The Great Arab Conquests (27 page)
Read The Great Arab Conquests Online
Authors: Hugh Kennedy
It was against this background, that of a very recently reinstated Roman administration and the sharp divisions between Romans and Copts, that the Muslim conquest of Egypt began. As Cyrus attempted, with little success, to impose his will on Egypt, the Muslim conquests were gathering pace in Syria. By 636, when Gaza and most of the coast of Palestine were in their hands, the authorities in Alexandria must have been seriously concerned. Reactions to this new menace were mixed. Cyrus was prepared to offer tribute to the Muslims in exchange for a non-aggression pact, and even suggested that a marriage alliance should be made between the emperor’s daughter Eudokia and Amr b. al-Ās, commander of Muslim forces in southern Palestine, after which Amr, like so many other barbarians in Byzantine history, would be baptized, ‘for Amr and his army had confidence in Cyrus and regarded him with affection’.
21
Tribute may indeed have been paid in the period between the loss of Syria and the Muslim invasion of Egypt. In 639 or possibly 640 Heraclius’s policy changed. He denounced the treaty made by Cyrus and replaced the patriarch/governor with a military man who was given instructions to organize a more robust defence. Cyrus was sent into exile in Cyprus and Constantinople, protesting in a public hearing that if his plan had gone ahead and he had raised taxes for the Arabs by a tax on trade, they would have remained at peace. The suspension of the payment of tribute seems to have been the immediate trigger of the Muslim invasion.
22
21
Tribute may indeed have been paid in the period between the loss of Syria and the Muslim invasion of Egypt. In 639 or possibly 640 Heraclius’s policy changed. He denounced the treaty made by Cyrus and replaced the patriarch/governor with a military man who was given instructions to organize a more robust defence. Cyrus was sent into exile in Cyprus and Constantinople, protesting in a public hearing that if his plan had gone ahead and he had raised taxes for the Arabs by a tax on trade, they would have remained at peace. The suspension of the payment of tribute seems to have been the immediate trigger of the Muslim invasion.
22
The Egyptian-Arabic accounts of the conquest begin with a legend about Amr b. al-Ās discovering the wealth of Egypt at first hand. Before the Muslim conquests began, he had come with a group from Quraysh to trade in Jerusalem. They took it in turns to pasture their camels on the hills around the city. One day, when it was Amr’s turn to do this, he came across a deacon, wandering in the hills. It was very hot and the deacon was half dead from thirst. Amr gave him a drink from his waterskin and the deacon then lay down and went to sleep. As he lay there, a huge snake emerged from a hole next to where he lay. Amr saw the snake and shot it with an arrow and killed it. When the deacon woke up, he asked what had happened. When Amr explained, the deacon was overwhelmed that his man had saved his life, not once but twice, both from dying of thirst and from the snake. He asked what Amr was doing and Amr explained that he was trading, hoping to make enough money to acquire a third camel to add to his two existing ones. The deacon asked how much blood money would be offered among Amr’s people for saving another man’s life, and was told that it would be one hundred camels, to which he replied that they had no camels in his country, but what would it be in dinars? One thousand was the answer.
The deacon explained that he was a stranger to the country, that he had come to pray at the church of the Holy Sepulchre and to spend a month in the wilderness in accordance with an oath he had taken. He was now going home, and he invited Amr to come with him, promising that he would be given double blood money when he got there.
So Amr left his companions and went off to Egypt, and was astonished by the size, prosperity and architecture of the city of Alexandria, where the deacon brought him. He was duly rewarded by the deacon, who then appointed a guide to lead him back to his companions in Jerusalem, now vividly aware of the wealth Egypt and Alexandria could offer.
We would be right to be very sceptical about the details of this story, but it makes the point that Amr, possibly alone among the early Muslim military leaders, knew something of Egypt and the opportunities it afforded. He seems to have consulted the caliph Umar in person, possibly when he came to Jābiya on his visit to Syria, about his plan to invade Egypt. Umar gave his consent to the project, although there are indications that he had his doubts about it. Amr set out with a force of between 3,500 and 4,000 men, chosen from tribes, notably the tribe of Akk, whose members lived in the Yemen, in the villages of the Tihāma plain along the shores of the Red Sea. These were not the tent-dwelling nomads of the Arabian and Syrian steppe, but men who lived in reed or brushwood huts by the coast, or in the stone houses of the mountain villages, and who tilled the fields. They were usually physically smaller and slighter than the Bedouin of the steppes, but just as tough and hardy. They were also used to a settled life, if not in towns at least in villages, and would not have brought flocks that needed to be pastured; in many ways they might have found the towns and villages of the delta and the Nile valley a familiar environment, though there was nothing in their native land to compare with the splendours of Alexandria.
