The Politics and Culture of an Umayyad Tribe: Conflict and Factionalism in the Early Islamic Period 9780755608317, 9780857724052

Citation preview

Mohammad Rihan is an assistant professor at the Lebanese University. He holds a PhD in Islamic History and Middle Eastern Studies from the University of Cambridge.

THE POLITICS AND CULTURE OF AN UMAYYAD TRIBE Conflict and Factionalism in the Early Islamic Period

Mohammad Rihan

Published in 2014 by I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd 6 Salem Road, London W2 4BU 175 Fifth Avenue, New York NY 10010 www.ibtauris.com Distributed in the United States and Canada Exclusively by Palgrave Macmillan 175 Fifth Avenue, New York NY 10010 Copyright © 2014 Mohammad Rihan The right of Mohammad Rihan to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by the author in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1988. All rights reserved. Except for brief quotations in a review, this book, or any part thereof, may not be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher. Library of Middle East History 41 ISBN: 978 1 78076 564 8 eISBN: 978 0 85773 620 8 ePDF: 978 0 85772 405 2 A full CIP record for this book is available from the British Library A full CIP record for this book is available from the Library of Congress Library of Congress catalog card: available Typeset by Newgen Publishers, Chennai

For Samar, Malek and Sari

CONTENTS

Note on Transliteration Acknowledgements

viii ix

Introduction 1. The Tribe ‘Amila: By Way of a Definition 2. ‘Amila in the Pre-Islamic Period 3. The Role of ‘Amila During the Islamic Conquests 4. ‘Amila Under the Umayyads 5. On ‘Amila, Jabal ‘Amila and Shi‘ism Epilogue

1 5 24 59 84 132 155

Notes Bibliography Index

159 199 217

NOTE ON TR ANSLITER ATION

In this book only ayn (‘) and hamza (’) diacritical marks are included. All Arabic long vowels or emphatic letters were omitted in order to avoid cluttering what should be an easily accessible text. Except in a few cases, all the names, places and cities were written in transliterated forms to avoid any anachronisms. In many cases the word ibn (son) was abbreviated to b. as is usual in academic circles. Transliterated words in quotations from the different sources have not been altered to conform with the system used.

ACK NOWLEDGEMENTS

This book is in origin a Ph.D. dissertation and it owes its publication to Tarif Khalidi for his sincere advice and Gerald Hawting and James Montgomery for their invaluable comments and to Khalid elRuwayhib for his constructive criticism. Special thanks go to the Jafet library staff at the American University of Beirut, to Maria Marsh of I.B.Tauris, to Amely and Hayat Beyhum for their editing skills and to Zeina Gabriel for her efforts in preparing the index. Special affection goes to Tony Nawfal and the late Kamal Salibi for their important remarks and our endless discussions. My deep affection goes to Wolfson College and the Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern studies at the University of Cambridge and to the German Orient Institute for Oriental Studies in Beirut. Finally my sincere acknowledgements go especially to my wife and my father and my late mother, my family and my friends for their endless love and understanding.

INTRODUCTION

Early Islamic political history is to a large extent tribal history. The early conquests were achieved by Arab tribes while the power base of the Sufyanids and the Marwanids consisted of Arab Syrian tribes and the civil wars that marred the Umayyad period were fought among tribal factions. The relatively extensive modern literature on the Umayyad period notwithstanding, our knowledge of the tribal world in the early Islamic period remains confused and incomplete. Despite the painstaking efforts of Arab historians to write ‘exact’ genealogies, confusion reigns in this field. Moreover the paucity of the sources concerning Syria under the Umayyads represents a serious obstacle for a better understanding of that period. This study is mainly an effort to shed some light on the history of the Umayyad tribal world by focusing on one of its Syrian tribes: ‘Amila. The tribe ‘Amila was one of the Arab Syrian tribes settled in Bilad al-Sham long before the advent of Islam. They participated extensively in founding, protecting and expanding the Umayyad state. Their history however is shrouded in mist and their contribution practically forgotten. A few attempts were made to sketch some of their history mainly by twentieth century Arab Shi‘i historians from the region of Jabal ‘Amil (southern Lebanon today). Their works, however, are incomplete and suffer from serious shortcomings. They claim, contrary to historical evidence, that ‘Amila was settled in the region before the advent of Islam and that it adopted Shi‘ism, through Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, since the early days of Islam. This study proposes to set out the political history of ‘Amila in the early Islamic age up to the late Umayyad period. Prior to the Islamic conquests, ‘Amila roamed the Syrian desert as a semi-nomadic tribe

2

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

and probably performed its duty, as an Arab federate of the Byzantines, watching the desert frontier. After the establishment of the Umayyad dynasty in power, ‘Amila evolved from a mere nomadic group into a major participant in the decision-making process and established itself, with its sister tribes of Ahl al-Sham, as the protectors and guardians of the Umayyad empire. There exists a plethora of primary sources, from the books of genealogies to the traditional chronicles, that are relevant to the Umayyad period, but unfortunately, few of them were useful for this study. The tribe ‘Amila has left very few traces in these sources despite its relatively long presence in Bilad al-Sham. Most of the extant sources reflect the anti-Umayyad and anti-Syrian bias of the later ‘Abbasid historians. The use of hitherto neglected sources and a fresh look at the traditional ones is essential for relating the history of the Umayyad tribal world. The Byzantine sources are undoubtedly useful for a better comprehension of the Umayyad period. They were however used in a limited way because they lacked references to the tribe ‘Amila per se. But many conclusions were drawn from their references regarding the other Syrian tribes such as the Ghassanids. Modern historiography has seldom resorted to Umayyad poetry as a reliable source for establishing the political history of that era. Unlike Jahili poetry,1 Umayyad poetry was not prone to significant nahl and its authenticity is relatively well established. Umayyad poetry has preserved for us many of the details pertaining to Umayyad political life. All the major civil wars, for instance, are reflected in the poetry of both Qaysi and Yamani poets. The Naqa’id of Jarir, al-Farazdaq and al-Akhtal is a good example that illustrates this point. This study has benefited significantly from the poetry of ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili (d.c. 720 A.D). His diwan2 is a major testimony to many of the political and military events that occurred in the Umayyad period. Rulers, military leaders, individuals, tribes, cities, and villages were mentioned in his verses. Being the major poet of the tribe, he allocated to his tribe ‘Amila a substantial part of his poetry which became ‘the official public record’ of the tribe. Without the poetry of ‘Adi, an important part of the history of ‘Amila under the Umayyads would have vanished.

INTRODUCTION

3

Mentioned in al-Nadim’s Fihrist, ‘Adi’s diwan was collected first by Tha‘lab al-Shibani in the third Hijra century. However, many other verses are extant in other sources like Yaqut al-Hamawi who, for instance, used his poetry extensively in order to identify villages and cities in Bilad-Sham. His poetry comprises all the established genres of the Umayyad period: hija’, fakhr, madih, and ghazal, but first and foremost it is a registry of his tribe’s deeds from Jahiliyya to his day. Many of the ‘Amilis’ battles, victories, enemies and allies were reported by ‘Adi. He personally witnessed some of the events he mentioned and he was close to the Umayyad court of both ‘Abd al-Malik and al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik which enabled him to be part of the upper circle of decision making. His poetry is a live testimony to many of the battles (Marj Rahit and Dayr al-Jathaliq for instance) fought by the ‘Amilis. Those battles as described by the ‘Abbasid chronicles did not mention the role of ‘Amila but rather spoke of Ahl al-Sham. Some of his verses are the only reference that shed some light on the history of ‘Amila under the Byzantines and on ‘Amila’s tribal alliances. Epigraphic and archaeological evidence have been used in the discussion of the pre-Islamic past of ‘Amila. The confusion reigning in the classical Arabic sources about this period discourages the attempt to write serious studies. Modern western scholarship (Lammens and Caskel) has dismissed the stories to be found in these later sources as ‘unworthy of belief’. However epigraphic data may be used to support some of the accounts mentioned by classical Arab historians and to establish a firmer chronological order of these accounts. In this book, the presentation of ‘Amila’s political history is preceded by a chapter that deals with theoretical questions relating to the tribal structure and its functions and dynamics. Based on modern anthropological studies of tribes and beduins in particular, this chapter intends to give a definiton of the tribe ‘Amila as it will be understood throughout the book. The second chapter investigates the pre-Islamic past of ‘Amila focusing on the ambiguous relation between ‘Amila and Zenobia in Palmyra as it is presented by the classical Arabic literary sources and which may be better understood with the discovery of new epigraphic evidence. In the third chapter, an attempt is made to clarify further

4

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

the role of the Arab Syrian tribes and in particular ‘Amila during the Islamic conquests. This role was underestimated by the traditional accounts and neglected by modern studies. In the fourth chapter, an attempt is made to retrace the political and military role of ‘Amila in building and protecting the Umayyad state. Finally, the last chapter is an attempt to revisit some of the unsubstantiated stories created by modern Arabic Shi‘i historians on the relation between ‘Amila, Jabal ‘Amil and the spread of Shi‘ism in the region.

CHAPTER 1 THE TR IBE ‘A MIL A: BY WAY OF A DEFINITION

Writing the history of a tribe that ceased to exist centuries ago impels us early on to realize that certain technical difficulties need to be sorted out before we begin our task. Perhaps narrating the history of a modern geographical entity is more convenient. In theory, it suffices to relate the events that occurred inside a geographical entity during a chosen historical period. However, things are different when it comes to a tribal group let alone an extinct one. The major hurdle we need to overcome is to define exactly the tribe concerned: linguistically, historically and anthropologically. A tribe undergoes a process of continuous modification throughout the centuries. Its traditions, its language and its social and religious constituents are occasionally subject to radical change. The anthropological, social and political elements of a tribe discussed in the Pre-Islamic period may not be the same when it is examined in the Umayyad period. Yet it is ‘the same tribe’. We thus need to ask what is meant by a ‘tribe’? What do we mean exactly by the ‘Amila tribe? This chapter will attempt to give some answers to these questions.

‘Amila in Modern Historiography The only attempt by modern western researchers to sketch some of ‘Amila’s history was written, as far as I know, by H. Lammens and

6

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

W. Caskel for the Encyclopedia of Islam.1 This study represents what the modern western academic world had to say on this tribe. Other brief introductory texts were written by modern Arab scholars. One classical example would be Ahmad Rida.2 Rida’s text is by no means the only one discussing the history of the tribe among modern Arab authors but it is the most elaborate and very representative of their approach. The history of ‘Amila according to Lammens and Caskel is narrated in the following paragraph: An old tribe in North-Western Arabia. The reports concerning their past are unworthy of belief. In the later genealogic system the ‘Amila tribe are reckoned as belonging to the South-Arabian Kahlan. At the time of the Muslim invasion we find them settled S.E. of the Dead Sea; they are mentioned among the SyroArabian tribes which joined Heraclius; but do not appear again in the history of the conquest. Shortly afterwards we find them established in Upper Galilee, which is named after them Djabal ‘Amila. They play a very unimportant part and are almost completely absorbed by the Banu Judham. ‘Adi b. al-Rika‘, the poet of al-Walid I, was their chief pride; he celebrated the Djudhamite Rawh b. Zinba‘, as the sayyid of his tribe; and thereby gives a further proof of their small importance. Ibn Durayd finds few notable men among them; satire rarely deals with them. After the 5th/11th the ‘Amila seem to have spread S. of the Lebanon in the present district of Bilad al-Shakif which is still called Djabal ‘Amila. According to Yakut, they also occupied a part of the country of the Isma‘ilis, a day’s journey to the S. of Aleppo, which he says was named after them ‘Amila Mountain. This isolated reference is the most surprising in that the corresponding text of the Marasid gives ‘Amira instead of ‘Amila. To avoid the difficulty, G. le Strange supposes an emigration towards the N. during the crusades, but without giving references. The Arabic historians of this period are ignorant of this change of place, and continue to use the synonym ‘Amila-Djalil. The application to the ‘Amila

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

7

of the passage from the Kur’an, by the poet Djarir is only a sneer of the Tamimite who was jealous of the favours enjoyed by Ibn al-Rika‘. The Djabal ‘Amil(a) in the Lebanon was, and is, an important Shi‘ite center, and several eminent Shi‘ite authors bear the nisba al-‘Amili.3 Lammens and Caskel defined ‘Amila as an ‘old tribe’. No additional information was provided concerning their tribal structure or their number. Their habitat was specified as being ‘North-Western Arabia’ (in the pre-conquests period). ‘Amila moved to ‘S.E of the Dead Sea’ at the time of the Muslim conquests then finally settled in the Upper Galilee which is named Jabal ‘Amila after them. This account is probably not accurate. Their presence in that region can only be confirmed as of the second Hijra century. In addition, these two scholars do not explain the factors which led the tribe to move from the edge of Northern Arabia to the heart of Bilad al-Sham. Their belief that two Jabal ‘Amila exist (the first one in Upper Galilee, the second in Bilad al-Shaqif) shows some unfamiliarity in the geography of the region. In fact, these two mountains are one and the same. Historically Bilad al-Shaqif is an integral part of Jabal ‘Amila and not the Jabal itself. The authors curtly dismissed the reports written by al-Tabari and al-Isfahani concerning Amila’s past as being ‘unworthy of belief.’ Moreover they did not specify which period of the past they thought could not be reconstructed on the basis of the traditional accounts. I would tend to think they meant their pre-Islamic past and, in particular, their connection with Palmyra. However, these reports cannot be completely dismissed since epigraphic evidence and historical interpretation might support some of al-Tabari’s narrative.4 Lammens and Caskel stressed the fact that ‘Amila played an unimportant role during the Muslim conquests and the Umayyad era. This is not entirely accurate. Recent research literature has shown that ‘Amila and its sister tribes, Judham and Lakhm, played a significant role during that period.5 The note concerning the scant number of notable men found among them can also be ignored; Ibn ‘Asakir’s Tarikh Madinat Dimashq reveals that notable men from the ‘Amila tribe were not few.6 Lammens-Caskel, however, cannot be criticized for their conclusions

8

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

since it is the discovery of new sources that has enabled us to modify their assertions on the history of ‘Amila. This modern western version is not completely different from the traditional local story written by Rida and others. Rida too describes ‘Amila as an old tribe that migrated to the Syrian desert and Jabal ‘Amila in the pre-Islamic period. According to him, its genealogy probably went back to Kahlan and Qahtan, eponymous father of the south Arabians. ‘Amila’s relation with the ‘Amaliq in the pre-Islamic period is rejected by him as it had been by Lammens and Caskel. He too stressed the fact that their chief poet was ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ and that they settled in Jabal ‘Amila as of their arrival in the region.7 However they do differ on other points: Lammens-Caskel are more sceptical concerning the stories about the origins of the tribe, whereas the Arab historian accepts that the tribe left Yemen after the collapse of the Dam of Ma’rib. Both versions leave many questions unanswered. What was the political and social milieu in which ‘Amila survived? Were the ‘Amila tribesmen nomads, semi-nomads or sedentary? Or could they have been all three? Where exactly was their home before reaching Jabal ‘Amila (South Lebanon today)? What was their status under the Byzantines and the Umayyads? All these questions and many others need to be answered if we have to write the history of the tribe ‘Amila. But most urgently we need to clarify the meaning of a fundamental term: what do we mean exactly by the ‘tribe ‘Amila?’ Is it the same monolithic body that existed for many centuries without any alteration in its structure and role? Did the tribe keep the same name, ‘Amila, throughout the centuries? Did the tribe ‘Amila in the preIslamic milieu coincide perfectly with the tribe ‘Amila established in the Umayyad state? No serious study can afford to leave such questions unanswered. This chapter will try to give a definition of the tribe ‘Amila as we intend to view it in this book and to sketch the tribal literature necessary for this study. The concept of tribe is unclear and controversial.8 The word is used to refer to a kinship group, an extended family, or a coalition of related families. It may refer to the elite family from whom some

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

9

larger confederation gets its name, to a cultural ethnic or other nonfamilial social group, or to conquest movements of pastoral peoples without regard for the internal basis of cohesion. According to Tapper, scholars and in particular anthropologists have failed to agree on a general definition of what constitutes a tribe. It seems impossible to find an analytical terminology that both takes account of indigenous categories and applies widely enough to be useful for comparison and classification.9 The definition of tribe and its application to a form of organization of peoples, societies and cultures remains confused.10 The tribe ‘Amila seems to have succeeded in keeping its name unaltered for centuries. It is well established that ‘Amila was the name of the tribe in the third and fourth centuries AH as corroborated by the classical Arab geographers.11 The same tribe is reported to have existed in the pre-Islamic and early Islamic periods by the futuh literature written in the early third century AH.12 It is true that the futuh literature is not contemporary to the period of the conquests, but it is nevertheless a well established source for the early Islamic conquests. The poetry of the Jahili poet al- A‘sha and the Umayyad ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili, al-Ra‘i al-Numayri and Jarir attest to the presence of their contemporary tribe ‘Amila. Ibn Khaldun in the ninth century AH related some of the tribe’s fortunes in the pre-Islamic periods. It is therefore well established that ‘Amila was known under the same name for many centuries. How old is the tribe ‘Amila? According to the Arab genealogists the ‘Amila tribal group emerged as of the third century AD. Moreover there is a possibility that the tribe ‘Amila existed as early as the eighth century BC.13

‘Amila in Classical Arabic Literature What then is ‘Amila? How did the Arab scholars identify it? How should we identify it? According to the lexicographer Ibn Durayd, ‘Amila is an Arabic Hayy (subtribe).14 Ibn Manzur defined it also as a Hayy but added that it could be singled out as the Qabila to which the poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ belonged. Ibn Manzur was more specific than Ibn Durayd by saying that it is a Yamani Hayy and its name is ‘Amila

10

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

b. Saba’. However, he added that Mudaris claimed that ‘Amila is of Ma‘add and quotes al-A‘sha, the poet: Ô ‘Amila! Why do you keep on claiming descent from other than your noble father? Your father is Qasit, return to your oldest descent.15 Al-Zabidi adopted practically the same view but tried to be more specific by providing the full genealogical descent of ‘Amila: ‘They are the sons of al-Harith b. ‘Adi b. al-Harith b. Murra b. Udad b. Zayd b. Yashjub b. ‘Arib b. Zayd b. Kahlan b. Saba’. They were named after their mother ‘Amila b. Malik b Wadi‘a b. Quda‘a, the mother of al-Zuhd and Mu‘awiya the sons of al-Harith b. ‘Adi.’ However al-Zabidi added one interesting remark; according to him there is one single false tradition, related by Ibn al-Athir, which linked ‘Amila to ‘Amaliq and this tradition was refuted by lexicographers.16 As a matter of fact, Ibn al-Athir is innocent of this accusation, and it seems that al-Zabidi did not check his sources thoroughly. Apparently Ibn al-Athir identified ‘Amila as al-Zabidi did and tried to rectify what was claimed about ‘Amila’s descent from the ‘Amaliq.17 Al-Zabidi, on the other hand, added more confusion by stating that another Yamani tribe, Banu ‘Amal could be the same tribe as Banu ‘Amala living in Jabal al-Khalil (Jabal al-Jalil).18 This reference is unique and not based on any historical reference. Obviously the individuals/groups living in Jabal al-Khalil are the Banu ‘Amila and not the Banu ‘Amala or the Banu ‘Amal, as corroborated by different sources among which are al-Hamadani, al-Muqaddasi and al-Ya‘qubi. In summary, ‘Amila was identified by the Arabic classical lexicographers as a Hayy and seldom as Qabila,19 never as a ‘Ashira (clan) or Batn (subclan) or Fakhdh. No doubt it is impossible, as several scholars have noted, to write an exact definition for each tribal group. ‘La confusion règne dans cette terminologie,’20 and ‘établir un tableau complet et définitif de la structure d’une confédération bédouine est le plus souvent impossible.’21 Despite the efforts of modern scholars to establish a certain order, one clear definition for each group has not been reached. But Arab genealogists tended to use quantity or volume

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

11

as a common criterion in establishing order between different groups: Sha‘b, Qabila, Batn, Fakhdh, ‘Ashira in an ascending or descending order. However, even Arab genealogists did not agree on similar definitions for every group. Al-Qalqashandi, in the fourteenth century AD, recognized the fact that the Arab genealogists did not agree on a specified order to rank every group. Thus he discussed this issue in the introduction of his book Nihayat al-Arab.22 He tried to introduce some definite order and thus ranked Sha‘b (nation) as the biggest unit then Qabila (tribe), ‘Amara (subtribe), Batn (sub-subtribe), Fakhdh and finally Fasila. Al-Qalqashandi supported his argument by quoting al-Mawardi and al-Zamakhshari but he acknowledged other versions mentioned by Ibn al-Kalbi who ranked Sha‘b as the biggest group, followed by Qabila, then, Fasila, ‘Amara and finally Fakhdh, while al-Nawawi included ‘Ashira before Fasila and al-Jawhari considered ‘Ashira to be the smallest unit.23 Hayy was not included as a specific group by the Arab genealogists. In this case why was ‘Amila described as a Hayy? Al-Qalqashandi included a short interesting notice in the end of his text: ‘it is possible that one may substitute any group name by Hayy, either as a general term: this is an Arab Hayy, or as a specific term: this is the Hayy of the clan X.’24 The Arab lexicographers defined the word Hayy as a Batn of the Arab Butun.25 But some added an explanation: Hayy is the group of the sons of a specific father whether they are few or many, although it could also be the name of a Sha‘b regrouping many tribes.26 The word Hayy is never used by modern beduins to designate any kind of tribal group.27 It is obvious that ‘Amila could not form a Sha‘b and in fact was never considered by the genealogists as such. The category Sha‘b is restricted to the eponymous fathers: Mudar, ‘Adnan or Qahtan and few others. Therefore the other alternative is more realistic. But was ‘Amila a group of a few or of many? ‘Amila, like any other tribal group, is subject to external and internal threats. These perils include famine, wars and diseases. These perils might turn a huge powerful tribe into a weak, small one and might possibly lead to its extinction.28 What is clear so far is that ‘Amila constituted a tribal unit (Hayy) which

12

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

increased or decreased in prestige, number and influence through the centuries. According to the anthropologist A. M. Khazanov, a nomadic or semi-nomadic tribe is never a purely territorial unit. First and foremost it is a political organization. Wherever territorial ties are not supplemented or mediated by political ones what we have is an ethnolinguistic unity. Whether such a unity can be regarded as a tribe is an open question.29 ‘Amila emerged in the pre-Islamic period as a nomadic group roaming the deserts of Bilad al-Sham. It evolved and functioned in reaction to the external world and its threats or resources. In the opinion of Khazanov, ‘the non-autarky’ of the nomads and semi-nomads’ economy means that their social and political organization cannot be fully autonomous and that culturally, to a certain extent, they are not self-sufficient. The latter is determined by the nature of relations with the outside world and the degree of advancement. It is no coincidence that nomads sometimes have more in common, socially and culturally, with agriculturists in the same area than with nomads from other areas.30 ‘Amila’s interactions with the outside world defined its tribal structure, as a result, its number, strength and categorization altered throughout the centuries.

The Inner Dynamics of the Tribe: Descent, Kinship, Neighbourliness and Muruwwa How did ‘Amila survive as a single unit (the numbers being irrelevant)? How did the inner dynamics of this tribal unit function? What kept it together for so many centuries despite the good and bad times? It is with Ibn Khaldun that we need to start searching for answers. As is well known, Ibn Khaldun provided us with the concept of ‘Asabiyya or the sentiment of group solidarity that results from, among other bonds, kinship, blood ties and common descent: Their defence and protection are successful only if they are a closely knit group of common descent. This strengthens their stamina and makes them feared, since everybody’s affection for his family and his group is more important (than anything else).

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

13

Compassion and affection for one’s blood relations exist in human nature as something God put into the hearts of men . . . (respect for) blood ties is something natural among men, with the rarest exceptions. It leads to affection for one’s relations and blood relatives.31 The fact that tribal units held together by group feeling (‘Asabiyya) can survive is endorsed by modern scholarship. The word Hayy in particular was considered by Robertson Smith as the basic single unit upon which every tribe or confederacy would be built. He translates it as a kindred group. According to him it is ‘the political and social unit, so far as there was any unity in that very loosely organized state of society.’32 It is the single unit whose active members have a common interest and act together in the following cases: the right and duties of blood feud, the distribution of inheritance and the distribution of booty.33 This group is also characterized by a common group name and the fellow-members of a man’s Hayy are called his ahl or Qawm.34 Thus to Robertson Smith, it is the Hayy bound by ‘Asabiyya that formed the basic social unit of the tribal system. He adds: The nomadic Arabs, whose way of life supplied the type on which all Arabian society was mainly moulded, are not to be thought of as roaming quite at large through the length and breadth of the peninsula. Each group or confederation of groups had its own pastures, and still more its own waters, beyond which it could not move without immediate risk of a hostile encounter. Within these limits families wandered at large with their cattle and tents wherever they could find water and forage. But generally these movements-say from summer to winter pasture-were made by the whole hayy together, and no small body felt itself to be safe at a great distance from its brethren.35 Robertson Smith does not give an exact definition of the word Hayy, since Arab genealogists, in general, did not include it in their terminologies as group or sub-group. It seems what Robertson Smith describes as Hayy is in fact the basic tribal group related by kinship and descent.

14

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Khazanov evolved further the concept of ‘Asabiyya. It is the mobility of nomads which limits the development of direct territorial and neighbourly links thus leaving kinship as the best alternative for the expression of social relations. The mobility of nomads and the permanent instability of a pastoral economy give rise to a fluid social organization which is capable of change. In the majority of nomadic societies, descent turns out to be the most appropriate principle in which the structuring role of the relations of kinship is conceptualized. Thanks to the application of the principle of descent, the social organization of nomads is often expressed in the aggregate of separate segments and discrete descent groups of different genealogical depth which, if the need arises, are capable of ‘fission or fusion.’36 However, it seems that not all forms of social organization amongst nomads acquire the form of descent groups, and not all of them are constructed on the basis of a single principle of descent. Ibn Khaldun recognized these differences when he wrote that ‘Asabiyya based on real kinship, was a considerably more effective uniting force than general belonging to a tribe: The affection everybody has for his clients and allies results from the feeling of shame that comes to a person when one of neighbours, relatives, or blood relation in any degree is humiliated. The reason for it is that a client (-master) relationship leads to close contact exactly, or approximately in the same way, as does common descent . . . For a pedigree is something imaginary and devoid of reality. Its usefulness consists only in the resulting connection and close contact . . . In this sense, one must understand the remark, ‘Genealogy is something which is of no use to know and which it does no harm not to know.’ This means that when common descent is no longer clear and has become a matter of scientific knowledge, it can no longer move the imagination and is denied the affection caused by group feeling.37 Khazanov elaborates the concepts of kinship and descent in a tribal unit by establishing that kinship regulates relations within a relatively small collective of people. Descent, on the other hand, regulates

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

15

relations between different groups and at the same time establishes the individual’s membership in a given society as a whole and within specific subdivisions of it; this membership involves both corresponding rights and commitments and sometimes even social positions. ‘Kinship establishes the position of the individual in society, descent legitimises it.’38 Descent operates in nomadic societies in two ways: in governing the real allocation of genealogies, and in providing through the notion of common descent a bond for all the members of a given society. Although the functions of the two are not entirely separable, they do not coincide in every way. Genealogies are important in the forming of descent groups and in defining how they are interconnected. The notion of common descent provides a theoretical foundation for social integration.39 The tribal world is far from being a stationary world. On the contrary it is in perpetual evolution and reconfiguration.40 Guichard adds that: Même si l’organisation en tribus n’était pas l’apanage éxclusif des nomades, il est peu contéstable que dans la plupart des cas tribu et nomadisme étaient fortement associés. La solidarité d’un groupe nomade ne pouvant trouver de fondement dans des liens avec un territoire trop vaste et imprecis, ni dans une attache villageoise, s’organise naturellement dans le cadre d’une tribu unie par les rapports de parenté qui associent les membres les uns aux autres. Le système patrilinéaire et endogamique arabe donne une cohesion particulière (asabiyya) à tous ces groupes fortement reférmés sur eux mêmes.41 But descent and kinship notwithstanding how did the tribe ‘Amila, or any other tribal unit for that matter, function? What internal mechanisms controlled its destiny? A tribe has no coercive apparatus and everybody participates in decision making. As a result disunity prevails: human activity cannot be coordinated on a large scale, and fission is a normal part of the political process. But if an entire tribal society were to acquire a sense of common purpose, it is obvious that it would be able to cooperate without coercion and without liability

16

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

of fission. In other words, its very primitivism would give it a huge advantage over the state.42 G. E. Grunebaum added interesting notes concerning the dynamics of the tribe: The cohesiveness of the tribal world was strengthened by its rivalries and conflicts. Victory and defeat, grandeur and misery had meaning only within the charmed circle of disorganized communion. The competitive element in intertribal life (mufakhara, munafara . . .), is rated of supreme importance in instilling meaning into the quest for survival and in unifying the countless groups that were roving an immense country by marking their submission to a body of outside opinion. It was this outside opinion in which a hierarchic stratification of the tribes was anchored; however unsatisfactory the place of a given tribe in this scale it indicated and guaranteed the group’s belonging; to struggle against an offensive rating, to maintain a position of pride-both would confirm that the group considered itself part of the North Arabian ‘universe’ . . . The model provided for a good deal of flexibility. The supersession of an original local unity by the assumption of a genealogical unity would function as the instrument of registration and stabilization of change. Although it is true that tribal genealogies would serve to legitimize the status quo and constitute an aid to the collective memory, the extent to which they mirror actual fact-at least in terms of past tribal history, break-ups of larger, agglomeration of smaller units, alliances and wanderings, is not to be underestimated. Besides, some of the larger, that is to say supertribal units such as Mudar, Rabi‘a, Quda‘a, appear to have had at various times a definite reality and hence a power of political motivation for the Northern Arabs.43 The genealogical principle is also extremely useful to nomads for reasons other than the forming of descent groups; in essence it is polyfunctional. This, in turn, explains why it is so widespread and vital. Genealogies can be consciously or unconsciously manipulated; they

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

17

are capable of broadening and narrowing, and of splitting up and merging in accordance with practical necessities and a specific historical situation. In such cases, nomadic social organization as a whole and its various levels acquire the ideological flexibility they need and the ability to re-organize to suit new conditions without losing the structuring principles.44 ‘Amila like all tribal groups resorted to political, military and economic means in order to survive. It attempted to manipulate its genealogies for political and military purposes under the Umayyads.45 The genealogies, ideologically, enabled many groups of nomads smoothly to incorporate and adopt outside groups into their own ranks without making any essential structural changes. Thus ‘Amila could ally themselves to the Ghassanids or to the Judhamids because both claimed to be of Kahlani-Qahtani descent or to the Kalbites since both claimed Yamani descent. A person not related to a clan or tribe by blood could enjoy some of the privileges and protection. He might become an ally, Halif, or a client, Mawla. The parties to an alliance were formally equal, but when a single individual became an ally of a tribe or clan, he tended to fall into a subordinate or dependent position. The status of client, however, was acquired by a slave on his emancipation. Slaves, usually children captured in raids, were also attached to the tribe.46 The most prevalent of tribes to survive are the ones that have realized the importance of neighbourliness. By this term I mean tribes sharing common territory, pasturages and water sources. Despite the importance of common descent and kinship, the essence of a nomadic community consists first and foremost of neighbourliness and production. Khazanov argues that private ownership of livestock and independent production by individual households form the economic bases of nomadic community. It is curious that mutual aid in a nomadic community seems to follow two courses. One is the neighbourly course and is concerned primarily with the needs of production; the other is based on kinship (participation in blood feuds) and is more connected with social functions. Thus it is not always the same group of individuals which has to be involved in both forms of mutual aid.47 Under these circumstances we can understand and evaluate the solid

18

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

bond between ‘Amila and Judham, its neighbouring tribe. Their relationship did not stem out of a lord-servant bond as suggested by Lammens-Caskel but rather out of a partnership bond.48 ‘Amila and Judham shared the same land and pasturages, probably for centuries, in addition to their descent connections. They shared two of the most important foundations upon which a beduin society is built: kinship and neighbourliness. W. Caskel confirms this point by stating that only the smallest units, which constantly migrate and camp together, and the next larger group, (i.e., the clans and their branches) form a solidarity group. The solidarity does not go further than the clans, and any combinations beyond them are ‘geographical units.’49 Another major element upon which the tribal structure is based is muruwwa. According to I. Goldziher, muruwwa means all the virtues which constitute the fame of an individual or the tribe to which he belongs; the observance of the duties which are connected with family ties; the relationships of protection and hospitality; and, the fulfilment of the law of revenge. It is regulated and disciplined by fixed traditional legal ideas. These ideas are based on the principle of right and equity. They are clear indication of a conscious striving for justice in the higher sense and inspired great esteem for the strong sense for justice of the society from which they emanated.50 In fact, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ did not hesitate, on several occasions, to proudly point out the muruwwa his tribe had shown towards the defeated enemy or the victorious ally.51

The Raider, the Trader and the Herder In the opinion of Tapper, the most successful tribal groups are probably those that maintain a set of alternative political institutions (institutionalized councils, leadership roles and so forth) and ideologies which they use to adapt to conditions of autonomy as well as to the different and changing aggressive policies of outsiders.52 From early history nomads from the Arabian desert have been intruding on the surrounding lands of settled civilization. The nomads would come to raid first of all, but they would frequently settle there themselves. Close relations between the settled nomads and those

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

19

still roaming in the desert facilitated trade. Only nomads could conduct caravans of merchandise across deserts and only nomads could guarantee the safe transit of such caravans. Thus in the history of the Byzantine and the Sasanian empires the nomads appear in the two roles of ‘raider and trader’. The two empires tried to defend themselves against the hostile nomads. They found that the most effective way was the employment of semi-nomadic groups on the imperial frontiers to repel any nomadic incursions. Donner confirms this point when he argues that the older view of nomad-sedentary relations as constituting an endless struggle between ‘the desert and the sown’ has more recently given way to one stressing the economic interdependence between the nomads and the settled people. Nomadic and semi-nomadic pastoralists depend on village communities for the agricultural staples as well as for numerous manufactured weapons, clothing, tent material, cooking tools and so forth. In turn the nomads provide the villagers with livestock and products of animal origin such as wool and hide. It was often with the nomads’ camels and under their protection that urbanly manufactured goods were transported from one town to another. The nomads benefited greatly from providing these transportion functions which brought payment in the form of cash and goods to the leaders of the tribes involved.53 But how did these tribal groups earn their daily living? No doubt the military service they provided to the states is an important source of income, but it was not the only one nor was it permanent. ‘Amila did not play solely the role of the soldier, although it was its primary function under the Byzantines and the Umayyads: like all roaming semi-nomads who eventually settled under the Umayyads, they had their own pastures of camels, goats and sheep, as attested by the poetry of the Umayyad poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili.54 ‘Amila seems to have evolved from a pure pastoral nomadic group into a semi-nomadic then into a semi-sedentary group and finally completed its evolution as herdsmen husbandry in the Umayyad period. Every category has some specific characteristics. According to Khazanov, pastoral nomadism proper is characterized by absence of agriculture, even in a supplementary capacity. Semi-nomadic pastoralism is characterized by extensive pastoralism and the periodic changing of pastures during the greater

20

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

part of the year; even though pastoralism is the predominant activity, agriculture exists in a secondary and supplementary capacity.55 It would appear that the two variants of semi-nomadic pastoralism are as follows: first, when the same groups in a given society are occupied with both agriculture and pastoralism; and, second, when within the framework of a given society there are groups which devote themselves primarily, or even exclusively, to pastoralism, alongside groups which are primarily occupied with agriculture. From an economic point of view ‘fully nomadic and semi-nomadic pastoralism are closely connected and often interdependent, forming many transitional states which depend on local specificity, their specific historical situation and ecological conditions’.56 In some situations semi-nomadic pastoralism can be a relatively stable economic system and function for a long time in a more or less immutable form. In other situations it can be a transitional stage between pastoral nomadism and a mixed economy. In still others, alternatively, it can be a stage in development from a mixed economy to pastoral nomadism. ‘From an economic point of view semi-nomadic pastoralism is also dependent on the outside world.’57 Semi-sedentary pastoralism differs most fundamentally from semi-nomadic pastoralism in that, in the former, agriculture plays the predominant role in the general economic balance. Semi-sedentary also implies the presence of seasonal migrations of pastoral groups and families within the given society. However, these migrations often seem to be shorter in both time and distance than the pastoral migrations of semi-nomads in the same kind of environment.58 Herdsmen husbandry or distant-pastures husbandry describes the situation in which the majority of the population leads a sedentary life and is occupied for the most part with agriculture while the livestock is maintained all year round on pastures tended by herdsmen especially assigned to this task.59 ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, the poet of the ‘Amila tribe, told of a pastoralism clearly akin to husbandry in his own tribe.60 The three most important animals determining the composition of herds in the nomadism of the Near Eastern type are the camel, sheep and goat. The beduins themselves in Arabia may be divided into camel-herders and sheep and goat-herders who also keep some

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

21

camels.61 Almost everywhere the camel is the most important riding and transport animal; it is also important for the milk it gives. Camels were very desirable because they are much faster, can go much longer without watering and can eat less desirable fodder plants than other animals; they can also live entirely without water if herbage is available and can carry loads far exceeding that of other animals.62 These qualities freed camel pastoralists to undertake much longer annual migrations. The distance of these migrations varies according to the different conditions between 50 and 100 km. Camel pastoralists may roam from one seasonal pasture to another in a well-established pattern for almost a year and may have very little contact with settled communities, or the camel-herding groups could spend several of the driest months of summer at a permanent water-source. Camel-herders migrate more and for longer periods than sheep-herders, and they have been less restricted by necessity to remain close to water-sources. Goats for the most part take the place of the sheep in the most adverse and mountainous conditions. Despite the high prestige value and partial military significance of the horse, there were few horses in the Arabian desert. ‘Horses are of no economic value but serve merely as weapons for procuring booty and influence.’63 The horse was basically used as a riding animal; it was not pastured with the herds and its meat and milk were not used for food. It would be interesting to determine when the combined use, during a ghazw, of the camel for riding over long distances and of the horse for final attack, was employed for the first time. Nomadic groups, despite their almost constant movement and their periodic contact with ‘outsiders,’ tended to be socially and culturally isolated. Their long presence in the desert away from cities and towns tended, as Donner has pointed out, to make them culturally conservative, i.e. slow to change their ways. On the other hand, it gave them a far greater impact on settled society and culture than their numbers would lead us to expect because their cultural conservatism meant that in their relations with settled communities they were continually re-emphasising the same values and customs.64

22

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

The Tribal Hierarchy One last point needs to be explained: what was the tribal hierarchy of ‘Amila? At the top of the pyramid of the tribal social structure there was the sayyid of the tribe (shaykh under Islam). In fact the sayyid was primus inter pares, the head of the tribal council (majlis) composed of the notables of the tribe (wujuh), who conducted the discussions in it.65 His position depended on his personal skills as the sayyid had no automatic coercive powers and could only win over his ‘board’ through conviction and not coercion. It is reported that Abu ‘Azm was the sayyid of ‘Amila in the pre-Islamic period; he forged the alliance with the Kalb tribe when he married his daughter Hayy to the leader of the Kalb tribe, Kalb b. Wabra.66 Shihab b. Burhum was the sayyid of the tribe under the Umayyads and was considered to be a close aide to Maslama b. ‘Abd al-Malik in particular.67 Qawwal b. ‘Amr and Khumam b. Ma‘qil were also notables of the tribe.68 The authority of the sayyid was usually challenged by the military commander (Qa’id, Ra’is) especially during wars. Among the ‘Amili military commanders in pre-Islamic period we have Qu‘aysis who once captured ‘Adi b. Hatim al-Ta’i.69 This incident was celebrated generations later by the ‘Amili poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ and it is established as a source of mufakhara for the ‘Amilis. Another military leader rose to fame under the Umayyads: Tha‘laba b. Salama who became the governor of Jund al-Urdunn in the last days of the Umayyads.70 Another personality was the hakam (arbitrator) of the tribe who could exercise some influence on the tribe due to his personal prestige. He was the person to whom the tribesmen referred in order to settle their disputes. He was an expert who should have proposed solutions to the disputing parties, but his suggestions were not mandatory. Naturally, in some cases, the sayyid could have been the ra’is and the hakam at the same time. One important figure remains to be discussed: the poet of the tribe. It is needless here to repeat the importance of the poet and his role in the Arab tribal world, but it suffices to say that he exercised considerable influence on the tribe’s public opinion and was considered to be the spokesman of the tribe and its defender. The satires of a poet could have catastrophic effects on the position of a tribe within the

THE TRIBE ‘A MILA

23

tribal society. The reputation of the Numayr tribe was considerably damaged by one single line from Jarir: fa ghudda al-tarfa innaka min Numayr. (Lower your gaze because you belong to the tribe Numayr). ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ was ‘Amila’s most prominent poet but he was by no means the only one.71 He was the caliphs’ poet (‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwan and al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik and possibly ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz).72 He no doubt fulfilled his role as the defender of the tribe on several occasions, notably against the Banu Numayr. He also became the poet of the Yaman faction and was their champion against Qaysi rhetoric.73 According to Biebuyck the concept of a tribe is first and foremost a device used by rural peoples for classifying themselves, as well as for delineating themselves and their society from other groups which may or may not be similar to them in culture and which may or may not be historically related to them. It is a method of social grouping which fulfils certain functions and has certain purposes. It is used by rural populations, and in more recent times also by city dwellers, as an expression of separateness, distinctiveness and uniqueness which is rooted in history and which is subject to change and redefinition.74 The tribe ‘Amila is a group in the technical sense: it has maintained permanent existence; it has a name; there are established and accepted principles for membership; and there are norms which permit and regulate its distinctive existence. The type of classification to which the tribe’s people adhere is pragmatic, flexible and adaptive. It leaves room for modifications and adjustments in a time perspective. As such, the tribe ‘Amila (the number and historical period being irrelevant) can be considered as a self-conscious group of people having the potential for common action. They are an interconnected network of institutions and social values and which have a basic set of common principles by which separateness and distinctiveness can operate.

