Walīd, Amr b. al-Ās and the future caliph Mu
c
āwiya b. Abī Sufyān.
c
āwiya b. Abī Sufyān.
Whether the text really is that agreed by Umar, or an ancient fabrication, we cannot be sure, but it gives a clear impression of how the Muslims should respond to their newly conquered Christian subjects. The fact that it bore the name of Umar undoubtedly gave it added weight and authority. The emphasis on the security of religion is not surprising, given the particular status of Jerusalem. Rather more unexpected is the provision that Jews are not to be allowed to settle in the city. This prohibition had been a feature of Roman law and the fact that a Muslim source records it suggests that the Christian negotiators had played a strong hand. Some of the clauses throw interesting light on the circumstances of the city. The provision made for Greek officials to leave points to an emigration of the upper and official classes, and the clauses about the country people who have come to the city are a clear reflection of contemporary circumstances.
Umar then visited the city in person. The fullest account of his visit is given in the Christian Arabic chronicle of Sa
c
īd b. Batrīq, also known by his Christian name of Eutychius.
53
Writing in the eleventh century, he preserved traditions intended to show how Umar had safeguarded the position of the Christians in the Holy City. According to his account, Sophronius welcomed Umar to the city and the people were given guarantees about their property and freedom of religious observance. When it was the time for prayer, the patriarch suggested that the caliph should pray in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre itself, but Umar refused because he said that if he did, the Muslims would take it as a shrine and it would be lost to the Christians. He then issued a document in which the Muslims were forbidden to pray in the precincts of the church and, as a result, the church has remained in Christian hands ever since. Umar then requested a site to build a mosque and the patriarch took him by the hand to the rock on the platform where Herod’s temple had once stood. The narrative is clearly fashioned to make it clear that the status of the Christians in Jerualem was based on the unimpeachable authority of Umar himself.
c
īd b. Batrīq, also known by his Christian name of Eutychius.
53
Writing in the eleventh century, he preserved traditions intended to show how Umar had safeguarded the position of the Christians in the Holy City. According to his account, Sophronius welcomed Umar to the city and the people were given guarantees about their property and freedom of religious observance. When it was the time for prayer, the patriarch suggested that the caliph should pray in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre itself, but Umar refused because he said that if he did, the Muslims would take it as a shrine and it would be lost to the Christians. He then issued a document in which the Muslims were forbidden to pray in the precincts of the church and, as a result, the church has remained in Christian hands ever since. Umar then requested a site to build a mosque and the patriarch took him by the hand to the rock on the platform where Herod’s temple had once stood. The narrative is clearly fashioned to make it clear that the status of the Christians in Jerualem was based on the unimpeachable authority of Umar himself.
In the Arabic tradition, Umar was guided by one Ka
c
b b. Abhar, a Jew who was converted to Islam and is said to have introduced many stories and traditions about the Jews into the new religion. In response to the caliph’s question, Ka
c
b suggested that the rock, which sticks up in the centre of the platform, should be the direction of their prayer on that day, but Umar rejected this, making it clear that God had reserved this role for the Ka
c
ba in Mecca. Umar was well aware that the site marked the position of the Jewish temple which had been destroyed by the Romans after the great Jewish rebellion in AD 70 and had been left as a rubbish tip in Byzantine times. He set about clearing the site himself and the people followed his example. He may have ordered the erection of a simple place of prayer. Certainly when the European Christian pilgrim Arculf visited Jerusalem after the Muslim conquest but before the beginning of the building of the Dome of the Rock in 685, he found a basic place of worship there. It is for this reason that the Dome is sometimes quite misleadingly referred to as the mosque of Umar (or Omar).
c
b b. Abhar, a Jew who was converted to Islam and is said to have introduced many stories and traditions about the Jews into the new religion. In response to the caliph’s question, Ka
c
b suggested that the rock, which sticks up in the centre of the platform, should be the direction of their prayer on that day, but Umar rejected this, making it clear that God had reserved this role for the Ka
c
ba in Mecca. Umar was well aware that the site marked the position of the Jewish temple which had been destroyed by the Romans after the great Jewish rebellion in AD 70 and had been left as a rubbish tip in Byzantine times. He set about clearing the site himself and the people followed his example. He may have ordered the erection of a simple place of prayer. Certainly when the European Christian pilgrim Arculf visited Jerusalem after the Muslim conquest but before the beginning of the building of the Dome of the Rock in 685, he found a basic place of worship there. It is for this reason that the Dome is sometimes quite misleadingly referred to as the mosque of Umar (or Omar).
By 640 the whole of Syria, apart from one or two coastal towns, had come under Islamic rule. The northern boundary of Muslim rule was established at Antioch, the ancient city of Cyrrhus and Manbij. Garrisons were established and the local people enjoined to let the Muslims know of any approaching Byzantine forces. For the moment, however, the Byzantines were too devastated by defeat, the death of Heraclius in February 641 and the subsequent struggles for succession to the imperial title to be able to mount any sort of counter-offensive.
The completion of the conquest of Syria opened the way for Muslim armies to cross the Euphrates and begin the conquest of the Jazira. The Arabic word
jazīra
means ‘island’ but since the seventh century the term has been used to describe the ‘island’ between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the lands of modern Syria and Iraq. To the north, the Jazira was bordered by the mountains of the Anti-Taurus in south-east Anatolia, the border running more or less along the modern Turkish frontier. The landscape is mostly flat open plains and desert. A recent historian notes: ‘the Jazira is rather like the Mediterranean, an ocean of steppe punctuated by archipelagos of river valleys and hills and settled unevenly on its shores’.
54
There is a natural unity to this area and communications are quick and easy, but at the time of the Muslim conquest it was divided between Byzantine territory in the west and Sasanian lands in the east, with the frontier near the ancient city of Nisibis, more or less along the line of the modern Syria-Iraq border. This division determined the way in which it was conquered, Muslim forces from Syria taking the lands on the Byzantine side of the frontier, forces from Iraq taking the ex-Sasanian lands further to the east.
jazīra
means ‘island’ but since the seventh century the term has been used to describe the ‘island’ between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in the lands of modern Syria and Iraq. To the north, the Jazira was bordered by the mountains of the Anti-Taurus in south-east Anatolia, the border running more or less along the modern Turkish frontier. The landscape is mostly flat open plains and desert. A recent historian notes: ‘the Jazira is rather like the Mediterranean, an ocean of steppe punctuated by archipelagos of river valleys and hills and settled unevenly on its shores’.
54
There is a natural unity to this area and communications are quick and easy, but at the time of the Muslim conquest it was divided between Byzantine territory in the west and Sasanian lands in the east, with the frontier near the ancient city of Nisibis, more or less along the line of the modern Syria-Iraq border. This division determined the way in which it was conquered, Muslim forces from Syria taking the lands on the Byzantine side of the frontier, forces from Iraq taking the ex-Sasanian lands further to the east.
Other books
Lilia's Secret by Erina Reddan
The Texan's Tennessee Romance by Gina Wilkins
Primal Scream by Michael Slade
Ephemeral (The Countenance) by Moore, Addison
The McClane Apocalypse: Book One by Kate Morris
The Dark Pearl Chronicles 1.1: Battle of the Half-Brothers by Donaldson, Levi
Tequila Mockingbird by Rhys Ford
Four Weddings and a Fiasco: The Wedding Caper by Patricia McLinn
The God Complex: A Thriller by McDonald, Murray
Egg-Drop Blues by Jacqueline Turner Banks