It was an extremely bold undertaking. This tiny army would have to cross Sinai and then, in the unfamiliar territory of the delta, defeat the local Byzantine army and take a number of well-fortified cities. They would be far from help if things went wrong. According to one well-known story, the caliph changed his mind and wrote to Amr, saying that if he was already in Egypt he should go on but that if he had not already crossed the frontier he should abandon the project. Amr guessed the contents of the letter and refused to open it until he had reached al-Arīsh, which marked the beginning of Egyptian territory,
23
on 12 December 639.
24
He could then claim that he had the caliph’s sanction for what he was doing.
23
on 12 December 639.
24
He could then claim that he had the caliph’s sanction for what he was doing.
The small army followed the ancient road along the coast to Egypt. As Butler remarks, ‘It was the immemorial high road to Egypt, the road which had witnessed the passage of the first prehistoric settlers in Egypt, the passage of Abraham, of Jacob and Joseph, of Cambyses, Alexander and Cleopatra, of the Holy Family and lately of the Persian invaders.’
25
25
The first town of any consequence was Farāma, ancient Pelusium, which lay near the coast just to the east of Port Said. The site is now uninhabited but it was important in pharaonic and Roman times. The fragmentary illustration in the Madaba map shows a town with colonnaded streets, surrounded by a wall with towers. The Romans in Egypt must have been aware of the earlier Arab conquest of Palestine, if only from the refugees who arrived from there, but Farāma seems not to have had a strong garrison. The Arabs besieged it for a month before taking it, but we have no real details of the conflict.
The arrival of the Muslims seems to have been seen by at least some of the Copts as an opportunity to cast off the authority of the hated Romans. Butler was shrilly dismissive of the idea that the Copts helped the Muslims at all, and says that the idea is only to be found in very late sources,
26
but his affection for the Copts and the absence of any edition of Ibn Abd al-Hakam clouded his judgement. (Ibn Abd al-Hakam, who certainly reflected eighth-century perceptions among the Arabs, makes a sharp distinction between the Copts and the ‘Rūm’. While the Rūm were the chief enemies of the Muslims, men with whom no compromise was possible, the Copts played a more ambiguous role.) He says that when the Arabs arrived, the Coptic patriarch Benjamin wrote to his followers saying that Roman rule had come to an end and ordering them to go to meet Amr. As a result the Copts of Farāma were an active (
a
c
wna
) help to Amr in the siege.
27
26
but his affection for the Copts and the absence of any edition of Ibn Abd al-Hakam clouded his judgement. (Ibn Abd al-Hakam, who certainly reflected eighth-century perceptions among the Arabs, makes a sharp distinction between the Copts and the ‘Rūm’. While the Rūm were the chief enemies of the Muslims, men with whom no compromise was possible, the Copts played a more ambiguous role.) He says that when the Arabs arrived, the Coptic patriarch Benjamin wrote to his followers saying that Roman rule had come to an end and ordering them to go to meet Amr. As a result the Copts of Farāma were an active (
a
c
wna
) help to Amr in the siege.
27
The Muslims then marched up the eastern side of the delta, probably keeping to the desert rather than being delayed by the canals and villages of the settled lands. At Bilbays the Byzantines put up some resistance and it took a month to reduce the town. They then went on to Umm Dunayn, probably on the Nile to the north of modern Cairo. According to the Egyptian tradition, the Byzantines had fortified themselves in an earthwork with gates and had scattered iron caltrops (
hasak hadīd
) in the open spaces. The fighting was hard and victory was slow.
28
After the victory, Amr distributed some modest rewards to his followers: a dinar, a
jubba
, a
burns
, a turban and two pairs of shoes. The
jubba
and the
burns
were typically Egyptian garments: the Yemenis were beginning to adopt the customs of the country.
29
hasak hadīd
) in the open spaces. The fighting was hard and victory was slow.
28
After the victory, Amr distributed some modest rewards to his followers: a dinar, a
jubba
, a
burns
, a turban and two pairs of shoes. The
jubba
and the
burns
were typically Egyptian garments: the Yemenis were beginning to adopt the customs of the country.