CHAPTER 2 ‘A MIL A IN THE PR E-ISL A MIC PER IOD

Only a few places in Bilad al-Sham remain to this day named after an Arab tribe. Jabal ‘Amil however was named after ‘Amila as of the third Hijra century at least. Yet, and despite all the attempts to write the history of Jabal ‘Amil, little is known about the tribe which was linked for centuries with this specific geographical region. The historians interested in the area tend to ignore the history of ‘Amila and in particular the pre-Islamic and Umayyad periods, and present an incomplete picture of the tribe’s history. The paucity of sources may have encouraged this trend, but several political and ideological factors consolidated it.1 Therefore a certain number of unsubstantiated stories were adopted which are now widely accepted as truthful. On the other hand, there have been serious attempts by modern researchers to reach conclusive evidence concerning the origins of the ‘Amila tribe, but these attempts, though sometimes valuable, remained at the mercy of the inaccuracies and contradictions that confuse the field of al-Ansab in general.2 Most modern historians and in particular Shi‘ite ‘Amilis tend to agree on a certain narrative. According to this narrative the ‘Amila tribe is an Arab tribe that migrated from Yemen centuries before Islam and settled in the Syrian Desert. To most of them its genealogy probably went back to Qahtan, the eponymous father of the south Arabians. After the Islamic conquests, ‘Amila embraced Islam and moved to Jabal ‘Amil and became, through Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, the

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

25

first Shi‘ite (pro-‘Ali) tribe not only in the region but also in the whole Muslim world, with the exception of the inhabitants of the Hijaz.3 This version is, in my view, another imagined beginning. It contains few demonstrable facts and displays many legendary aspects. In this chapter I will try to present a different version based on primary sources and recent scholarship. I will relate the early history of ‘Amila under the Byzantines. The history of this tribe during this period must, however, remain incomplete due to the scarcity of sources available to us. It will nevertheless attempt to present an improved and well documented version which will hopefully throw some light on a tribe that ceased to exist centuries ago, but whose memory remains alive in the collective consciousness of a whole populace until the present day. The early history of ‘Amila may be divided into two major periods: ancient and Byzantine. This division does not reflect only a chronological order. It illustrates, in addition, the evolution of the ‘Amila tribe from a local nomadic tribal unit into a military corps entangled with the regional politics of the ancient world.

‘Amila in Ancient Times The ancient history of Banu ‘Amila is virtually unknown. The earliest extant inscription mentioning the tribe ‘Amila may possibly be the Assyrian king Tiglath-Pileser III’s inscriptions of the eight century BC on the Nimrud slab present now in the British Museum. The text reads as follows: From the beginning of my rule, to the seventeenth year of my reign, the tribes of Itu’, Rubu’, Hamarani, Lahuata, Harilu, Rubbu, Rapiku, Hiranu, Rabilu, Nasiru, Gulusu, Nabatu, Rahiku, Ka-, . . . , Rummulutu, Adile, Kipre, Ubudu, Gurumu, Bagdadu, Hindiru, Damunu, Dunanu, Nilku, Rade, Da . . . ., Ubulu, Karma’, Amlatu, Ru’a, Kabi’, Li’tau, Marusu, Amatu, Hagaranu, (the cities of) Dur-Karigalzu, Adidu (?), the strongholds of Sarragiti, of Labbanat, of Kar-bel-matati,-all the Arameans of the banks of the Tigris, the Euphrates and the

26

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Surappi, even to the Uknu, by the shore of the lower sea (Persian Gulf), I conquered, many of them I slew, I carried off their spoil. The Arameans, as many as there were, I brought within the border of Assyria and set my official over them as governor.4 It is not an easy task to identify the tribe Amlatu mentioned above with our tribe ‘Amila. It remains a speculative exercise. Nevertheless there is always a possibility that Amlatu could be the same tribe as ‘Amila. If this was the case, then the tribe was able to keep its tribal name intact throughout the centuries. The Assyrian text is rich in clues and insights. Some of the tribes mentioned have Arabic roots and could be the same Arabic tribes that survived until the Islamic period (for example Jurum could also be the same Arab tribe Jurm). These tribes, it seems, originated from the same region where ‘Amila eventually appeared, i.e the Fertile Crescent. An expert in the Assyrian history identified them as mostly Aramean tribes.5 The presence of Arab nomadic tribes on the border of the Syrian desert was common and many documents and letters among the Nimrud letters refer to those Arabs.6 According to some historians, perhaps ‘the Atamaean beduins’ of Upper Euphrates who interfered in Assyrian political affairs in 880 BC were predecessors of the Arabs. The beduin element of the Arabian Peninsula was to be found originally in the area which extended between Syria and Mesopotamia.7 This area and the commercial routes leading from the Persian Gulf to Syria, and from Syria to Egypt and southern Arabia influenced events in the Near East during the last two millenia BC and the Roman period. The presence of Arabs in the eighth century BC Assyrian records was extremely common. Since the eleventh century BC various Aramaean groups had infiltrated Babylonia, rising to play a prominent role in the days of Tiglath-Pileser III. These Aramaean tribes (cited above) formed a substantial settlement around the Persian Gulf and were a bane to Assyrian kings. They were subjugated only after many repeated attempts and then exiled in large numbers.8 Is the Aramaean Amlatu tribe related to our ‘Amila? It is possible that the etymology of the word ‘Amila is Aramaic. The Arab lexicographers have failed to provide a convincing origin for the word ‘Amila. However like many Arabic words, ‘Amila

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

27

may have an Aramaic origin. Perhaps it is a fusion of two words: ‘amm’el which might mean ‘God includes all,’ or ‘aum-’el which might mean ‘abundance (i.e. granted by of God)’ or ‘am-’el which might be translated ‘The year of God.’9 Another convincing interpretation of the word is found in Hebrew. According to Kugman, the Hebrew words ‘am and el have Aramaic origins and they mean: The people of God.10 Thus the Aramaic origin of ‘Amila is possible but is it the same as Amlatu? Unless new epigraphic and archaeological evidence appears, it will be extremely difficult for us to confirm or deny the existence of the tribe ‘Amila in the eighth century BC. The possibility however remains an option to be considered. ‘Amila and the ‘Amaliq Some historians tried to trace ‘Amila back to biblical times, and referred to a possible descent from the ‘Amaliq.11 This possibility often confused modern ‘Amili historians who could not completely dismiss this possibility but showed their inclination towards ‘Amila as the descendents of Qahtan. They explained the existence of this link as denoting a different ‘Amila who happened to bear the same name.12 However, the stories recorded in al-Tabari, al-Mas‘udi, al-Isfahani and Ibn al-Athir deserve a different interpretation and further investigation. It is quite accepted among Arab historians and genealogists to divide the Arabs into two major groups: al-Ba’ida which consisted among others of al-‘Amaliq, ‘Ad and Thamud who disappeared from history, and al-Baqiya to whom belonged all the remaining Arabs. It is claimed that survivors of the ‘Arab al-Ba’ida remained and were able to reintegrate their identity with either Qahtani or ‘Adnani tribes. Al-Mas‘udi mentioned in particular ‘Amaliq, ‘Ad, Tham-d, Tasm, Jadis and Wabar as examples.13 But is there any link between the tribe ‘Amila and the ‘Amaliq? Earlier sources have emphasized such a possibility. Al-Tabari, who depended in his narration on Hisham Ibn al-Kalbi (d.204 AH),14 wrote: The king of the Arabs in al-Jazira and near Bilad al-Sham was ‘Amr b. Zarb al-‘Amliqi, of ‘Amila of the ‘Amaliq. Jadhima

28

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

assembled many Arabs and headed with the intention to conquer him [‘Amr]. They met and engaged in heavy fighting and ‘Amr b. Zarb was slain and his troops dispersed and Jadhima and his men withdrew victoriously with their spoils.15 Al-Isfahani, basing himself on Ibn al-Kalbi’s student, Ibn Habib, told a similar story but added another detail on ‘Amr’s name which became ‘al-’Amili min’ Amila al-‘Amaliq’ instead of al-‘Imliqi.16 Al-Mas‘udi for his part cited the name of Queen Al-Zabba’, the daughter of ‘Amr, but specified that she and ‘Amr were of the house of ‘Amila of the ‘Amaliq ‘Ahl Bayt ‘Amila min al-‘Amaliq.’17 As to the confused memories of Palmyra of Zenobia and al-Zabba’, the issue becomes more problematic. To modern scholars al-Zabba’ is identified with Zenobia.18 According to the traditional Arabic sources it seems more convincing to speak about an Arab queen called Na’ila, known in tradition by the name al-Zabba’.19 She was the daughter of ‘Amr b. Zarb al-’Amili, king of al-Jazira, who was killed in battle with the Lakhmid king Jadhima al-Abrash or al-Abras.20 Ibn al-Kalbi reported that he ruled the land that ‘lay between Hira, Anbar, Baqqa, Hit and its district and ‘Ayn al-Tamr and its desert range as far as Ghuwayr, Qutquna and far beyond’.21 According to the traditional sources al-Zabba’ and the ‘Amilis seem to have dominated an extended area adjacent to that of Jadhima and stretching from today’s northern Syria in the north to Palestine and al-Balqa’ and Dawmat al-Jandal in the south.22 She reportedly lured Jadhima to her capital on a promise of marriage and union of their persons and their kingdoms, and killed him. The subsequent epic describes the vengeance exacted by Jadhima’s nephew ‘Amr b. ‘Adi the Lakhmid who was the first to make Hira his capital.23 The question that needs to be answered now is: were the pro- Zabba’ ‘Amliqis related to ‘Amila tribe? The answer is perhaps found in Ibn al-Kalbi’s narration in al-Tabari’s history. It was first mentioned that the troops of al-Zabba’ were the survivors of ‘Amaliq and ‘Arab al-Ba’ida, and pro-Quda‘a tribes.24 It was previously noted that Al-Zabba’ herself was a descendent of the ‘Amila house of the ‘Amaliq. We have thus far no reason to deny the connection between ‘Amila and the

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

29

‘Amaliq. ‘Amila is known to the Arab historians and genealogists as a Yamani tribe and ‘Amaliq had nowhere been linked to any sub-tribal group or clan by the name of ‘Amila, except in this particular incident. Al-Bakri al-Andalusi, writing in the fifth Hijra century, described how the Banu Salih settled down in Palestine after being accommodated by the Banu Udhayna of ‘Amila.25 Although Banu Udhayna are acknowledged by Arab historians to be of ‘Amliqi descent, al-Bakri mentioned only their ‘Amili genealogy and neglected completely their ‘Amliqi origins. They probably formed, at that time, a distinct group within ‘Amila, but their ‘Amaliq ancestry by the fifth century AH was not a relevant issue anymore and possibly considered as part of a forgotten past. It is worthy of note that the early Arab historians (second and third Hijra century), who wrote on the connection between ‘Amila and ‘Amaliq, found no need to explain the difference between ‘Amila the Yamani tribe and ‘Amila of the ‘Amaliq, as if the connection was selfevident and clear. One possible explanation might be as follows: these two groups joined forces and intermingled to form one tribe after the migration of ‘Amila from Yemen to Iraq then to Northern Syria. Some early sources suggested that some sub-tribal groups of ‘Amila migrated first not to Palestine or Syria but to Iraq. Ibn Al-Kalbi reported that under the reign of the Persian king Ardashir, the king of the Yemen was Tubba‘. Tubba‘ who migrated from Yemen towards al-Anbar in Iraq, but he paused for a short period in al-Hira. Before leaving for al-Anbar, he left behind al-Hira some of his men: of Azd, Lakhm, Judham, ‘Amila and Quda‘a who settled down and built their homes and were joined later by people of Tay’, Kalb, al-Sakun and Bilharith b. Ka‘b and Iyad.26 Instead of mentioning general tribal groups such as Qahtan or Himyar, Ibn al-Kalbi was very specific in his narration. He reported the exact names of every tribe that settled in the area. This probably demonstrates his total faith in the data available to him. We can thus safely assume that ‘Amila, or a sub-tribal group of it, migrated and settled first in Iraq. It is possible also that some other groups of ‘Amila migrated to Palestine at the same time and both mingled again as of the third or fourth

30

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

century AD. But, according to the available primary sources, ‘Amila first settled in al-Hira. Ibn al-Kalbi mentioned ‘Amila without any connection to ‘Amaliq. This text, chronologically, precedes the story of Jadhima and al-Zabba’ and the ‘Amilis. It confirms the fact that ‘Amila and ‘Amaliq united only at a later stage in Palmyra. But how did they manage to leave Iraq and why? Al-Tabari, based on Ibn al-Kalbi, gave us the solution to this riddle. In his accounts of the Persian kings and in particular in narrating the reign of Ardashir, the Persian king who occupied Iraq, al-Tabari informs us that Quda‘a refused to acknowledge his sovereignty and decided to separate his tribe from the Tanukh tribe led by the predecessors of Jadhima. They therefore left for Bilad al-Sham and joined their relatives of Quda‘a living under the authority of al-Zabba’: When Ardashir took over Iraq, many of the Tanukh were loath to live in his kingdom, and to pay him allegiance. Those who belonged to Quda‘a and who came with Malik and ‘Amr the two sons of Fahm and Malik b. Zuhayr, left and headed for al-Sham and joined Quda‘a there.27 The ancient story of the ‘Amaliq’s origins may have been a legend, but early Arab historians had reasons to believe that ‘Amila existed in the third century AD under a formidable Queen named al-Zabba’ (this is probably the same as Zenobia). After their departure from Iraq following its conquest by the Persians, the ‘Amilis joined forces with the Palmyrenes. The result of this alliance was the creation of a semiautonomous state which lasted probably for a few decades only. The defeat of this state by the Romans may have pushed Quda‘a – among whom were the ‘Amilis – to move southwards into Palestine and join forces with their relatives. As noted by al-Bakri and Ibn Khaldun above, Banu Salih of Quda‘a, who belonged to the troops of al-Zabba’, moved to settle down with the Banu Udhayna of ‘Amila. This text suggests that Banu Udhayna of ‘Amila left Palmyra first, possibly as a result of the Roman victory, and sought refuge by the end of the third century AD in southern Palestine.

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

31

‘Amila and Palmyra Lammens and Caskel dismissed the history of ‘Amila in the pre-Islamic period as ‘unworthy of belief.’ Their assumption perhaps stems from the orientalists’ sceptical approach to classical Arab historiography based on oral traditions. It is clear that some aspects of the version written by Ibn al-Kalbi and Ibn Habib, as reported by al-Tabari and al-Isfahani, are fictitious and confused. Al-Zabba’ is probably the Arabic name for Zenobia. The presence of the ‘Amaliq in Palmyra in all likelihood is a legend and the Palmyrenes were defeated by the Romans. The Arabic sources ignore totally the fact that the Romans defeated Zenobia and destroyed Palmyra and instead focus on the inter-Arab aspect of the struggle. The role of the Lakhmids in these events is not easy to determine; they may have participated with the Romans against Palmyra or acted independently in a small role which was exaggerated in the traditional Arabic sources. However, recent archaeological and epigraphic evidence support, at least, some of the information in classical Arab historiography. An inscription written in Greek and Nabatean was discovered in Umm al-Jimal, in Hawran, which translates as follows: ‘This is the column of Fihr of Shullai, tutor of Jadhimat, King of the Tanukh’.28 The inscription clearly states that the tutor of Jadhima is buried in Umm al-Jimal. The presence of the tutor in the distant Hawran does not necessarily prove that the authority of Jadhima reached this region. It could perhaps attest to the battles between the Palmyrenes and Jadhima. In fact, it appears that the city of Umm al-Jimal was destroyed completely by the wars of the third century AD.29 The inscription, most importantly, attests to the presence and existence of Jadhima the king of Tanukh (GDYMT MLK TNWKH) as cited in the classical Arabic sources. Thus archaeological and epigraphic evidence corroborates some of the historical information and confirms the existence of a historical figure named Jadhima. Moreover, the developed form of the Nabataean script of the inscription might in fact suggest that the third century is the right context.30 Another South Arabian inscription from the third century AD states that a mission was sent by the king Shammar to the northeast region of the Peninsula: ‘In the kingdom of Persia and the land

32

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

of Tanukh’ (MLKTY FRS W’RD TNKH).31 This text confirms the classical Arabic sources concerning the whereabouts of Tanukh on the borders of the Persian Gulf and al-Hira.32 That the Tanukh (among whom were the Quda‘a and ‘Amila) moved eventually under the Sasanid Ardashir to Syria as previously mentioned by al-Tabari and endorsed by modern scholarship now seems more likely.33 The archaeological evidence that links the Palmyrenes and the ‘Amilis is now better established. The famous Nabateo-Arabic inscription of Namara is even more revealing. Discovered and published by R. Dussaud,34 the epitaph of Imru’ al-Qays, the Arab king buried in Namara, between Bostra and Damascus, in AD 328, establishes a fixed and clear date and introduces some order in the confused chronology of the Arabic texts. Most significantly it corroborates the genealogy of Jadhima as reported by Ibn al-Kalbi and al-Tabari. The text, as translated by Dussaud runs as follows: Ceci est le tombeau d’Imru’lqais fils de ‘Amr, roi de tous les Arabes, celui qui ceignit le diadème, qui soumit les deux (tribus) d’Asad, (celle) de Nizar et leurs rois, qui dispersa Madhhij jusqu’à ce jour, qui apporta le succès au siège de Nedjran, ville de Chammar, qui soumit la tribu de Ma‘add, qui repartit entre ses fils les tribus et organisa celles-ci comme corps de cavalerie pour les Romains. Aucun roi n’a atteint sa gloire, jusqu’a ce jour. Il est mort l’an 223, le septième jour de Kesloul. Que le bonheur soit sur sa postérité.35 Imru’ al-Qays is the famous Lakhmid king of Hira. His name and his father’s name ‘Amr b. ‘Adi, and his being the second king of Hira after his father as reported by the classical Arabic sources, all coincide with the data of the inscription. Ibn al-Kalbi, as presented by Caskel, reconstructed the genealogical descent between Jadhima and Imru’ al-Qays. ‘Amr b. ‘Adi, the father of Imru’ al-Qays and the founder of the Lakhmid dynasty in Hira, is Jadhima’s nephew. The story matches, to a great extent, the Arabic version related by traditional Arabic sources. Modern western scholarship tends to accept this version as valid.36

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

33

Furthermore, it is worth mentioning that Ibn al-Kalbi noted that the Lakhmids were once named the Numara and that name was given to the place of birth of ‘Adi and his son. This might explain why Imru’ al-Qays was buried in Namara in his birthplace (masqit ra’s). The story, in the traditional Arabic literature, has probably been prone to some fictitious elements but many of its heroes did really exist. Jadhima and his nephew may or may not have encountered Zenobia, as related in the Arabic tradition, but they did exist as did Zenobia. The confusion in the chronicles of Ibn al-Kalbi and Ibn Habib notwithstanding, we can no longer dismiss them automatically. They contain a substantial number of historical facts although their chronology is confused. It is thus not inconceivable to accept the account related to ‘Amila in line with these traditions. As a matter of fact, epigraphic evidence and historical interpretation could substantiate the existence of the ‘Amilis in Palmyra under Odenathus and Zenobia in Palmyra in the third century AD. Despite the different interpretations of the evidence, it remains the only source mentioning clearly the word ‘Amila in Palmyra. At the site Kheurbet Leqteir near Palmyra a unique text was found inscribed on a triangular shaped cippus. This epigraph was written in the Palmyrene language and it reads on the first face: DKYRN BNY—(que soient commémorés les fils de—).37 The French translation may not be exact and does not reflect the meaning as intended by the original writers. BNY in Palmyrene language means Banu in Arabic, thus the word ‘fils’ in French or ‘sons’ in English might not be the proper one. Banu, in Arabic, is used as the group of people who form a clan or a tribe, i.e. Banu ‘Amila. It is used as the sons of a certain individual who became a head of a sub-clan or a clan. On the second face of the cippus, it reads: ‘ML’, (‘Amlâ). Schlumberger identifies it as a person’s name (nom propre de personne) or a name of a city (ou de ville). Neither alternative is very likely; the city ‘Amila does not exist, at least not in the Arabic geographical literature written by Yaqut, al-Muqaddasi, Ibn al-Faqih, Ibn Khurradadhbeh and others. As to the name of the person ‘Amila, it was used by the Arabs in rare cases. The empty space—between BNY and ‘ML’ could either be for a village or a tribe if compared with the other Palmyrene epigraphs.

34

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

The word BNY in plural was used only for these two cases (village or tribe). Even if the word BNY is used to name several members of one family, it is worth mentioning that their names were not cited before as is customary in the Palmyrene language and traditions. J. Stark identifies it as ‘ml’. According to him it means ‘a worker’ which indicates the literal meaning in Arabic and traces it back either to Aramaic ‘amela’ or Arabic ‘amil.38 Stark’s interpretation does not seem adequate; the word worker on the cippus is inappropriate and does not seem to reflect any reality. A cippus is usually used to write family names. Moreover the word in Palmyrene is written ‘Amilah and not ‘Amil. The author acknowledges that his interpretation of the philological roots of the word ‘ml’ is not decisive: it could be either Aramaic or Arabic, but in general his inclination is towards an Arabic etymology. Stark has shown that a majority of Palmyrene names have Arabic etymologies and that words that require Arabic interpretation are attested with far more frequency than any other language. Aramaic remains according to him a less possible interpretation. Two keen researchers in Palmyrene archaeology confirm this fact: L’orthographe présente des variations, dont certaines au moins semblent indiquer que la langue était en pleine évolution, en particulier pour les consonnes sifflantes et dentales. Mais ce qui complique le problème, c’est la présence à Palmyre de nombreux Arabes, qui ont pu influencer les prononciations. Alors qu’on n’a relevé qu’une dizaine de termes arabes dans les textes palmyréniens, les noms de personnes à étymologie arabe y sont nèttement majoritaires.39 As to the third face of the cippus, it is illegible.40 It is important to mention that the author stated that the site has never been touched by outsiders and that all the objects were discovered by him.41 Why did Schlumberger and Stark fail to identify the term ‘amila with the tribe ‘Amila which seems the most obvious choice? Their lack of expertise in the Arabic tribal world could be an explanation. The tribe ‘Amila is not as famous as Kalb for example. Thus it is possible for many researchers not expert in the field to omit it as a possibility.

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

35

Other scholars have tried to elaborate an explanation for this inscription. Ryckmans gives the word as written in Palmyrene script. He refers it to its Thamudean roots. According to him it is pronounced ‘Amilat.42 He believes it is the same one that Wüstenfeld identified as the tribe ‘Amila, or the Banu ‘Amila:43 ‘Amila bint Wadi‘a die Frau des Hârith ben ‘Adi, dessen Nachkommen nach ihr Banu ‘Amilia heissen.’ (‘Amila bint Wadi‘a, the wife of Harith ibn ‘Adi, whose descendents were called ‘Amila after her). It seems to me that Ryckmans resorted to the more obvious choice. The word in Palmyrene reads ‘Amila and in Arabic the tribe ‘Amila is the most obvious choice. According to a specialist in Palmyrene and Nabatean languages, J. Cantineau, the word clearly reads in Palmyrene ‘Amla.44 Cantineau, in another book, tracks its roots to the verb in Arabic ‘Amala (to work) but identifies it, strangely, as ‘Umayla.45 It is unlikely that this word means in Arabic ‘Umayla because, phonetically, the word ‘Amla in Palmyrene does not match with ‘Umaylah. Moreover Cantineau based his assumption on Ibn Durayd’s al-Ishtiqaq46 but apparently he did not choose the proper word. Why would Cantineau choose the wrong word? When revising Ibn Durayd’s book as edited by Wüstenfeld, one could explain what could have happened. The index includes a list for male names and another one for tribes. Under the male names, ‘Amila obviously is not included, but ‘Umayla is mentioned. Although Ibn Durayd does cite the name of the tribe ‘Amila while explaining the etymology of the word ‘Umayla, it seems that Cantineau favored ‘Umayla. In the tribal index, again ‘Amila was not mentioned and, unless one is an expert in the field of the Arab tribes, one is unlikely to know that ‘Amila would be mentioned under the name of al-Harith b. ‘Adi.47 Thus Cantineau could easily have overlooked the existence of a tribe called ‘Amila. The epigraphic evidence discussed above is, however, not conclusive. It shows nevertheless that the family, tribe or group ‘Amila did exist in Palmyra. Whether this ‘Amila is the tribe ‘Amila remains to be proven. But a connection between ‘Amila and the city Palmyra as recorded by the classical Arabic traditions cannot be dismissed out of hand. Inscriptions in Greek, in the region of Syria, reflect an area of interchange between the Graeco-Roman culture of the settled region

36

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

and the communal structures of the nomads. This is reflected in the inscriptions honouring individuals as ‘strategos of the nomades’, or ‘syndikos of the nomades’.48 In Palmyra the case becomes even more peculiar. Crucial evidence is found in the inscriptions of Palmyra: the dedications of the great buildings and temples of Palmyra are all made in the name of tribes. The tribes existed in parallel with any commercial organization at Palmyra and reflected the social structure belonging to the nomadic origin of the peoples, the quasi-feudal troops of beduin under a leading shaykh.49 No dedication, except the one discussed above, was found naming ‘Amila specifically. This does not deny the possibility that ‘Amila had a role in Palmyra as suggested by the traditional Arabic sources. Caravan protection from and to Palmyra was provided by ‘synodiarchs’ or chief accompaniers who would recruit a body of troops from his tribesmen in the desert to guarantee the camel caravans a safe conduct in the desert. It was probably paid for by the merchants. Palmyrene trade was directed to the lower-middle Euphrates and then to the shores of the Gulf. From the Persian Gulf, Palmyrene merchants sailed as far as India. On the outward journey Palmyrene traders will surely have used boats to go down the Euphrates. It is evident that the Palmyrenes had complex diplomatic, economic and military relations with these other peoples. Relations between nomads and passing caravans did not necessarily involve simply attack and defence.50 It is not uncommon for the tribe ‘Amila, coming from Hira in the region of the Euphrates, to have found their way into Palmyra, ‘the Jewel of the Desert,’ as caravan protectors or simple semi-nomads interacting with a settled community. This possibility can be further enhanced when it is compared to the sudden emergence of Odenathus (Udhayna). The family of Odenathus emerges suddenly from the shadow of aristocratic clans. It has been suggested that the rise of the dynasty is the result of the arrival of bands of newcomers driven across the Euphrates by the aggressive new Persian dynasty of Shapur I.51 The new elite bear the names from varied linguistic origins. Odenathus is Arabic (Udhayna-little ear), but he is the grandson of Nasor and son of Hairan (Aramaic). They seem thus distinguished from the Aramaic race that makes up the bulk of Palmyra’s population, and the linguistic argument provides

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

37

slight further support for the supposition that Odenathus was one of the tribal shaykhs who was involved in the caravan escorts. Septimus Odenathus was born AD 220, the son of Hairan, the son of Vaballath Nasor. The Arabic origins of his name, whereas his father’s is Aramaic, suggests a mixed Aramaic and Beduin descent. His Latin name shows that his family acquired citizenship under the reign of Romans. The first we hear of him is in a dedication, in Palmyrene, which refers to him as ras dy tadmwr ‘Chief of Tadmor.’ Two other dedications referring to him as ras tadmor date from AD 252. The first of these is in Greek as well as Palmyrene, and attributes senatorial rank to him. He may have acquired it between AD 222 and 254. His military successes on Rome’s behalf in the 250’s elevated him to the rank of consularis and by AD 258 he received from Gallienus the title of strategos of all the East.52 A modus vivendi was established beween Rome and the Parthians until AD 224, when the Parthian empire was overthrown by one of its vassal kings, the Sassanid Persian Ardashir. The murder of the last Arsacid kings threw the east into turmoil. Their supporters fled to all quarters. Two of the Arab tribes, the Tanukh and the Quda‘a-’Amila included- fled to Syria, and became important players in the struggle of Rome against Palmyra. It is not unlikely that the family of Odhenatus of Palmyra also came west at this time, establishing itself in its new home and rapidly acquiring a dominant position.53 Al-Bakri mentioned that it was the Banu Udhayna of ‘Amila that was settled in Palestine when they were joined by the Banu Salih a few decades later. Is it a simple coincidence that one major clan of the tribe ‘Amila is named Udhayna?

‘Amila under the Byzantines Due to the extreme paucity of sources, it is very difficult to establish a detailed history of the ‘Amila tribe as an independent unit. It is nevertheless possible to deduce shreds of its history from the larger, more extensive history of the Arab federates in the Byzantine Orient. Thus the next few pages will attempt to write a history of ‘Amila as reflected in the history of its sister Arab Syrian tribes.

38

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

‘Amila under the Byzantines in the fourth, fifth and sixth century AD appears to have established itself in a new region, south of Palestine, and acquired a new status. ‘Amila appears to have functioned as military units, forming part of the Arab federates and fighting alongside the Byzantines in defence of the empire.54 The Arab federates had an extensive presence in the Orient as of the fourth century AD. They formed, with their military militia, ‘a shield’ to protect the Byzantine empire. The Tanukhids and Salihids lived in the north; Kalb lived in the centre and possessed Dumat al-Jandal; Lakhm was in the province Arabia; the tribes ‘Amila and Judham were in the southern part of Arabia and in what later came to be known as Palestina Tertia.55 This area occupied by ‘Amila extended from Ayla in the south to the Dead Sea in the north. The role of the Arab tribes was to assist the imperial troops in protecting that region from raids by hostile beduins.56 These semi-nomadic Arab tribes had culturally more in common with the tribal society of the Arabian peninsula than they did with the settled communities of Syria. They had, however, for the most part adopted Monophysite Christianity, but they were distinct from the settled people of Syria both in language and in their way of life. They dominated the southernmost part of Syria, where the Nabatean Arabs had once established their mercantile capital Petra, for long periods.57 A new structure had to be devised to fill the vacuum created by the fall of Palmyra under Odenathus and to meet the challenges posed by the Arabs in the Arabian Peninsula. The vacuum placed the Romans in a constantly reactive position in defence of their frontiers. This new structure was the work of Diocletian, who complemented the military victory of Aurelian over the Arabs by the construction of the Strata Diocletiana.58 But the new defence system with its limes Diocletianus and its Roman limes (fortified frontiers) in the Arabian desert was not enough to deal with challenges coming from the Arabs and the Arabian Peninsula. The limes was established yet the empire remained in a state of permanent tension. The tension was only resolved through the employment of federate Arabs to deal with the Peninsular Arabs who were raiding the imperial frontier. The Arab Syrians were Byzantium’s answer to the permanent challenges that were coming from the Arabian frontier. The Byzantines conveniently turned the military Arab groups

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

39

who fought their way across the limes into allies of the empire. They allowed these Arab groups to settle on Byzantine territory and granted them annual subsidies in return for military service. The Theories of the Limes In the next few paragraphs I will highlight the theories advanced regarding the Roman limes. It is important to discuss this issue in depth because it is due to the limes that probably ‘Amila and the other Arab federates managed to evolve from roaming desert nomads into regional tribal groups entangled with the policies of the Byzantine and Persian empires. Much has been written on the Byzantine defence system in the Orient. Brunnow and Domaszewski elaborated the theory of the two limes, the inner and the outer running from north to south.59 This theory has been accepted by some and rejected by others. A. Musil and A. Poidebard argued for the existence of this double line of defence. Musil distinguished the limes interior on which Roman forts were located from the limes exterior, the outer boundary of the territory that lay beyond the limes interior, inhabited by the Arab tribes allied to Rome or to Byzantium. He believed that the internal limes were permanent and strongly fortified, while the external limes contained no permanent garrisons and was not fixed.60 Poidebard argued, however, that a zone inhabited by allied nomads without Roman posts could not be named limes. He concluded that there were indeed two lines of defence, a double limes, but the outer limes was not abandoned to the Arabs. It was most likely dotted with fortified posts.61 Bowersock had his doubts concerning the ‘two limites,’ interior and exterior; he proposed the use of the term ‘fortified territory’ for translating limes in the Orient. He concluded that the system in this region was one of defence in depth rather than of a defensive line.62 However, the absence of a fortified line raises the question of how incursions from the deserts of Arabia were prevented. Shahid identified even further the Arab presence in that region. Arab allies of Byzantium, he argued, were settled on both sides of the limes. But instead of speaking of a limes exterior in connection with

40

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

the Arabs, he proposed to resort to such terms as a Roman sphere of influence or an area of indirect Roman presence beyond the Roman frontier. These terms are less confining than limes. They reflect the political and military reality of the Roman presence, which was not precisely located in a certain area but was related to the allied Arab tribes and their unsettled way of life. It could have been a fluctuating frontier. With the presence of the allied Arab tribes outside the limes, and instead of using the term limes exterior with its misleading association, Shahid introduced the term ‘Arab shield’ in referring to these tribes outside the Roman limes. This outer shield must be distinguished from the inner one inside the limes consisting of Arab tribes settled within the limes.63 P. Mayerson argued persuasively that we cannot think of the limes as a border in the modern sense of the word- as a line between ‘us’ and ‘them’- nor as a line of fortifications designed to keep out the enemy known as the Saracens.64 The Romans could not prevent small groups of individual Saracens from infiltrating or moving about the provinces. Mayerson believed that it is necessary to discard the association of the term limes with the words ‘borders’ or ‘boundary’ because, for many, these words are closely associated with a line of separation, whether it be of states, provinces or armies. They do not serve to describe the military or political situation in this part of the Roman empire. It seems best to translate the term limes as ‘frontier’ in the sense used in the United States; i.e, as the land that forms the furthest extent of a country’s settled or inhabited region.65 The whole province of Palestina Tertia should be considered a frontier province in the sense stated above. As such, scattered communities required protection from raiding nomads who lived within or outside the province. The military units, whether Arab federates or Roman soldiers, provided the functions necessary for policing a frontier territory: patrolling, scouting, escorting and pursuing. The Arabs as Guardians of Byzantium ‘Amila and the Arab Syrian federates were newcomers who probably crossed the limes in the fourth century and some possibly in the third such as the ‘Amilis and the Quda‘a. ‘Amila’s connection with the

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

41

Palmyrenes notwithstanding, they were at that stage a semi-nomadic tribe. One of the most important differences between the new federates and the Palmyrenes is that the life and history of the latter centered around their fortress city, Palmyra, as did the history of the Nabateans around Petra. It was from their cities and because of them that the Palmyrenes and Nabateans were able to pose a threat to the empire. In contrast, even though the Arab Syrian federates had their military establishments and their capitals, they could not develop a major urban centre. Their conversion to Christianity constituted probably the difference between them and all the other previous Arab groups. The federates received annual salaries and subsidies and thus they were paid soldiers, but this material bond alone could not have induced a real sense of loyalty. Christianity solved this problem by uniting the two parties within a spiritual fold. There were three different communions: the Melkite (Chalcedonians), the West Syrian (Monophysite or Jacobites), and the East Syrian (Nestorian).66 The federates were mostly Monophysites, but their commitment to Christianity varied from one tribe to another. These federates had an important place in the Byzantine army of the Orient, a function that gradually developed throughout the fourth and fifth centuries until it reached its climax in the sixth century. The Arabs were professional fighters, raiders in the Arabian Peninsula before they settled in both parts of the Fertile Crescent. Unlike their Nabatean and Palmyrene predecessors, they did not engage in trade or agriculture and thus were purely professional soldiers who were kept at a high level of military efficiency. The Byzantines no doubt exercised considerable influence on their military readiness; after all they formed part of the Byzantine army during wars. They adopted Roman weapons and methods of warfare as well as Roman discipline and organization. They functioned as mobile cavalry units in the army of the Orient. To this army they contributed numbers, mobility and spirit. The Byzantine armies of the sixth century, for instance, were relatively small armies and the Arab troops formed a considerable portion of them.67 Their role as guardians of the desert frontier, imposed on them, in all likelihood, the use of camels and horses. Their weaponry consisted mainly of the sword and the spear, which are mentioned

42

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

continuously in Jahili Arab poetry and in ‘Adi b. al-Riqa’s. The bows and arrows are practically missing from the literature. These weapons were usually used by the archers in an army; the federates were not known for their talents in archery. Although the Arabs learned discipline and training from the Byzantines, their mobile warfare did not derive from Byzantine strategies which recommended methods that were very different from desert warfare. In the Strategikon of Maurice, there is an emphasis on defensive warfare mainly.68 Kaegi described the Byzantine method of warfare in the following words: it was a warfare of patience, timing, cleverness, and endless manoeuvring. Glory and zeal in battle were not regarded as essential qualities for success in war.69 The Arab way of warfare did not fit these recommendations. The Arab federates were familiar with the principles of desert warfare which emphasized speed, secrecy and surprise. The Byzantine connection added discipline and strategy to their fighting methods. An expert on the Arab federates documented what the Arabs assimilated from the Byzantines in their methods of war in the sixth century: Fighting not in lines but in units and divisions, as is clearly indicated in Book II (The Strate¯gikon), which deals with cavalry battle formation, the use of spies and scouts, the employment of flags, the term ‘chiliarch’ which may become the Arabic Jarrar, the leader of a thousand.70 The Arab Syrian federates had three main missions: the defence of the more exposed provinces against the infiltrations of the Arab nomads from the Arabian Peninsula; the containment of the pro-Persian Arabs, the Lakhmids; and participation in the regular campaigns of the Byzantine army against the Sasanids. In spite of the rise of the limes and the concentration of regular Roman troops along that limes in great numbers, the Arab federates remained indispensable, especially for dealing with the Arabs of the Peninsula. Neither static massive troops nor walls could deal with the threat coming from the Peninsula. Only mobile

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

43

troops could meet it and neutralize it. Thoroughly familiar with desert warfare, with the topography of the Arabian heartland from which they had come, and with its tribes, the Arab federates could impose Byzantine’s will and policies in the desert. The relations between Byzantines and Arabs, however, were often marred by misunderstanding and mistrust. The Arab method of warfare, based on freedom of manoeuvre, illustrates one aspect of such misunderstanding, for it was the exact opposite of the Byzantine method based on mass. The battle of Raqqa, for instance, in AD 531, was lost by the Byzantines through their misunderstanding of the tactics of the few thousand Arabs composing the right wing of their army, whose manoeuvres were misconstrued as flight.71 The relations between the two were not easy to manage since the Arabs never considered themselves to be only employees on the payroll, or subordinates waiting to execute orders. On the other side, the Byzantines, or at least some of their emperors and military leaders, never looked at the Arabs as equal partners with shared goals and values. Thus conflict and tension between them was not uncommon. The major rift between the Byzantines and the Arab federates, however, was the religious one. The Ghassanids, for instance, were staunch Monophysites and were persecuted by Byzantium. They sometimes chose to leave the service of the Byzantines rather than betray their beliefs. Tanukh and ‘Amila Byzantium interacted with three major groups of Arab federates, allies of Byzantium, in the course of three centuries: the Tanukhids in the fourth century, the Salihids in the fifth and the Ghassanids in the sixth. Each of these three centuries roughly witnessed the rise of a new dominant group of federates. It is very hard to establish the identity of the Arab federates from the Byzantine sources, but Arabic sources are unanimous in stating that the first group of Arab federates were the Tanukhids along with other Arab groups in Syria.72 The Tanukhids were able to gain Byzantium’s trust and support because they adopted Christianity.73 Tanukh, however, was not one tribe but a group or a confederation of tribes. It is very difficult to establish whether ‘Amila

44

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

joined Tanukh or allied itself to it or remained independent. It is possible that ‘Amila crossed the limes, after their defeat under al-Zabba’, as of the late third century and were later joined by Tanukh. The most important sources on the Arab federates of Byzantium in that period are those on the Arab conquests of Bilad al-Sham. Although Islamic sources were recorded much later in the ninth and tenth centuries AD, they provide almost complete lists of the Arab federate groups that fought with or against Byzantium during the Islamic conquests. It is not difficult to isolate the tribes and groups that were already inside the limes in the fourth century. The tribes that received notice in al-Tabari and al-Baladhuri, for instance, are the ones which participated in the major encounters between Muslim troops and Byzantines at Mu’ta, Fihl and al-Yarmuk. These were ‘Amila, Judham, Lakhm, Balqayn, Bahra’, Bali, Kalb, Ghassan, Tanukh and Salih.74 Others also appeared on different occasions: Kinda, Tayy’ and ‘Udhra. Shahid was able to identify several tribes which migrated after the fourth century and they are Ghassan, Tayy’ and Bahra’.75 The rest of the tribes that almost certainly reached Bilad al-Sham before the fourth century were ‘Amila, Judham, Lakhm, Balqayn, Bali, Salih, Kalb and Tanukh. These tribes operated between the Provincia Arabia and Palestina Tertia, but their role in the region for Byzantium is not clear. According to Shahid it is probable that they had a federate status. The area settled by these tribes and in particular ‘Amila and Judham would still have been within that of the Byzantine presence or the unofficial sphere of influence in Arabia; consequently, these tribes would have been engaged in the defence of the Byzantine frontier.76 Al-Ya‘qubi mentioned Quda‘a as the first Arab tribal group to join the Romans: ‘fa sarat ila muluk al-Rum famallakuhum.’77 They were made ‘kings’ over the Arabs of al-Sham after they adopted Christianity.78 What is certain, however, is that Tanukh, the dominant Quda‘i tribe, did not have any presence in the southern part of Palestine because it joined hands with Lakhm in the north and formed a huge confederacy; it is therefore only logical to leave that mission to other Arab tribes. It is not unlikely that ‘Amila and Judham fulfilled that mission. The presence of these two tribes in that area is almost certain. The Arabic sources on these tribes refer to them in areas in

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

45

which they were settled in the seventh century AD. But with rare exceptions, the evidence would suggest that these tribes were settled in the fourth century in roughly the same area as in the seventh. As is well known, these semi-nomadic groups had their own pastures and limited seasonal migrations.79 Thus their dependence on their own water and pasturage restricted their mobility. No great upheavals were noted that might have displaced them. This theory is compatible with what the Arabic sources have told us concerning the movement of ‘Amila. We have seen already how ‘Amila could have crossed from Mesopotamia to Syria under al-Zabba’ in the third century AD (or much earlier), and they moved again to Filastin after the destruction of the Syrian Queen by the Lakhmids. With the destruction of the Palmyrene ‘Arab shield’ and before it the Nabatean, Byzantium was engaged in establishing a new one against the Arabs of the Peninsula in the fourth century. ‘Amila along with Judham, Balqayn and Bali lived in roughly the southern part of Palestine which became Palestina Tertia toward the middle of the fourth century. Naturally the absence of any archeological and epigraphic evidence hinders our conclusions, but it would be safe to say that they lived in Hisma and Madyan north of Hijaz.80 These tribes were settled far from the Persian border and the Euphrates. They were strategically stationed on the roads that led from the Hijaz into the Provincia Arabia and Palestina Tertia making them more easily defensible by Arab than by regular Roman soldiers. Salih and ‘Amila The fifth century witnessed the fall of the Tanukhids as Byzantium’s dominant group and the emergence of Banu Salih. Their fall did not mean their disappearence nor the eclipse of the other federate groups as allies of Byzantium. The later fall of the Salihids in the sixth century did not end the existence of these federates. Their survival following continuous changes added to the complexity of the structure of the federate presence in the area. The relation between the Salihids and the ‘Amilis was rather special. According to the Arabic sources, Banu ‘Amila in Palestine

46

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

(Banu Udhayna in particular) accommodated the Salihids led by al-Hudurjan when they crossed the limes, probably in the third century AD. The son of al-Hudurjan, Labid, forged an alliance with the ‘Amilis who needed the Salihids as military support. The extension of their kingdom under Zarb, grandfather of al-Zabba’, and the existence of their bitter enemy the Lakhmids might explain their need for an additional ally like the Salihids. After the death of al-Zabba’, the ‘Amilis apparently withdrew further south towards Filastin leaving behind the Salihids, who by the fifth century became the new masters of the region until the arrival of the Ghassanids. The story is related in al-Bakri: They [Banu Salih] joined Zarb b. Hassan b. Udhayna al-‘Imliqi . . . they remained with the kings of ‘Amaliqs, raiding together and accumulating the spoils of war until the days of al-Zabba’, daughter of ‘Amr b. Zarb . . . They became her cavalry and her protectors (wulat amriha). When ‘Amr b. ‘Adi defeated al-Zabba’, they took over the rule and remained rulers until they were overthrown by the Ghassanids. Salih and these tribes remain in their lands to this day.81 Meanwhile the role of ‘Amila in Palestine remained probably the same as the Arabic monastic establishment in Palestina Tertia grew even larger in number. Protection from raids was needed even more for the monks and the inhabitants of the monastic centres.82 It is possible that their alliance with the Salihids provided them with an eminent status in the phylarchate hierarchy. ‘Amila, like the other federates, benefited from the long peace with Persia during the fifth century. Byzantium had a relatively harmonious relationship with the Arab federates. Byzantium, occupied by its wars against the Germanic barbarians, needed the Arabs even more in order to find and establish better trade routes and zones of influence. It is almost certain that after the Germanic occupation of the western half of the Mediterranean and the dangers posed for navigation and trade, the empire looked toward the Red Sea and Indian Ocean as new outlets.83 This further explains its interests in the services of the

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

47

Arab tribal groups as federates. Thus these groups -among whom was ‘Amila- emerged, in the fifth century as guardians of the Arabian frontier and protectors of Byzantine commercial interests in the Red Sea and the Arabian Peninsula. During the fifth century the Arab federates consolidated the positions they had gained in the fourth century due to the increased reliance of Byzantium on their services. As a result of these new trading routes Palestina Tertia, dominated by ‘Amila and its sister tribes Judham and Lakhm, gained even more importance and became, administratively, a fully independent unit carved out of Provincia Arabia.84 Ghassan and ‘Amila Beginning with the sixth century AD, Byzantine policy on the desert frontier came to depend to a considerable extent on Arab client confederation. The Arab Syrian federates fulfilled their mission to eliminate successfully the threat from the desert. The Judhamids and ‘Amilis in particular had shown strong commitment to Byzantium in the sixth century.85 In addition to that, the federates succeeded in their assignment to contain the Lakhmids, the Arab allies of Sasanid Persia. This threat was dealt with in the sixth century when Ghassanid federates crushed their Lakhmid enemies and occupied and burned their capital Hira. The Byzantine empire could not afford to maintain the dense network of garrisons on which Rome had once depended. By the second half of the sixth century, the condition of the Byzantine army, especially under Justinian, deteriorated. It was plagued by problems of diminishing manpower, difficulty of payment, low recruitment, mutinies and lack of discipline.86 In contrast, there arose a relatively small mobile army – the Ghassanid contingent which possessed some of the qualities the Byzantine army had lost.87 By that time, the Ghassanids and the other federates were an army and not merely a band of raiders. They formed a contingent of cavalry since this was their place in the composition of the Byzantine army of the Orient.88 The Byzantines maintained a number of clients at any one time, but for most of the sixth century the dominant client group was the Ghassanid confederation. Their leader al-Harith b. Jabala, was recognized as a king

48

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

and given the important court title of Patrikios. The Ghassanids justified imperial confidence. They served with distinction in Byzantine campaigns against the Persians, and on their behalf shattered the rival power of the Persian Arab clients, the Lakhmids of Hira, in southwestern Iraq. ‘Amila and Judham in Palestina Tertia recognized Ghassanid supremacy in the sixth century. In a rare but important reference to the ‘Amili-Ghassanid relations during the sixth century, al-Dabbi related a story on how the kings of Ghassan used to treat their allies. A Ghassanid tribal chief was in pursuit of a man from ‘Amila, possibly for revenge. He captured two brothers: Simak and Malik. The brothers were given the option to chose one of them as the victim. Both offered their lives. The Ghassanid thus killed Simak. Malik was released and returned to his tribe. He subsequently avenged his brother’s death by killing the Ghassanid chief in a raid. The story shows how the balance of power was in favour of the Ghassanid, who were able to detain two men and act as their jailor, judge and executor. The story does not record any reaction on the behalf of the ‘Amila tribe which accepted the Ghassanid judgement. The survivor subsequently avenged his brother on a personal basis. The balance of power, according to this source, was not in favour of the ‘Amilis who reacted as the Ghassanids’ minor ally.89 In a unique direct reference to a military alliance between ‘Amila and Ghassan, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-’Amili provided us with a poem in which he enumerates the achievements of his tribe in the jahiliyya:90 Neither the son of Murra, al-Mu‘addal, is from us nor is ‘Amr b. Hind the year he came during the festive season, Leading the sons of Nizar and the people of Iraq from al-Mala arrogant and haughty, When we realized he is invading us we attacked him with our large army. ‘Amr b. Hind is none other than the son of the Lakhmid king alMundhir and Hind, daughter of Arethas the Kindite. After the death of his father, he became king of al-Hira (AD 554–69).91 His father al-Mundhir was defeated and killed in the battle of Chalcis by the

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

49

Ghassanids and their allies. ‘Amr tried to retaliate in a series of attacks to regain the lost Lakhmid prestige. Traditional sources refer to this day as Yawm Marj Halima when the Ghassanids again inflicted a heavy defeat on the Lakhmids.92 According to ‘Adi the participation of the ‘Amilis in this battle is substantial and essential. These verses show the solid alliance established between Amila and Ghassan in the sixth century. Unfortunately there is no direct data on the participation of ‘Amilis in other battles fought by the Ghassanids. What is certain however is that ‘Amila by the sixth century had become a major ally to the Ghassanids and a guardian of the Byzantine empire The success of the Ghassanids, however, gave them the potential to become dangerously independent in Byzantine eyes. It was surely this, in addition to their devotion to Monophysite theology, that persuaded the emperor Tiberius in AD 580 and later Maurice in AD 582 to break up the Ghassanid confederation.93 Maurice was a Chalcedonian and considered the Monophysites heretics. This included the Ghassanids. As a soldier to whom a military manual, the Strategikon, is ascribed, he placed no confidence in the federates. He considered them unreliable and treacherous allies. He did not get along with them during their military operations thus conflict was inevitable. Maurice was the Magister militum per Orientum and his opinion was well received in Constantinople; he was soon to become the son-in-law of the emperor and his successor.94 The death of emperor Tiberius and the accession to power of Maurice proved to be fatal to the Ghassanids. The dissolution of their Phylarchate was soon proclaimed by Byzantium. Both their king Mundhir and his son Nu‘man were sent into exile. The end of Ghassanid supremacy allowed the Byzantines to subsidise a greater number of lesser allies. The most important were perhaps the Judhamids and their sister tribe ‘Amila in the very north of the Hijaz and south of Palestine. Of this event Michael the Syrian informed us that: Le royaume des Tayâyê fut partagé entre quinze princes. La plupart d’entre eux se joingnirent aux Perses, et dès lors l’empire des Tayâyê chrétiens prit fin et céssa, à cause de la perfidie des Romains. L’hérésie se repandit parmi les Tayâyê.95

50

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Thus we understand from this text that the Ghassanids, or at least pro-Ghassanids, split into fifteen tribal groups. The text is not clear about the identity of these groups or their leaders, but we know that some of them joined the Persians as their new patrons. The statement of Michael implies that Persia was not the only destination of the dissatisfied leaders but, in fact, there were other destinations. This lacuna was dealt with in the Armenian version of The Chronicle of Michael the Syrian written by the priest Ishok in the thirteenth century. A translation of this Armenian version appeared in 1868 by Langlois. This version was used and commented upon by both Nöldeke96 and I. Shahid.97 The translation goes as follows: Lorsque cette fatale nouvelle fut connue dans les états de Mentour, ses sujets furent constérnés et bléssés au fond du coeur. La discorde éclata bientôt parmi eux, et s’étant divisés en 15 partis, chacun élut un chef. Quelques uns de ces chefs corrumpus par l’or des Perses se soumirent à leur domination, les autres se réunirent aux Chamirs, et un petit nombre accepta la suzeraineté des Grecs. Ce fut ainsi que l’impie concile de Chalcédonie devint la cause de la chute de ce magnifique royaume des Syriens.98 Ishok is believed to have derived his data from a Syriac manuscript of Michael that included this information.99 Furthermore, both Nöldeke and Shahid acknowledged the authenticity of Ishok’s text as a real copy of Michael’s manuscript. The text is clear on the destination of the 15 new groups: some were attracted by a Persian offer, others went to a place named Chamir, and, the rest remained under Byzantine suzerainty. The first destination, Persia, was chosen probably as a result of the termination of the Byzantine annual subsidy. A new income would be most welcome among these groups though it meant serving an old enemy. These tribal groups were probably located the closest to Mesopotamia which was under Persian influence. They possibly went to the Persian dominions directly or went to the open desert but worked in the service of the Persians.

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

51

The second destination, Chamir, is not well identified. Nöldeke thought that this meant Cappadocia in Asia Minor. He thought that the Armenian version confused the emigration of the Ghassanids in the sixth century with that of the Arab tribes during the Muslim conquest, such as Ghassan and Iyad, into Asia Minor.100 Shahid believes that Nöldeke committed a mistake in identifying Kemir with Cappadocia which led Nöldeke to confuse the two migrations. Shahid proposed that Kemir is none other than Himyar in South Arabia.101 This is perhaps more plausible. Himyar, after all, is where most of the Syrian Arabs had hailed from before they wandered in the Peninsula until they finally reached their destination in Syria and Palestine. Shahid argues that they kept their contacts with South Arabia, especially Najran, strong throughout the sixth century. South Arabia, under Persian rule, would have welcomed a new enemy of the Byzantines. Shahid also argues that many Syrian tribes had previously returned to the Arabian south in Hadramawt. One example would be Kinda.102 Shahid’s explanation seems more pertinent due to the fact that if they migrated to Asia Minor, under Byzantine sovereignty, why were they not included in the third group of chiefs (i.e. ‘A small minority went with the Romans’), who accepted Byzantine suzerainty? If they headed for Asia minor, under Byzantine control, this would have meant that they ended their hostility to the Byzantines. So why should they migrate in the first place if their relations with the Byzantines ameliorated? Why should not they remain in their own lands? And, as previously mentioned, most of these semi-nomadic Arabs remained for several centuries on roughly the same lands due to the scarcity of water and food resources.103 The third group of the fifteen chiefs accepted Byzantine suzerainty. Nöldeke argued that the statement must be interpreted in ecclesiastic terms, namely, that the Arabs converted from the Monophysite doctrine to the Chalcedonian one.104 Shahid, on the other hand, thought this was not the case. It should be remembered that originally not all the Ghassanids were Monophysites and a minority among them were Chalcedonians. So it is possible what is meant here are those Ghassanids who now came out openly as Chalcedonians and cooperated with the Byzantine authority.105 In my opinion, however, both

52

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

scholars tended to stretch the sentence mentioned in the text beyond its literal meaning. It was simply describing how a third party, unlike the other two parties, decided to remain under the Byzantine rule as they had been for several centuries past. We need to remember that these tribes were still in open revolt against the Byzantine persecution of their king and the dissolution of their organization. If these Arabs converted from Monophysitism to Chalcedonianism, why did the author not say it in clear terms as he did in the last sentence: ‘It was the Chalcedonian heresy that destroyed the kingdom of the Syrians?’ I would rather explain it in a more straightforward sense. Some of the rebel groups therefore made peace again with the Byzantines and regained their previous status as their military allies. But who were these Arabs who elected their own chiefs/ phylarchs? Were they all Ghassanids, or did they include non Ghassanids (‘Amilis, Judhamids, etc.)? It may be argued that these were Ghassanids or pro-Ghassanids who were outraged by the Byzantine treatment of al-Nu‘man and for that reason reorganized themselves, after the demise of the central authority of the Ghassanids, into fifteen groups. The division into fifteen groups and the election of the chiefs suggests that these tribal groups of federates were now acting on their own and not in concert with the Byzantine authority as their overlords, with the exception of the last minority group which had chosen to remain under Byzantine suzerainty. It is not known whether ‘Amila participated in the rebellion led by the Ghassanids against the Byzantines but one might speculate that they gained more independence as a result of the dissolution of the Ghassanid Phylarchate.106 Since it is also well attested that their dwellings remained the same it is reasonable to argue they were the ones who accepted Byzantine authority. On the other hand, ‘Amila and Judham needed their annual subsidies from the Byzantines so it is also possible they did not participate in this rebellion in the beginning and later tried to fill the gap left by the Ghassanids. The Byzantines did not dispense with the services of other Arab federates who were available.107 Trimingham, for instance, claims that Judham (and its allies ‘Amila and Lakhm) gained more influence as a result of the suppression of the Ghassanid phylarchate and that the Judham chiefs, under the synonym of Quda‘a, were regarded as guardians of

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

53

the Syrian limes.108 Nöldeke and Shahid confirm this theory but both also agree that this situation could not have lasted long. After about three years of a non-Ghassanid interlude Maurice decided that he could not do without the Ghassanid shield which had protected the Orient for the last century. Apparently, the performance of the non-Ghassanid phylarchate was not sufficient for the defence of the area. But the new Ghassanids under Jafna had been downgraded from a basileus to an ordinary phylarch. It seems that Maurice restored the phylarchate but not the Basileia which was conferred on the Ghassanid king Arethas c. AD 530. The restored Ghassanids however were Monophysites. Perhaps, as Shahid argued, the death in AD 593 of the Ghassanids’ bitter enemy, Gregory the Chalcedonian Patriarch of Antioch, removed from the scene one of the principal thorns in the side of Monophysitism and its protectors the Ghassanids.109 Immediately after the fall and death of Maurice, Phocas, the new emperor, released Mundhir from his exile in Sicily and the Ghassanid king returned home. But it was under Heraclius that the relationship between the Arabs and the Byzantines witnessed the restoration of the old harmonious relationship. But this same period witnessed the Persian invasion and the defeat of the Byzantines in AD 613/614. The home of the Ghassanids in Palestina Secunda (Jawlan) and Arabia was occupied. The Ghassanids had no choice but to flee to the desert or to Byzantium.110 The Persians then occupied Jerusalem after taking Galilee and Caesarea. Palestina Tertia, the homeland of ‘Amila, did not come under direct occupation, but a vacuum in authority occurred. A. A. Vasiliev argued in his History of the Byzantine Empire that: this invasion freed the marauding Arabian tribes from the ties of association and the fear which had controlled them, and they began to form the unity which made possible their general attacks of a later period.111 Vasiliev was not referring merely to the nomads of the Arabian Peninsula who used to raid this area and had been usually deterred by the federates. The rest of the sentence, which mentions ‘ties of association’, suggests the federates and not the nomads of Arabia were

54

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

included. It could possibly mean the ‘Amila and Judham tribes who lived in this area. It is probable that the federates of the border region, due to the power vacuum and the sudden cessation of annual subsidies and income from Byzantium, might have resorted to forms of banditry and plunder for survival. ‘Amila however was able to survive throughout these confused and troubled years of Persian occupation. It is also possible that the tribe might have fled its original dwellings, but what is certain is that twenty years later during the Islamic conquests, ‘Amila and its sister tribe Judham were back on their own territory, as attested to by all Arabic sources on the futuh literature.112

The Tribal Structure of ‘Amila Despite ‘Amila’s obscure origins and ancestry, most Arab genealogists and historians tend to link it to Qahtan, eponymous father of the Southern Arabs. A single exact genealogy, however, was never agreed upon by most historians and genealogists. Even the origins of the name ‘Amila were in dispute. Some thought it referred to a male and others to a female. Several genealogies were noted and different lines of descent were attested.113 Little is known about ‘Amila as an independent unit in the last years of Heraclius. It was, however, part of a larger confederation, the Ghassanids, which led the Qahtanid tribal group of Banu Kahlan. According to the Arabic traditions, the Banu Kahlan had several kindred groups (Hayy), among which were: Azd (of which the Ghassanids were the strongest), Tay’, Madhhij, Hamdan, Kinda, Murad, Anmar, Judham, Lakhm, Ash‘ar and ‘Amila.114 ‘Amila was divided into several clans (Batn) and sub-clans (‘Ashira). The most famous were the Banu al-Tamathan, Banu Sha‘l and Banu Mawhaba, Banu Salman, Banu Hayy and Banu al-Aqra‘, Banu Sa‘d, Banu Salama and Banu ‘Ijl, Banu Sufay, Banu Sa‘ida, Banu al-Ajdham, Banu Udhayna and Banu Qurra, in addition to Banu Hani’a, Banu Hallaf, Banu Jurm and Banu Mu‘awiya and finally Banu ‘Atab and Banu Juray‘.115 Their exact number cannot be accurately estimated, but they were able to form a considerable fighting force for several centuries which could, in turn, indicate a relatively populous tribe. Al-Ra‘i al-Numayri corroborates this hypothesis in his satire against the poet of ‘Amila

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

55

‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘. He clearly states in his poem that a tribe should not be very proud for being only populous: Oh You who threaten me violently with your great number Since when do you intimidate me with your glory and number, If you are capable truly to move my glory from its source Then try moving mount Abana with the numbers you have gathered116 ‘Amila’s close relations with Banu Judham no doubt boosted their influence and number. They are likely to have formed one group in Palestina Tertia.117 Their alleged descent from a common ancestor probably had a huge impact on their close ties. It is also possible that their antiquity and long co-habitation as neighbours in roughly the same area accounts for their strong alliance which turned their relationship into a political alliance. They allied themselves to the powerful Banu Kalb during this period through marriage; Hubay (or Hayy) the daughter of Ab- ‘Azm b. ‘Awkalan b. al-Zuhd b. ‘Amila was married to Kalb b. Wabra.118 This alliance with the Banu Kalb was to become of great importance to ‘Amila during Umayyad rule, especially since the mother of Yazid b. Mu‘awiya, the Caliph, belonged to the Kalb tribe. Their descent from Qahtan was however disputed on several occasions in the early Islamic period. It is possible that their decision to settle for the Qahtani genealogy was motivated by political and economic incentives. Their Yamani-Qahtani ancestry would probably solidify more their alliance with the Yamani ruling apparatus under the Umayyads than a Qaysi-‘Adnani lineage. It is well attested, in different sources, that their legal Yamani lineage was challenged by their contemporaries whether Yamanites or Qaysites. In a famous incident in the reign of Yazid b. Mu‘awiya (60–4 AH/AD 680–83), the Judhamid leader Rawh b. Zinba‘ asked the caliph Yazid to assign Judham and their allies to the Ma‘add Qaysi lineage. He claimed that their descent was not Yamani nor was their original home al-Sham. The illustrious ‘Amili poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ supported this claim: We consent, even though it may trouble our community, To what our tribal chief, Rawh b. Zinba‘, has asserted

56

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Although ‘Adi here was speaking for his tribe, he, nevertheless, acknowledged that the leaders of his tribe were not consulted. He, however, accepted the decision of his ‘tribal chief.’ This alleged descent survived only for a few days. The other influential Judhamid leader Natil b. Qays protested to Yazid against this lineage. He accused Rawh of being a perjurer saying: ‘Rawh b. Zinba‘ is a treacherous liar,’ al-Ghadir al-Kadhib Rawh b. Zinba‘. Natil denied any descent from the Qaysi Ma‘add branch and confirmed on the other hand the Qahtani Yamani genealogy.119 To Natil, his tribe would share with the Yaman their destiny for better and for worse. Rawh had to withdraw his claim and Yazid ratified it. Again, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, the poet, supported this claim: Qahtan is our father, after whom we are named, but the father of Khuzayma is Khindif ibn Nizar. Are we to exchange our father, after whom we are named, for the father of some group, absent and invisible? ‘Adi justified his change of position by saying that Natil’s advice is invaluable to him and to his clan (Banu ‘Amila), and that he cannot afford Natil’s wrath: ‘a‘azuhuma sakhtan wa ansahuma li wa li ‘ashirati.’120 As of that moment, the Qahtani-Yamani lineage was ‘officially’ adopted by the leaders of the tribe and the Umayyad ruling family and by Arab genealogists. This ‘official’ recognition did not hinder outside voices from claiming ‘Amila to be descendents of a Qaysi Northern father. Mus‘ab al-Zubayri, for instance, mentioned such a possibility. According to an Arab poet, Sim‘an b. Hubayra, who belonged to Banu Asad the QaysiNorthern tribe, ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm are their sister tribes: Inform Judham and Lakhm if you accidentally meet them, and people usually benefit from knowledge, Send the tribe ‘Amila a message that will be delivered by a fast camel You are truly our brothers, for life is created in the womb

‘A MILA

IN THE

PRE-ISLAMIC PERIOD

57

This claim was endorsed again by the Banu Asad during the governership of Khalid al-Qasri, the famous Yamani leader, in Iraq, who brought with him Syrian troops. These troops were mainly composed of ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm. The Banu Asad cried that these people are their own ‘Antum Qawmuna’ and repeated the same poetry.121 ‘Amila’s real genealogy might never be reconstituted. Like many other Arab tribes at the time of the conquests, their decision to confirm their Yamani link was probably connected to economic and political factors.122 However, one note is worth mentioning. ‘Amila did not suddenly pretend to be a tribe of Yamani origin. They rather emphasized it in order to strengthen their status under the Umayyads. Their Yamani origin was already established on the eve of the Islamic conquests. The above mentioned incidents can only corroborate this fact. Rawh b. Zinba‘ asked to change this fact, while Natil refused and confirmed their acknowledged Yamani status. Moreover, the poetry of the Banu Asad is quite revealing. It simply admits a common ancestor and a rather ancient separation between the two tribal groups. According to P. Guichard, the tribal world is not an immovable world. It is in perpetual evolution and recomposition.123 ‘Amila apparently followed this golden rule.

‘Amila’s Religious Beliefs Little is known about ‘Amila’s religious beliefs before the Islamic conquests. Many Arabic sources indicate their conversion to Christianity. They were probably Monophysite Christians like their powerful neighbours the Ghassanids, but their conversion was probably superficial. They were differentiated from the Nasara (Christians) and were named Mutanasira, ‘Christians who did not have firm belief in Christianity.’124 Al-Jahiz, (d.255 AH), on the other hand, stressed their total conversion to Christianity: There is no tribe among the Arab Christians whose religion totally opposed that of the Polytheists as did Taghlib, Shayban, ‘Amila, Lakhm and Judham.125

58

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

But Ibn al-Kalbi reported that they kept some heathen traditions and used to perform a special pilgrimage to their deity: al-Uqaysir in al-Sham. This deity was also worshipped by Judham, Lakhm, Ghatfan and Quda‘a.126 But unlike their sister tribes Judham and Lakhm, ‘Amila probably did not perform any pilgrimage to Makka.127 Early sources preserved for us many of the ritual invocations, talbiya, uttered by the tribes during their pilgrimage to Makka. None belonged to ‘Amila. The historical sources, thus, provide us with conflicting reports on ‘Amila’s religious beliefs. One possible explanation could be as follows. ‘Amila’s conversion to Christianity was probably accomplished in the late sixth century as a result of the fall of the Ghassanid influence. Their conversion however remained superficial because only a few years separated them from the Persian invasion which probably severed ‘Amila’s connections with their Christian masters. Unlike other Christian tribes, such as the Ghassanids and the Banu Taghlib who kept their faith for decades after the establishment of Muslim rule, ‘Amila almost immediately embraced Islam as their new faith. This could only be a sign of a superficial Christian faith in the tribe. ‘Amila seems to have survived for several centuries in the desert of Bilad al-Sham, first as a semi-nomadic tribal group emanating possibly from Iraq and passing through Palmyra then settling in the southern part of Palestine. They emerged afterwards as Arab federates and protected the Byzantine empire for centuries. The contact with the Byzantines probably had significant effect on the tribe, turning them from sheep and camel herders into a more sophisticated unit conducting wars and implementing Byzantine’s policies in the desert frontiers. ‘Amila’s long history with the Byzantines notwithstanding, it was their encounter with the new Muslim rulers that presented them with the opportunity to become one of the major actors in the new politics of Islamic society and not a mere tribal group in the service of the Byzantine empire.

CHAPTER 3 THE ROLE OF ‘A MIL A DUR ING THE ISL A MIC CONQUESTS

The sudden collapse of the Byzantine and the Sasanid empires and the Islamic conquests of a large part of the ancient world represent a watershed in world history. They changed drastically the face of the ancient world. It is not surprising then to find numerous studies trying to explain, understand and analyse this cataclysmic event. The secrets of the surprising Arab success is beyond the scope of this study and is an extremely complex issue. Only details related to the topic of this chapter will be treated: the role of ‘Amila and the pro-Byzantine Arab tribes in the Islamic conquests. Many theories have been advanced to explain the conquests and the fall of the two empires which had dominated the region for centuries. The role of the Arab Syrian tribes during the Islamic conquests, however, has rarely been treated in depth or has simply been ignored by many historians. Though it is common knowledge now that the major forces which were in control of the frontier area for the last decades before the rise of Islam were the Arab Syrian tribes, many modern historians failed to take notice of its significance for the Muslim conquest. The frontier area was the primary target of the Muslims because it was their only gate to the Fertile Crescent. It is possible that the Arab Syrians played a substantial role in shifting the balance of power

60

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

in favour of the Muslims against their former masters the Byzantines. The relatively well experienced, well trained Arab federates added strength to the Muslim armies. Their expertise in combat and familiarity with the terrain were, probably, indispensible to the Muslims.1 Many theories were elaborated by scholars in order to explain and understand the success of the conquests. Here is a brief and incomplete sketch of the most important theories elaborated. Traditional Islamic theory considered the conquest to be the result of religious devotion to Islam and as a real demonstration of divine will to favour Islam in its endeavour to free the world from the infidels. It was the battle of the few good Muslims against the many evil infidels. The Arab Syrian tribes’ later alliance with the Umayyads perhaps influenced the judgement of the ‘Abbasid chronicles who almost entirely ignored the role played by the Syrians in advancing the cause of the Muslims. This explanation was not accepted by Western and modern scholarship which provided its own interpretations. William Muir, for instance, explained the conquests as the result of mass migration of Arab tribes driven by their greed and love of pillage.2 This view was challenged by L. Caetani who stressed the fact that the Muslims did not enjoy numerical superiority in their battles with Byzantium and Sasanid Persia and proved that the forces employed by all three parties were in fact small. Yet Caetani did accept that the conquest was somehow generated by a migration of Arabs due to profound economic distress and impoverishment as a result of a gradual process of desiccation.3 H. Lammens, for his part, presented another interpretation. He believed that the Islamic expansion was born of the innate inclination for raiding among the Arabs. The success of the first incursions due to superior military organization, he argued, pushed the Arabs later on to consider conquest and occupation.4 C. H. Becker agreed that the first conquests were essentially accidental, and that it was only after these decisive early victories that the further Islamic conquests became planned operations. He argued that after these victories, the great migrations of Arabs driven by hunger and greed, took place.5 In an article published in 1956, G. H. Bousquet emphasized the prime role of religious commitment as the driving force behind the

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 61

conquest. Economic factors, such as spoils of wars and booty, were of secondary importance. He distinguished however between the motivations of the conquest and the causes of the conquest’s success. He cited as causes of success the general weakness of Byzantium and of Sasanid Persia due to their prolonged wars, and the accidental presence of a large number of good military commanders in the Arab ranks.6 M. Canard disagreed with those who explained the Islamic conquests in terms of numerical superiority or better military organizational skills. Military factors, he said, could not explain the Arab successes. He attributed these successes to the fortuitous weakness of the Muslims’ enemies and to the general disaffection of the indigenous population of Syria and Iraq. Furthermore, he doubted that economic factors played an important role in the Arab expansion because the invasion would have ended in Syria and Iraq and would not have pressed further.7 To F. Gabrieli the military factors that contributed to the success of the Muslim conquest remain to be solved. He concluded, however, that the motives behind the expansion were the need for plunder, living space and food which was in shortage due to climate changes.8 M. A. Shaban advanced the thesis that the conquests were the result of economic difficulty caused by the ruin of trade after the ridda wars. Because the tribesmen of Arabia were experiencing such difficulties they were tempted to launch raids into the Fertile Crescent. By chance the raids succeeded and grew into conquests led by the unique qualities of the military leader Khalid Ibn al-Walid.9 So far most of these historians believed that the conquests essentially had an accidental beginning; that is, the first conquests were the implausible result of sporadic raids launched mainly for economic reasons by Arab tribesmen. This was probably true, but meanwhile the Arab Syrians were not sufficiently studied and their role during the conquests was not adequately elaborated. De Goeje, for instance, failed to realize the weight of the Arab Syrians in the combat and relegated them to the status of ‘spectators’ awaiting the outcome of the struggle between the two parties.10 The more recent historiography of the Islamic conquests has contributed significantly to a better understanding of the rapid collapse of the

62

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Byzantine empire in Bilad al-Sham and Africa. The Arab tribes allied to Byzantium were studied more cautiously and their possible role in the conquests was highlighted, but a full story of their involvement remains to be written. F. Donner invites us to consider, in addition to the purely economic factors, certain religious and political inducements that helped make Syria and Iraq the focus of the early Muslims. The ideological message of Islam itself filled some or all the ruling elite with the notion that they had a religious duty to expand the political domain of the Islamic state. He argues that the political importance of securing the backing of the nomads had become clear to Muhammad during his struggle with Quraysh. A central aspect of the consolidation of the Islamic state was the subjection of nomadic groups to control by the ruling elite of settled people from the Hijaz. The continued political consolidation of the Islamic state beyond the confines of Arabia would of course have involved further efforts to subdue nomadic groups in the Arabian and Syrian desert that remained independent of the state.11 On the other hand, the Byzantines had been trying to reconstruct their tribal alliances from the ground up after the retreat of the Sasanids, extending their ties among the Syrian and northern Hijazi nomadic tribes in order to form the defensive coalitions needed to guard Syria.12 This came about while the Byzantine authorities tried to reassemble the pieces of their shattered political presence in Syria. The southern limits of Byzantine control, which had formely extended to Ayla on the Red Sea, now seem to have come no farther south than the Dead Sea.13 Thus a race was launched between the two powers to bring these tribes into alliance. This much at least was probably seen as necessary if the Islamic state was to survive. For its survival depended on a friendly attitude among these tribes with which Medina and Makka had regular commercial contact.14 The importance of the Arab Syrians in the conquests were highlighted by Donner when he describes Abu Bakr’s determination to bring the nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes under the control of the Islamic state: The first phase of the conquest in Syria is an effort to extend further the process of political consolidation that had been begun by Muhammad in Arabia.15

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 63

In the second phase of the conquest of Syria, the Muslims embarked on a new policy, and were more willing to challenge Byzantine armies and cities, which they had avoided during the first phase. Donner suggests that this change of policy probably resulted from the Muslims’ success in bringing a number of the nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes of Palestine and southern Syria under their control.16 But Donner’s analysis did not quite match his final conclusions regarding the role of the Arab Syrian tribes in the final confrontation. There are repeated references throughout the sources to Christian tribesmen, he says, providing assistance to the Byzantines. Additionally the Byzantine army that was ultimately defeated at Yarmuk included tribesmen from the Ghassan and others of Quda‘a. In the case of Lakhm, Bali, Judham and ‘Amila which are said to have been on both sides, it is likely that existing political divisions within the tribes were important in determining whether a group aligned itself with the Muslims or the Byzantines. The author concludes that a considerable number of Syrian tribesmen continued to back the Byzantines.17 The only weak point in this analysis is perhaps his evaluation of the part played by the Syrian tribes in shifting the balance in favour of the Muslims. He pictured the zone inhabited by these tribes between Ayla on the Red Sea in the south and the Dead Sea in the north as a buffer zone where both Muslims and Byzantines competed to win the tribes’ allegiance. This statement is probably true. However, what Donner does not mention is to what extent the Muslim-Syrian alliance played a role in achieving the conquest of Bilad al-Sham. To him the tribesmen of Syria were divided in two camps and their presence or absence might have had the same effect on the outcome of the battle.18 Why then have historians failed thus far to clearly identify the role of the Arab Syrian tribes during the conquest? The paucity of sources and the apparent confusion in early sources probably justify the absence of a clear and in-depth analysis. I also believe that other causes hindered their research. The Arab Syrian tribes were rarely studied as an independent factor during the conquests.19 The focus was always either on the two empires or on the Muslims. It is well established that the Byzantines had for centuries entrusted the Arab Syrian tribes with the protection of their southern borders near the Peninsula. The Arab Syrians were mainly frontier guards. They formed an important

64

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

division in the Byzantine army of the Orient, and the defence of the southern borders was entrusted to them. It could thus be safely argued that their political decision not to support the Byzantines was a key element in explaining the success of the conquests. For if the ‘key element’ in the Byzantine defences decided to shift allegiance and transmit its loyalty to the Muslims, the Byzantine collapse could be better understood and explained. Donner believes that the migrations were the result of state policy, planned by the state and implemented by the state’s offer of various incentives to the emigrants. But as to the military success of the Muslims, it could be explained by the traditionally accepted factors. There can be little doubt that the conquests were made easier by the exhaustion of the Byzantine and Sasanid Empires, the confusion that reigned in the Sasanian ruling house, the disaffection of many of the subjects of the two empires, and the convenience of inner lines of communications that the Muslims enjoyed. But perhaps the most important factor contributing to the success of the conquests according to Donner was: The remarkable degree to which a new Islamic state with an expansionist policy could harness for its purposes the rugged warriors of Arabia. The rise of the state made it possible to weld into an incredibly effective fighting force those tribesmen whose energies had hitherto been consumed by petty quarrels among themselves and whose political horizons had hitherto usually been limited to their own tribe and its affairs.20 W. Kaegi added some new insights on what happened using both Arabic and Byzantine sources. He reached the following conclusion. The invasion of the Muslims occurred while Byzantium was still in the process of restoring its authority over the full extent of the eastern borders of its empire. After the defeat and retreat of the Persian troops the empire was in the process of restoration and reunification. If it had had more time, it might have succeeded in halting the Muslim invasion. The Muslim invasions caught the empire off balance at a very awkward time, and kept it off balance. Thus the exertion of minimal

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 65

pressure at the critical moment and place gave the Muslims maximum rewards in terms of military victories and territorial conquests.21 The Byzantines were just restoring their authority in the Syrian cities and countryside. Their power structure was not yet established in the area east of Jordan and the Dead Sea where the Arab Syrian tribes had been for long periods accustomed to autonomy. Kaegi was not totally clear about the role of the Syrian Arabs in the conquests. Although he implied that some of them had switched allegiance in the battle of Yarmuk, his overall point of view saw the Arabs as the allies of the Byzantines who did not make the best use of them. The Byzantines decided upon a strategy of relying on walled towns. The Arabs should have been relied upon in mobile warfare and not in fixed defences.22 Thus, according to Kaegi, the Arab tribes remained faithful to the Byzantines but were practically ineffective. They were denied by the Byzantines the right to wage their favourite mobile method of warfare. Shahid stresses that the Arab federates’ role lies probably in their absence. He thus introduces an original factor that might have led to the sudden collapse of the Byzantines. As has been indicated, the ‘Arab shield’ that protected Byzantium against the nomadic Arabs was considerably weakened by Maurice and the Persian wars. Both the rise of Islam and the Arab conquests constituted for Byzantium a series of surprises that completely confounded the empire. When Heraclius contained the Persian offensive and won the war, he had at his disposal some military manuals, such as the Strategikon that helped him wage his campaigns. But when, after winning the war against the Persians, he fought the Arabs he had absolutely nothing to guide him on how to operate against this new foe. This was disastrous for a Byzantine general and emperor used to consulting military manuals on the particular barbarian adversary he was to fight.23 H. Kennedy in a critical study on the early Muslim armies asserted that ‘despite all the great mass of words, the full explanation for Muslim victory still eludes us.’24 He nonetheless dismisses religious fervour and bravery as partial explanations especially since the Byzantines also had firm ideological and religious commitments and were not likely to be less brave.