29
What happened after the hard-won victory at Umm Dunayn is not clear. For the Muslims, the main objective must have been the great fortress of Babylon (Old Cairo), strongly held by a Byzantine garrison. But Amr may have felt that this was beyond his power until he received reinforcements from Arabia. It is at this point that the Christian source, John of Nikiu, takes up the story (the pages that may have described the first Arab incursions being lost). According to him, Amr decided to bypass the fortress until reinforcements arrived from Arabia and to move south to the fertile oasis of the Fayyum. From Umm Dunayn he crossed the River Nile and marched past the pyramids and the ruins of the ancient Egyptian capital of Memphis, through the palm groves and fields of the Nile valley to the entrance of the Fayyum. The Fayyum is a large oasis about 70 kilometres south-east of Cairo. In Roman times it was famous for its grain production, and it must have been a tempting target for Amr and his men as they waited for reinforcements.
Amr’s expedition to the Fayyum is not recorded in any of the Arabic sources, but is described by John of Nikiu.
30
Access to the oasis was defended by the local garrison and the Arabs seem to have been unable to penetrate very far, contenting themselves with seizing sheep and goats from the high ground on the edge of the cultivated area. They did take the little town of Bahnasā, however, which they sacked, slaughtering all the men, women and children they came across. Amr’s movements were being shadowed by the commander of the local militia, called John, with about fifty men, but Amr discovered their presence. The Byzantine forces tried to escape to their fortress at Abwit, travelling by night and hiding up in the gardens and palm groves by day. They were betrayed by a local man, however, surrounded and all killed. John was drowned in the river. It seems that Amr then heard of the arrival of the expected reinforcements and made his way back north to begin the assault on the fortress of Babylon.
30
Access to the oasis was defended by the local garrison and the Arabs seem to have been unable to penetrate very far, contenting themselves with seizing sheep and goats from the high ground on the edge of the cultivated area. They did take the little town of Bahnasā, however, which they sacked, slaughtering all the men, women and children they came across. Amr’s movements were being shadowed by the commander of the local militia, called John, with about fifty men, but Amr discovered their presence. The Byzantine forces tried to escape to their fortress at Abwit, travelling by night and hiding up in the gardens and palm groves by day. They were betrayed by a local man, however, surrounded and all killed. John was drowned in the river. It seems that Amr then heard of the arrival of the expected reinforcements and made his way back north to begin the assault on the fortress of Babylon.
The raid on the Fayyum and the death of John seem to have caused consternation among the Byzantines: raiding along the desert margins of the delta was one thing, penetrating into the Nile valley was altogether more serious. The body of the dead John was rescued from the river with a net, embalmed and sent eventually to Constantinople. The emperor Heraclius is said to have been extremely angry at what had happened and the commander of Byzantine forces in Egypt, Theodore, hurried to the Fayyum to see what he could do. Another general called Leontios was sent to the Fayyum to stabilize the defences. According to John of Nikiu, ‘he was obese in person and unacquainted with warlike affairs’, and after leaving half his troops in the oasis, he returned to Babylon. The Fayyum was saved for the empire, but only temporarily.
Meanwhile, Muslim reinforcements were approaching along the eastern side of the delta, just as Amr had done. When he returned from the Fayyum, he had to cross the river again to meet up with them. It was a dangerous moment, but the Byzantine commanders failed to take advantage of their opportunity and Amr successfully joined the newcomers. The new army was said to have numbered 12,000 men,
31
commanded by Zubayr b. al-Awwām. Zubayr had been one of the earliest followers of Muhammad and had great prestige as an early Muslim, but this was Amr’s expedition and there was no doubt that he would remain in charge. Zubayr is described as of medium height, good looking (
hasan al-qma
) with a pale complexion, a thin beard but thick hair on his body. He was brave, even rash, in battle, but Amr was the brains of the whole operation and he remained in overall command.
32
31
commanded by Zubayr b. al-Awwām. Zubayr had been one of the earliest followers of Muhammad and had great prestige as an early Muslim, but this was Amr’s expedition and there was no doubt that he would remain in charge. Zubayr is described as of medium height, good looking (
hasan al-qma
) with a pale complexion, a thin beard but thick hair on his body. He was brave, even rash, in battle, but Amr was the brains of the whole operation and he remained in overall command.
32
The united Muslim armies camped at the ancient city of On (Heliopolis), now a suburb of greater Cairo but then on the fringes of the desert. The city had been of great importance in antiquity but was now largely abandoned: ‘When the Arabs came, little of the ancient grandeur remained beyond some broken walls, and half-buried sphinxes, and the solitary obelisk which stands to this day as a memory of a vanished world.’