66

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

‘Amila and the Muslims: Friends or Foes? In this section I will not attempt a full or detailed study of the Arab Syrian tribes during the Arab conquests. My aim is to investigate ‘Amila’s role and destiny during this period. My research led me to believe that the Arab Syrian tribes played a much more considerable role in the success of these conquests than previously thought. The Arab federates formed for centuries a formidable force in the service of the Byzantines; they were relatively well trained, well disciplined and well acquainted with the Syrian desert. They were crucial to the Byzantines and to the Muslims if either of them needed to control the southern part of Palestine and Syria. After two decades of Persian occupation, the Arab Syrian tribes no doubt gained more independence and autonomy. In fact, a generation had grown up without ever knowing Byzantine rule. In addition to the long tradition of depending on the Arabs who enjoyed a great deal of autonomy, as their border guards, much of Palestine, southern Syria and Jordan was effectively self-governing under the local tribes of ‘Amila and its sister tribes. We know that some of them did participate in the combat to defeat the Persians; as did the Ghassanids25 who evacuated their lands in the Jawlan during the Persian occupation.26 But we have little information on ‘Amila and the other tribes that occupied the southern parts of Palestine and Syria during this period. But upon the return of the Byzantines, the Syrians renewed their relations with their old masters, acting as the guards of the desert frontier. This is clearly stated in the late Arabic sources which mentioned ‘Amila and the other tribes as the leading groups allied to Byzantium against the raids of Muslims during the life of the Prophet: When the messenger of God proceeded to Tabuk in the land of al-Sham in order to raid it, news reached him that the Byzantines and ‘Amila, Lakhm and Judham and others gathered their troops in the year nine of Hijra . . .27 The Byzantines, after their victory over the Persians and the demobilization of a considerable part of their troops, depended even more

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 67

upon the Arabs to protect their southern frontier. The land covered by ‘Amila and the Arab Syrian tribes actually increased in size: it stretched from Ghazza in the west and the Dead Sea in the east to the Red Sea in the south. A considerable part of this area was autonomous after two decades of Byzantine absence. The Muslims no doubt sensed this vacuum and were able to fill it. Meanwhile Muhammad signed several treaties with the rulers of many isolated cities such as Ayla during the Tabuk raid.28 We do not know how Byzantium was able to restore its relations with the Arab Syrian tribes in the reign of Heraclius and in particular after the end of the Persian presence in Bilad al-Sham. But we know for certain that the Ghassanids and their last king Jabala b. al-Ayham were foremost among the allied Arab tribes of Byzantium in the early 630s.29 ‘Amila’s fortunes during the war between the Sasanids and the Byzantines is almost completely unknown. However, we find them defending the southern frontier alongside the Byzantines against the Muslim penetrations during the life of the Prophet Muhammad. Almost all Arabic sources attest to their presence in the encounters between the Muslims and Byzantines prior to the full invasion of Syria by the Muslims. These sources, however, show substantial differences in their view of the position of ‘Amila and its allies during the invasion. They all agree that these tribes shifted their alliances at one point and deserted the Byzantine camp, but the exact time in which this took place is not clear. Was it after the Arabs finally defeated the Byzantines at al-Yarmuk or long before? It is extremely important to clarify this point. If the Syrian Arabs did join the Muslims only after al-Yarmuk, their role in Muslim conquests would be negligible and therefore the military explanation of why the Byzantines failed to halt the Muslims would remain ambiguous. On the other hand, if the Syrian Arabs joined the Muslim side long before the battle of al-Yarmuk, this opens the door to a multitude of new prospects that need to be answered by historians. Did the military expertise of the Syrian Arabs, due to their long relations with the Byzantines and their discipline and their knowledge of the desert routes in Bilad al-Sham, play a crucial part in advancing the Muslim cause at the expense of the Byzantines? Could the Muslims have achieved their conquests without this alliance?

68

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

After all, it was the Arab Syrians who controlled the southern frontier for centuries and kept the Arabs of Hijaz at bay. It was these same Arab Syrians who constituted the largest part of Heraclius’ army in the Orient. The Byzantine army was not large in size and its effective mobile striking force was modest. It could ill afford to commit more than 20,000 of their men in major eastern battles, especially since Byzantine positions in Africa and Italy were under almost constant attack. As a result, they could not serve as a source for soldiers, and actually competed with the eastern regions for manpower, and needed reinforcement themselves.30 The army of Heraclius, in this region, was thereafter demobilized. It is estimated that it numbered, on the eve of the Muslim conquests, 10,000 in Syria, especially northern Syria, of whom surely 5,000 or less, including friendly Arab hired guards, remained in the three Palestinian provinces and Arabia.31 There was no alternative, in short, to seeking military manpower for the Orient from Heraclius’ kinfolk, the Armenians and especially from the Arab Syrians who had the advantage of familiarity with the local terrain, climate and military methods of the empire’s potential enemies. It is in my intention to show that ‘Amila and its sister tribes joined the Muslims long before the battle of al-Yarmuk; however, it lies beyond the scope of this book to study the impact of their alliance with the Muslims on the final outcome of the conquests.

The First Encounters Between ‘Amila and the Muslims Arabic sources tend to be confused and ambiguous concerning the Arab Syrian tribes during the Muslim conquests and the collapse of the Byzantine empire in Bilad al-Sham.32 Direct references are rare and do not reveal any detailed information. The earliest sources of the second Hijra century like al-Azdi are more informative on this topic than those of the third Hijra century like al-Baladhuri, al-Ya‘qubi, al-Tabari and Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi. It is probable that the ‘Abbasid chronicles tended to minimize or ignore the role played by the Syrian tribes in advancing the cause of Islam and spreading it throughout the ancient world in the early conquests because of the Syrian tribes’

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 69

role and influence under the Umayyads. Few indications nevertheless survived in the earliest sources; their existence is crucial for rewriting the history of the Arab Syrian tribes during the early conquest. Muhammad encountered ‘Amila and the Arab Syrian tribes on three different occasions and in three different locations. He tried several methods to deal with them. He tried military pressure at first but was fiercely resisted and pushed back. Then he attempted the hit and run raids but achieved little. Finally he opted for negotiations and diplomacy which resulted in a deal that increased the Prophet’s influence and prestige. During these stages ‘Amila remained hostile to Muhammad and according to all sources they fought alongside the Byzantines in order to push back the new threat arriving from the desert. ‘Amila’s first encounter with the Muslims was probably at the battle of Mu’ta in AD 629/8 AH.33 Mu’ta is located in the middle of a fertile place in the Balqa’ region a few miles east of the southern part of the Dead Sea.34 The Balqa’ is the closest region in the Byzantine empire to Medina and is largely inhabited by ‘Amila, Lakhm and Judham. Muslim traditions report that Muhammad sent envoys to introduce Islam to several rulers and kings, including the Byzantine emperor whom he sought to contact through the local governor of the province. The Byzantines reportedly intercepted the first Muslim messenger al-Harith b.‘Umayr al-Azdi at Mu’ta and had him executed. The Muslims retaliated by sending their troops to meet the Byzantines and their Arab Allies. The battle of Mu’ta was the first armed clash between Muslims and Byzantine forces. According to an expert in Arab-Byzantine relations, this battle represented a collision point between two newly established forces trying to expand their authority.35 This battle occurred little more than two months after Heraclius met with the Persians in July AD 629 in Cappadocia to discuss final terms. Only then did the Persians undertake the evacuation of their troops from occupied Byzantine territory. The battle was part of a Byzantine policy of probing into regions where they had not operated for more than two decades. The Byzantines were attempting to reestablish their authority in these areas. They were probing south, with the aid of the Arab tribes, while the Muslims were probing north. The collision was inevitable.

70

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

The Byzantine presence had newly been reestablished in the regionfor simply two to three months – their control therefore was rather incomplete and indirect in spite of the fact that their military readiness was at its highest level. It is only logical then to assume that real power resided in the hands of the Arab Syrian tribes dominating the area such as ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm. Reports36 suggest that the commander of the area was a Byzantine, but the troops were largely dominated by the Arab Syrian tribes. Most of the Byzantine soldiers could not have had the time to familiarize themselves with the local needs. They had virtually no time before the Muslims attacked at Mu’ta. We can therefore safely assume that the Byzantines depended, in this particular occasion, on their Arab allies to protect their newly acquired positions. It is extremely difficult to establish how the Arab Syrian tribes resumed their alliance with the Byzantines after two decades. The Ghassanids apparently kept their contacts with Byzantium and probably fought alongside them against the Persians.37 However, we do not have details of ‘Amila and its sister tribes during the invasion. Perhaps they remained in the desert far away from both the Persians and the Byzantines. Their strong presence alongside the Byzantines immediately after the retreat of the Persian troops suggests that their relations with the Persians was not friendly, to say the least. Moreover, some Arabic sources reported that ‘Amila and the Kalb tribe raided the Tay’ tribe and captured its leader, ‘Adi b. Hatim al-Ta’i. This raid probably coincided with the period of the Persian invasion.38 ‘Adi b. Hatim is not a fictitious character. His encounters with the Prophet, at a later stage, are well documented in the sources.39 All this suggests that ‘Amila, in addition to its sister tribes, were active in the southern region of Palestine during the Persian occupation. The Battle of Mu’ta ended with a clear Muslim defeat and the death of three major Islamic figures: Zayd b. Haritha the prophet’s adopted son, Ja‘far b. Abi Talib the prophet’s cousin and ‘Abd Allah b. Rawaha. Khalid b. al-Walid reportedly saved the rest of the army by employing sophisticated manoeuvres.40 The Muslims nevertheless were able to pass through Palestina Tertia and reach Mu’ta near the Dead Sea unopposed by any Byzantine force. This might be an indication of a repositioning of the Arab Syrian tribes up to the north. The area was

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 71

a buffer zone between the Byzantines and the Muslims. Both powers tried to gain the friendship of its local inhabitants. The Muslims failed to achieve their purpose. The Arab Syrian tribes clearly sided against the incursions of the Muslims and were able, under the leadership of the Byzantines, to defeat the Muslims. The Byzantine version is explicit on this matter: Mouamed, who had died earlier, had appointed four emirs to fight those members of the Arab nation who were Christian, and they came in front of village called Mouchea, in which was stationed the vicarius Theodore, intending to fall upon the Arabs on the day when they sacrificed to their idols. The vicarius, on learning this from a certain Koraishite called Koutabas, who was in his pay, gathered all the soldiers of the desert guard and, after ascertaining from the Saracen the day and hour when they were intending to attack, himself attacked them at a village called Mothous, and killed three emirs and the bulk of their army. One emir, called Chaled, whom they call God’s Sword, escaped.41 The desert guards mentioned by Theophanes are possibly ‘Amila and its sister tribes. De Goeje and J. Wellhausen suggested that the sacrifice rituals, mentioned by Theophanes, were conducted by the Quda‘is in honour of the deity venerated by the ‘Amilis, al-Uqaysir.42 The Byzantine sources thus confirm the Arabic versions. The leader of the pro-Byzantine troops was a Byzantine but the burden of the fighting fell on the shoulders of the Arab Syrians. ‘Amila and its sister tribes had thus resumed their role as the guardians of the southern frontiers. The second encounter between ‘Amila and the Muslims took place in the skirmishes or battle of Dhat al-Salasil a month after Mu’ta. It seems that Muhammad needed to raise the morale of his troops after their defeat at Mu’ta and to gain control of the area north of Hijaz. The site of this place is not exact on the map but it is situated in the Balqa’ region according to Yaqut.43 It is accepted however, by all sources, to be located in the land of the Judham tribe and probably in the northern part of Hijaz. It was distant from the area controlled by Byzantium or its Arab allies, but it contained some Quda‘a groups such as Bali, ‘Udhra

72

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

and Balqayn. ‘Amr b. al-‘ As was chosen as the leader of this raid because of his family ties with the Bali tribe which might facilitate his mission in subduing those tribes living near Muslim territory. It is possible that those Quda‘a groups were influenced by the defeat of the Muslims at Mu’ta and tried to show signs of insubordination to their Muslim neighbours. Some reports suggest that a major battle between the Muslims and a group of Quda‘a, Judham, ‘Amila and Lakhm ended in the victory for the Muslims.44 Dhat al-Salasil, however, was not a major confrontation. It was a series of short raids aimed at subduing the nearest tribes of Quda‘a. The bulk of ‘Amila and its sister tribes were not established in that region. They probably moved after the Persian defeat and their strongholds were established south of the Dead Sea near Mu’ta. The Muslims appear to have learned the lessons of Dhat al-Salasil and Mu’ta. They seem to have realized that their military capabilities alone would not allow them to directly oppose the Arab Syrian tribes in their own strongholds. They could, however, gain control of isolated spots north of their territory that were remote enough from the Arab Syrian tribes of ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm which had resumed their role as the frontier guards of the Byzantine empire. In Year 9 AH/AD 630, Muhammad tried to push his zone of influence to Tabuk in ‘the land of al-Sham’ as described by the Arabic sources.45 The campaign of Tabuk was a complete success; Muhammad resorted to diplomacy and was able to extend his authority over several isolated cities in the northern Hijaz such as Ayla, Udhruh, al-Jarba’, and Muqna. The defenceless Christian and Jewish inhabitants of these cities had no option but to seek peace with Muhammad. Although sources did mention that the Muslims had received information warning them of an army formed by Byzantines and ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm was ready to attack them at Tabuk, the Arab Syrian tribes did not act against the movement of the Muslim troops.46 The cities near the Red Sea were extremely remote from their bases. They were in the buffer zone, a vacuum probably filled by the beduins.

‘Amila and the Muslims: the New Alliance When the Byzantines recovered Palestine and Syria in AD 628, they reorganized the system of defences in Syria just south of the Dead Sea

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 73

in the region of Mu’ta; the limitanean system in the Naqab, abandoned since the time of Justininan, was not renewed.47 The victory at Mu’ta must have left the Byzantines and their Arab allies confident of their ability to eliminate any threat coming from the Arabian Peninsula. Perhaps the death of Muhammad and the wars of apostasy further boosted the Byzantines’ confidence in the reliability of their security measures. Relations between the Arab Syrian tribes and Byzantium, hitherto solid, witnessed nevertheless a serious crisis during this period. The Byzantine empire was passing through a severe financial crisis due to the long war waged against the Persians and the inefficiency of their bureaucracy. The government’s difficulty in finding funds to pay troops was a reality. Contemporary sources refer to these financial shortages and modern scholars acknowledge this financial and economic crisis.48 The peak of the crisis was reached when Heraclius interrupted the monetary allowances of the Arab Syrians and their stipends. Theophanes corroborates in his Chronicle the dire conditions of the Byzantine finances which ultimately led to the suspension of yearly payments given to the Arab Syrians in exchange for their role as guardians of the desert: Now some of the neighbouring Arabs were receiving small payments from the emperor for guarding the approaches to the desert. At that time a certain eunuch arrived to distribute the wages according to custom, the eunuch drove them away, saying, ‘The emperor can barely pay his soldiers their wages, much less these dogs!’ Distressed by this, the Arabs went over to their fellow-tribesmen, and it was they that led them to the rich country of Gaza, which is the gateway to the desert in the direction of Mount Sinai.49 Theophanes believed that the Arab desert guards betrayed their Byzantine allies. He thus attributed the defeat inflicted on the Byzantines in Ghazza and in Southern Palestine to the Arabs’ shift from one side to the other. Naturally other major factors contributed to the collapse and defeat of the Byzantines in this area. The Syrian Arab factor, however, should not be underestimated. But who were exactly these desert guards? It is extremely difficult to answer this

74

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

question with any certainty. Mayerson identified them as the beduins of Southern Palestine and Sinai whose good knowledge of the desert was a major asset that was well exploited by the Muslims. Without the help of the beduins, who knew their way over the lesser-known routes and where to find supplies of water, the Muslims could not have entered deep into Sinai and thence northward to Ghazza. The city was not prepared for this massive attack and was taken completely by surprise.50 It is very difficult to establish the identity of the Arabs who allied themselves with the Muslims in the capture of Ghazza. It is not really of great importance whether they were beduins or ‘Amila or any other tribe. What matters in this case is the trend itself. The Muslims exploited the Byzantine financial problems to their own benefit. Cultural affinity, a common language and blood kinship no doubt contributed to the establishment of this new alliance among the Arabs against Byzantium.51 But it was financial need that gave the Arab Syrians the impetus to change sides. This trend was repeated by the Muslims with every Syrian tribe involved in protecting the Byzantine frontiers. Mayerson has already pointed out the fact that the agreement between Muhammad and the cities of Ayla and Adhruh and the others was a sign of the times. Town by town, and not by collective negotiation, communities came to terms with the Muslims.52 It is probable that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar imitated Muhammad’s style in capturing the cities in northern Hijaz, and dealt separately with every tribal group in Southern Palestine and Syria. By that time and after two decades of autonomy under the Persian-Byzantine war, the Syrian tribes became accustomed to autonomous behaviour and hence their decision was not unusual to their newly acquired habits of autonomy. The policy of dealing with the Arab Syrian tribes one by one is confirmed in early sources. Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Azdi in the late second Hijra century distinguished between three different Arab Christian parties. Each group had its own political inclinations towards the Muslims: The polytheists (Mushrik) Arabs in [Bilad] al-Sham who followed Heraclius were of three groups. One group followed the religion of the Arabs [Muslims] and sided with them. Another group

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 75

were Christian (Nasara) and had firm belief in Christianity and were with us [the Byzantines]. The third group were Christians and did not have firm belief in Christianity and who said we hate to fight our brothers in religion (Ahl Dinina) and we hate to support the foreigners (‘Ajam) against our people [the Arabs].53 The first party apparently represents the groups situated north of Hijaz and in the Sinai who embraced Islam after being abandoned by the Byzantines. Their alliance with the Muslims was complete. Not only did they switch sides; they also abandoned their old Christian religion or heathen traditions and adopted the new faith. The second group represents the Ghassanids and their allies who lived in the northern sector of Palestine near the Byzantine heartland. It is well established in both Byzantine and Arabic primary sources that the Ghassanids under their king Jabala b. al-Ayham remained faithful to the Byzantines. The Ghassanids or at least a major part of them even chose to leave their homelands and to migrate to Byzantium after the conquests. The third group is more difficult to identify. Some historians tried to locate them in the Balqa’ region and in the city of Fihl and hinted towards the Salih and Tanukh tribes.54 ‘Amila and its sister tribes could have belonged to the third category, since they adopted Christianity in addition to their heathen traditions and eventually allied themselves to the Muslims, though in a much later period than the northern Hijazi tribes. This alliance was necessary and essential for Muslims who desperately needed the help of the dominant tribal groups in Southern Palestine in order to achieve their conquests. The Muslims used similar strategies to attract allies of their opponents on the Persian front too. From the early stages of the conquests, the Muslims attracted the allies of their enemies. The most famous were those Sasanian troops who defected to the Muslims during the course of the Iraqi conquests. Just prior to al-Qadisiyya, thousands of the Persian king’s troops are reported to have deserted in exchange for permission to settle down where they liked, to become affiliated with an Arab group of their choice and to earn salaries. The famous Asawira55 joined the Muslims at the time of the conquests in southern

76

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Iraq, converted to Islam, and fought against their fellow Persians, in exchange for a high pay and a place to settle.56 It is not unlikely that the same trend was repeated with the Arab Syrians. ‘Amila and its sister tribes eventually settled down in Palestine, Jordan and Syria, where they shared the spoils of the war eventually forming the backbone of the Umayyad army. If we look at the end result (new land, high pay) we can conclude safely that a deal was sealed between the two parties. Very few traditional Arab historians dealt with the role of the Arab Syrian tribes during the conquests. Al-Azdi and al-Waqidi were explicit in depicting the actions of ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm during the conquests. According to them, these tribes sided with the Muslims long before the decisive battle of al-Yarmuk. The alliance between the Muslims and ‘Amila and its sister tribes was a key step in achieving the conquests of Syria. On the other hand, the historians of the late third or early fourth Hijra century (Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi, al-Tabari, al-Baladhuri and al-Ya‘qubi) had little or nothing to say about the Arab Syrian tribes during the early conquests. They tended to show them either as minor players totally submissive to the Muslims or to depict them as staunch pro-Byzantine soldiers or simply ignored them. A considerable difference is noted concerning the role played by the Arab Syrian tribes during the conquests in the accounts related by al-Waqidi and al-Azdi in the second Hijra century. Al-Waqidi’s Futuh al-Sham contains several references pertaining to this topic.57 The relationship between the Muslims and the Arab Syrians was not hostile. As a matter of fact, both groups were aware of their common cultural background. They describe each other as cousins (banu ‘amm fi al-nasab) or having close blood relations (rahamuka muttasila bi rahamina).58 Al-Waqidi’s text conveys the idea that the Arab Syrians were divided between the two opposing camps. Some allied themselves early to the Muslims and the rest remained faithful to the Byzantines until the last minute. He does not mention when the schism occurred, neither does he mention the factors that led to this division. However, it is certain, according to al-Waqidi, that some of the Arab Syrians left the service of the Byzantines and joined the ranks of the Arabs. Their role

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 77

in winning the battle of al-Yarmuk was indeed decisive. Among these tribes were ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm.59 Al-Waqidi’s account does not provide us with a rational explanation as to why and how the schism occurred among the tribes. The division was not only between tribes (i.e. Ghassan vs ‘Amila), it was also division within each tribe (i.e. Ghassan vs Ghassan). This description is a rare version however.60 Perhaps it is due to the fact that stories in al-Waqidi’s futuh tend to be confusing because of the subsequent insertion of information. It is possible, nevertheless, to assume that during the Byzantine – Persian war and the presence of hostile Persian troops in Palestine, the large geographical area inhabited by the ‘Amilis drove them to disperse and live separately. This could have led to the emergence of several distinct sub-tribes that reacted disparately in different areas to the Muslim presence. Otherwise, it is hard to imagine the relatively well trained, disciplined, long established tribes dividing themselves on this level with no obvious explanation. The inconsistencies in al-Waqidi’s text notwithstanding, it remains possible that some of the Arab tribes, among whom were ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm, joined the Muslims long before the decisive Battle of al-Yarmuk.61 It is the account of Abu Isma‘il Muhammad al-Azdi that reveals most of the details related to the role performed by ‘Amila and its sister tribes in the conquest of Syria. It is one of the earliest extant Arabic sources dealing with the Islamic conquests of Syria and one of the few extant documents from the second Hijra century. Al-Azdi’s text has generally been ignored and suffered from accusations of forgery by De Goeje.62 Recent studies however showed that Al-Azdi’s text is of utmost value and should be included in any study of the history of early Islamic Syria.63 Several major direct confrontations occurred between the Muslims and the Byzantines after the capture of Ghazza. Ajnadayn (AD 634), Fihl (AD 635), Marj al-Safar (AD 635) and al-Yarmuk (AD 636) are the major ones. They were all won by the Muslims. We have no accurate information on the Arab Syrians in Ajnadayn. However, al-Azdi was categorical in his assertion that ‘Amila and its sister tribes joined the Muslims after Ajnadayn and just prior to the Battle of Fihl. Al-Azdi

78

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

provides us with strong evidence for the shift in allegiance of these Arab Syrian tribes and its implications for the outcome of the struggle. In his narration regarding the defeat of the Byzantines in Ajnadayn, al-Azdi relates to us the events that followed: When the Byzantines realized that Abu ‘Ubayda was heading towards them, they turned to Fihl in al-Urdunn. All the Muslims assembled in it [Fihl], Lakhm, Judham, Ghassan, ‘Amila, al-Qayn, and others from Quda‘a arrived there and joined the Muslims whose number increased and then they joined the army of the Muslims.64 Al-Azdi provides us with the specific date of the official merger between the Muslims and these Arab Syrian tribes, January AD 635. However this official unification between the two sides was not spontaneous. The two sides had been in close contact since the early days of the conquests. The text is insightful in that regard. The Arab Syrian tribes joined the Muslim troops as Muslims. Whether they embraced Islam in Fihl or some time before is not clear.65 In either case, they joined the Muslim side as old, trusted allies. Al-Azdi acknowledges that they added strength, might and troops to the Muslim army. In Fihl, ‘Amila and its sister tribes revealed their alliance with the Muslims. Their relations had probably been secretive and limited for the previous few years. But after the first major defeat of the Byzantines, the nature of their alliance changed. The conquests turned from limited raids into a full scale invasion. The Arab Syrians thus became indispensable to the Muslims and their presence was needed not only as spies or helpers but mainly as a fighting army. The Arab Syrians’ expertise in warfare and in particular the siege of cities was in high demand.66 Al-Azdi confirms the fact that the Muslims gained more in strength and in number by citing another chain of authorities reaching back to Malik Abu Tayba al-Qayni. This man belonged to al-Qayn, one of the Quda‘a confederation which included ‘Amila. He said: My people the Qayn were present at the battle of Fihl on the side of the Muslims as were Lakhm, Judham, Ghassan, ‘Amila,

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 79

Quda‘a. These tribes included a huge amount of people who helped the Muslims win over their enemy.67 The addition of ‘Amila and its sister tribes was not a negligible one. On the contrary, it was necessary and essential. The author uses the word ‘huge crowd’ (jam‘ ‘azim kathir) in describing the number of those who joined the Muslims. Then he stresses the fact that without the help of these Arab Syrians, the Muslims could not have won over the Byzantines.68 This again is highlighted in al-Azdi’s text when he describes the battle of al-Yarmuk and those who participated in it. He said that one third of the people present were the Azd. However the majority of people were the people of Yaman (‘izam al-nas) and Himyar which ‘included Hamdan, Khawlan, Madhhij, Quda‘a, Lakhm, Judham, ‘Amila, Kinda . . . ’.69 As is well known, the Arab Syrians were mostly of Yamani origin.

The Versions of Late Historians on the Role of ‘Amila During the Conquests A- Al-Baladhuri was aware of the complexities of the frontier zone between the Arabian Peninsula and Bilad al-Sham. He realized the important role played by ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm as the desert Guardians. He knew that the new system established by the Byzantines immediately after the withdrawal of the Persians was similar to the one established in that region for the last three centuries. In his account of Muhammad’s campaign against Tabuk,70 al-Baladhuri draws our attention to the news that spread among the Muslims of the arrival of enemy troops composed of Byzantines, ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm.71 The news turned out to be just a rumour and Muhammad therefore completed his peace treaties and new alliances with the towns of Tabuk and Ayla. The significance of this incident lies in al-Baladhuri’s awareness of the role played by ‘Amila and its sister tribes in defending the Byzantine empire. According to him, they formed the first line of defence against any intrusions or military campaigns emanating from the Peninsula. Yet he does not acknowledge their role during the

80

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

conquests of Syria and Palestine. To him they remained subordinate to the Byzantines until their defeat at al-Yarmuk.72 The real battles according to al-Baladhuri were fought by the Byzantines themselves who sometimes used their Arab allies. Furthermore, he considered ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm as subordinate to the Ghassanids and as fighting under the leadership of Jabala.73 Al-Baladhuri ignores completely the role of the Arab Syrian tribes in the Battle of Fihl and in general he attributes to them secondary and insignificant importance. Thus al-Baladhuri, despite his original comprehension of the growing importance of ‘Amila and its sister tribes in defending the Byzantine frontiers, fails to reconcile these facts with his narration. His version suffers from several contradictions and inconsistencies. On the one hand he acknowledges the importance of ‘Amila in defending the Byzantine frontier yet he relegates it to a secondary status under the Ghassanids with a minimal role in the defence of the Byzantine empire. It is well established now that the Ghassanids had lost their Phylarchate and their supremacy over the other southern tribes by the end of the sixth century AD. The Persian occupation probably deepened the division between the northern tribes led by the Ghassanids and the southern tribes of ‘Amila and Judham. This division was sealed when the Christian Ghassanids remained pro-Byzantine to the last moment, while the southern tribes sided, long before them, with the Muslims. B- Al-Ya‘qubi disregards completely the tribes of ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm. According to him the conquests were a struggle between the Muslims and the Byzantines. The Arab Syrian tribes were granted no significant place in his narration. Nonetheless, shreds of a different story appeared in his narration of ‘Umar’s visit to Jerusalem immediately after its fall: Then ‘Umar ordered that the spoils of war shall be divided equally among all the people except for Lakhm and Judham and he said: I do not treat those who came out of misery [the Muslims] and fought their enemy like those who came out from their homes[the Arab Syrians]. But a man replied:

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 81

If God made the migration of the prophet to us and then we went out of our homes to meet the enemy would we be deprived of our share?74 The text, despite its brevity, is extremely informative on the role of ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm. Al-Ya‘qubi implicitly acknowledged the presence of Lakhm, Judham and ‘Amila during the distribution of the booty75 implying that they indeed participated in the conquests as partners of the Muslims. According to the caliph ‘Umar, Judham and Lakhm and, consequently, ‘Amila had the right to have a share in the spoils because they fought against the Byzantines. ‘Umar however refused to treat them equally because he considered their sacrifice less deserving than the efforts made by the Arabs coming from the Peninsula. He considered the Arab Syrians to be wealthier and operating within their ‘home’.76 The importance of this brief story lies in what is not said. Since these Arab Syrian tribes had a right to share spoils, it meant that they were not treated as Christians, nor did they have to pay any jizya or the double amount of sadaqa as was the case with the Christian Banu Taghlib or Banu Ghassan.77 The Banu ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm, according to this text, had accepted Islam as their new faith in the early stages of the conquests. Unlike many Christianized tribes, their conversion was total and immediate. They were not forced to become Muslims, but probably accepted it because it was the price to pay in order to forge the new alliance. Unlike the Ghassanids, their Christian faith, as noted earlier, was not deeply rooted in their traditions; as a matter of fact they had retained heathen pilgrim traditions at al-Uqaysir. C- Al-Tabari’s version confirms even more the ‘Abbasid trend to underrate the role of ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm in the conquests. Despite al-Tabari’s endeavour to achieve complete accuracy and balance in his history, he nonetheless accepted the version which depicted these tribes as pro-Byzantine forces fighting against the few Muslims. According to al-Tabari’s version, ‘Amila, Judham and Lakhm fought under the leadership of the Ghassanid king Jafna against the Muslims in the battle of al-Yarmuk. He, however,

82

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

acknowledges the fact that some people of Judham and Lakhm (Nas min Lakhm wa Judham) had previously joined the ranks of the Muslims. He does not specify how and why some of these tribes severed their alliance with the Byzantines and joined the Muslims. Yet even those few who joined the Muslims deserted the Muslims in a moment of need during the heat of battle and escaped to nearby villages.78 This story, it seems, is also preserved in poetry:79 The tribes of Lakhm and Judham ran away, While we were clashing with the Romans, If they ever return we shall not become friends again. With al-Tabari, the role of Arab Syrian tribes was not yet completely obliterated but mutated. According to him, only a few of these tribes willingly joined the Muslims and at the crucial moment, later, deserted the Muslims. Thus their role during the conquests of Syria was insignificant and, furthermore, hindered the advance of the Muslims. D- Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi (d.314 AH) paints all the Arab Syrian tribes as pro-Byzantine troops. By the end of the third Hijra century their role, no matter how minor, in the Syrian conquests was totally ignored. The only indigenous people who helped the Muslims, according to Ibn al-A‘tham, during the conquests were the Nabateans: Those Nabateans were Christians but they were closer to the Muslims due to their piety, they were the Muslims’ spies and their messengers, but the Byzantines never suspected them’80 The role of the Nabateans in offering their help to the Muslims is well attested in several other sources.81 However, their close relations with the Muslims did not originate because of the latter’s piety and kindness. The Nabatean merchants from Syria were active in Medina where there was a suq al-Nabat.82 The Nabateans, it seems, wanted to continue trading with Medina even after the

THE ROLE

OF

‘A MILA DURING

THE

ISLAMIC CONQUESTS 83

establishment of the Muslim state. This obviously did not please the Byzantines who asked their governors to mistreat the Medina traders many of whom were Nabateans.83 The clash between the two sides was thus inevitable and the Nabateans sided with the Muslims. Unlike the Arab Syrian tribes, the Nabateans were a settled population, composed mainly of farmers and traders. They were not renowned for their military skills or war expertise. Their role therefore was easier to highlight, by historians, as it was secondary in comparison to the great military achievements of the Muslims. The role of ‘Amila grew as the Muslim troops marched into Bilad al-Sham. Their new alliance with their Arab kinsmen was probably a key factor in the Muslim victory. The advent of the Muslims allowed ‘Amila to leave its role as subordinates to the Byzantines and to become real partners and decision makers in the new Muslim order laid down by the Umayyads in Bilad alSham. Their geographical location in the period leading up to the Muslim conquests remained at the southern part of the Dead Sea. During Umayyad rule they moved to the north, to the Junds of Filastin and al-Urdunn. There is no hard evidence, however, to suggest that ‘Amila settled at this time inside Jabal al-Jalil. Their presence remained for at least a century on the borders of what would eventually become their homeland.

CHAPTER 4 ‘A MIL A UNDER THE UM AY YADS

The establishment of Umayyad rule over the newly conquered Muslim world was achieved mainly by Arab Syrian tribes. Their military expertise and their discipline, acquired under the Byzantines, allowed them to subdue their enemies. They formed the backbone of the conquering armies against Byzantium. They subdued the internal rebellions in Iraq, Persia, North Africa and Hijaz. In other words, they dominated the Muslim world for over a century. According to some historians there was not just one single Umayyad army but rather a number of different armies at different times. The most important were the Syrian troops, ahl al-Sham. These formed the underpinnings of the Umayyad regime alongside the Iraqi forces which eventually disappeared due to their unreliability.1 The partnership between ahl al-Sham and the Umayyads was probably first established and then later developed by the Abu Sufyan family that used to trade with the Arab Syrian tribes before the rise of Islam. It is reported that they owned a farm near Damascus called Baqbash.2 Mu‘awiya b. Abi Sufyan perhaps knew of the military potential of ahl al-Sham and resorted to creating a political power based on an alliance between him and the Arab Syrian tribes during his governorship in Syria. This alliance led, after two decades, to the emergence of Mu‘awiya as a strong governor with almost complete autonomous authority against ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, the new caliph in Hijaz. The Syrian

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

85

armies in Mu‘awiya’s time must have been effectively organized and led even though they had not yet formed a standing professional army. It is the Marwanids, and in particular the Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik, who created a regular army predominantly recruited from the Syrians (ahl al-Sham).3 The Syrian army became a largely professional force and the instrument of Umayyad authority over the rest of the Caliphal lands. Mu‘awiya acknowledged their importance by allying himself to the powerful Kalb tribe of Quda‘a through marriage. Maysun, the daughter of the Kalbite leader Bahdal, became his wife and the mother of his son and heir Yazid. Later events have shown that perhaps Mu‘awiya had no choice but to appoint Yazid as his heir; the Kalb tribe was a major partner in the decision-making process and would not probably have allowed any other alternative. The Umayyad – ahl al-Sham alliance benefited both parties. The Umayyad family used them to rule supreme over the Muslims while ahl al-Sham acquired wealth, land and authority. In order to guarantee the stability of Syria and its security, both parties were convinced of the necessity of keeping Syria free of the uncontrolled immigration which plagued Iraq.4 This phase also witnessed the transformation of ahl al-Sham from semi-nomadic tribes into a settled community, and probably for the first time, they became full-fledged city residents. Nevertheless, this settlement did not hinder either their combat ability nor their beduin spirit as this transformation was slow and prolonged and lasted for more than a century. As a matter of fact, and contrary to expectations that settlement in the cities of the conquered lands would weaken tribal attachment, it did in fact increase tribal loyalty. It seems that in reaction to the Umayyad state formation tribal identity was politicized to a high level.5 Indeed, the caliph had military reasons for maintaining tribal loyalties as they were used to maintain discipline in the lower ranks of the army.6 In Syria, the tribes were quartered in junds and could easily be mobilized for military campaigns. Unlike the pre-Islamic period, the history of ‘Amila under the Umayyads is better recorded. However, like the history of Syria during the same period, the amount of data available remains scant. ‘Amila seems to emerge as a major party in the ruling apparatus and a key contributor to the establishment of the Umayyad dynasty. For the first

86

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

time, the available data reveals to us a history not only of the tribe as such, but of the ‘Amili individuals with their own distinct names and identities. The research conducted in this book involved, in addition to the tribe as a unit, individual members of ‘Amila, poets, ‘Ulama and military leaders, who influenced and shaped Umayyad and early ‘Abbasid societies. With their Yamani allies, ‘Amila participated extensively in building, protecting and expanding the Umayyad empire. They supported Mu‘awiya in his quest for power against his rivals. They defended Umayyad rule and secured the transition of government from the Sufyanid to the Marwanid house. Added to all this is their role in the conquests against the Byzantines in the west and the east.

‘Amila’s Tribal Alliances in the Early Umayyad Period The first communities to take advantage of the newly conquered Syria were the Arab Syrian tribes dominated by the Quda‘a-Kahlan confederation which included among others the tribes of Kalb, Judham and ‘Amila. As a matter of fact they outnumbered their fellow Muslim conquerors who were confined, in the early stages at least, to Jabiya in the Jawlan. The situation in Syria, immediately after the conquests, was rather critical. Inhabited Syria covered a large area and was vulnerable to Byzantine attacks from the north and along the Syrian coast. Additionally many of the urban areas were deserted because a majority of their Greek and local inhabitants were forced to leave them.7 Thus it was necessary to arrange for the re-occupation of these deserted lands and towns and to establish garrisons all along the frontiers with Arabs and non Arabs if necessary.8 Therefore, after dividing Syria into five junds: Hims, Dimashq, al-Urdunn, Filastin and Qinnasrin, tribesmen were settled in them according to their tribal affiliations. Most of the Yamani tribes settled in the first four junds while the last one, Qinnasrin, which covered the region of Jazira, was inhabited by the Qaysite tribes of Arabia.9 The Arab Syrians were given lands and mainly settled in the junds of Filastin, al-Urdunn and Dimashq. Hims was predominantly inhabited by Muslim conquering troops of Yamani origin. Thus the

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

87

inhabitants of Syria were divided into two major parties. A minority party which was confined to the Qinnasrin and Jazira area included the tribes coming from Arabia of Qaysi origin. A second, majority party, included the Arab Syrian tribes and the Yamani tribes coming out of Arabia.10 The preservation of the delicate balance of power inside Syria was the responsibility of Mu‘awiya who was appointed by the caliph ‘Umar b. al-Khattab as the governor of Syria after the death of his brother Yazid b. Abi Sufyan. Mu‘awiya’s policy was to maintain stability and balance among these tribes. This stability was extremely important for the defence of Syria against Byzantine threats as well as for his plans to remain in power as long as possible. Mu‘awiya gradually controlled the flow of immigration to the province. He used his powers to astutely limit immigration of the tribes and to exploit to the maximum their fighting abilities. Thus a system of patronage emerged based on mutual services.11 The Arab Syrians increased their stipends and wealth in exchange for their loyalty and military might.12 The clear result was that Syria kept its hegemony and security under the same leader in comparison to Iraq which was plagued by social and political upheavals and antagonisms caused, among other reasons, by the continuous flow of migrating Arab tribes. The ‘Amili tribesmen established good relations with the Umayyad family throughout their reign and in particular with Mu‘awiya and his son Yazid. This was initially possible because of their considerable number and their military expertise. Far from being the most populous, ‘Amila, nevertheless, was not considered to be a small tribe.13 Furthermore, the tribe was the close ally of the powerful Judham tribe that completely dominated Jund Filastin. Their relationship is well attested in historical sources and mainly in the poetry of ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili who celebrated this strong alliance on many occasions. In addition to his acknowledgment that the leaders of the Judham tribe were his leaders, as noted in a previous chapter, ‘Adi openly announced ‘Amila’s close tribal ties with Judham and Lakhm:14 We speak to our people (fellow tribesmen) Judham and Lakhm as dear ones.

88

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

‘Adi used the word qawmana (our people, fellow tribesmen) to describe his relations, as a ‘Amili, with Judham and Lakhm. Furthermore, he considered himself to be endeared to them (habib). His madih concerning their fighting abilities on different occasions is a clear indication of his affinity towards them as a close tribal ally. The tribes of Himyar and the Quda‘a confederation were also celebrated in his poetry as brothers and allies. ‘Adi’s verses were composed as a response to al-Ra‘i’s satire of denying him any lineage with Quda‘a. Thus ‘Adi named in his reply the allies of the ‘Amila tribe and the degree of proximity between them as a sign of pride and mufakhara (mutual boasting). Thus Quda‘a could easily have come to the rescue of ‘Amila if the need arose and their brothers the Banu Himyar were on perfect terms with them and their closest brothers were the Banu Judham:15 Quda‘a will not abandon us when the tribal leaders boast their descent, Our brothers, Himyar, would seek perfection for us for praise can only be build on praise, Judham, our closest sister tribe, knew (that we were being lampooned by al-Ra‘i) but their sister tribe (‘Amila) is neither in need nor angry. ‘Amila’s long established alliance with the strongest Yamani party, the Kalb tribe, in all likelihood guaranteed them their privileges. The Kalbites dominated the tribal politics of the Umayyad dynasty. The Kalb tribe was the most populous group. It also enjoyed the most influential positions because of its family ties with Mu‘awiya who married Maysun the daughter of their leader Bahdal. Naturally this marriage was a political marriage.16 But the position of the Kalb tribe as the ‘uncles’ of the heir-apparent and the next caliph, Yazid I who also married a Kalbite, remained unchallenged.17 ‘Amila’s alliance with Kalb is old and was well established before the Muslim conquests. Sources referred to this alliance and reported on their common raid against the Banu Tay’. The leader of the ‘Amilis, Qu‘aysis, detained ‘Adi b. Hatim al-Ta’i as his prisoner. However, a

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

89

Kalbite leader, Shu‘ayb b. Rabi‘ al-‘Ulaymi, reprimanded Qu‘aysis for his action and freed the prisoner without any ransom.18 Ibn Durayd related the same account, but added to it a verse by the ‘Amili poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ in which he claimed that it was ‘Amila who released ‘Adi b. Hatim19: We released ‘Adi b. Hatim from Tay’ of the two mountains from his captivity. The Tay’ poet, Bishr, denied this claim and showing, his gratitude to the Kalbites, attributed Ibn Hatim’s freedom to the ‘Ulaym clan of the Kalb tribe: You lied O son of Sha‘l, you did not release the son of Hatim, neither were your forefather a prestigious tribal leader, It was ‘Ulaym who saved ‘Adi b. Hatim by paying his ransom and (Tay’) is grateful to him. Hisham b. al-Kalbi reported an identical story, but added to it one more verse by the Tay’ poet. Ibn al-Kalbi related how the alliance between ‘Amila and Kalb originated. It was Abu ‘Azm b. ‘Awkalan b. al-Zuhd b. ‘Amila who initiated this alliance and offered his daughter (Hubay or Hayy) as wife to Kalb b. Wabra. Thus the three major clans of the tribe Kalb: Thawr, Kalad and Abu Hubahib were all descendents of a ‘Amili mother. The ‘Amilis were the maternal uncles of the Kalbites. ‘Amila and Kalb were virtually one family. Thus it was a blood relation first and foremost; second, it became a military alliance; and third, it was transformed into a political alliance. According to Ibn al-Kalbi, there were six generations between the poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ and Abu ‘Azm.20 If we consider a thirty-year period as the standard unit between each generation, we can deduce that this alliance was secured in the late fifth century AD. According to several sources, the poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ died in the early eighth century AD and it is estimated that he was born in the mid-seventh century.21 ‘Amila and Kalb practically formed one group for long periods of time and joined forces on several occasions especially under the famous

90

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Kalbite leader Zuhayr b. Janab al-Kalbi. In one of his poems, ‘Adi enumerates the deeds of his tribe in the Jahiliyya. It is obvious that most of their battles were fought in alliance with the Kalbites. He stated, for instance, that the ‘Amilis freed the uncle of the pre-Islamic Arab poet, Imru’ al-Qays, from his captivity:22 We released the uncle of Imri’ al-Qays from his captivity and we did not ask him to return the money he owes us for releasing him, We released the Banu- Bakr from their heavy chains put by Abu Karb. Imru’ al-Qays’ only famous uncle was al-Muhalhil b. Rabi‘a of Taghlib, the hero of al-Basus wars.23 This story is corroborated by Zuhayr b. Janab’s poetry:24 We captured Muhalhil and his brother (Kulayb), and the son of ‘Amr and the son Shihab and we put them in chains. And: May Taghlib perish because their women are herded to the market like slaves with no ornaments, Our fast horses pursued theirs until they captured al-Muhalhil on the water source of Hubayy. The battle between the Kalbites and the Banu Taghlib and Bakr is recorded in many traditional Arabic sources.25 The Kalbites and their Yamani allies inflicted a heavy defeat on their ‘Adnani adversaries. Sources often do not mention in detail the allies of the Kalbites. The verses of ‘Adi, however, throw some light on these unknown participants. ‘Amila succeeded in releasing al-Muhalhil, the bitter enemy of Zuhayr, and many of the ashraf of the Banu Bakr. This is a clear indicator of the strong alliance between the two tribes. ‘Amila, although eclipsed by the tribe Kalb, managed to play the role of the intermediary. ‘Adi was boasting not only about the prowess of his tribe but its muruwwa and their ability to forgive their enemies.

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

91

But how do we know that this alliance could have persisted for more than two centuries? The sources provide us with a ‘Amili clan leader, Sa‘d b. Zuhayr b. Janab al-Kalbi, who lived in the late sixth century. He was Abu ‘Azm’s great grand-son and his mother was a ‘Amili. He chose to join the ‘Amila tribe instead of Kalb. Thus we can deduce from these facts that three generations after the alliance was sealed between the two tribes, one of the ‘Amili clan leaders is known as al-Kalbi. This case is not unfamiliar to Arab tribal traditions. It is well established that a man could join another tribe and to carry its name either by virtue of being their mawla, or ally, or through marriage.26 It is also well established that ‘Adi b. Hatim, who was captured by the ‘Amili-Kalbite alliance, met the prophet Muhammad and his sister Saffanah was captured by the prophet in the Tay’ raid. He is considered to be one of the Sahaba and supporters of ‘Ali during the civil war.27 Thus we can safely assume that their alliance persisted for more than two centuries and there is no reason to deny that it remained active under the Umayyads. On the contrary, the position of the Kalb tribe as the ‘uncles’ of the caliph Yazid could only have pushed ‘Amila to strengthen even further their relationship. As a matter of fact the Umayyad ‘Amili poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ referred to this rather special relationship:28 My wife approached the land of my people, she was grieved by my restlessness and exile, On the territory of the loved ones in the lands of the tribe Kalb among the clans of ‘Amir and Janab. ‘Adi uses the words ‘the land of my people’ (ard qawmi) to describe the destination where his wife is heading. Then he mentions that it is on Kalb land where ‘his loved ones’ live (diyar al-‘aziz min ard Kalb). It is possible, therefore, to conclude that some ‘Amili clans used to live on Kalb land as their close allies. However, the balance of power between the two tribes was not equitable. Apparently, Kalb was the dominant party. The Kalbite leader imposed on the ‘Amili tribe leader the release of his prisoner, and to add insult to injury, he criticized him by saying: ‘Who are you

92

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

to allow yourself the capture of nobles!’ (ma anta wa asr al-ashraf ).29 The Kalb tribe was by far more populous and its lands stretched from al-Jawlan in the south to Palmyra in the north.

‘Amila’s Territorial Settlement The tribe ‘Amila moved inside Syria after the Muslim conquest and settled in the junds of Filastin and al-Urdunn. Their presence is attested to between the city of Tayma’ in the south of Filastin and Baysan south of Lake Tabariyya in al-Urdunn. It seems that some of the tribe remained semi-nomadic while others became city dwellers and lived in Dimashq, Baysan, Tabariyya and Safad. But their presence was restricted for most of the Umayyad period to the southern and eastern districts of al-Urdunn near Baysan and Lake Tabariyya. Many historical sources refer to them as ahl al-Urdunn. But their presence in jund Filastin remained small and eclipsed by their strong partners, the Judhamids, who it seems constituted the majority of the Arab inhabitants of that jund.30 Despite the paucity of sources on the Umayyad period, poetry preserves for us, fortunately, the diwans of the Arab poets which provide valuable references to the history of the Umayyads and the Arab tribes. The Umayyads opened their courts to a considerable number of Arab poets among whom were: al-Farazdaq, Jarir, al-Akhtal, al-Tirimmah and al-Ra‘i al-Numayri to name a few. Even some Umayyad Caliphs are reported to have composed poetry.31 The poetry of the ‘Amilis considerably improves our comprehension of the tribe’s history. Sources mention the existence of four ‘Amili poets in the pre-Islamic period. The first, ‘Awad, belonged to the Salama clan.32 Unfortunately the sources are silent on his life and poetry. The second poet is Duwayd al-‘Amili who was a contemporary of the Lakhmid king al-Nu‘man b. al-Mundhir. However, even though his preserved poetry does not exceed a few verses, it does reveal certain aspects of the ‘Amili poet’s personality.33 The remaining two, Simak and Malik, were mentioned before in the context of describing the balance of power between ‘Amila and the Ghassanids under the Byzantines. Only a few verses are ascribed to them.34 They nevertheless

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

93

reveal a clan very proud of its Yamani descent and one which adhered to the tribal laws of revenge (tha’r). Simak’s verses are a call to avenge his own death, while Malik’s poetry was uttered after the fulfilment of this promise. Some of Simak’s poetry goes as follows: I vow, if they ever kill Malik, to watch over them like a snake. Malik’s poetry ends by fulfilling the promise to revenge: O Banu Qumayr I have killed your leader and, as of now the feelings of inferiority and anxiety disappeared. These verses are few and do not reveal the geographical spread of the tribe nor any relevant historical information. The poetry of ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, on the other hand, is an invaluable source to a better understanding of the history of the ‘Amila tribe during the Umayyad reign. ‘Adi’s poetry is relatively rich in historical and geographical allusions.35 It is mainly because of his poetry that we can investigate the settlement of the tribe during that period. Naturally the results do not form an accurate map, but rather a rough sketch. Moreover, ‘Adi was a well known personality in the Umayyad court and among the Marwanid house in particular. Thus he was well placed to record the major events that involved ‘Amila as a contributor to the establishment of the Umayyad rule and, in particular, to the rise of the Marwanid house. The map It is reported that ‘Abd al-Aziz b. ‘Amir was a ‘Amili muhaddith from the town of Tayma’. (Shaykh min ‘Amila min ahl Tayma’).36 Tayma’, according to Yaqut, is a small town on the edge of al-Sham to the south, on the Damascus Hajj road. Notwithstanding ‘Amila’s movement to the north, towards Filastin and al-Urdunn, it seems that some sub-tribal groups remained on the edge of the Arabian Peninsula. It is recorded that the Jewish inhabitants of Tayma’ were evacuated by the caliph ‘Umar b. al-Khattab when the decision was taken to make

94

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Arabia inhabited by Muslims only.37 It could be speculated that ‘Amila and other tribes rushed to fill the gap left by the departure of its original population. Many semi-nomadic groups from ‘Amila, Judham and Kalb remained in the desert region, Badiyat al-Sham, between the Arabian Peninsula and al-Sham. This is referred to in ‘Adi’s poetry on several occasions. Moreover, the text mentions the word Shaykh min ‘Amila; Shaykh could also mean a leader of a clan or a tribe. It is highly unlikely to find a leader of a clan living by himself. One might speculate that his presence was accompanied at least by his close clan. The presence of ‘Amila in this town is therefore established with reasonable probability. The man is described as being from the inhabitants of Tayma’ (min ahl Tayma’). Once ‘Adi reached a source of water that belonged to the Kalbite Banu Bahr known as Khala near al-Qunaynat in Badiyat al-Sham. This spring of water had witnessed in the past a clash between clans from the Banu Taghlib (clans of Awhad and ‘Atab). ‘Adi, as an ally, was received warmly by the Kalbites at this spring and granted fresh water and food. He thus expressed his gratitude by reciting the following verses:38 The Banners of the Banu Bahr were not visible but if I meet them my wishes would be granted, When we reached al-Qunaynat on a hot summer day, Fresh water was brought to us in a wooden cup, From the source Khala filled with memories of the clash between the clans of Awhad and al-‘Atab. It is therefore obvious that some clans of ‘Amila and Kalb remained in Badiyat al-Sham as allies and friends. It remains very difficult to assess the number and whereabouts of the ‘Amilis in this region. It suffices to mention that, after the Muslim conquest, some nomadic sub-tribal groups of ‘Amila remained in the desert between Tayma’ in the south and the southern tip of the Dead Sea in the north. As previously mentioned, many clans and sub-tribal groups of ‘Amila moved towards the cities and towns of the junds of Filastin and al-Urdunn. The region of the city of Ma’ab (previously known as

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

95

Areopolis) was populated by ‘Amilis. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa’ described the region where the Banu Qurra of ‘Amila resided:39 A woman and her parents of the clan Qurra were brought out by the heat to seek water near Ma’ab where its houses are clearly visible, Your family occupied the regions of Qutud, Gharb and Sahsahan so where are you settled exactly? ‘Adi was looking for a woman of the Banu Qurra of ‘Amila that used to fetch fresh water during the heat near Ma’ab. Her clan lived in al-Qutud, Gharb and Sahsahan.40 But ‘Adi did not know exactly which one. It is not clear whether this clan was a settled community or a nomadic group. I am inclined to chose the first option since ‘Adi pointed out the fact that the clan occupy (Ihtalla)41 the regions of Qutud, Gharb and Sahsahan. These are the names of two mountains and a valley. Moreover it would be improbable for a nomadic group who normally move in small groups to occupy such a large area.42 But a larger settled group could live in such a relatively large area. However, this conclusion remains speculative and needs further corroboration. What is certain is that clans of the ‘Amila tribe used to live, or had their pastures, in the region of Ma’ab during the Umayyad period in an area where one could see houses located (Tura Qusur Quraha). It is also certain that the area of Baysan was populated by ‘Amilis and in particular the clan of ‘Adi, the Banu Sha‘l. This detail was mentioned by the Umayyad poet al-Ra‘i al-Numayri in a satirical poem targeted against ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘. He explicitly mentioned the fact that ‘Adi was brought on the back of a camel from the villages of Baysan:43 You have dishonored me and your pride corresponds to that of a donkey in a lion’s den, You were brought from the region of Baysan on the back of a dusty scandalous camel. Despite the poem’s satirical note, there is no reason to doubt al-Ra‘i’s information concerning ‘Adi’s homestead. By mentioning that ‘Adi

96

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

came from Baysan in jund al-Urdunn, Al-Ra‘i was trying to undermine his legitimacy by describing him as an outsider to the Damascene court life. Other historical sources do not deny this version. Al-Isfahani mentioned that ‘Adi was not a beduin but lived in a settled community and that only his house was located in Damascus. (Kan manziluh bi Dimashq wa huwa min Hadirat al-Shu‘ara’ la min Badiyatihim).44 In other words, ‘Adi came from a settled community but had a house in Damascus. Ibn ‘Asakir noted the fact that he is not a real Damascene by saying he came to Damascus and praised the caliph al-Walid. (Qadima Dimashq wa madaha al-Walid b.‘Abd al-Malik).45 The data available concerning the date and birthplace of ‘Adi are limited but of extreme value to our understanding of ‘Amila’s geographical settlement. We know that he was considered to be in origin from a settled community in Baysan. According to a study dedicated to his poetry, it was estimated, by the editor of the book, that the poet ‘Adi was born at the end of the third Hijra decade (around AD 650).46 This implies that two decades after the conquests, some branches of the ‘Amila tribe moved to the north and settled near the city of Baysan near Tabariyya. If we look at the last city where ‘Amila was located before the invasion (Mu’ta south of the Dead Sea), we can estimate the relatively long distance crossed by the tribe in less than two decades from south to north. It is most probable that the area known today as Jabal ‘Amil was not populated by ‘Amilis in the early Umayyad period despite a vague reference to a village called Shaqra’ owned by a man called ‘Adi.47 There currently exists a village in Jabal ‘Amil called Shaqra’. Could it be linked it to ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘? This is not supported by tangible evidence. Yaqut does not specify the whereabouts of this village nor does he give the full name of the man ‘Adi who owned it. Thus Shaqra’ could be anywhere and ‘Adi could be anyone. Damascus also represented an important centre for several ‘Amili personalities during the late Umayyad and early ‘Abbasid periods. However it is not clear whether the ‘Amilis migrated to the capital of the Umayyads as a clan or their migration was restricted to individuals. The ‘Amilis in general inhabited junds of al-Urdunn and Filastin and they formed, with their Kalbite and Judhamid allies, the majority of

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

97

the military force in al-Urdunn. But their military might in Damascus was never mentioned and they were never called Ahl Dimashq. On the contrary they were usually referred to as Ahl al-Urdunn. It is therefore safe to assume that the settlement of ‘Amilis in Damascus was restricted to individuals, not as a tribe, and occurred mainly as of the early ‘Abbasid period. Many of the ‘Amilis living in Damascus occupied senior positions in the Umayyad state. The ‘Amili presence in Damascus was not restricted to the Umayyad period; it persisted well beyond and into late ‘Abbasid times.48

‘Amila and the Sufyanids It is needless to discuss again the role played by the Quda‘a confederation and their importance in the Sufyanid political arena. ‘Amila’s close alliance with the Kalb tribe and their Kahlani-Quda‘i lineage insured them a privileged place in the new Sufyanid order. Unfortunately sources seldom mention ‘Amila as an independent unit and refer continuously to Judham, Kalb or Quda‘a. Some references nonetheless remained extant. If these were combined with a serious reinterpretation of some historical events that occurred under the Sufyanids, a more detailed account of ‘Amila’s fortunes might emerge. Siffin The confrontation at Siffin is the most appropriate opportunity to clearly identify the tribes, clans and individuals who supported the Sufyanids and those who sided with ‘Ali b. Abi Talib. Sources cited their names individually as well as their specific roles.49 The Arabic sources on the topic are substantial and, in particular, Ibn Muzahim’s Waq‘at Siffin which provides a detailed account of the battle. Ahl al-Sham clearly sided with Mu‘awiya and formed the core of the troops involved. They were the most disciplined and the most advanced military corps and their military tactics proved their efficiency during combat. The Syrian infantry performed advanced tactical manoeuvres.50 This is endorsed by modern studies which stress the disposition of Syrian troops to obey orders and to maintain their discipline, kneeling with their spears in

98

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

the face of an incoming cavalry charge. These studies consider this a sign of training and professionalism. It was this discipline and training which gave them the advantage over their disorganized enemies.51 The Syrian army was assembled and led by its tribal chiefs, fought under its tribal banners and used its tribal cries, which probably dated back to the wars of the Jahiliyya.52 The battle was largely conducted between armies of infantry fighting with bows, spears and swords. Horses were used to bring men to the battlefield and cavalry was used for scouting or turning a flank or engaging other cavalry, but they could not win a battle against a well-prepared and disciplined infantry.53 The Syrian army was divided into three major regiments: left (maysara), middle (qalb) and right (maymana).54 Each regiment was composed of infantry and cavalry. The maysara was the regiment of the Yaman; the maymana was constituted of the Qays of Qinnasrin and al-Jazira; and, the qalb was the regiment of the Damascenes (Yaman and Qays). The sources indicate, with some minor inconsistencies, the names of the Syrian tribes and their leaders who participated in the Battle of Siffin. The tribes of jund al-Urdunn were under the command of Sufyan b. ‘Amr al-Sulami, and the tribes of jund Filastin were headed by Maslama b. Mukhlid. The infantry of jund al-Urdunn was led by ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Qays al-Qayni and the infantry of jund Filastin was under al-Harith b. Khalid al-Azdi. The Banu Quda‘a who lived in al-Urdunn were commanded by Hubaysh b. Dalja al-Qayni.55 The Banu Kinana of Filastin were headed by Shurayk al-Kinani and the Madhhij tribe of al-Urdunn was headed by al-Mukharriq b. al-Harith al-Zubaydi. The tribes of Lakhm and Judham, then in Filastin, were led by Natil b. Qays al-Judhami. The Banu Hamadan of al-Urdunn were headed by Hamza b. Malik al-Hamadani, the tribe of Ghassan from al-Urdunn was led by Yazid b. al-Harith and the Khath‘am tribe was commanded by Hamal b. ‘Abdallah al-Khath‘ami. Al-Dinawari added to this formation the Banu Himyar led by Hani’ b. ‘Umayr. According to the sources, the Syrian tribes of Yamani origin which participated in the Battle of Siffin and formed the bulk of Mu‘awiya’s army were the following: ‘Ijl, Kalb, Ash‘ar, ‘Akk, Khath‘am, Hamdan, Tay’, Kinda, Himyar, Quda‘a, Judham, Lakhm, Azd and Ghassan.56 ‘Amila was not mentioned as an independent clan with its own

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

99

banners and battle cry.57 Does this mean that ‘Amila did not participate in the confrontation? It can hardly have been so. We know from past events and later ones (the battle of Marj Rahit for instance), that ‘Amila constituted a formidable military force and was able to sustain it during the Umayyad caliphate. It would be highly improbable for this tribe to remain neutral in this conflict. This would have been noted by Mu‘awiya who would probably have severely punished them. It is possible that the ‘Abbasid historians neglected to mention it due to the fact that ‘Amila, under the ‘Abbasids, became an insignificant military force. Thus the case was similar to what happened to their role in the conquests, a role minimized and sometimes totally ignored. Or they could have mingled with the Quda‘a, Kalb or Judham tribes and were denied an independent banner. The sources nevertheless left us some notes on ‘Amili participation in the Battle of Siffin. Al-Mas‘udi thus related the death of ‘Ammar b. Yasir who fought against the Umayyads: Then [‘Ammar] advanced to the midst of the combat and many spears fell on him, Abu al-‘Adiya al-‘Amili and Ibn Juwayn al-Saksaki killed him and they disputed over his spoils. They presented their case to ‘Abdallah b. ‘Amr b. Al-‘As· who dismissed them.58 According to al-Mas‘udi it was a man from the tribe ‘Amila who killed ‘Ammar b. Yasir, one of the most prominent Sahabis. This story is corroborated by al-Maqdisi who reported that Abu ‘Amir al-‘Amili killed ‘Ammar b. Yasir.59 A slight difference is noted between the two versions relating to the first name of the man involved but the tribe’s designation remains the same. Al-Baladhuri reported two versions: ‘Abu al-Ghadiya killed him [‘Ammar], Abu Mikhnaf reported he is ‘Amili, but Hisham b. al-Kalbi said he is a Murri.’60 The significance of this story lies not only in the participation of ‘Amili tribesmen in the confrontation at Siffin, but in the death of ‘Ammar who was a venerated figure even among the Umayyads themselves. It is reported that the prophet had predicted the death of ‘Ammar by the ‘party of the aggressors’ (taqtuluh al-fi’a al-baghiya).61 However Mu‘awiya succeeded

100 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

in neutralizing the effects of this story on his men by stating that the ones who killed ‘Ammar were those who brought him to the battlefield in spite of his old age. The killing of a prominent figure such as ‘Ammar by a ‘Amili could reflect the real devotion of the ‘Amilis, in particular, and the Yaman, in general, to the cause of the Umayyads.62 The absence of the tribe ‘Amila from the accounts that dealt with the battle of Siffin notwithstanding, it is almost certain that they were present but many historians of the ‘Abbasid age failed to take notice of it due to the reasons mentioned earlier. Therefore we can only speculate about their exact positions during the actual battle. The ‘Amilis could have been included in the troops of Sufyan b. ‘Amr al-Sulami who led the people of al-Urdunn, or the infantry of al-Urdunn commanded by ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Qays al-Qayni, or Quda‘a of al-Urdunn headed by Hubaysh b. Dalja al-Qayni or the Banu Judham and Lakhm of Filastin. Al-Hazimi, quoting Ibn Habib, reported that ‘Amila is a branch of the Saksak: ‘wa min al-Sakasik ‘Amila biha yu‘rafu banuha.’63 If this is true and some ‘Abbasid historians considered them as a single group, we thus have more evidence on the participation of the Sakasik in this Battle.64 However, this conclusion is speculative and needs further evidence to corroborate it and the relation between the tribe ‘Amila and the tribe Saksak needs further investigation.65 It is worth mentioning that the second man who slaughtered ‘Ammar b. Yasir belongs to the Saksak tribe. Indeed many Sakasik tribesmen did participate in the Battle as reported by al-Minqari and al-Dinawari. In their eagerness to support the Umayyads, ‘Amila and the other Yamanis were driven not only by feelings of loyalty and discipline but also by financial rewards, spoils of war and the power of influence, just as under the Byzantines they had benefited from their military participation. The tribe ‘Akk for instance asked that 2,000 of them should receive 2,000 dirhams for their support each year, and, if a recipient died, his cousin should receive the payment: ‘ifrid li qawmi fi alfayn alfayn wa man halika minhum fa ibn ‘ammih makanuhu.’66 The Battle of Siffin was a golden oppurtunity for ahl al-Sham to reap financial gains and political influence. It would be highly unlikely for ‘Amila to have missed that occasion.

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

101

We can safely postulate that at least some ‘Amili tribesmen participated in the battle of Siffin and thus consolidated the rule of Mu‘awiya. The presence of Judham, Lakhm, Quda‘a, Kalb and Saksak could be considered as an important sign for the participation of ‘Amila in this battle. This hypothesis could further be supported by the fact that there are no signs of ‘Amila or its sister tribes on the side of ‘Ali while many of the other tribes were divided between the two camps. For ‘Amila the reign of Mu‘awiya and Yazid I could be considered as a period of movement towards the north and settlement in the junds of al-Urdunn and Filastin, as has been shown earlier. Perhaps the proclamation of Mu‘awiya in Filastin in AD 661 as the new caliph for the tribes of Filastin and al-Urdunn, after the battle of Siffin, is a sign of appreciation for these tribes and their loyalty towards the Sufyanids.67 It appears that Mu‘awiya and his son Yazid I frequently visited these junds because their tribes provided a reliable support for the regime. They chose to settle in al-Sinnabra, a few miles from Tabariyya, the capital of al-Urdunn. The Junds of Filastin and al-Urdunn enjoyed a period of tranquillity compared to the turmoil of Iraq which encouraged a trend of migration from southern Filastin and Badiyat al-Sham towards these regions. One indication of this may be the relatively high taxes which were collected from the two junds: 180,000 dinars were collected in al-Urdunn and 450,000 dinars in Filastin.68 Al-Harra The consolidation of Sufyanid rule was achieved, among other things, by a series of confrontations and battles. Naturally a heavy burden fell on the shoulders of Ahl al-Sham who were able, for the first time in the history of the young Muslim state, to safeguard and secure the transition of power, from one caliph to his son. ‘Amila and the people of jund al-Urdunn participated in defending the Sufyanid regime against its enemies. The first military confrontation under Yazid I occurred in Karbala’ where al-Husayn b. ‘Ali was slaughtered by the soldiers of ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad b. Abih. It seems that Ahl Sham did not participate in this incident. According to al-Mas‘udi, all those who assassinated al-Husayn and his family originated from al-Kufa, and

102

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

‘no one from al-Sham was there.’69 Unlike ‘Abdallah b. al-Zubayr’s rebellion, this confrontation did not really threaten the existence of the Sufyanid rule and was easily settled and could be handled by the forces stationed in Iraq. On the other hand the rebellion of ‘Abdallah b. al-Zubayr and the people of Medina, in the battle of al-Harra, represented a major menace to the reign of Yazid I. He had to entrust the mission to quell his enemies to his most reliable troops and to Ahl al-Sham in particular, the people of Filastin and al-Urdunn. It is reported that Yazid sent to Ibn al-Zubayr the following verses:70 Call upon your god in heavens, for I am dispatching the tribes of ‘Akk and Asha‘r to fight against you, And the men of Kalb and al-Sakun, Lakhm and Judham preceded by the battalions of Himyar, How would you escape from them Abu Khabib, run for your life before the soldiers arrive. As cited in the verses ascribed to Yazid I, the tribes that participated in the campaign to subdue Ibn al-Zubayr were mostly the Arab Syrians of Yaman origin: ‘Akk, Ash‘ar, Kalb, Sakun, Lakhm, Judham and Himyar. The number of troops varied, according to sources, between 5,000 71 and 12,000.72 The army was led by Muslim b.‘Uqba al-Murri and his lieutenants were Rawh b. Zinba‘ al-Judhami heading the people of Filastin; Hubaysh b. Dalja al-Qayni leading the people of al-Urdunn, and, Husayn b. al-Numayr al-Sakuni leading the people of Hims.73 ‘Amila, in itself, was not mentioned but this does not mean it was not present in this campaign also. As at Siffin, it seems that it was merged with people of al-Urdunn, led by Hubaysh b. Dalja al-Qayni, or with the Lakhmids and Judhamids. It is very unlikely that the caliph sent all the tribes of al-Urdunn and Filastin to fight Ibn al-Zubayr and excluded ‘Amila, which was a major tribe in that area in close alliance with Kalb and Judham. The discipline and professionalism of the Syrian troops once more gave them the edge over their enemies.74 Their military superiority was evident during the siege of Makka. Their use

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

103

of catapults and of siege machinery75 show a legacy of superior training and discipline probably due to the Byzantine experience.76 ‘Amila under the Sufyanids had become a police force whose prime mission was to secure power for the Umayyads in exchange for influence and above all wealth. The wages of the military expedition were paid in advance to the Arab Syrians,77 and was in addition to what they may obtain from the spoils of wars.78 It is possible that ‘Amila was not operating independently from the other Arab Syrians and this might explain their omission by the Arab chronicles of the ‘Abbasid period. What is almost certain, however, is that ‘Amila and Ahl al-Sham had been transformed, by the end of the Sufyanid reign, from peripheral Byzantine frontier guards into regime guardians and protectors.

‘Amila and the Marwanids The Marwanid period is ‘Amila’s golden age. During this period ‘Amila and many of the Yamanis became policy makers in addition to their role as guardians of the Muslim empire. This promotion did not occur accidentally, but was the result of a deal that the Yamanis concluded with the Marwanids who were eager to keep the rule in the Umayyad house after the demise of Yazid I and Mu‘awiya II. Al-Mas‘udi reported that the Yamanis, headed by the Kalbite Hassan b. Malik b. Bahdal, stipulated, before giving full support to Marwan b. al-Hakam, that they should be given the same concessions as they enjoyed during the caliphates of Mu‘awiya I, Yazid I and his son. They demanded annual payment for their support and precedence in the court. They also demanded to be consulted in the decision-making process of every important matter.79 Al-Husayn b. al-Numayr, for instance, requested that his people be settled in al-Balqa’ and that pasturage be made available for them.80 The Marwanids accepted all these terms. The Yamanis were not concerned with the identity of the ruling party as long as their needs were satisfied. Apparently they tried to arrange an agreement with Ibn al-Zubayr immediately after the death of Yazid I. The leader of the Harra campaign, al-Husayn b. al-Numayr al-Sakuni, met with Ibn al-Zubayr and offered him, in front of the leaders of the

104 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Syrian army, the title of caliph in Syria. Ibn al-Zubayr openly refused this offer.81 Unlike Ibn al-Zubayr, Marwan b. al-Hakam realized the importance of the Syrian troops and adhered wholeheartedly to their demands. To this, another Syrian leader, Malik b. Hubayra al-Sakuni, proclaimed boldly: We do not owe you [Marwan] any pledge of allegiance and we only fight for worldly gains. If you [Marwan] provide us with what Mu‘awiya and Yazid used to, we shall support you; otherwise, all the Qurayshites are equal to us.82 Marj Rahit Marj Rahit represented a watershed in the history of the Umayyads. It was not only a clash of a tribal nature between Yaman and Qays, nor was the schism between these two factions only tribal.83 The schism took place within both factions. The staunch Yaman tribe Judham was divided over this issue. The old Natil b. Qays supported Ibn alZubayr despite Natil’s steadfastness in claiming Yamani descent during the reign of Yazid; whereas, the young Rawh b. Zinba‘ al-Judhami supported the Marwanids despite his suggestion to shift the lineage of the Judhamids and ‘Amilis into ‘Adnani Qaysi descent.84 The schism had political and financial roots too. As shown above, many of the Yaman supported Marwan for political purposes and financial rewards. However, many of the Qays and some of the Yaman defended Ibn al-Zubayr for the same purposes. Perhaps geography played a role in the conflict.85 According to the sources the Umayyads were assisted by the ‘people of al-Urdunn,’ by which is meant the Kalb tribe and their ‘Amili allies who by then had settled mainly in that Jund. ‘Amila adhered fully to their Kalbite allies unlike their Judhamid brothers who suffered internal dissent. Al-Ya‘qubi reported that all the regions supported Ibn al-Zubayr except for al-Urdunn.86 Al-Tabari noted that Ibn al-Zubayr had the support of the people of Kufa, Basra and those of Makka and the people of al-Sham and al-Jazira except the people of al-Urdunn.87 Al-Mas‘udi said that Marwan b. al-Hakam was proclaimed caliph in al-Urdunn whose people were the first to pay him

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

105

allegiance.88 In a poem attributed to Marwan, he listed the people who supported him.89 These tribes were the Kalb, Ghassan, Saksak, Tayy’, al-Qayn and Tanukh. They all had a strong presence in Jund al-Urdunn. This list may not be accurate but it throws some light on the alliances of the moment. ‘Amila was not mentioned in this poem although we know that it supported Marwan in his quest for power. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ indicated clearly the role of his tribe in the Battle of Marj Rahit:90 In hardship there is a clan (‘Amila) that would avenge them (the Marwanids) and kill their enemies whether they were content or not, Without the help of God and the people of al-Urdunn the nation would have been divided at Marj Rahit, They supported the people of al-Sham when they knew of the great injustice inflicted on them, They agreed on a fixed date and once all their troops were assembled they marched chanting: Allah is our lord, Before the battle their infantry and knights were inferior in number, At the battle of Marj Rahit God granted them, in addition to victory, their leader Marwan the sword of God, And his son and successor ‘Abd al-Malik and for that we are all grateful, Then God chose, as their heir apparent, from their own family, the enlightened one, God knew that al-Walid was suitable for kingship, thus he chose the one who pleases God and his subjects, We are your subjects and God protects us and You preserve us on earth after God. This poem was delivered by ‘Adi when al-Walid was declared caliph in AD 705. Naturally the madih in it is to be expected from the poet of the Marwanids, but the historical information it provides can be deemed authentic. The young ‘Adi had witnessed Marj Rahit and was proud of his tribe’s participation in it. They were the ‘hayy’ whose help the Marwanids depended upon during hard times. He was explicitly

106 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

clear about who saved the Umayyads: God and the people of al-Urdunn. This is clear evidence that ‘Amila constituted a major element of ahl al-Urdunn. He differentiated plainly between ‘Amilis (Ahl al-Urdunn) and the people of al-Sham who used to visit them. When the ‘Amilis saw that the people of al-Sham (he probably meant the Umayyad family) were treated unjustly, they hurried to their rescue and joined forces with them despite their inferior numbers. ‘Adi explicitly underlined the fact that the ‘Amilis supported Marwan, then ‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwan and his son al-Walid. This poem, contemporary to the events, clearly states that ‘Amila endorsed and defended the Marwanid house. The consequences of the battle of Marj Rahit are well known. The ‘Amilis and their allies inflicted a severe defeat on the Qays and restored the caliphate, at least in Syria, to the Umayyads. The division among the Arabs under the Umayyads between northerners and southerners became a tangible reality. The Marwanids continued their march and recaptured Egypt from the pro-Zubayrid party. This mission was achieved by ahl al-Urdunn led by Hassan b. Bahdal and Malik b. Hubayra al-Sakuni.91Before his demise Marwan b. al-Hakam secured the bay‘a for his son ‘Abd al-Malik. This step was in violation of the original agreement devised by the leader of the southerners Hassan b. Bahdal at al-Jabiya prior to the battle of Marj Rahit. Supposedly, Marwan’s successor should have been Khalid b. Yazid who should have been succeeded by ‘Amr b Sa‘id b. al-‘As.92 Marwan was able to alter his original plan because of the continued support of ahl al-Urdunn. Upon his return, Marwan settled in al-Sinnabra in al-Urdunn and agreed with Hassan b. Bahdal to change the original agreement.93 It seems that a combination of threats and incentives (fa arghabahu wa arhabahu) were presented to the Kalbite leader in order to convince him of the necessity of change.94 The Kalbite leader enforced this decision upon his people and their allies who accepted it without delay.95 Dayr al-Jathaliq The reign of ‘Abd al-Malik witnessed the restoration of Umayyad rule all over the empire. Mainly the Yamanis of Ahl al-Urdunn

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

107

accomplished this mission. ‘Abd al-Malik sent his troops led by ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad to Iraq. The Syrian Qays tribes proved their disloyalty to the Marwanid cause. Their military leader, ‘Umayr b. al-Habbab al-Sulami, betrayed ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad during the battle against the army of al-Mukhtar al-Thaqafi led by the formidable Ibrahim b. Malik al-Ashtar al-Nakh‘i. Because his people were defeated at Marj Rahit, ‘Umayr sealed a secret deal with Ibn al-Ashtar by which he would retreat from the battlefield and leave it open to the Iraqi troops. Ibn al-Ashtar benefited from this golden opportunity and defeated his opponents and killed the leaders of the Syrian Army.96 The mission of restoring Umayyad rule was therefore left mainly to the Yaman tribes. ‘Abd al-Malik launched two major campaigns against the Zubayrids. The first was aimed at Iraq, now under Zubayrid control, and the second headed for the Hijaz. Meanwhile the Zubayrids defeated the forces of al-Thaqafi and gained control of Iraq. The burden of facing the Marwanids thus fell on Mus‘ab b. al-Zubayr, brother of ‘Abd al-Allah, at Dayr al-Jathaliq (near modern Baghdad). The victory of the Umayyad troops was secured by the ‘Amilis and their Yaman allies despite a late submission of the Qays Syrian troops to ‘Abd al-Malik.97 ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, who apparently was present, celebrated this victory by the following verses:98 By my life our horses filled both sides of the Euphrates in pursuit of Mus‘ab, We marched against him in battle formation with no significant losses, The soldiers wave their well-shaped lances and spears, Led by the caliph with his clear face and noble descent, I would sacrifice my mother and her sons for you and if you wish I would sacrifice my father too, My words are not uttered out of fear for I am not guilty to fear any punishment Those who are with us will be safe and those who are against us will flee, We assisted them and we were victorious by the caliph’s presence and by the will of Allah.