33
The site was on high ground and well provided with water. Amr made it his base. Knowing that he lacked the equipment or technical expertise for a siege, he attempted to lure the defenders out of their fortress and engage them in battle in the open country. The main Byzantine force under Theodore advanced towards Heliopolis across the flat lands between the River Nile and the Muqattam hills, where modern Cairo now stands. The two armies probably met in July 640. Amr’s main force engaged the Byzantines but he also sent a small cavalry detachment of some five hundred men through the hills by night so that they could ambush the enemy from the rear. The strategem worked. As the main forces were engaged the ambush party attacked and the Byzantine army was thrown into confusion. Some succeeded in reaching the safety of the walls of Babylon, but many perished as they tried to flee by land and river.
34
33
The site was on high ground and well provided with water. Amr made it his base. Knowing that he lacked the equipment or technical expertise for a siege, he attempted to lure the defenders out of their fortress and engage them in battle in the open country. The main Byzantine force under Theodore advanced towards Heliopolis across the flat lands between the River Nile and the Muqattam hills, where modern Cairo now stands. The two armies probably met in July 640. Amr’s main force engaged the Byzantines but he also sent a small cavalry detachment of some five hundred men through the hills by night so that they could ambush the enemy from the rear. The strategem worked. As the main forces were engaged the ambush party attacked and the Byzantine army was thrown into confusion. Some succeeded in reaching the safety of the walls of Babylon, but many perished as they tried to flee by land and river.
34
The next objective for the invaders was the fortress of Babylon itself. This fortress was a massive product of Roman military engineering,
35
probably built in around AD 100 by the emperor Trajan in response to a Jewish rebellion in Alexandria. It lay at a crucial point at the head of the delta where the Rawda island narrowed the Nile so that it could be crossed on a bridge of boats. The name Babylon, by which it always seems to have been known in ancient times, gave rise to a number of legends about its foundation by Nebuchadnezzar or later refugees or colonists from the original Babylon in Iraq. The Arabs came to know it as Qasr al-Shama, but its old name lingered on in medieval Europe, where the Sultan of Egypt was often known, confusingly, as the Soldan of Babylon. Almost triangular in plan, the great brick and stone walls,12 metres high and almost 3 metres thick, ran along the river bank to the west and through gardens and monastic compounds to the east and north. At the south there was a massive gate flanked by D-shaped towers, known as the Iron Gate, which gave on to the Roman port. Overlooking the river bank there were two more massive towers, 30 metres in diameter. With an area of 5 hectares, it contained about ten churches or monasteries within its walls and a substantial civilian population, as well as the garrison. It may have been over six centuries old at the time of the Muslim invasion, but it had lost nothing of its military strength. Before the early twentieth century the fortifications remained virtually intact, sheltering within their walls Coptic churches and a synagogue. Since then, however, much of the fabric has been demolished, and only traces remain of its ancient grandeur.
35
probably built in around AD 100 by the emperor Trajan in response to a Jewish rebellion in Alexandria. It lay at a crucial point at the head of the delta where the Rawda island narrowed the Nile so that it could be crossed on a bridge of boats. The name Babylon, by which it always seems to have been known in ancient times, gave rise to a number of legends about its foundation by Nebuchadnezzar or later refugees or colonists from the original Babylon in Iraq. The Arabs came to know it as Qasr al-Shama, but its old name lingered on in medieval Europe, where the Sultan of Egypt was often known, confusingly, as the Soldan of Babylon. Almost triangular in plan, the great brick and stone walls,12 metres high and almost 3 metres thick, ran along the river bank to the west and through gardens and monastic compounds to the east and north. At the south there was a massive gate flanked by D-shaped towers, known as the Iron Gate, which gave on to the Roman port. Overlooking the river bank there were two more massive towers, 30 metres in diameter. With an area of 5 hectares, it contained about ten churches or monasteries within its walls and a substantial civilian population, as well as the garrison. It may have been over six centuries old at the time of the Muslim invasion, but it had lost nothing of its military strength. Before the early twentieth century the fortifications remained virtually intact, sheltering within their walls Coptic churches and a synagogue. Since then, however, much of the fabric has been demolished, and only traces remain of its ancient grandeur.
Other books
The Oracle of Stamboul by Michael David Lukas
The Christmas Kite by Gail Gaymer Martin
Hope To Escape by Jack Parker
NOLA by Alexie Aaron
The Lavender Garden by Lucinda Riley
Slayed by Amanda Marrone
Parts Unknown by Rex Burns
El socio by Jenaro Prieto
Stone Cold by Norman Moss
The Mistletoe Effect by Melissa Cutler