108 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

‘Adi was clear in his claim that his tribe and its allies were superior on the battlefield. His tribe was asked to assist the Marwanid caliph (u‘ina bina), and its triumph depended first of all on God’s will (wa man yansur allahu lam ughlabi) and then on its fighting abilities and discipline (dalafna ilayhi bi dhi tudr’in), devotion to the caliph (fida’uka Ummi wa abna’uha) and finally on its self confidence (fa man yaku minna yabit Aminan wa man yaku min ghayrina yahrubi). The ‘Amilis were extremely proud of their participation in this campaign. They stressed the fact that the death of Mus‘ab should be attributed to them alone and not to ahl al-Sham as a whole. The brother of the poet ‘Adi is reported to have recited the following verse in which he boasted of killing Ibn al-Zubayr:99 We killed Mus‘ab the son of the prophet’s close companion (al-Zubayr), The brother of Asad and the Yamani of Madhhij (Ibrahim al-Ashtar). In the absence of contemporary documents on the second civil war, ‘Adi’s poetry represents a rare and reliable source for that critical period. Fortunately for us, it comes from a ‘Amili poet who was eager to boast (mufakhara) of the role of his tribe in establishing this new Marwanid order. These verses were not only a poem of madih offered to the caliph but also a personal testimony lived by the poet who wanted to remind the caliph of the debt owed by his dynasty to the poet’s tribe.100 The second campaign launched by ‘Abd al-Malik aimed at quelling once and for all the rebellion of ‘Abd Allah b. al-Zubayr in Makka. The mission was entrusted to al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf al-Thaqafi and ahl al-Sham wal Urdunn. The number of troops sent to fight Ibn al-Zubayr is put by the sources as having been between 7,000101 and 20,000 soldiers.102 The Syrian troops were composed of ahl Hims, ahl Dimashq, ahl Filastin, ahl Qinnasrin and ahl al-Urdunn.103 By now it is well established that the ‘Amilis formed a substantial part of ahl al-Urdunn’s troops. Moreover al-Tabari reported the exact position of these troops during combat. Ahl al-Urdunn were stationed, in the last phases of the war, at Bab al-Safa.104 It seems that victory was achieved mainly by

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

109

the cavalry of the Arab Syrians.105 It is reported that through a series of skirmishes, the Syrian knights weakened the defences of Ibn al-Zubayr whose infantry was negligible in the first place. The ‘Amili horsemen, probably, participated in these combats specially since ‘Adi had once celebrated these knights and their fighting abilities. During military raids, equipped with their armour, the ‘Amili horsemen would attack their enemy in battle formation:106 The horsemen riding on the back of the horses equipped with their armour incite the horses with their ropes, The knights shielded by swords and armour are preparing for war, They belong to the clans of Qasit and Zuhd (‘Amila), the claws and incisors of the tribe. Iraq After the reunification of the Muslim empire, the Marwanid house needed to pacify their most troublesome province, Iraq. The mission was entrusted to al-Hajjaj who had shown considerable talents and strength of character in leading the army. His most urgent problem was the imminent threat from the Kharijites which was made worse by the reluctance of the Iraqi soldiers to face them.107 The threat of the Khawarij, chiefly those led by the formidable Shabib b. Yazid,108 had to be dealt with by different means. Al-Hajjaj was unable to defeat Shabib with the local Iraqi troops and thus had to resort once again to his loyal troops Ahl al-Sham brought over from Syria. Reports mention that ‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwan sent an army led by Sufyan b. al-Abrad al-Kalbi and another regiment from the tribe Madhhij headed by Habib b. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Hakami.109 Many other Arab Syrian tribesmen joined them. ‘Sufyan b. al-Abrad al-Kalbi and Habib b. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Hakami of the tribe Madhhij and those who joined them from Ahl al-Sham entered Kufa.’110 It is difficult to name the Syrian tribes that participated in the combat, but obviously Kalbites and Madhhijites were the main troops in addition to the tribes of Qayn, ‘Udhra, Khath‘am and Himyar.111 Thus it could be argued that

110

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

the usual Yamani factions were present during that campaign. Did ‘Amila join them? Apparently there was a substantial number of ‘Amili soldiers who participated in this conflict. It is reported that al-Hajjaj asked Sufyan b. al-Abrad112 to pursue the Khawarij after the death of Shabib. Sufyan appointed al-Bakhtari b. ‘Amir al-‘Amili as head of the army’s rear. (wa ja‘ala ‘ala saqatih al-Bakhtari b. ‘Amir al-‘Amili).113 It is well established now that Marwanid factionalism characterized the army as well as the rest of the state offices: As the governor increasingly relied on men of his own regimental background, the appointment of a top-governor came to mean the appointment of a faction whose members from the lowest subordinate at the bottom to the figure-head at the top all diverted part of the revenues into their own pockets. Dismissal of a sub-governor accordingly came to mean the dismissal of a faction whose successors had few inhibitions in the application of the post-dismissal treatment.114 It is thus not uncommon to find that the regiment (rear) led by al-Bakhtari is the contingent of the ‘Amilis. Sufyan b. al-Abrad al-Kalbi115 appointed men of his own factional background among whom we could almost certainly find old trusted allies like the ‘Amilis. It is then only logical for al-Bakhtari al-‘Amili to take with him his own kin as soldiers looking for spoils and new opportunities in Iraq. The role played by Sufyan and his troops was paramount in defeating Shabib especially after the latter repulsed every force launched against him by al-Hajjaj and Bishr b. Marwan.116 Sufyan used the cavalry, infantry and the archers to defeat his enemy.117 Shabib and his wife Ghazala were eventually killed, and his successor al-Butayn was also pursued and killed by Sufyan and his troops.118 Reports suggest that a huge army of ahl al-Sham led by Sufyan b. al-Abrad pursued the Khawarij beyond Iraq and into Tabaristan.119 The campaign ended in a total victory and the defeat of the Khawarij, thereby averting their threat for a long period to come. The accounts related to this campaign are vague and do not mention in detail the names of the tribes involved in it. However, the ‘Amilis and the other

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

111

Syrian tribes which joined Sufyan from the start probably remained with him too. Reports do not mention any rotation of troops and it is logical to conclude that the army kept the same troops it originally had in addition, perhaps, to some reinforcements brought from Syria. Moreover the sources indicate that al-Hajjaj reinforced Sufyan’s Syrian troops with an Iraqi army from Kufa led by Ishaq b. Muhammad b. al-Ash‘ath who was instructed to remain under the command of Sufyan.120 This campaign was the ‘Amilis’ first one beyond Iraq but it remained in the sphere of policing and securing the empire. But then, they, in all likelihood, formed the elite of the Marwanid forces and were entrusted with the most difficult and critical missions. Not only did they pursue the Khawarij to Tabaristan and Rayy but they succeeded in securing the most impregnable regions and eliminating the leaders of the Khawarij. Qatari was followed and slain while ‘Ubayda b. Hilal was surrounded, attacked by catapults and eventually slaughtered.121 This campaign revealed the dedication and high military organization of the ‘Amilis and their Quda‘i allies. The ‘Amilis, like the rest of Ahl al-Sham, continued to perform their role as the guardians of the state in return for spoils, authority and prestige. Soon their appetite would increase and they would participate not only in defending the Marwanid regime but they would also take part in the futuh campaigns beyond Iraq and Egypt. As of this point in time ‘Amila evolved from a guardian into a conqueror and its members participated in the movement of settlement outside Bilad al-Sham, probably for the first time in its history.122 The situation in Iraq remained explosive and continued to witness a number of rebellions on the part of the disaffected people of Iraq. These rebellions did not present any serious challenge to the authority of al-Hajjaj and his Syrians. However, one major rebellion broke out in the beginning of the eighth century AD which critically threatened the authority of the Umayyads in Iraq. This was the revolt of ‘Abd al-Rahman b. al-Ash‘ath.123 He was a descendant of the leading family of the Kinda tribe. His grandfather had participated in the conquests and settled in Kufa. The Banu al-Ash‘ath belonged to the ashraf of the city and played a major role in its politics. Ibn al-Ash‘ath was appointed by

112

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

al-Hajjaj as the commander of the famous ‘army of the peacocks’ which was sent to Sistan to defeat the still independent ruler of Zabulistan.124 In Sistan the army rebelled because, it is reported, al-Hajjaj had ordered an immediate attack while Ibn al-Ash‘ath needed more time to prepare. It seems the soldiers did not like the prospect of a long and difficult campaign so far from their families and homes in Iraq. Thus Ibn al-Ash‘ath, with the support of his troops and many other Iraqis from other garrisons, decided to march back to Iraq to defeat al-Hajjaj and to eventually overthrow the Umayyad caliphate.125 ‘Abd al-Malik sent Syrian reinforcements to Iraq, their numbers varying between 100 and 150 soldiers daily but unfortunately their exact tribal identity was not reported.126 The first battle between the Syrian troops and the rebels occurred on the river Dujayl. This battle witnessed the defeat of the Syrian troops and their retreat to Basra.127 The rebels managed to take control of Basra and were on the verge of inflicting a heavy and final defeat on al-Hajjaj. But the intervention of Sufyan al-Abrad al-Kalbi and his Quda‘i – ‘Amili troops turned the defeat into a limited victory over Ibn al-Ash‘ath’s troops.128 The accounts do not specify the exact composition of Sufyan al-Abrad’s troops but we know that Sufyan remained in the region of Tabaristan until he was recalled by al-Hajjaj at the outbreak of the mutiny.129 It is only natural to assume that he kept his previous Syrian troops with him and that his ‘Amili troops also remained with him. We can moreover speculate that they were reinforced by other ‘Amilis sent from al-Urdunn along with other tribes. The final confrontation between the two sides took place at Dayr al-Jamajim.130 It was a long series of skirmishes and lasted for several months. Sufyan’s troops formed the cavalry of al-Hajjaj’s army131 and their role, yet again, was decisive in securing the victory.132 Sufyan’s attack was essential in forcing the rebel forces to consider the offers of pardon issued by al-Hajjaj to only those who would surrender.133 The rebellion ended and the survivors, including Ibn al-Ash‘ath, who refused to surrender, fled to Sistan. Eventually Ibn al-Ash‘ath was captured and killed by the troops of Sufyan b. al-Abrad al-Kalbi and his Quda‘i-‘Amili troops.

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

113

The Poet of al-Walid The reign of the caliph al-Walid (705–715 AD) was relatively peaceful and witnessed substantial economic growth. Government spending seems to have increased on public projects and on a welfare system.134 Iraq was pacified by the Arab Syrian forces which were now stationed permanently in the newly built city of Wasit. The Syrian Army developed, to a large extent, into a professional135 organization and Syrians were sent there on a rotating basis to serve in its ranks. Meanwhile the wars of conquests continued and the armies of the Umayyads reached Spain under Musa b. Nusayr while central Asia and India were conquered by Qutayba b. Muslim. As regards ‘Amila, the reign of al-Walid continued to favour them as one of the guardians of the empire. The tribe apparently benefited from a privileged relationship with the caliph who favoured the poet of the tribe ‘Adi and considered him his ‘poet, panegyrist and eulogist.’ ‘Adi was preferred to giants of Arabic poetry like Jarir, al-Farazdaq and al-Akhtal. The privileged position attributed to ‘Adi is mainly due to the role played by his tribe and not to his talents as a poet. After all, as a poet, ‘Adi can hardly be compared to the great poets of the Umayyad age.136 But Both Jarir and al-Farazdaq were Mudaris and al-Akhtal was a Christian. ‘Adi often spoke about the role of his tribe in establishing and safeguarding the Umayyad-Marwanid rule. For instance, upon al-Walid’s accession to the throne, ‘Adi delivered the poem in which he celebrated the part played by his tribe in establishing the rule of the Marwanids.137 ‘Amila’s privileged position was again exhibited by the treatment bestowed on ‘Adi as the spokesman of his tribe. A famous incident occurred between ‘Adi and Jarir at al-Walid’s court. ‘Adi was introduced to Jarir by the caliph as a man from ‘Amila (Hadha Rajul min ‘Amila).138 Then a small dispute broke out between the two poets because Jarir directed his hija’ at the ‘Amilis accusing them of lack of generosity and contrasting it with their long penis: The ‘Amili is known for his lack of generosity, However his penis is long

114

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

‘Adi retaliated by referring to a sexual interaction between himself and Jarir’s mother: Did your mother tell you how long it is, Or you are a man who does not know what is he saying? At this point the caliph intervened and prevented the confrontation between the two poets by prohibiting Jarir from uttering any satires against his favourite poet under the threat of being saddled, bridled and mounted by ‘Adi (la ’in shatamtahu la usarrijannaka wa aljumannaka hata yarkabaka).139 Thus Jarir refrained from delivering any hija’ against ‘Adi. Sources mention that Jarir nevertheless composed a satire against him but did not mention ‘Adi’s name in it (fa kanna Jarirun ‘an ismihi).140 This incident is significant. First the caliph’s emphasis on the poet’s nisba is not accidental. Al-Walid could have stated, for instance, to Jarir that ‘Adi is his favourite poet but instead chose to highlight ‘Adi tribal affiliation as the most important aspect of his poet’s identify. Second, the caliph did not remain impartial between the two poets as he would normally have done, but chose rather to side with ‘Adi against Jarir. This is a rare incident where a caliph would prefer one poet to another. Perhaps being the poet of the caliph pushed al-Walid to draw some boundaries not to be trespassed by Jarir. But the tribal origin of ‘Adi is not to be neglected. ‘Amila was one of the major tribes defending and policing the empire and no rational ruler would compromise the stability of his rule by offending its guardians. A satire could, in some cases, have devastating effects on the tribes. Suffice it to mention the effects of the satire launched by Jarir against the Banu Numayr. The New Order Under Sulayman The death of both the caliph and al-Hajjaj in addition to the advent of Sulayman b. ‘Abd al-Malik to the throne modified the role of ‘Amila in Umayyad politics. It seems that the emergence of the Mudari and Yamani army factionalism in the east is mostly related to Sulayman and his protégé Yazid b. al-Muhallab.141 ‘Amila’s relations with

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

115

Sulayman deteriorated immediately. The reasons behind this reversal of fortunes are not clear. Perhaps ‘Amila’s strong links with al-Hajjaj influenced Sulayman’s unfavourable conduct towards the tribe. After all, the ‘Amilis could have been the prison guards in which Yazid b. al-Muhallab was held captive.142 The antagonism between al-Hajjaj and Sulayman was not unknown and it was ferocious. And it is well attested to now how Yazid, upon his installation as the governor of Iraq and the east, appointed his ‘Yamani’ men to the offices previously held by al-Hajjaj’s men. The situation in Syria with regards to the factionalism that appeared in the east is not as certain. Ahl al-Sham were not involved in the factional politics, at least not inside Syria. Their role as the guardians of the empire remained intact. Thus Sulayman’s negative attitude towards ‘Amila could not be explained in those terms. He knew he could not antagonize the police forces of the Umayyad empire but he could always manifest a certain amount of personal discontent towards some of his ‘Amili subjects, chief among whom was their poet ‘Adi. He did have the allegiance of the people of Filastin but those of al-Urdunn were directly linked to the caliph al-Walid and ‘Abd al-Malik before him. Sulayman’s new policy towards ‘Amila was implemented immediately upon his accession to the throne. The poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ was summoned to his court in chains. The proclaimed reason was ‘Adi’s position as the panegyrist of al-Walid. Sulayman released ‘Adi when the latter admitted that he is the panegyrist not of al-Walid but of the whole Umayyad house.143 The speed of the action taken by Sulayman and the humiliation inflicted on ‘Adi show the degree of discontent felt by the caliph towards ‘Adi and what he represented.144 He was the poet of ‘Amila who supported al-Walid and al-Hajjaj. Sulayman repeatedly humiliated ‘Adi on different occasions specially in the presence of the poet al-Farazdaq whom he preferred.145 Obviously ‘Adi had lost his position as ‘the poet, panegyrist and eulogist’ of the Umayyads. The decline of the status of its poet notwithstanding, ‘Amila remained one of the pillars of the Umayyad state and army but its role started to change and, probably for the first time, its involvement in the conquests increased. This is perhaps due to a deliberate policy by the caliph and Ibn al-Muhallab to move the loyal supporters of the

116

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

previous regime away from the inner circles or as an attempt by the tribe to move itself away from the inner circles of Sulayman towards less controlled places in the thughur. The New Territorial Expansion The wars of conquests reached their peak under al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik and the borders of the Umayyad state reached Spain, Central Asia and India. It seems that ahl al-Sham wal Urdunn did not partake in the first waves of these campaigns which were conducted mainly by the people of the provinces (Iraqis, Khurasanis, Berbers and North Africans).146 The Umayyads had a policy of sending their most troublesome populations to the newly conquered lands with the notable exception being in the conquest of al-Sind.147 It is reported that 6,000 Syrian troops sent by al-Hajjaj led by Muhammad b. al-Qasim participated in the conquests of that region.148 However, according to al-Ya‘qubi, the troops of Muhammad b. al-Qasim returned to their countries after some disturbances.149 The Sind campaign notwithstanding, it seems that the Syrians did not play any major role in the early campaigns. Sulayman’s accession to power, however, increased the involvement of the Arab Syrians in the conquests. Two major campaigns were launched simultaneously: the first one was led by Maslama b. ‘Abd al-Malik against Constantinople and the second was led by Yazid b. al-Muhallab against Khurasan and the Caspian provinces which had been partially subdued in the first waves of conquests. Ahl al-Sham apparently were introduced for the first time into that region at that time. The army seems to have been enormous: it was reported to be more than 100,000 coming from Syria, al-Jazira, Iraq, Rayy and Khurasan.150 The Syrians formed a substantial part of the army, numbering around 60,000 soldiers according to sources.151 Even if these figures are somewhat inflated, the size of the army may have been substantial, and this could be indicative of the decision taken by the Arab Syrians to evolve their strategic ambitions and goals and change their roles from enforcers to conquerors. Perhaps Sulayman encouraged this trend due to his personal conflict with them and in particular ahl

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

117

al-Urdunn. The booty from the conquests no doubt encouraged them to further involve themselves in these campaigns. The ‘Amilis participated in these campaigns and their settlements reached Khurasan. The village of Madwa located in Khurasan was populated by ‘Amilis. Their most prominent figure was a Muhaddith named Abu al-Qasim ‘Ubayd Allah b. Muhammad al-Madwini al-‘Amili.152 This village is one of five that merged into one large city known as Banjdih153 near Marw al-Rawdh. It was not uncommon for a tribe to settle in a whole village in Khurasan. Sources speak of villages populated only by the tribe Kinda or by the tribe ‘Anbar.154 The presence of ‘Amilis in this region could be attributed to the campaigns led by Yazid b. al-Muhallab especially since his father was buried in Marw al-Rawdh,155 or to the campaigns that involved the Syrians under Hisham b. ‘Abd al-Malik. Naturally it is very difficult to establish how and when the ‘Amili settlement started and how it evolved. Neither their number nor the duration of their settlement can be estimated because Banjdih is considered to be a large city by Yaqut but was not mentioned in the Arab geographical literature.156 The silence of other sources on Banjdih and ‘Amilis in that region do not help in reaching an answer. What is certain however is that some of them settled in Khurasan looking for wealth and new opportunities but it seems that the ‘Amili movement towards the east remained limited. An active involvement of the ‘Amilis in the wars against the Byzantines during the annual campaigns (sa’ifa, shatiya) is not recorded but cannot be dismissed either. What is probable however is that active ‘Amili involvement in these campaigns could be linked to Maslama157 who was in charge of these campaigns and enjoyed a special relationship with ‘Amila. The first major campaign to include a large number of ahl al-Sham was the one sent against Constantinople.158 But the first ascertainable starting point, that indicates the beginning of the involvement of the ‘Amilis in the wars against the Byzantines, could be the conquest of Tuwana during the reign of al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik. It seems that ahl al-Urdunn enjoyed privileged treatment from Maslama despite the fact that his armies usually were manned by the Qaysites of al-Jazira. The Chronicles report that he always treated them with extra concern even if they occasionally exasperated him.159

118

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Some ‘Amilis in particular joined Maslama for long periods of time. Ji‘al the son of Shihab, the leader (Sayyid) of the tribe ‘Amila, b. Burhum b. Ma‘qil al-‘Amili, and Khumam b. Ma‘qil al-‘Amili the brother of Shihab both belonged to Maslama’s retinue.160 The sources do not mention when or how they joined him, but the earliest references we have about ahl al-Sham being connected to Maslama occur during the campaigns of Tuwana and Constantinople. What is certain however is that two notables (Sharif) of ‘Amila attached themselves to Maslama. They were the brother and the son of the leader of the Sha‘l clan, the most important clan in ‘Amila.161 It could thus be postulated that an undefined number of ‘Amili troops followed them in Maslama’s campaigns. Unfortunately the sources only mention that the two notables joined Maslama but do not indicate when and where. (Kan ma‘a Maslama). Did they remain with him during other campaigns? This is possible because the sentence in Arabic refers to a long attachment to Maslama who would later on use many Syrian soldiers in his military operations in Iraq against Ibn al-Muhallab. The campaigns against the Byzantines conducted by the ‘Amilis were celebrated by the poet of the tribe ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ who apparently participated in them. In one poem he attributed to his own people, Judham and Lakhm, the ability to prevent the Byzantines from invading Bilad al-Sham.162 Moreover he described the regions where the ‘Amili-Umayyad troops were stationed during the campaigns against the Byzantines:163 We are in a region where free Arab beautiful women rarely venture into, Filled with enemies impeding the efficient post of the caliph to reach its destination, I told her how did you reach me in spite of Duluk and the invincible mountains, And the rivers Jayhan and Alis and the harsh land of Khazaza and the brave nations. The poet indicated that the troops were stationed near Duluk, in the region of Aleppo near the rivers Jayhan and Alis in the Masisa region inside the Byzantine territories.164

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

119

Protecting the Empire under ‘Umar II and Yazid II ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz’s new policies regarding the termination of the conquests and fiscal reforms seem to have been well appreciated by the ‘Amilis. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ was able to regain some of his privileged position in the court of the Umayyads, but ‘Umar’s pious disposition did not favour poets in general. Nevertheless ‘Adi’s two extant poems in praise of ‘Umar are witness to his own improved fortune and that of his tribe. ‘Amila resumed its police work for the Umayyads. A rebellion of the Khawarij erupted in Iraq, and Maslama, at the head of an army of ahl al-Sham, ended their rebellion swiftly.165 ‘Umar imprisoned Yazid b. al-Muhallab allegedly for financial corruption. What was the attitude of the ‘Amilis towards Ibn al-Muhallab? Despite ‘Adi’s personal respect for him, the ‘Amilis did not hesitate to side with the caliph against his rebellion. ‘Adi admired the generosity of Ibn al-Muhallab and his few verses complimenting him can be attributed to a personal esteem of the man.166 But the verses were recited while Ibn al-Muhallab, though in prison, was still proUmayyad and had not yet rebelled against them. This was not ‘Adi’s only attempt to flatter a leader despite the caliph’s wrath.167 But his poetry in those instances was of little political value and displayed only personal affection. Yazid b. al-Muhallab managed to escape from his prison towards the end of ‘Umar’s reign in AD 720 and fled to Basra where he was able to launch a revolt against the Umayyads. He was able, with the help of his own tribe, the Muhallabids of Azd, and many Mudaris (Tamim, Bakr, Quraysh, Kinana, Bajila, Khath‘am) who joined him from Kufa and Basra, to take control of Basra and Wasit and to defeat its Umayyad governor. His success was mainly due to the financial incentives he offered and to the absence of the regular Syrian troops from Wasit. The rebellion was crushed by the troops of Maslama sent by the new caliph Yazid b. ‘Abd al-Malik. It is widely accepted that the war of the two Yazids intensified the factional schism. Some historians argue that the defeat of Ibn al-Muhallab was followed by the installation of the Qaysis in key positions in Iraq and the east, in reaction to Ibn al-Muhallab’s identification with the Azd. They add that the army which ended the rebellion was the army of the Syrian-Mesopotamian

120 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

frontier which was predominantly Qaysi.168 The evidence however suggests that the army of ahl al-Sham that defeated Ibn al-Muhallab was not mainly composed of Qaysis but that Yamani elements were strongly present. The appointment of many Qaysis into key offices did not necessarily mean that the Qaysi elements were favoured unconditionally. Al-Hajjaj used to appoint Qaysis as his senior commanders yet his troops remained from a Yamani Syrian background. It is essential to distinguish betwteen the Yamanis of the east and ahl al-Sham. The intensification of factionalism in the east did not mean that it involved the Arab Syrians who remained the guardians of the caliphate. Their role was to protect the caliphate in return for wealth and authority. In that sense being a Syrian was more beneficial to them than being Yamani. ‘Amila was a good example. Their genealogy was not settled until the early Sufyanid period when they chose the Qahtani-Yamani descent. The participation of ahl al-Sham of Yamani origin in terminating the rebellion of Ibn al-Muhallab was extensive to say the least. We know that many ‘Amili troops led by Khumam and Ji‘al remained with Maslama for long periods of time. Sources speak of ahl al-Sham and not only of ahl al-Jazira as would have been the case if the army was formed only by the Qaysis of al-Jazira.169 Many leaders of this army were Yamanis. Among them was al-Fahl b. ‘Ayyash from the Banu Zuhayr b. Janab al-Kalbi who is reported to have killed Ibn al-Muhallab.170 Al-Husayn b. Hammad al-Kalbi managed to save three of the captives from execution.171 Mudrik b. Dabb al-Kalbi was assigned by Maslama to capture and kill those who managed to escape from the Umayyad army.172 Thabit Qutna,173 a pro-Muhallab poet, mourning Yazid b. al-Muhallab mentioned the names of the Yamani tribes which defeated his master: Himyar, ‘Akk, Judham, Madhhij, and Kalb.174 The reign of Yazid II reconfirmed the role of ‘Amila and the Arab Syrians as the protectors of the empire. They regained their former status under ‘Abd al-Malik and al-Walid. According to Ibn Qutayba, Yazid II emulated the policies of al-Walid and it seemed as if al-Walid had not died.175 (wa sara bi sirat al-Walid akhih wa ihtadha ‘ala mithalih wa akhadha ma’khadhahu hatta ka’nna al-Walid lam yamut). ‘Amila must

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

121

have been involved in restoring order to the Marwanid house and it protected the governorship of ‘Umar b. Hubayra al-Fazari who replaced Maslama as the governor of Iraq and the east. The poem dedicated by ‘Adi to ‘Umar b. Hubayra witnesses the renewed involvement of the ‘Amilis in the inner circles of Umayyad power.176 Ibn Hubayra was one of the steadfast northerners who actively inflamed the factionalism in the east. Nonetheless ‘Adi, the proud poet of ‘Amila, did not hesitate to celebrate him as a victorious champion. The ‘Amili involvement was not yet influenced by the factionalism of the east and their role as guardians of the caliphate dominated their tribal affiliation. The East The military campaigns sent to subdue the eastern frontier and the continuous movement to conquer in that region forced the new caliph Hisham to depend more on the Syrian troops in facing his foreign enemies. Consequently their presence in the east intensified. The few records found previously in the sources pertaining to the existence of Syrian troops in the east suddenly turned into a deluge of information during the reign of Hisham b. ‘Abd al-Malik. Ahl al-Sham probably participated in all the military campaigns against the Turgesh tribes in Khurasan and the Khazars in Adharbayjan and Armenia. We find them in Samarqand, Bukhara, Marw, Balkh and in Transoxania. According to the sources their numbers varied but increased drastically and reached more than 30,000 soldiers in one single campaign. The extensive participation of the Arab Syrians in the east notwithstanding, the ‘Amilis seem not to have participated in these campaigns or, at least, their presence was insignificant. Evidence suggests that the Syrian army was constituted of the people of Filastin, Qinnasrin, Hims, and the Kalbites of Dimashq and Ahl al-Jazira.177 Ahl al-Urdunn were not mentioned. Nonetheless a partial ‘Amili presence in the east cannot be ruled out; they could have been incorporated with the Kalbites of Damascus or the Judhamids of Filastin. No direct evidence, however, has been found to corroborate this thesis.

122

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

‘Amila seems however to have established itself in Iraq especially during the governorship of Khalid al-Qasri. When the newly appointed governor Khalid reached Iraq with his Syrian troops, among whom were Judham, Lakhm and ‘Amila, the Mudaris of Banu Asad b. Khazima claimed that ‘Amila and its sister tribes were their people (Antum Qawmuna).178 Sources speak of Ahl al-Urdunn as part of Khalid’s retinue and they were still present at the end of his governorship.179 Some ‘Amilis seem to have turned to civilian life and remained in Basra after the fall of the Umayyads.180 But the principal mission of the ‘Amilis remained the same: to police and secure the empire against internal and external enemies. Thus it is highly probable that they constituted a substantial part of the Syrian troops sent by Khalid to crush the rebellion of al-Harith b. Surayj in Khurasan.181 Perhaps their involvement in the wars in the east is linked to the jurisdiction of Khalid over Khurasan who seems to have been removed from his authority on many occasions. The settlement of the ‘Amilis in the east, in comparison with the number of troops involved, remained restricted and was not transformed into a major wave of immigration towards the east. The ‘Amilis were not directly involved in the factionalism that raged in the east. They were first and foremost the soldiers of the caliphs whose prime mission was to protect the empire. They were considered by some Iraqis as northerners and despite their good relations with Khalid al-Qasri they were not persecuted by his successor Yusuf b. ‘Umar. They probably remained as the guards of the new governor. Their mission was to protect the caliph’s governor and not any person in particular. As a matter of fact sources speak of a close aide of the staunch pro-Mudari Yusuf b.‘Umar named Dukayn b. Shajara al-‘Amili.182 The presence of this ‘Amili, who apparently came apparently with Yusuf from Yaman upon his appointment as the governor of Iraq, does not necessarily mean that the ‘Amilis were divided between the two factions. On the contrary it indicates that ‘Amila protected and served the caliph first. If the caliph decided to remove one of his governors, ‘Amila would automatically side with the caliph and support the governor’s successor. If some ‘Amilis remained, for instance, loyal to Khalid, it was perhaps due to a personal choice and not to factionalism.

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

123

Ahl al-Sham, including probably some ‘Amilis, remained in Iraq under the command of Yusuf and kept serving the caliphate by crushing its enemies relentlessly. The rebellion of Zayd b. ‘Ali was terminated swiftly by the Syrian forces. The Mudar-Yamani factionalism did not affect their loyalty nor their efficiency. A major event which occurred in the west in North Africa, the Berber revolt in AD 739 however, pushed the Syrians, and the ‘Amilis in particular, to leave the east and to move towards the west. The West The ‘Amilis’ main settlement movement occurred in the west, in North Africa and al-Andalus. Evidence suggests two main reasons for the emigration of ‘Amilis towards the west, an unlikely destination for a Syrian tribe. The revolt of the Berbers and the fall of the Umayyad caliphate in the east pushed many ‘Amilis, soldiers and civilians, to settle in that region. The revolt of the Berbers threatened Umayyad rule in North Africa. Hisham decided to use his elite forces, Ahl al-Sham, to restore his authority. There were many causes for the discontent among the Berbers. For example, attempts were made to deprive them of their status of equality. More taxes were extracted from them to increase naval operations. Additionally, they were prohibited from crossing to and settling in al-Andalus. All these factors contributed to the evolution of their discontent into a large scale rebellion against Umayyad rule. The ‘Amilis, led by Tha‘laba b. Salama al-‘Amili, were sent with other Syrian troops to restore order. The army was headed by Kulthum b. ‘Iyad al-Qushayri who failed to quell the rebellion. His Syrian troops suffered a heavy defeat and he was killed. After an initial refusal to receive the defeated Syrian forces, the governor of al-Andalus, ‘Abd al-Malik b. Qatan, faced another rebellion of the Berbers in al-Andalus and had to resort to the Syrians who were led by Balj b. Bishr al-Qushayri and Tha‘laba b. Salama al-‘Amili at that point.183 The ‘Amili-Syrian troops subdued the Berbers swiftly and managed to oust ‘Abd al-Malik b. Qatan from his post and to slay him because he refused to help them in their hour of need in North Africa.184 Approximately one year later, the sons of ‘Abd al-Malik, Qatan and

124 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Umayya tried to gather their forces and to recapture their positions but the Syrians managed to defeat them yet again even though their leader Balj was slain. Thus Ta‘laba b. Salama al-‘Amili was chosen by his fellow soldiers as their new governor. The governor of North Africa, Hanzala b. Safwan al-Kalbi, endorsed the appointment of the ‘Amili leader.185 The reign of Tha‘laba was short, approximately one year, but essential to the establishment of the ‘Amilis in al-Andalus. According to the sources, his reign was just (fa sara fihim bi ahsan sira; Azhara fiha al-‘Adl).186 He, however, was unable to reconcile his Qaysi enemies, and the factionalism that was inflamed in the east was also present in the west. Tha‘laba remained in al-Andalus even after the arrival of the new governor, Abu al-Khattar Husam b. Dirar alKalbi, in order to supervise the influx of many of the Syrians who were settling in al-Andalus. The settlement of the ‘Amilis began apparently in Qurtuba (Cordoba) and Riyya (Malaqa).187 The biographical literature is replete with prominent ‘Amili figures in these two cities as judges, scholars, generals and merchants.188 They managed to expand their presence all over al-Andalus in a relatively short period. Granada became a major centre of ‘Amili figures throughout the centuries. The Banu Simak, in particular, seem to have been a leading family with long established judiciary traditions.189 Tulaytila (Toledo) became another centre of the ‘Amili presence in al-Andalus.190 The collapse of the Umayyad state probably accelerated the immigration process and ‘Amila seems to have firmly established itself not only in al-Andalus for centuries but in North Africa as well. The sources record that ‘Amila merged with the local tribes of Algeria and the Berbers (wa qad ikhtalatat ‘Amila bi ahl al-Jaza’ir wa min ‘Amila Banu Mu‘awiya) (Hawar b. Urig b. Barnas illa ma yaz‘am ba‘duhum annahum min ‘Arab al-Yaman, taratan yaqulun min ‘Amila).191 The Coup d’Etat The assassination of the new caliph al-Walid II represented a new dangerous trend to ahl al-Sham and the ‘Amilis. They were the soldiers of the Umayyad caliph regardless of his tribal inclination. Al-Walid II had occasionally shown a tendency to favour Qays at the expense of

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

125

the Yamanis, especially when he delivered Khalid al-Qasri to his bitter Mudari rival Yusuf b.‘Umar. However al-Walid II was aware of the vital support ahl al-Sham could provide to any caliph. Thus he raised the stipends and allowances that were accorded to them yearly.192 His generosity towards them even surpassed his predecessors’ and in an action equalled only by al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik, Ahl al-Sham profited from social benefits.193 In point of fact, the original politico-financial agreement made by the Umayyads and the Arab Syrians was not only kept but reinforced and increased. This might explain why Ahl al-Urdunn and the ‘Amilis were hesitant to support the coup carried out by Yazid III against his cousin the caliph. The ‘Amilis could not perhaps understand the objective of this coup because it represented a first of its kind in the Marwanid house. The support of ‘Amilis and other Arab Syrians for the caliph was not tribal and ideological but mainly political and financial. In principle, there was no significant difference between Yazid III and al-Walid II. Undoubtedly many political, social, religious and personal causes influenced Yazid III and his supporters to move against al-Walid II. The Qadariyya movement influenced mainly the Damascenes and probably did not have an effect on the people of al-Urdunn.194 What is certain, however, is that the coup was not instigated by all the Arab Syrians nor all the Yamanis. Sources indicate that they were the Yamanis and the Kalbites of Damascus in particular and not a wide Yamani conspiracy to overthrow the pro-Mudari caliph.195 It was not a Yaman versus Qays movement despite the fact that the death of Khalid al-Qasri was exploited by the party of Yazid III. It seems that his death was deliberately used to inflame the feelings of the Yamanis in order to muster their support for the coup. Until his death, Khalid was not acclaimed as a champion of the Yamanis. But by resorting to poets, the coup instigators succeeded in using Khalid’s death as one of the reasons they had toppled al-Walid II.196 The ‘Amilis and ahl al-Urdunn were sceptical about this coup and needed to be convinced by the new rulers despite the fact that these new rulers were mainly their traditional allies of Kalb, Sakasik and Lakhm of Damascus. The coup was endorsed by neither the Sayyid of the Marwanid house al-‘Abbas, the brother of Yazid III, nor by Marwan b. Muhammad, l’homme fort of the thughur.197 Ahl Hims opposed the

126 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

coup immediately198 and did not acknowledge the new caliph. In fact they endorsed the son of al-Walid II, the heir apparent, as the new caliph. Yazid III, after initial negotiations, had to resort to military power to force his opponents to accept him as the legitimate ruler.199 The ‘Amilis and the tribes of al-Urdunn did not show signs of hostility but at the same time did not pay allegiance to the new caliph. They took precautions and acted with extreme vigilance. They associated themselves with the tribes of Filastin, led by the sons of Rawh b. Zinba‘ al-Judhami, Sa‘id and Dib‘an, who dismissed the governor appointed by al-Walid and asked the son of Sulayman b. ‘Abd al-Malik, Yazid, to become the governor of jund Filastin. In their turn, the tribes of al-Urdunn followed their allies in Filastin and appointed Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Malik as their new governor.200 This step was probably taken to show Yazid III that although they were no longer the men of al-Walid II they had not yet become his men either. The old contract had to be reconfirmed between the two parties. Ahl alUrdunn wanted to make sure that their privileges were not lost under the new regime. Thus their allegiance was paid to Yazid III only when the latter, through his general Sulayman b. Hisham, promised them financial benefits and various prestigious offices.201 The gravity of the situation pushed Tha‘laba b. Salama al-‘Amili to withdraw immediately with his ‘Amili troops from North Africa and to return to Bilad al-Sham,202 perhaps because his previous competitor, Thabit b. Nu‘aym al-Judhami, was accompanying the new caliph Marwan II as the new homme fort of the Yamanis in Filastin and alUrdunn.203 Meanwhile the atmosphere among the tribes of al-Urdunn remained unfriendly to the new caliph. The Damascene army, however, started to dominate the region and threatened to treat the tribes’ property as if it were their own. The tribes decided not to prolong their opposition but expressed their anger against the poor performance of their governor Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Malik and deposed him.204 The First ‘Amili Governor The reign of Yazid III was too short for him to implement any reforms but its consequences for the relations between the Arab Syrians and

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

127

the caliph were critical. Marwan b. Muhammad, the new and last Umayyad caliph, wanted to keep a good relationship with Ahl al-Sham. The execution of some of those involved in the death of al-Walid II and his sons notwithstanding, Marwan was merciful with his enemies. Sulayman b. Hisham, the military commander of Yazid’s army, and Ibrahim b. al-Walid, the successor of Yazid III, were pardoned and they both joined Marwan’s retinue. The advent of Marwan II to the throne divided the Arab Syrians. Their position had been hitherto to support any Umayyad caliph appointed by his predecessor. With the coup of Yazid III, this point of view was seriously shaken. His tenure was too brief to witness any major rift in their ranks although the signs of rift were starting to appear. The Yaman supporters of Yazid III and many of the senior members of the Umayyad family were not satisfied with the loss of their appointed caliph Ibrahim nor with the victory of Marwan II who was not a direct heir apparent to the throne. The rebellion, nevertheless, of Ahl al-Sham did not involve all of them, and particularly not the ‘Amilis who supported Marwan II as the legitimate caliph. The suggestion that Marwan II was pro-Qaysi and anti-Yamani finds little support in our historical accounts. Many incidents indicate, for instance, a good relationship between them. First, Thabit b. Nu‘aym al-Judhami, one of the leaders of the Yamanis and Judhamids of Filastin, was protected by Marwan from the wrath of the caliph Hisham. He decided to interfere and ask Hisham to pardon Thabit because the leaders of the Yamanis asked had him to do so.205 This could only show a friendly relationship between the two parties. A Qaysi extremist could hardly interfere to save the live of a Yamani leader and Yamani leaders could hardly ask a staunch Qaysi leader to mediate had they not been friendly. Second, Marwan was extremely tolerant with the senior followers of Yazid III when judged according to the traditions of the time. Third, Marwan II did not impose governors on the tribes. As a matter of fact he allowed them to elect their own governors followed by a general amnesty in return for their allegiance.206 The behaviour of Marwan was obviously not that of a staunch Qaysi who was looking only for revenge. He acted like a mature caliph who wanted to heal the wounds that were caused by the clash between al-Walid II and Yazid III.

128 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Some of the Arab Syrians, however, were not completely satisfied with the situation. Thus the people of Dimashq, Hims and Filastin rebelled a few months later against the authority of Marwan II. The reasons for the rupture are not clearly stated but many could be guessed at. The Qaysi-Yamani struggle persisted despite the best efforts made by Marwan II to minimize it. The internal schism inside the Umayyad family was not healed and perhaps the sons of Yazid III and Hisham felt that their right had been usurped by an illegitimate caliph. The Kalbites probably felt they were less favoured in comparison to the Qaysis.207 The people of Filastin led by Thabit also had additional reasons to rebel against Marwan II. They had previously rebelled against him when Marwan II first decided to march against Yazid III while the latter was still alive. Their declared reasons were that their allegiance was towards the caliph, al-Walid II, and since he died they pledged allegiance to the new caliph Yazid III. Thus they needed to return to their Junds. Marwan II, however, refused their demands suspecting that their trip back home had a different purpose. He accused the tribes of extortion targeted against non Muslim tribes. The situation was solved by a promise to reintegrate them after the conclusion of the deal between Yazid III and Marwan b. Muhammad. The latter acknowledged the legality of Yazid’s rule who in turn confirmed Marwan in his position as governor of Armenia.208 The ‘Amilis and ahl Al-Urdunn did not side with the other Syrian tribal groups and remained loyal to Marwan II. Upon his accession, the ‘Amilis chose al-Walid b. Mu‘awiya b. ‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwan as their governor. He was Marwan’s son-in-law and his cousin. This choice, in this critical period, revealed ‘Amila’s political and strategic decision. They were pro-Umayyad and pro-Marwanid (Marwan b. al-Hakam). The ‘Amilis stood firm by their decision and probably, for the first time in their history, confronted militarily their Judhamid allies.209 Al-Walid b. Mu‘awiya called for help from the generals of Marwan and with their help defeated the Lakhmid and Judhamid troops of Thabit in Tabariyya.210 The historical alliance between ‘Amila, Lakhm and Judham had been broken. ‘Amila chose to maintain its historical role as the men and guardians of the caliph while Judham, Lakhm and Kalb decided to be the caliph’s makers. Perhaps the presence of the ‘Amili

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

129

general Tha‘laba who had no contact with the pro-‘Abbasids pushed the ‘Amilis to remain loyal to the caliph. The limited settlement of the ‘Amilis in the east possibly restricted their contacts with the Hashimiyya movement. Their loyalty was rewarded when Marwan II appointed Tha‘laba as the governor of Jund al-Urdunn.211 He was the first and last ‘Amili to govern that region under the Umayyads.212 Thabit and his sons were slain and crucified while Sulayman b. Hisham and Ibrahim remained loyal to Marwan. In another gesture of reconciliation, Marwan redistributed the stipends to ahl al-Sham and many of them were sent to Iraq to fight the Khawarij.213 The internal discontent among the Arab Syrians proved to be more powerful than Marwan II and overpowered his gestures of reconciliation. After the death of Thabit, Sulayman represented the best hope for some of the Arab Syrians and in particular the Kalb tribe.214 Sulayman led the insurrection in northern Syria but this time Marwan II crushed it with maximum severity. It is reported that many cities were destroyed by the caliph in retaliation, among which were Dimashq and Hims.215 This uprising intensified the schism between ‘Amila and its old established ally, the Kalb tribe. The long lasting alliance was finally destroyed when Sulayman, who managed to escape to Iraq, forged an alliance to topple Marwan II with the bitter enemies of ahl al-Sham, the khawarij led by al-Dahhak b. Qays.216 This major turn of events pushed all the tribes to adopt extreme decisions. Until now the struggle was restricted to the members of the Umayyad house and ahl al-Sham. There had always been room for reconciliation and political manoeuvres, as had been the case with Sulayman himself who was pardoned and reinstated within the Umayyad ruling establishment. But with the use of ‘foreign’ help to conquer the throne in Syria, the rules of the game changed. Thus new alliances were forged among the Syrians themselves. Their long established unity and alliances were destroyed. ‘Amila sided with Marwan II against its old allies. Thus Tha‘laba was asked by Marwan II to provide military assistance which he did without hesitation.217 The ‘Amilis participated in all the campaigns against Sulayman and Mansur b. Jumhur al-Kalbi and the khawarij.218 Many ‘Amilis occupied senior military positions in the army of Marwan II. Thus, Baraka b. Yazid al-‘Amili was

130 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

appointed commander of the fleet and then replaced by Ma‘an b. Salim al-‘Amili.219 Perhaps the vacancies provided by the absence of many Judhamids and Kalbites pushed Marwan II to depend more on ‘Amila as a source for commanders within the ruling establishment. Or, perhaps, they were appointed as a gesture of gratitude towards ‘Amila. The collapse of the Umayyad state was caused, among other reasons, by the disagreements and divisions of Ahl al-Sham. Many of them, especially those who were defeated by Marwan II, did not hesitate to plot against him and to ally themselves, in particular the Judhamids, with Abu Muslim al-Khurasani and his ‘Abbasid-Persian troops.220 The ‘Amilis however supported their Umayyad caliph. Their leader Tha‘laba was among the very few who remained loyal to Marwan II, and had to leave his land to escape with Marwan II from the troops of ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Ali.221 Sources are silent on the destiny of the ‘Amilis during this critical period and tends to ignore Syria after the ‘Abbasid revolt. However, it is not very difficult to imagine that unlike the other tribal groups, ‘Amila would have suffered the full wrath of the ‘Abbasids. Perhaps our investigation of their settlement inside Jabal ‘Amila could be traced to this period. ‘Amila under the Umayyads underwent a substantial transformation in its function and structure but their unity as a tribe remained solid, at least on the political scene. From a mere semi-nomadic unit struggling to maintain its daily survival by raiding its neighbours or by protecting the Byzantine frontiers, ‘Amila evolved into a formidable army force protecting, securing and expanding the Umayyad empire. They forged and maintained an alliance with the Umayyad house and pledged allegiance to its head, the caliph. Their function as a tribe was to protect the caliph and his regime. This choice eventually lead to their demise and to their exile to peripheral regions under the ‘Abbasids. Unlike the Kalbites or the Judhamids, they failed to evolve their political notions regarding the transformation of power and thus were identified with the Umayyads and banished immediately from the political scene. On the other hand, they were hesitant to participate extensively in the internal struggles among the Umayyads and thereby prolonged the dynasty’s life for few more years. The structure of the tribe became more complex and diversified and stretched from Central Asia to Spain. Many of the ‘Amilis settled in

‘A MILA

UNDER THE

UMAY YADS

131

Damascus, Kufa or al-Andalus. They rose to reach the highest ranks first in the military then in the judicial and religious fields. Despite its complexity their unity as a tribe apparently remained intact even two centuries after the fall of the Umayyad state. Sources keep referring to the tribe ‘Amila as one single unit and ‘Amilis remained attached to their ‘Amili lineage centuries after the collapse of the Umayyad state. Tribal confederations emerged for military-political reasons and, therefore, despite the fact that sometimes they did not have common leadership and clashes amongst them could not be avoided, the ‘Amila can and should be regarded as a political group.222 Compared to their allies the Judhamids or the Kalbites, their political choice remained unified during periods of political turmoil. Their political role nonetheless ended with the fall of the Umayyad house. Under the ‘Abbasid they suffered, like the rest of Syria, from neglect and their role in the decision-making process completely disappeared. They became just another ordinary tribe trying to survive in their final home, Jabal ‘Amila.

CHAPTER 5 ON ‘A MIL A, JABAL ‘A MIL A AND SHI‘ISM

‘Amila, among other Yamani tribes, stood to lose the most from ‘Abbasid victory. The Arab Syrians who helped the cause of the ‘Abbasids may have had good reasons to hope that they would retain their authority under the new regime. But ‘Amila, which remained faithful to Marwan II, probably suffered most. Some historians argue that with the collapse of the Umayyad state, members of the Arab Syrian families of the early ‘Abbasid period found their status as a military elite ever more circumscribed as mere provincial troops. More and more of Syria’s ashraf found themselves blocked out of caliphal service and cast only as notables, local elites who were distinguished by their lack of any formal connection with the ‘Abbasid government. No longer imperial elites yet not quite ordinary subjects, the Arab Syrian elite of ‘Abbasid Syria and their factional followings competed furiously for the few formal positions of influence that were offered to them.1 By the early years of the ‘Abbasid period ‘Amila was, in all likelihood, terminated as an active unit in the political and military scenes. Many of its elite families migrated to al-Andalus and North Africa or moved to Damascus. ‘Amilis of the ‘Abbasid period were mostly civilians: judges, historians, master builders, clergymen, Ruwat and Muhaddithun.2 They settled down as local notables mainly in Damascus and in Jund al-Urdunn and some parts of Jund Filastin. Nonetheless it

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

133

is a small region in Jund al-Urdunn that gained the name Jabal ‘Amila as of the third Hijra century despite the fact that the attribute ‘Amili, at the time, meant the tribe and not the region. This probably meant that ‘Amila, as a tribe, remained active and united.

Jabal ‘Amila in Pre-Modern Arabic Historiography Al-Ya‘qubi’s Kitab al-Buldan is probably the oldest source that linked the tribe ‘Amila to Jabal ‘Amila. He wrote in the third Hijra century: ‘the inhabitants of Jabal al-Jalil are people of ‘Amila’.3 Jabal al-Jalil, according to Yaqut al-Hamawi, is near Damascus and one of a series of mountainous elevations which starts in Hijaz and ends in Hims, however, ‘in al-Urdunn it is known as Jabal al-Jalil.’4 Jund al-Urdunn was one of five junds, which constituted Syria under the Umayyads, the remaining four being: Filastin, Dimashq, Hims and Qinnasrin.5 Jund Al-Urdunn covered roughly the area between the cities Sur and Haifa in the west and north, Jarash and the Dead Sea in the east and south.6 However ‘Amila, in the third Hijra century, did not live exclusively in Jund al-Urdunn. Some of its clans inhabited Jund Filastin further south and mingled with other Arab tribes such as Judham, Lakhm and Kinda.7 ‘Amila was thus present in at least two junds in the third Hijra century and was not exclusively settled in Jabal ‘Amila. The junds of al-Urdunn and Filastin formed a considerable area in Syria and covered roughly the area between Sur in the north and Ghazza in the south, and the area between the Mediterranean in the west and the Dead Sea and Lake Tabariyya in the east. But the region hitherto known as Jabal al-Jalil in Jund al-Urdunn was named Jabal ‘Amila most probably for the first time by al-Hamadani in the early fourth century.8 Al-Hamadani used the word ‘Amila fi Jabaliha in his attempt to describe the homeland of ‘Amila.9 Between al-Ya‘qubi’s and al-Hamadani’s descriptions a slight difference is noted. Although both descriptions emphasized the presence of ‘Amila in the Jabal as the exclusive tribe, al-Ya‘qubi did not mention that area as the homeland of ‘Amila. As a matter of fact he added that ‘Amila’s dwellings are also in nearby Filastin. Al-Hamadani, however, noted the presence of Lakhm and Judham as the sole inhabitants of Filastin while ‘Amila

134 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

was ‘in its mountain’ (fi jabaliha) whose precise location he described thus: ‘Jabal ‘Amila dominated ‘Akka and has a view on al-Urdunn.’ We can now notice the difference between the two accounts. It seems that during the half century after al-Ya‘qubi’s text, ‘Amila apparently abandoned its remaining positions in Filastin and lived only in Jabaliha which became an exclusive description of ‘Amila’s homeland. Jabal al-Jalil lost its original name and became Jabal ‘Amila. Therefore Jabal ‘Amila formed, long before the spread of Shi‘ism in it, a distinct tribal community. Al-Muqaddasi provides us with one of the earliest extant descriptions of Jabal ‘Amila during the fourth Hijra century. He describes it as a rustaq (rural area) of the small city Qadas, (Qadas madina saghira ‘ala safh jabal kathiratu al-khayr wa rustaquha Jabal ‘Amila).10 According to him Jabal ‘Amila included many villages and a fertile agricultural land. ( Jabal ‘Amila dhu qura nafisa wa a‘nab wa athmar wa zaytun wa ‘uyun al-matar yasqi zuru‘ahum yatillu ‘ala al-bahr wa yattasil bi Jabal Lubnan).11 But this region described above was no larger than a rustaq of a small city which implies that Jabal ‘Amila was probably inhabited by a small community. Al-Muqaddasi however did not mention the tribe ‘Amila in his description of the region neither inside the jabal nor outside it. It is as if the tribe by the end of the fourth Hijra century had ceased to exist. Instead he speaks of Shi‘ites who consituted the majority of the population living on the outskirts of the Jabal in Tabariyya and Qadas.12 Al-Muqaddasi’s statement is clear. Jabal ‘Amila is constituted of many villages and small communities. Can we locate some of them? Can we attribute them to the late Umayyad or early ‘Abbasid period? It is possible to compare a modern study of the villages and cities of modern Jabal ‘Amil with Yaqut’s Mu‘jam al-Buldan and al-Muqaddasi’s work in order to isolate the villages that existed under the ‘Abbasids. In Muhsin al-Amin’s Khitat Jabal ‘Amil, there are twenty two cities, towns and villages considered to be inside modern Jabal ‘Amil which were also mentioned by Yaqut and al-Muqaddasi. These are: Abil al-Zayt, Abil al-Qamh, Iskandaruna, Qadas, Tibnin, al-Hula, al-Khurayba, Duban (only mentioned in Yaqut), Dayr Mimas, Shaqif Arnun, Shaqif Tayrun, Sarafanda, Safad, Sur, ‘Adhnun, Qadas, Qal‘at Abi al-Hasan, Kark, Marj

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

135

‘Uyun, Mashghara, al-Nawaqir, Siddiq (mentioned only in al-Muqaddasi) and Hunin. The number of these villages is limited compared to the hundreds existing today but this number reflects, to some extant, the picture presented by al-Muqaddasi who spoke of a Rustaq inhabited by a small community.13 Despite the fact that Arab geographers identified ‘Amila with a specific geographical region, Jabal ‘Amila was not recognized as an independent administrative unit. It seems that many villages and cities of Jabal ‘Amila belonged to three different Junds: Dimashq, Hims and al-Urdunn.14 But most of what is acknowledged by traditional accounts as Jabal ‘Amila was included in Jund al-Urdunn, in particular Sur, Tabariyya, Baysan and Qadas.15 The Umayyad sources could only confirm the presence of ‘Amilis as far as Baysan in the south of the Jabal. ‘Abbasid sources confirm their presence ‘in their mountain’ located north of Baysan. Did ‘Amilis live inside the area under the Umayyads? It is very difficult to establish this fact in the absence of evidence and due to the entanglement of the early history of Jabal ‘Amila, as written by modern Arabic historians with their unsubstantiated stories. However, a plausible account can be put forth. It is possible that by the end of the Umayyad period some clans of the tribe could have moved into the villages of the mountain. The area of the jabal is included in Jund al-Urdunn and it is fertile and suitable for settlement and agriculture. Thus many clans of ‘Amila, settled or semi-nomadic, could find no better place to settle than inside al-Urdunn. Meanwhile many of the ‘Amilis were involved in maritime industry and warfare. Baraka b. Yazid al-‘Amili and Ma‘n b. Salim al-‘Amili were in charge of the fleet under Marwan II. Bakkar b. Bilal al-‘Amili in the early period of the ‘Abbasids (d. 183 AH) was in charge of building the fleet.16 This shows that some ‘Amilis had established traditions in the maritime world. The best two sea ports in Bilad al-Sham were in ‘Akka and Sur. Both were in jund al-Urdunn and were considered to be the gates to Jabal ‘Amila. Moreover ‘Akka was the centre of a maritime industry until the days of Hisham b. ‘Abd al-Malik who transferred it to Sur.17 The city of Sur (Tyre) is an integral part of Jabal ‘Amila according to modern historians. The establishment of some clans of ‘Amila thus could be explained under

136

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

these conditions. In addition, and after the fall of the Umayyad state, many ‘Amilis may have moved inside the Jabal for security reasons and took to farming and agriculture. All this was accompanied by the earthquake of AD 747 which severely damaged the city of Baysan and its surroundings, and left it as ‘a pale shadow of its former glory.’18 The earthquake may have encouraged ‘Amili tribesmen to move from Baysan to Jabal ‘Amila seeking refuge.

The Early History of Jabal ‘Amila in Modern Arabic Historiography This point of view, however, is drastically contradictory to what modern Arab historians have projected in their accounts. Modern Arabic Shi‘i historiography on the early history of Jabal ‘Amila appears often to be embroiled in a polemic. Recognizing the paucity of their sources, modern Shi‘i historians nevertheless attempt to project an image of that history often based on little more than fantasy. Thus, one prominent historian describes the origins and development of Shi‘ism in the region as follows: ‘Shi‘ism is well spread among the inhabitants of the region and it is inherited from one generation to another,’19 and considers this statement sufficient as historical proof. Despite their eager efforts to reconstruct the history of the Shi‘a in this region under the late ‘Abbasids and the Ottomans, modern historians, when writing about the Umayyad period, seem simply to accept oral tradition as valid historical evidence. Modern Shi‘i historians based their assumptions on an imagined beginning. They insist that Jabal ‘Amila was Arab, Muslim and Shi‘i from the early days of Muslim rule. They consider the current Shi‘a inhabitants of the region to be the descendants of ‘Amila, an old tribe that migrated from Yemen and settled in Bilad al-Sham before the Muslim conquests. They claim that Shi‘ism began to spread in the area immediately after the ‘Amila tribe embraced Islam through Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, one of the Prophet’s companions, during the governorship of Mu‘awiya b. Abi Sufyan.20 This version of history was, in all likelihood, first put forth by al-Shaykh Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Hurr al-‘Amili (d.1104 AH) in

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

137

the seventeenth century, in his book Amal al-Amil fi ‘Ulama’ Jabal ‘Amil.21 He wrote: During the reign of ‘Uthman, when Abu Dharr was banished to al-Sham, he remained for some time where many became Shi‘a. Then, when Mu‘awiya banished him to the countryside, he went to Jabal ‘Amil where they all became Shi‘a.22 He concluded that, with the exception of a minority in Medina, the first to become Shi‘a were the inhabitants of Jabal ‘Amila who made up the majority of all Shi‘a at that early period.23 Al-Hurr did not provide us with the source upon which he based his information. It is possible that he was influenced by early Shi‘i scholars like al-Nawbakhti (d.c. 310 AH) who considered Abu Dharr to be one of ‘Ali’s first followers. In the absence of any historical evidence to prove this claim one can only speculate about his motives for citing this story. Al-Hurr, an otherwise reputable scholar, cannot easily be accused of myth-making. It is, however, reasonable to assume that scholars of his day and age were willing to admit widespread oral reports into the category of trusworthy reports.24 These oral reports, however, were not similar to the long established traditions of khabar and tawatur. They were not oral traditions inherited from one historian to another. Moreover, these oral reports could not even be compared to the elaborate traditions of African oral histories. As a matter of fact they were only historical gossip.25 Al-Hurr, by recording it, transformed it into a tradition. In any case, the story of Abu Dharr as founder of Shi‘ism in Jabal ‘Amila was already born in the seventeenth century. Until the beginning of the twentieth century, the origins of Shi’ism in the region, as told by al-Hurr, continued to be characterized as widespread oral history. The ‘Amili journal Al-‘Irfan which first appeared in 1909 adopted this foundation story and transformed it into written and thus authoritative reality. Several authors participated in this undertaking. The first was Ahmad Rida (d. 1954) who, in a famous article in 1910 in which he defined the term Matawila, generally embraced al-Hurr’s version, but added his own interpretation, thus creating a newer version.26 To him Abu Dharr was not

138

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

only a pro-‘Alid and a Shi‘i who spread Shi‘ism in Jabal ‘Amila. He was additionally a ‘socialist’ (Ishtiraki) who defended the right of the poor to share with the wealthy the spoils of conquest and war gained by the state. Rida turned him into a social and political activist who roamed Bilad al-Sham spreading his egalitarian message. The author used several different sources in order to prove his point: al-Tabari, al-Mas‘udi, Ibn al-Athir and Abu al-Fida. He, however, was not able to produce any historical reference which indicated that Abu Dharr was in Jabal ‘Amila at all, let alone that he spread Shi‘ism in the region. The historical citations he mentioned referred only to his dispute with Mu‘awiya. He then added a text by Abu Hatim al-Razi in Kitab alZayniyya [sic]Fi Tafsir al-Alfaz al-Mutadawala Bayn Arbab al-‘Ulum in which he cited the name Abu Dharr as one of the four companions of the Prophet who were known to be Shi‘a.27 At the end of his article, Rida refers briefly to the incident which occurred between Abu Dharr and the Jew-turned-Muslim, Ka‘b al-Ahbar, cited in al-Mas‘udi, as evidence of Abu Dharr’s honesty and egalitarianism.28 Rida also cited the existence of two shrines (Maqam), now converted into mosques, dedicated to Abu Dharr, in the area of modern Jabal ‘Amil. One is in Sarafand and the other is in Mays al-Jabal. He claimed they were built immediately after Abu Dharr’s arrival as a sign of the success of his mission.29 The author added one final element to his story claiming that those who answered the call of Abu Dharr were compelled to hide their real intentions and resort to pious dissimulation (taqiyya) because they feared persecution. This state of affairs lasted ‘as long as circumstances permitted’ (ma sha’t lahum al-ahwal), after which they were able to guarantee their safety and announce their true faith to the world.30 The author does not cite any historical evidence to prove his theory, but, at least to modern Shi‘a, the oral tradition became real history. The central point Rida wanted to address was, in all probability, the fact that the Shi‘a of Jabal ‘Amil were the first to become Shi‘a with the exception of the Hijaz community. At this moment the foundation story seems complete. Shakib Arslan (d. 1946),31 however, attempted another, more corrective approach. In an article written a few weeks after Rida’s, he agreed with Rida’s general conclusions but criticized the lack of

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

139

historical evidence in his article.32 The editor of the journal, in a footnote, responded fiercely to Arslan’s criticism: If the author [i.e. Rida] had historical evidence he would have used it; however, recurrence and commonly used hearsay suffice.33 Despite his criticisms, Arslan accepted Rida’s version without adding any historical evidence except for a brief reference to the Umayyad poet, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ being a member of the ‘Amila tribe.34 To Arslan the existence of the Shi‘a in Jabal ‘Amil since Abu Dharr is a historical truth ‘referred to only accidentally by historians’ (al-mu’arrikhun la yadhkurun hadha al-amr illa ‘aradan).35 To him oral tradition that is inherited from one generation to another is good enough as historical evidence, but he concludes only God holds the ultimate truth.36 Despite Arslan’s early criticism, he eventually agrees with Rida’s version. Muhsin al-Amin (d. 1952), in his book Khitat Jabal ‘Amil, was more inquisitive than his predecessors.37 He extensively used several primary Arabic sources and elaborated more than any predecessor on the Arabic origins of ‘Amila.38 He relied, among many others, on al-Ya‘qubi, al-Tabari, al-Qalqashandi, Ibn-‘Asakir and Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani. He was the first to offer a convincing argument about the origins of ‘Amila without referring to hearsay or foundation myths. His research was the result of the need to answer, in an objective manner, the majority Sunni establishment who branded the Matawila (Shi‘a of Lebanon) as of Persian descent. This is evident in the following typical attack which he set out to answer: Al-Matawila are Shi‘a of Persian origins and are joined by groups of atheists (malahida) such as Nusayris and Isma‘ilis.39 To al-Amin, and to many other ‘Ulama, this was an unacceptable thesis that needed to be remedied once and for all in order to dispel the atmosphere of distrust between the two communities.40 He believed that the division between the Sunna and the Shi‘a was political, not religious, in nature and only politics could end the conflict between the two parties.41 He had, meanwhile, to defend his own community

140 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

against the prejudices launched by some of the Sunnite community, as did many of his predecessors like al-Shaykh al-Mufid, al-Murtada and al-Hilli before him. Al-Amin, notwithstanding his attempt to base his arguments on written historical evidence, failed to address the larger issue of the origins and development of Shi‘ism in Jabal ‘Amil. He repeated the foundation myth of Abu Dharr but took care to express his reservations about it. He thus wrote: If the spread of Shi‘ism among the inhabitants of Jabal ‘Amil at the time of Abu Dharr’s exile is valid, then they were the first to become Shi‘a, second only to the people of Hijaz.42 The full acceptance of the foundation myth was complete when al-Amin acknowledged that although there are no written historical references to the conversion of Jabal ‘Amila by Abu Dharr, this can be accepted because the oral tradition is well spread among the inhabitants and preserved from one generation to another (wa tawaruth al-zann bi dhalika).43 Although he accepted that Shi‘ism developed in Jabal ‘Amila around the third century AH,44 as the historical sources would suggest, he nevertheless entertained the story of Abu Dharr as a serious possibility. By the middle of the twentieth century, the foundation myth of Abu Dharr and the origins of Shi‘ism, as expounded by the earlier generation of historians became, apparently, an established reality accepted by many. At that point a second generation of Shi‘i historians had emerged to contribute to the historiography of Jabal ‘Amila. The early history of that region, however, was not seriously reconsidered. The version expounded by the previous generation became an established truth due, as much as anything else, to the personal religious prestige enjoyed by al-Hurr al-‘Amili, Muhsin al-Amin and Ahmad Rida. Shaykh Muhammad Taqi al-Faqih (d. 1999), for example, in his Jabal ‘Amil fi al-Tarikh, simply based all his argument regarding the development of Shi‘ism in the Jabal on secondary sources written by the first generation of historians.45 He offers his readers no primary sources. To him, the ‘fact’ that Abu Dharr started the process

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

141

of converting people to his cause is established beyond doubt. He does, however, acknowledge that the reasons that drove Abu Dharr to sojourn in Jabal ‘Amila remain unknown since no source referred to it.46 The story of Abu Dharr gained legendary proportions with al-Faqih: he was not only responsible for the spread of Shi‘ism in that region but was, among other companions, the one who defended and spread Islam in Bilad al-Sham against the forces of evil represented by the Sufyanids.47 Tarikh Jabal ‘Amil, written by Muhammad Jabir al-Safa (d. 1945), is one of the most accomplished texts concerning the history of the region.48 Al-Safa resorted to a plethora of primary and secondary sources in order to draw an elaborate image of Jabal ‘Amil under the Ottomans and in particular during the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. However, the early history of the region was dismissed in a few sentences. To him, the lack of sources concerning the Jabal is due to the harsh policy practised by the Umayyads on the ‘Amila tribe as both a Yamani tribe and as a Shi‘i community.49 The rise of Shi‘ism in the region was summarized in one sentence: Shi‘ism in it [Jabal ‘Amil] is ancient and goes back to the days of the Prophet’s Companion Abu Dharr al-Ghifari.50 Thus, Al-Safa, in his turn, adhered to the foundation story and created one of his own. The Yaman were considered by all of the sources as staunch allies of early Umayyad rule and formed the backbone of their army. Al-Safa, nevertheless, chooses to ignore this fact and to indulge in speculation. By the 1970s, a third generation of Shi‘i historians, influenced probably by growing academic rigour, began to investigate the social and intellectual history of the Jabal. New aspects were researched, new dimensions were discussed, but the early history of the region and the origins and development of Shi‘ism remained a mystery. Hasan al-Amin (d. 2002) approached the problem with caution and acknowledged the absence of historical evidence that could support the foundation story of Abu Dharr.51 He concluded, somewhat hesitantly, that this story might or might not be true.52 However, he pointed out

142

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

that under the Fatimids (AD 909–1171), Jabal ‘Amila and the whole of Bilad al-Sham witnessed the development and spread of Shi‘ism. But he failed to explain the reasons behind it and whether it was a culmination of a long process that started after the Arab conquest, or the result of the Shi‘ite wave (Hamadanis, Isma‘ilis and Qaramita) that engulfed the region in the fourth century AH. As to the history of the Jabal under the Umayyads, the author concluded that it was a history of poetry, literature and thought. He based his opinion on the existence of poets, ‘Ulama’ and Fuqaha’ named after the ‘Amila tribe, or who originated from the cities of Sur and Sarafand which are located in modern Jabal ‘Amil.53 By trying to bypass the foundation story of Abu Dharr, H. al-Amin seems to have ended up creating another one. It would, of course, be somewhat anachronistic to confuse the ‘Amila tribe with the Jabal ‘Amil of today. It may be that this region took its name from ‘Amila, but as mentioned earlier, it is by no means certain that this name was acquired under the Umayyads. On the contrary, most of the geographical sources named that region as part of Jund al-Urdunn. The history of ‘Amila is not the history of Jabal ‘Amila; their histories, nevertheless, would converge probably in the early ‘Abbasid period. It is also uncertain whether a person from Sur or Sarafand would necessarily have belonged to the ‘Amila tribe. Many sources in fact indicate that the inhabitants of these cities were either the indigenous Christian inhabitants or of Persian descent or else new Arab settlers. There is no evidence to corroborate the presence of ‘Amila in those cities. ‘Amila and Jabal ‘Amila, under the Umayyads are two separate entities. An inhabitant of Sur at that time was called an Urdunni or Suri and not ‘Amili. Being ‘Amili did not make him necessarily from Jabal ‘Amila. Muhammad K. Makki was another Shi‘i scholar who tried to trace the roots of Shi‘ism in the region.54 He based his work on several authorities such as Henri Lammens, Adam Metz and Julius Wellhausen and argued that Shi‘ism was not of Persian origin as some historians had tried to assert. However, the treatment of the topic of early Shi‘ism in the region is superficial. For Makki, Shi‘ism in the region grew as a result of ‘simple visits by Abu Dharr and Salman al-Farisi.’55 In support, he cites the names of several shrines of distinguished pro-‘Alid

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

143

personalities such as ‘Ammar b.Yasir and Salman al-Farisi, and naturally Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, ignoring the probable Mamluk or Ottoman origins of these shrines.56 In 1992, the first truly revisionist account of the early history of the region and the development of Shi‘ism in Jabal ‘Amil appeared. Ja‘far al-Muhajir in al-Ta’sis li Tarikh al-Shi‘a fi Lubnan wa Suriyya, offered a different analysis of the problem which refuted the story of Abu Dharr, depicting it as a legend (Ustura).57 He based his argument on the fact that there is not a single piece of evidence which establishes a link between Abu Dharr and Jabal ‘Amila, although he accepts the fact that Abu Dharr could have visited the area.58 He argues that the development of Shi‘ism in the region was a complex process that could not be the result of the activities of one single missionary – even a person as important as Abu Dharr.59 The myth of Abu Dharr simplifies the story to the point of obliteration, and to accept it is to accept legend and to deny history.60 His position appears thus far to be the most radical among Shi‘i historians who had previously dealt with this issue. He nevertheless found some purpose in the foundation myth. Abu Dharr would be a symbol of an outsider who brought Shi‘ism to the Jabal, because ‘Shi‘ism could only have reached the Jabal from outside its boundaries and its social and cultural components.’61 Thus the early history of Jabal ‘Amila received a new interpretation by al-Muhajir. To him, the region was deserted after the Arab conquest because its original inhabitants, Banu ‘Amila, had left for Byzantium with their allies, the Byzantines.62 The region, he believes, remained a vacuum for almost two centuries. However, by the fourth and fifth centuries AH, the region showed evidence of a Shi‘a population present at the edge of the Jabal, in cities like Tabariyya, Qadas and Sur.63 Moreover, the author believes that only after the Crusaders invaded the region was the Jabal populated by waves of Shi‘a escaping their ruined villages.64 Al-Muhajir’s interpretation, however, presents some serious inaccuracies and errors. He assumes, contrary to historical evidence,

144 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

that the tribe ‘Amila was settled in the Jabal long before the Islamic conquest and only abandoned the region immediately after the Islamic conquest and departed for Byzantium. The conquests, as a matter of fact, allowed ‘Amila to migrate from their original homeland in south Filastin and to settle down first in north Filastin then ultimately to move to Jabal ‘Amila in the early Abbasid period. Moreover, al-Muhajir assumes that the region remained a vacuum after the conquest for almost two centuries. This hypothesis is questionable since the survival of village names in Aramaic, Syriac or Greek may suggest a different conclusion.65 The continuous habitation of the region throughout the Umayyad period can not be dismissed automatically. Except for a few works of scholarship, the early period received little attention or was mystified in various ways by all those who have dealt with it.66 One major factor contributed to this state of affairs: the existence of an anachronistic mind-set among historians which held firmly to the view that the same geo-religious entity had existed, without substantial change, from the early days of Islam until modern times. These historians were faced with the challenge posed by the silence of the written sources concerning the foundation story of Abu Dharr. Furthermore, there was little evidence, if any, to suggest that Jabal ‘Amila was an independent administrative unit rather than part of a larger unit. In my opinion,67 a good starting point to investigate the origins and development of Shi‘ism in the region would be the movements of the Qaramita in Eastern Arabia and Bilad al-Sham, Fatimids in northern Africa and Egypt and Syria, Hamadanis in Aleppo and Buwayhids in Baghdad and the Zaydis in parts of Iran and Yemen. It was probably these movements that had the greatest impact on the establishment of Shi‘ism in the Jabal. However, early evidence (i.e. Muqaddasi) suggests that the spread of Shi‘ism, at that period, in the Jabal remained restricted to certain specific villages; it had not yet evolved into a major community. The spread of Shi‘ism and in particular its Twelver version in Bilad al-Sham, historically anti-Shi‘ite, was improbable. Shi‘ism nevertheless started to show signs of firm presence in Jabal ‘Amila as of the sixth Hijra century. Most sources would agree on this point.

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

145

They, however, tend not to explain why. When the ‘Abbasid state was gradually seized, in the fifth Hijra century, by waves of Turkish tribes emanating from central Asia, these Turkish tribes adopted Sunnism in its severest form. The most important of these tribes were the Seljuqs who conquered Iran and Iraq and overthrew the Shi‘i Buwayhids and took control of Baghdad. They were to remain in power until the sixth Hijra century. The coming of the Seljuqs was a severe blow to the Shi‘a in Iraq and Iran. But the situation in Syria and parts of northern Iraq was different. A number of tribal emirates remained. The most powerful of these, the Mazyadids, was a dynasty of Shi‘i emirs who made their capital at Hilla on the banks of the Euphrates between Karbala’ and Najaf. In Syria also, dynasties of Shi‘i emirs held sway for long periods of time. The Shi‘i Hamadanis were overthrown by the Shi‘i ‘Uqaylids of Mosul. At Tarablus (Tripoli, Northern Lebanon), another Shi‘i Dynasty, the Banu ‘Ammar, held power until overthrown by the Crusaders in the early sixth century AH. According to travellers like Nasir Khusraw (d. 479 AH) and Ibn Battuta (d. 770 AH), a majority Shi‘i population was found in Halab, Tarablus, Ba‘labakk, Saida, Sur and Tabariyya in addition to Dimashq, Hims and Hama. At the same period, the Fatimids were gradually being pushed back and with it the tide of Isma‘ili Shi‘ism. In these areas where Isma‘ili power was declining, there almost suddenly appeared large communities of Twelver Shi‘a in Bahrayn and in Jabal ‘Amila where there are no reports of large communities of Twelvers having existed before. At the same time, the area witnessed the first incursions of the Crusaders with their devastating effects on the local population. It can tentatively be postulated that the declining wave of Isma‘ili power left behind it larger Twelver Shi‘a communities as converts from Isma‘ili Shi‘ism. We might speculate, for the moment, as to the reasons for such conversions. The Isma‘ilis had become feared and hated by the rest of the Muslim world and large numbers of them were killed. This was particularly true of the Qaramita of Bahrayn, who had committed the blasphemous act of removing the Black Stone of the Ka‘ba. Thus it seems plausible, that a number of Isma‘ilis converted to the much more acceptable Twelver form of Shi‘ism and resided in the inner side of Jabal ‘Amila in order to protect themselves. All this coupled with

146 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

the invasion of the Crusaders who occupied most of the Syrian coast and parts of the hinterland, created waves of refugees seeking Jabal ‘Amila for asylum. How then are we to view this debate about Jabal ‘Amila in modern Arabic Shi‘i historiography? We must first of all keep in mind the general political atmosphere in which this debate on origins unfolded. Rida and M. al-Amin, for instance, wrote during a period when Sunni-Shi‘i relations were particularly tense. Their writings represent, perhaps, a self-defence mechanism against a hostile Sunni environment which often considered them as Rafida and of foreign or Persian origin and seldom as Muslims or Arabs.68 It was, thus, imperative to emphasize that not only were the inhabitants of the Jabal Muslims but they are the true followers of the Prophet’s family and the first ones to respond to their call for justice. They are not only Arabs; they are the descendants of ‘Amila, one of the oldest Arab tribes known in the region. This debate on the early history of Jabal ‘Amila also holds within it the prospect of an investigation of the survival of oral tradition as a trustworthy source of historical facts. This debate is an old one in Arabic historiography.69 The fact that contemporary Shi‘i historians were prepared to revive and employ oral tradition as an argument with which to balance the absence of written evidence indicates the degree of eagerness with which these historians wanted to maintain the integrity of their Shi‘i identity within an unfriendly Sunnite majority.

Abu Dharr al-Ghifari and ‘Amila in Pre-Modern Arabic Historiography: a Critical Review Modern Shi‘i historians maintain that Abu Dharr al-Ghifari converted ‘Amila – the inhabitants of Jabal ‘Amila – to Shi‘ism.70 They nevertheless agree that no hard evidence supports this claim. They insist that it is self-evident and well accepted by all Shi‘ite circles. Abu Dharr’s story, in time, turned out to be an imagined beginning created by the Shi‘ite community. Classical Islamic historiography contains little information about Abu Dharr, and what is known about him is mostly of an ambiguous

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

147

nature. Sources, for example, cannot even establish his real name. Ibn Sa‘d (d. 230 AH) wrote that his name might be Jundub or Burayr ibn Junadah.71 Ibn ‘Asakir (d. 571 AH), for his part, reported that his real name was controversial and it is only ‘apparent’ that his name was Jundub ibn Junadah.72 Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (852 AH) cited several versions of the name, such as Ibn Junadah, Ibn ‘Ashraqa or Ibn al-Sakan.73 Jundub ibn Junadah, however, is the most accepted version. He was a Sahabi and is said to have worshipped one God before his conversion. When news of Muhammad reached him he went to Makka to make inquiries. He immediately believed in the message and is said to have been the fifth believer (or even the fourth in Shi‘i sources). He was sent by Muhammad to his tribe, Banu Ghifar, where he stayed until he went to Medina after the battle of the Ditch. Later he lived in Syria until he was recalled by ‘Uthman. He retired, or was sent, to al-Rabadha, where he died in 32/652. He is credited with 281 traditions, of which al-Bukhari and Muslim together cite 31.74 Abu Dharr and the Umayyads There is no historical evidence to suggest that Abu Dharr passed by the region now known as Jabal ‘Amil. Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest that he had any contacts with the ‘Amila tribe. It is also very difficult to show that he ever had any relationship with ‘Ali. As a matter of fact, all the evidence we possess so far points to long service in the forces of the established enemies of ‘Ali such as ‘Uthman, Mu‘awiya and ‘Amr ibn al-‘As. Modern and classical Shi‘i historians considered Abu Dharr to be pro-‘Alid and a staunch foe of Mu‘awiya. Even al-Muhajir, who was the only one to question the establishment by Abu Dharr of Shi‘ism in the region, did not hesitate to consider him as ‘one of the strongest supporters of ‘Ali.’ Nevertheless, there is little evidence for any durable contact between ‘Ali and Abu Dharr. Ibn Sa‘d relates that ‘Umar kept Abu Dharr at Medina until the former’s death. In contrast, and according to Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam (d. 257 AH) who gives the earliest surviving account of the conquest of Egypt, Abu Dharr was present at the action at Heliopolis, 19 AH, at the siege of the citadel of Babylon which fell 20 AH and at Alexandria,

148 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

21 AH. In the same year he was posted to the garrison at al-Fustat, where he was assigned to the Corps of Ansar.75 The testimony of Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam rests on the rolls of the Diwan in Egypt. Abu Dharr is also said by al-Tabari to have spent the caliphate of ‘Umar, 13–23 AH, in Syria where we find that Abu Dharr and ‘Ubadah ibn al-Samit were both in the army commanded by Mu‘awiya which captured Amorium in 23 AH76 and with the forces which captured Cyprus in 28 A.H.77 According to Ibn ‘Asakir78 and al-Nuwayri (c. 775 AH), he was posted in Alexandria at the head of the military garrison after the conquest.79 Except for the unique testimony of Ibn Sa‘d, who did not refer to any relation with ‘Ali, most of the classic sources emphasize the active military role of Abu Dharr during ‘Umar’s reign and under Mu‘awiya’s leadership. This being so, we might assume that between the death of the Prophet and the end of the caliphate of Abu Bakr in 11 AH nothing is known of Abu Dharr’s whereabouts. It seems he spent his time in Syria under the Caliphate of ‘Umar from 13 AH to 18 AH where he witnessed the conquest of Jerusalem, after which we find him in Egypt with ‘Amr ibn al-‘As during the conquest of Egypt. He came back for a short period to Medina on ‘Uthman’s accession to power. He however, did not remain there for long and asked the caliph to let him go because the Prophet had told him to leave Medina if the building construction reached Sal‘. ‘Uthman granted him his wish. He settled in Syria, then under the firm control of Mu‘awiya. Abu Dharr remained in Damascus which he left for the purpose of pilgrimage only. Abu Dharr was probably a pro-Umayyad, but the historical sources report a clash between Mu‘awiya and ‘Uthman on the one hand and Abu Dharr al-Ghifari on the other. It is, thus, essential to know the historical background to this conflict. The Muslim soldier was entitled, in addition to the traditional booty, to other prizes of war, namely the taxes levied on conquered lands and peoples. Under the first caliph, Abu Bakr, these taxes, we are told, were distributed equally among all the warriors, but ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, the second caliph, created a Diwan of all those having a right to military pension. ‘Uthman, who instead of assigning pensions

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

149

entirely to the warriors, reserved a share of it for his family and his governors. The ensuing tension is best summarized by M. A. Shaban: ‘Uthman’s drive to assert his authority as Amir al-Mu’minin resulted in yet another unforgivable error. Again it was concerned with money, this time the distribution of the fifth of the booty sent to Medina. As we have already indicated the guidance of the Qur’an and the Sunna on this most delicate of matters was subject to the different interpretations of the interested parties. Even Muhammad had been openly criticized for his handling of the question, and it is therefore not surprising that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar were tactfully discreet, perhaps claiming some freedom with a fifth of this fifth. ‘Uthman was less discreet and boldly assumed freedom in dealing with the whole sum, paying the stipends and then using the rest as he saw fit for the public good.80 Thus his cousin, Marwan b. al-Hakam, was appointed Head of the Diwan; his foster brother ‘Abdallah, banished by the Prophet, was made Governor of Egypt, and Mu‘awiya was confirmed in his office as Governor of Syria. The administration soon faced charges of nepotism. The lands and wealth that had been taken by Muslim soldiers were now administered and controlled by a body of nouveaux riches relatives of ‘Uthman who saw no point ‘in laying treasure up in heaven’ as the puritans would advocate, preferring to lay it up on earth and use it for personal benefits. They did all this in spite of the Quranic verse addressed to those ‘who treasure up gold and silver and expend it not in the way of God.’81 This same passage of the Quran was quoted by Abu Dharr, who is made to quarrel with Mu‘awiya about the misuse of public funds which belonged, according to Abu Dharr, to the people and to the state. He incited people to abide by the Quranic stipulation which states that the rich should not ‘lay treasure up.’ Some said that the payment of the zakat exempted them from further duties towards the needy who had not been enriched by the Muslim conquests. ‘Uthman and Mu‘awiya represented this school of thought while Abu Dharr

150 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

was the representative of those who opposed them. Mu‘awiya found no other option but to send Abu Dharr to ‘Uthman in Medina. Abu Dharr departed to Medina. There he spoke to ‘Uthman of the thirty descendants of Abu al-‘As, including ‘Uthman, who according to an utterance ascribed to the Prophet, would seize public revenue and the exchequer. Asked by ‘Uthman to confirm this, ‘Ali said, according to al-Ya‘qubi (d.284 AH): ‘yes’82, and according to others: ‘no’. In both cases, however, ‘Ali quoted Muhammad: ‘Heaven hath not given shade to nor earth borne one more upright than Abu Dharr.’83 Abu Dharr quarrelled with Ka‘b al-Ahbar in the presence of ‘Uthman concerning the interpretation of the Quran. Abu Dharr left or was made to leave Medina for al-Rabadhah. Pro-Shi‘i sources like al-Ya‘qubi and al-Mas‘udi reported that ‘Ali and his sons escorted him on the way to al-Rabadhah in spite of ‘Uthman’s prohibition.84 On this matter the other historians remain silent. Sayf b. ‘Umar (d.180 AH), however, provided us with the earliest extant text and probably the least conflicting and most coherent one. He acknowedged the dispute between Abu Dharr and Mu‘awiya in Damascus. Abu Dharr headed for Medina upon the request of the caliph ‘Uthman who took the side of Mu‘awiya in this dispute. Unable to convince the caliph, Abu Dharr decided to retire to al-Rabadhah. ‘Uthman accepted this decision and offered Abu Dharr nevertheless, as a friendly gesture, a herd of camels and a flock of sheep and two slaves and instructed him to come back regularly to Medina in order for him not to become beduin once again (hata la ya‘uda i‘rabiyan).85 According to Sayf b. ‘Umar Abu Dharr was not exiled, but he retired of his own free will, ‘He went to al-Rabadhah on his own free will when he realised that ‘Uthman did not take his side.’86 Abu Dharr and Shi‘i Traditions Shi‘i traditions of the classical period tended to overlook certain facts and were often inclined to speculation in order to show Abu Dharr’s Shi‘ite tendencies. Why would an alleged pro-‘Alid figure of this stature remain in Mu‘awiya’s entourage for so long? Classical Shi‘i historians offer no satisfying answer. They simply deny this fact and

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

151

insist, contrary to earlier historical evidence, that he did not leave Medina until he was exiled by ‘Uthman. Alternatively these traditions tried to add certain anachronistic elements to their accounts by having Abu Dharr pledge allegiance to the descendants of ‘Ali as the rightful heirs and using rhetoric later employed by the Twelver Shi‘ites. Ibn Babawayh (d.381 AH),87 for instance, claims that Abu Dharr saw the Prophet leading ‘Ali by the hand to Makka’s burial ground. The Prophet opened the grave of his father and mother, who woke up and proclaimed their loyalty to the Prophet and ‘Ali as his successor.88 Ibn Abi al-Hadid (d.655 AH),89 possibly because of his Mu‘tazilite background, tried to give, in Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, a more balanced view. In general he adopted the Shi‘a version, in which Abu Dharr was expelled by ‘Uthman to al-Sham, concluding that this was what ‘most scholars of Sira and Akhbar’ would hold. Ibn Abi al-Hadid acknowledged, however, the existence of other versions according to which Abu Dharr decided to move, of his own free will, to al-Sham and al-Rabadhah. Ibn Abi al-Hadid thus chose to reconcile the conflicting versions by accepting the story of forced exile which ‘Uthman was compelled to impose in order to avoid divisions among Muslims. This step, according to Ibn Abi al-Hadid, is permissible to the Imam in order to avoid worse evil.90 Is it possible then to determine Abu Dharr’s inclinations? Shi‘i historians tend to picture him as a rebellious individual who incited people against the corruption of the Umayyads who decided to punish him and send him into exile at al-Rabadhah. Other historical sources, including classical Shi‘i sources, picture him as a man who preferred solitude. He was an ascetic and was compared to Jesus. Those descriptions hardly fit a rebel. They may however fit a pious man whose convictions do not tolerate different interpretations. His clash with the Umayyads may thus stem not so much from pro-‘Alid sentiments, as from his zeal and fervour for a literal Islam. The status of a Companion allowed him to criticize those in power. He was a representative of the older opposition to the aristocratic usurpation of power represented by Mu‘awiya. Thus the clash between them may be seen as socio-political and related to the interpretation of the original message. The ‘Alids misrepresent Abu Dharr’s dispute with those who departed from the

152

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

pristine piety of Islam, as exemplified in the lives of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar, which is addressed in particular to ‘Uthman as well as to his kinsmen and party. Since they considered these to be the enemies of ‘Ali, Abu Dharr’s quarrel with them made him by default a supporter of ‘Ali. Thus the faction of ‘Ali claimed him as one of their own. In order to prove that Abu Dharr was persecuted by ‘Uthman because of his Shi‘i tendencies, Shi‘i sources refer to al-Rabadhah as ‘the worst place on earth’ where only the enemies of the state would be banished. Al-Rabadhah was a grazing ground, a hima, which was confiscated by the state from the tribes after the Ridda wars. The basis (asl) of a hima is fodder and water (kala’). In the hima, one or more springs of water are usually found.91 The hima may often cover a considerable expanse of territory. Lökkegaard identified al-Rabadhah as a vast tract of land whose borders were extended over the course of time.92 It would be highly improbable to send into exile a pro-‘Alid foe into a fertile, rich territory, especially when we take into consideration that ‘Ammar b. Yasir was flogged and humiliated by ‘Uthman because he showed pro‘Alid tendencies. Al-Rabadhah was one of Medina’s villages and was situated on the Hijaz road.93 It was a regular halting place for caravans plying their trade between Syria, Egypt and Iraq, where the mutiny against the caliph ‘Uthman began.94 The caliph could not have been unaware of the discontent that was smouldering in the provinces. It was hardly, therefore, the place to which ‘Uthman would have sent a revolutionary who was allegedly dangerous to the existing order. Al-Rabadhah is described, perhaps more objectively as the home of a community where on Abu Dharr’s arrival the ritual prayer was being celebrated, and where he later built a mosque.95 Thither he retired, of his own free will, to his estate where he received a considerable allowance from public funds according to Ibn Sa‘d and al-Tabari. This could hardly be the punishment of an exile, as depicted by Shi‘i sources, who loathed the caliph. Modern Shi‘i historians, usually, have Mu‘awiya banishing Abu Dharr to the area now known as Jabal ‘Amil, a fact attested nowhere else. Yaqut al-Hamawi, however, stated that Jabal al-Jalil (Jabal ‘Amila now) was the place where Mu‘awiya imprisoned those accused of the murder of ‘Uthman.96 Mu‘awiya, as depicted by historical sources, was

ON ‘A MILA, JABAL ‘A MILA

AND

SHI‘ISM

153

a man of hilm (self-restraint) and makr (cunning). Even al-Tabari, a historian with some ‘Alid sympathies, described him as one of the best kings that the Arabs had. Mu‘awiya, the astute politician, would thus entrust only his most loyal people to stand guard over his opponents. It might therefore be argued that the inhabitants of Jabal al-Jalil – the ‘Amila tribe or others – were likely to have been among Mu‘awiya’s most loyal troops, and therefore those least likely to become followers of a Shi‘a rebel. In addition, Abu Dharr’s demise occurred before that of ‘Uthman, and no source mentions that he was imprisoned. Thus we can safely assume that Abu Dharr was never exiled to the region of Jabal ‘Amil. We may never know why the modern Shi‘a of Jabal ‘Amil chose Abu Dharr as their guide to Shi‘ism. It may have something to do with the fact that there were certain links established between him and ‘Ali as I have shown earlier. But we could conclude that he had no direct links with either the ‘Amila tribe or with Jabal ‘Amil. His relations with ‘Ali were far less frequent and less intimate than his relations with the Umayyads and they were possibly the result of a convergence of common interests over a short period of time. Perhaps Abu Dharr needed support for his pious and populist stand and ‘Ali represented the best prospect. Their relationship was short and probably ended when Abu Dharr withdrew from public life and accepted defeat. His withdrawal was not that of a bitter enemy. It was more likely that of a disappointed, tired man who realized that the state built by the Umayyads was not for him. His approach to Mu‘awiya, however, was that of a father figure who gives advice to his wayward son. He was a regular visitor to the court of Mu‘awiya and his presence was required by the latter. An incident related by almost all sources is the best illustration of their ‘special relationship’. Mu‘awiya decided to build a new castle, al-Khadra’, for himself. Abu Dharr interfered and advised Mu‘awiya not to do so, because ‘if it was built by the Muslims’ funds it would be a betrayal of religion, and if it was built by your money [Mu‘awiya’s], then it would be extravagance (israf ).’ A pro-‘Alid foe of Mu‘awiya would not have advised him against building a new castle because it was israf nor would he have taken such a positive attitude toward Mu‘awiyya. The word itself indicates concern

154 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

for Mu‘awiya’s interests. Additionally, pro-‘Alid would not have been consulted by Mu‘awiya in the first place. We can safely conclude that Shi‘ism in Jabal ‘Amil was hardly the result of a single missionary’s efforts. Shi‘ism had to wait for the ‘Abbasid period to emerge in the region. Syria at that time was under the firm control of Mu‘awiya and presented a great obstacle to ‘Ali b. Abi Talib who was never able to penetrate it. Historical records showed little or no sympathy to ‘Ali in Syria. The Arab tribes, of which ‘Amila was one, formed the backbone of the Syrian army and were hostile to all ‘Alid elements and were involved in defeating all Shi‘a uprisings in Iraq. The gap between pro-Umayyad Syrians and ‘Alid Iraqis was too wide to be bridged by one person in such a short period.

EPILOGUE

A significant factor in the history of ‘Amila consists in its connection with the outside political world. The emergence, evolution and eventual fall of ‘Amila should be viewed first and foremost as a result of the interaction of the tribe with the political world that surrounded it. It is because ‘Amila successfully handled its relations with the outside political world that it survived for several centuries. The rise of the ‘Amilis as a significant tribal element in the political world of the ancient Near East could be attributed to the emergence of Palmyra or to the establishment of the Roman limes. The fall of that city did not hinder or affect their capabilities to adapt themselves to the realities of the Roman world. According to Caskel, the beduinization of Arabia started with the fall of the city of Petra in the second century AD and, in particular, with the fall of Palmyra which had even graver consequences. As a result of the collapse of these states, the caravan roads and, with them, the settlements in the interior began to be abandoned. The transformation of ‘Amila from a semi-nomadic group into a more advanced tribal one conducting and protecting Byzantine frontiers can be attributed to its success in adapting itself to the changes in the neighbouring political world. The advent of Islam probably presented ‘Amila with a golden opportunity to once again benefit from the cataclysmic change that occurred on the political scene of the Near East. Unlike many of the non-Arab inhabitants or other Arab tribes like the Ghassanids who stood to lose most from the fall of the Byzantine empire, ‘Amila decided to join the new order and probably contributed to the success of the early Muslim conquests. Moreover ‘Amila seems to have adapted itself to the realities

156

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

of the new Muslim state that appeared as a result of the internal struggles between the Umayyads and the ‘Alids and Kharijite opponents, then later between the Marwanids and the Zubayrids. The demise of the tribe as an active political unit at the end of the Umayyad period can be attributed, among other reasons, to the changes brought about by the ‘Abbasid revolution. As ‘Amila benefited from the opportunities presented by the outside political world to evolve, it would be plausible to argue that it was the same outside political world which ended their involvement in it. Another phenomenon in the history of ‘Amila consists in its ability to gain influence despite the relatively inferior numbers of its members, by establishing solid relations with the ruling dynasties of the region. The sources speak of their relations with Palmyra through the ruling dynasty only (al-Zabba’ and her father and possibly Udhayna). The ‘Amilis established a rather special relationship with the Umayyad ruling house and in particular the Marwanids. They often defended and implemented the policies of the caliph thus turning their role into that of a pillar of the Umayyad order. As such, they were sidelined by the overthrow of the Umayyads and the establishment of ‘Abbasid rule which contradicted drastically what they regarded as the legal caliphate. This explains, in a way, their inability to readjust their policies and to constructively try to establish new relations with the ‘Abbasid rule. Unlike their Arab Syrian counterparts who did not hesitate to collaborate with the ‘Abbasid regime, ‘Amila seems to have accepted defeat and isolated itself as an active political tribe. A third important phenomenon in the history of ‘Amila consists in its ability to rise above its pragmatism. They repeatedly chose to follow their perceived interest regardless of the realities of tribal genealogies. They were usually classified as a Yamani tribe and as such opposed to the Qaysi tribes; this, however, did not prevent them from defending al-Hajjaj, al-Walid II and Marwan II. They were incapable of implementing this policy upon the arrival of the ‘Abbasids and for once decided to defend their tribal identity instead of pursuing their tribal interests. The tribal world under the Umayyads is rather complicated and almost as confusing to us as it was to the classical Arab historians.

EPILOGUE

157

A study of the individual tribes, as this book has shown, could contribute to a better understanding of the Umayyad period. The politics of the period were, after all, based on tribal alliances. The major Yamani-Qaysi rift cannot be simplified as merely a conflict among tribal factions or parties. These were individual tribes who were proud of their past deeds, whether military or political, and of their descent. However, the shift of lineage and descent that occurred within certain tribes during the Umayyad period shows that the genealogical realities could be overlooked and falsified in accordance with tribal interests. The internal struggle that occurred in the final phase of the Umayyad reign (AD 744–750) cannot be explained in terms of descent or tribal factions only. ‘Amila, like the rest of the tribes, saw its interests diverge from those of many of its former allies and in particular the Kalbites and the Judhamids. They did not hesitate to follow their own path. A fourth phenomenon in the history of ‘Amila lies in its readiness to migrate to a new area when the sources of food and income became scarce. Once their sojourn in either Mesopotamia or Palmyra became impossible to sustain they did not hesitate to migrate to the south of Palestine where they found new pasturage and a new source of income as semi-professional soldiers in the service of Byzantium. This lasted for a substantial period of time because the conditions of survival remained steady for centuries. Once the Muslim factor appeared and drastically changed the conditions of survival, ‘Amila immediately reacted and migrated north. They settled near the new sources of income and power in the Umayyad state, in Jund al-Urdunn. Once this situation was threatened, under Sulayman and with the advent of the ‘Abbasids, the ‘Amilis moved either to the west in al-Andalus or to Jabal ‘Amila which turned out to be their final destination as a single tribal unit. A fifth major phenomenon in the history of ‘Amila consists in its adherence to the tribal evolutionary process. As Khazanov has shown, most tribes evolve from their nomadic status to a semi-nomadic then into a semi-sedentary and finally into a settled sedentary tribal community. In the pre-Islamic phase, ‘Amila transformed itself from a nomadic into a semi-nomadic community. Then, in the post-Islamic period it evolved into a semi-sedentary and a fully fledged tribal

158

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

sedentary community. This evolution, although common among Arab tribes after the advent of Islam, was not inevitable among all tribes. Many ended up being sedentary but others remained beduinized. The last traces of ‘Amila under the Umayyads show a fully fledged sedentary tribe with little or no commitment to their nomadic past. A last phenomenon involves the commitment of the ‘Amilis to create and protect an Arab kingdom whether in Palmyra, under the pro-Byzantine Arab monarchies, or, finally, the Arab kingdom of the Umayyads. The data available to us cannot corroborate this conclusion with regards to ‘Amila in the pre-Islamic period. But throughout the Umayyad period ‘Amila committed itself to the cause of the ruling dynasty and the establishment of the state, first by Mu‘awiya then by the Marwanids. The ‘Amilis and the Arab Syrian tribes fought their wars, defended their cause, protected and expanded their empire. The dedication and zeal shown by the ‘Amilis in their mission, and well rewarded by the Umayyads, may indicate their awareness of the importance of building an Arab tribal kingdom. Perhaps their refusal to ally themselves to the ‘Abbasids might be explained as a rejection of a new dynasty where Arab supremacy was no longer the norm.

NOTES

Introduction 1. For more details on this topic see, Nasir al-Din al-Asad, Masadir al-Shi‘ir alJahili wa Qimatuha al-Tarikhiyya (Beirut, 1956); Michael Zwettler, The Oral Tradition of Classical Arabic Poetry: its Character and Implications (Columbus, 1978). 2. There are three modern versions of ‘Adi’s diwan: The first one edited by Nuri al-Qaysi and Hatim al-Damin and published in Baghdad in 1987. It is based on the version collected and edited by Tha‘lab al-Shibani in the third Hijra century. This edition is the most reliable among the new editions and it includes an almost complete collection of ‘Adi’s poetry. The second modern version, edited by Hasan Nur al-Din published in Beirut in 1990, is less complete and is mainly a collection of ‘Adi’s poetry in several primary sources. The third modern version, edited by Tahsin al-Salah in ‘Amman in 1999, is rather a biography of ‘Adi in addition to many of his poems collected from the Baghdad edition and other primary sources.

Chapter 1. The Tribe ‘Amila: By Way of a Definition 1. H. Lammens and W. Caskel, Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition), s.v. ‘ ‘Amila.’ 2. Ahmad Rida, ‘Banu ‘Amila,’ al-‘Irfan 31 (1945): 218-24; see also, Muhsin alAmin, Khitat Jabal ‘Amil. Ed. Hasan al-Amin (Beirut, 1983), 47-50. 3. EI, s.v. ‘‘Amila.’ 4. This point is discussed in a different chapter, ‘ ‘Amila in the Pre-Islamic Period.’

160 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

5. For sources on ‘Amila during the conquests, see Muhammad al-Azdi, Futuh al-Sham. Ed. W.N. Lees (Calcutta, 1853), 114. This point is elaborated in another chapter, ‘‘Amila During the Islamic Conquests.’ 6. This issue is elaborated in a different chapter, ‘ ‘Amila under the Umayyads.’ 7. Rida, ‘Banu ‘Amila’, 218-24. 8. In addition to the works cited in this chapter on the tribes and nomads, the following is a list of relevant works on the subject: The Desert and the Sown: Nomads in the Wider Society, ed. Cynthia Nelson (Berkeley: University of California, 1973) This work contains articles by: Ernest Gellner, F. Barth, W. Swindler, T. Asad, A. G. Ahmed, A. Mohammed, D. Cole, G. R. Fazel, A. S. Bujra, G. J.Obermeyer; A. W. Zakariyya, ‘Asha’ir al-Sham (Beirut and Damascus, 1997); Jean Chelhod, ‘Les Structures Dualistes de la Société Bédouine,’ L’Homme 9 (1969): 89-112; J. Lecerf, ‘Note sur la famille dans le monde arabe et islamique,’ Arabica 3 (1956): 31-60; E. Bacon, ‘Types of Pastoral Nomadism in Central Asia and Southwest Asia,’ Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 10 (1956): 44-68; M. Fried The Notion of the Tribe (Menlo Park: Cumming Publishing Company, 1975); E. Marx, ‘The Tribe as a Unit of Subsistence: Nomadic Pastoralism in the Near East,’ American Anthropologist 79 (1977): 343-63; A. Southall, ‘The Illusion of Tribe,’ Journal of Asian and African Studies 5 (1970): 28-50; W. Dostal, ‘The Evolution of Bedouin Life,’ In L’Antica Societa Beduina. Ed. F. Gabrieli. 11-33 (Roma: Centro Di Studi Semitici, 1959); Jibrail S. Jabbur, The Bedouins and the Desert: Aspects of Nomadic Life in the Arab East Trans. L. Conrad, ed. Suhayl Jabbur and L. Conrad (New York, 1995); M. Mundy and B. Musallam, The Transformation of Nomadic Society in the Arab East (Cambridge, 2000). 9. Richard Tapper, ‘Anthropologists, Historians, and Tribespeople on Tribe and State Formation in the Middle East.’ In Tribes and State Formation in the Middle East. Ed. P. S. Khoury and J. Kostiner, (Los Angeles, 1990), 49. 10. Daniek Biebuyck. ‘On the Concept of Tribe,’ Civilisations 16 (1966): 500. 11. See for instance, Ahmad b. Abi Ya‘qub al-Ya‘qubi, Kitab al-Buldan (Beirut, 1988), 88; Abu Muhammad al-Hasan al-Hamadani, Sifat Jazirat al-‘Arab. Ed. David Muller (Leiden, 1968), 132. 12. See al-Azdi, Futuh al-Sham. Ed. William N. Lees; Abu al-Hasan al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-Buldan. Ed. Radwan M. Radwan (Beirut, 1991). 13. This point is discussed in another chapter, ‘ ‘Amila in the Pre-Islamic Period.’ 14. Muhammad b. al-Hasan b. Durayd (d. 321 A H), Jamharat al-Lugha (Beirut, 1987), vol. 2. Ed. R. Baalbaki. 15. Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-‘Arab. Ed. ‘Ali Shirri (Beirut, 1988), vol. 9, 401.

NOTES

16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29.

30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40.

161

See, S. Agha and T. Khalidi, ‘Poetry and Identity in the Umayyad Age,’ Al-Abhath 50-5 (2002-3): 55-119, on the way tribes struggled to redefine their descent. Muhammad Murtada al-Zabidi, Taj al-‘Arus. Ed. M. Hijazi ( Kuwait, 1998), vol. 30, 60. Ibn al-Athir, al-Lubab fi Tahdhib al-Ansab (Cairo: Maktabat al-Qudsi, 1356 A. H), vol. 2, 107-8. Al-Zabidi, 61. Abu Mansur Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Azhari (d.370 AH), Tahdhib alLugha ed. M. Najjar (Cairo, 1964), v2, 422. Antonin Jaussen, coutumes des Arabes au pays de Moab (Paris, 1908), 112. Robert Montagne, ‘Notes sur la vie sociale et politique de l’Arabie du Nord: les Shemmar du Negd,’ Revue des Etudes Islamiques (1932): 65. Ahmad al-Qalqashandi (d.821 A.H), Nihayat al-Arab fi Ma‘rifat Ansab al‘Arab. Ed. Ibrahim al-Abyari (Cairo, 1959), 13-14. Ibid., 13-14. Ibid., 14. Ibn Manzur, v3, 427; al-Zabidi, v37, 511. Al-Azhari, v5, 285. Touvia Ashkenazi, ‘La tribu arabe: ses éléments,’ Anthropos XLI-XLIV (1946-9): 657-72. Ashkenazi, 662. A.M. Khazanov, Nomads and the Outside World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 151. It is a global and comparative study of pastoral nomadism. Well researched and documented, it is an authoritative source on nomadism. Ibid., 122. Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah, trans. Franz Rosenthal (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967), 97-8. W. Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia (Beirut, 1973), 41. This is a reprint of the original copy. Ibid., 67. Ibid., 26. Ibid., 41. Khazanov, 139. Ibn Khaldun, The Muqaddimah, 99. Khazanov, 140. Ibid., 140. Pierre Guichard, ‘Nomadisme et Tribalisme.’ In Etats, Sociétés et Cultures du Monde Musulman Médiéval X-XV siècle, v2, 114 (Paris: Presses Univ. de France, 2000).

162

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

41. Ibid., 118. 42. Patricia Crone, ‘The Tribe and the State,’ In States in History. Ed. John A. Hall, ( Basil Blackwell, 1989), 72. 43. G.E. Grunebaum, ‘The Nature of the Arab Unity Before Islam’, In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Ed. F.E Peters, v3, 8 ( Aldershot: Ashgate, 1999). This is a reprint of the original article. 44. Khazanov, 142. 45. This issue will be discussed in another chapter, ‘ ‘Amila under the Umayyads.’ 46. W. Montgomery Watt, Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition), s.v ‘Badw.’ 47. Khazanov, 135. 48. ‘Adi would refer on numerous occasions to his sentiments towards Judham and Lakhm, they were his ‘fellow tribesmen’ (qawmuna), his closest brothers (ikhwanuna al-adnun). I really do not know why Lammens and Caskel referred to the ‘Amilis as inferiors to the Judhamids. Perhaps it is due to the incident where ‘Adi referred to Ibn Zinba‘ as his Sayyid. He was a Sayyid (tribal chief) to both Judhamids and ‘Amilis. These two tribes formed one big confederation led by Ibn Zinba‘. Thus ‘Adi’s reference is that of a member in this alliance to his tribal chief. (whether he was a Judhamid or ‘Amili). 49. W. Caskel, ‘The Bedouinization of Arabia,’ In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Ed. F. E. Peters, v3, 35 (Ashgate: Aldershot, 1999). A reprint of the original article. 50. Ignaz Goldziher, Muslim Studies, ed. M. Stern (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1967), v1, 22. 51. See ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili, Diwan ‘an Abi al-‘Abbas b. Yahyya Tha‘lab al-Shibani (d. 291 AH) Ed. Nuri al-Qaysi and Hatim al-Damin (Baghdad, 1987), 194. 52. Tapper, 67. 53. Fred Donner, ‘The Role of Nomads in the Near East in Late Antiquity,’ In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Ed. F. E. Peters, vol. 3 (Ashgate: Aldershot, 1999), 24. This a reprint of the original article. 54. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili, Diwan. ed. Hasan Nur al-Din (Beirut, 1990), 42-52; ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan Ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin; Tahsin al-Salah, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili: Hayatuh wa Shi‘ruh (‘Amman, 1999), 100-108. Ibn al-Riqa‘ devoted several of his poems to describing animals and in particular camels, gazelles and horses and their importance to the tribesmen in the desert. 55. Khazanov, 19. 56. Ibid., 20. 57. Ibid., 21. 58. Ibid. 59. Ibid., 22.

NOTES

163

60. See his diwans cited above. 61. This paragraph is based on the studies of Donner, ‘The Role of Nomads’ 22-3; Khazanov, 54-7; H. von Wissman, EI (second edition), s.v ‘Badw.’ 62. For a full study on the history of the camel, see Richard Bulliet, The Camel and the Wheel (New York, 1990). 63. Alois Musil, The Manners and Customs of the Rwala Bedouins. (American Geographical Society, Oriental Explorations and Studies. Nbr 6. New York, 1928), 371. 64. Donner, ‘The Role of Nomads’, 27. 65. In addition to the cited references, the following paragraph is based on the studies of: Joseph Henninger, ‘La Société Bédouine Ancienne,’ In L’Antica Societa Beduina Ed. F. Gabrieli (Centro Di Studi Semitici: Roma, 1959): 69-93; H. Lammens, Le Berceau de L’Islam (Rome, 1914), 327-8; J. Chelhod, Introduction à la sociologie de l’islam (Paris, 1958), 22-64. 66. Yaqut al-Hamawi, al-Muqtadab min Kitab Jamharat al-Nasab. Ed. N. Hasan (Beirut, 1987), 268; W. Caskel, Gamharat an-Nasab: Das Genealogische Werk Des Hisham ibn Muhammad al-Kalbi (Leiden, 1966), 244. 67. Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim b. Sallam, Kitab al-Nasab Ed. Mariam Khayr al-Diri‘ (Beirut, 1989), 313; Hisham b. al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add wal Yaman al-Kabir. Ed. Naji. Hasan (Beirut, 2000), 199. 68. Ibid., 313. 69. Ibn Durayd, al-Ishtiqaq. Ed. A. Harun (Baghdad, 1979), 374; Ibn Sallam, Kitab al-Nasab, 313; Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add ed. N. Hasan, 199-200. 70. Ibn Durayd, al-Ishtiqaq, 374; Caskel, 244. 71. ‘Amila had at least three other poets who will be discussed in a different chapter ‘ ‘Amila under the Umayyads.’ 72. For full information on ‘Adi’s life and literary work, see: Al-Salah, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘; his Diwan ed. Nur al-Din; ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili, Diwan ed. N. al-Qaysi and H. Damin; for less detailed studies see: K. Mardam, ‘ ‘Adi b. alRiqa‘,’ Majma‘ al-Lugha al-‘Arabiyya 15: 245; Muhammad al-Kafrawi, Tarikh al-Shi‘r al-‘Arabi (Cairo, 1961) vol. 1, 104; al-Amin, Khitat Jabal ‘Amil, 55-60; Mustafa al-Shak‘a, Rihlat al-Sh‘ir min al-Umawiyya ila al-‘Abbasiyya (Beirut, 1979), 245. 73. This point shall be elaborated in a different chapter, ‘ ‘Amila under the Umayyads.’ 74. Biebuyck, 510.

Chapter 2. ‘Amila in the Pre-Islamic Period 1. These factors were discussed in a different chapter, ‘On ‘Amila, Jabal ‘Amila and Shi‘ism.’

164 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

2. See, for instance, H. Lammens-Caskel, Encyclopedia of Islam; Rida, ‘Banu ‘Amila,’ 218-24; see also, al-Amin, Khitat, 47-50. 3. As illustrated in a different chapter al-Hurr al-‘Amili was the first one probably to inscribe this theory in his book Amal al-Amil fi ‘Ulama’ Jabal ‘Amil. Ed. A. Husayni (Baghdad, 1385 AH). 4. Daniel David Luckenbill, Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1926) v1, 283. The book contains the complete English version of the historical records of ancient Assyria. 5. Abraham Anspacher, Tiglath Pileser III (New York, 1966), 23. 6. See Israel Eph‘al, The Ancient Arabs: Nomads on the Borders of the Fertile Crescent 9th-5th Centuries BC (Leiden, 1982), 94-5. 7. A. Grohmann, Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition), s.v. ‘al-‘Arab.’ 8. A. Malamat, ‘The Aramaeans,’ in Peoples of Old Testament Times, ed. D. J. Wiseman (Oxford, 1973): 139. On the Aramaean expansion in the Persian Gulf, see M. Dietrich, Die Aramäer Südbabyloniens in der Sargonidenzeit (Neukirchen, 1970). 9. Enno Littman, Syria. Publications of the Princeton University. Archaeological Expeditions to Syria in 1904-5 and 1909. Division IV.C. Safaitic Inscriptions. 10. Kugman, Milon ‘Ibri-‘Arabi (Aman-Beirut, 1970); I owe this hypothesis to Dr. Kamal Salibi and Dr. Tony Nawfal. 11. According to Encyclopedia of Islam the ‘Amaliq were the Amalekites of the Bible. In the Muslim literary tradition this ancient people is connected, in the genealogical table, to either Shem or to Ham. On the other hand, in the mythical pre-Islamic history of Arabia and in the legendary cycle of the Yamanite migrations, they are listed among the first tribes speaking Arabic. On this topic see, Yusuf al-Hurani, al-Majhul wal Muhmal min Tarikh alJanub al-Lubnani (Beirut, 1999); Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century (Washington, 1984), 384; early historians such as al-Tabari, al-Mas‘udi and Ibn Khaldun referred to the ‘Amila /‘Amaliq link. A full interpretation of these accounts will be presented below. 12. Al-Amin, Khitat, 50. 13. ‘Ali b. al-Husayn al-Mas‘udi, Muruj al-Dhahab wa Ma‘adin al-Jawhar. Ed. Charles Pellat (Beirut, 1966) vol. 2, 167. 14. Hisham b. Muhammad al-Kalbi is a major historian of pre-Islamic Arabia and its tribes. He lived in early ‘Abbasid times and was of Shi‘i origins. As a result of his efforts, the history of pre-Islamic Arabia has not entirely vanished. Although the Lakhmids of Iraq and their capital Hira were the ones that attracted Ibn al-Kalbi’s attention, he left some important works on the Arabs of Syria. The information on these Arabs may be found, in part, in later historians who used the lost works of Hisham, both as direct

NOTES

165

students such as Ibn Habib, or indirect ones, such as al-Tabari who relied heavily on him for pre-Islamic history. Mas‘udi and Ibn Khaldun used him extensively and Yaqut summarized Hisham’s book al-Muqtadab min Kitab Jamharat al-Nasab. The intensive study on Hisham’s book Jamharat al-Nasab conducted by W. Caskel is extremely useful to better understand his work. In modern times Nöldeke, Rothstein and Shahid sensed his importance and his reliability in reconstructing their histories of the Arab tribes in pre-Islamic times. Kister describes Caskel’s study on Ibn al-Kalbi’s Jamharat al-Nasab ‘indispensable book for students of Arabic genealogy, history of the Jahiliyya and of early Islam’. Hisham’s value resides in his use of nonoral sources such as excavations, reliance on specialists on biblical and Palmyrene history, Christian asfar and epigraph as represented by the Arabic inscriptions of Hira. On this topic, See F. Rosenthal, A History of Muslim Historiography (Leiden, 1968), A. al-Duri, Bahth fi Nash’at ‘Ilm alTarikh ‘ind al-‘Arab (Beirut, 1960), I. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century (Dumbarton Oaks, 1984), W. Caskel, Gamharat an-Nasab; M. J. Kister and M. Plessner, ‘Notes on Caskel’s Jamharat An-Nasab,’ Oriens 25-26 (1976): 48-68; T. Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought in the Classical Period (Cambridge, 1994). 15. Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari, Tarikh al-Umam wal Muluk (Beirut: Dar alKutub al-’Ilmiya, 1995) vol. 1, 364. Despite Ibn al- Kalbi’s being a reliable source for pre-Islamic periods, it is important to mention that my reconstruction for the ‘Amaliq / ‘Amila connection is based on the available sources which are not necessarily always accurate. The sources are then prone to some fictional elements. Accurate accounts may never be found due to the fact that oral traditions are prone to change after a long period of time (five centuries in Ibn al-Kalbi’s accounts). On the validity of oral traditions see, Elizabeth Tonkin, Narrating Our Pasts: The Social Construction of Oral History (Cambridge, 1992); Jan Vansina, Oral Tradition as History (Wisconsin, 1985). 16. Abu al-Faraj al-Isfahani, Kitab al-Aghani ed. ‘Abd Allah al-‘Alayli and Musa Salama and Ahmad Abu Sa‘d (Beirut: Dar al-Thaqafa, 1973), vol. 15, p 253. 17. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 2, 69; Al-Himyari (d. eighth century AH) wrote on the city of Hims: ‘One of largest cities in al-Sham, it was named after a man from the ‘Amaliq called Hims· and it is heard that a man from ‘Amila is the first one to live in it.’ The presence of ‘Amila in the northern part of Syria was not strange for an eight century geographer. See, Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Mun‘im al-Himyari, al-Rawd al-Mi‘tar fi Khabar al-Aqtar. Ed. I. Abbas (Beirut, 1975) s.v. ‘Hims.’

166

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

18. See M. Piotrovsky, ‘The Arabic Version of Queen Zenobia’s (al-Zabba’) story,’ Palestinskii Sbornik LXXXIV (1970), 170-84; I. Shahid, Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition), s.v. ‘al-Zabba’ ’; Both argued for identifying al-Zabba‘ with Zenobia. One exception was noted however: J. Spencer Trimingham, Christianity among the Arabs in Pre-Islamic Times (London, 1979), 155. He argued that al-Zabba’ and Zenobia are two different persons. To him alZabba’, a local queen, somewhat antedates Zenobia. This version however, is not based on solid evidence, and does not answer why the Arab traditional sources ignored Zenobia. The fact that the traditional sources ignored the existence of Zenobia does not undermine their version of events because epigraphic evidence (discussed below) support some of the Arabic version. 19. Al-Tabari, vol. 1, 365; al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 2, 68; al-Isfahani, vol. 15, 253. 20. Al-Jahiz mentioned him as one of the most famous Arab Abras, see al-Jahiz in al-Bursan wal ‘irjan wal ‘imyan wal hulan. Ed. Muhammad al-Khawli (Cairo-Beirut, 1972), 73. See also, al-Tabari, vol. 1, 360-9; al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 2, 69-73. 21. Al-Tabari, v1, 362. 22. According to Yaqut, Zabba’ built a castle in the city of Khanuqa on the Euphrates in the Jazirah region. See Yaqut al-Hamawi, Mu‘jam al-Buldan ed. Farid al-Jundi (Beirut, 1990) vol. 2, 390. According to al-Bakri, king Zarb, father of Zabba’, helped the Banu Salih, his allies, reside in the region between al-Balqa’ in the south and Hawwarin the north. See ‘Abd Allah al-Bakri al-Andalusi, Mu‘jam ma Ista‘jam. Ed. Mustafa al-Saqqa (Cairo, 1945), vol. 1, 26. 23. Hira was situated on the right bank of the lower Euphrates, bordering the desert zone on the one side and, on the other, some of the most fertile and prosperous lands of Iraq. It remained the capital of the Lakhmids for roughly three centuries. 24. Al-Tabari, vol. 1, 365. 25. Al-Bakri, v1, 23; Ibn Khaldun related a similar account, Ibn Khaldun, ‘Abd al-Rahman (d. 808 AH). Kitab al-‘Ibar, (Beirut, 1966-77), vol. 2, 504. 26. Al-Tabari, vol. 1, 331. 27. Ibid., vol. 1, 392. See also ‘Izz al-Din Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh. Ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Tadmuri (Beirut, 1997) vol. 1, 351. It is important to mention that Quda‘a is often used as a general term to describe a confederation of tribes and in particular the Qahtani southern Yamani tribes such as ‘Amila, Judham, Lakhm. As a matter of fact ‘Amila is usually referred to as ‘Amila Quda‘a. 28. M. Vogue in Syrie Centrale: Architecture civile et religieuse du Ier au 7ème (Paris, 1865-77); E. Littmann, Publications of the Princeton Archaeological Expedition

NOTES

29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

36.

37.

38.

39. 40.

167

to Syria, 1904-05 and 1909. (Leyde, 1914-1941) IV A, no 41. This text is endorsed by modern sholarship, see Maurice Sartre, Trois études sur l’Arabie romaine et byzantine (Bruxelles, 1982), 134-6; see also Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century, 127. B. De Vries, ‘Umm El-Jimal in the First Three Centuries AD,’ in Freeman and Kennedy, The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East, (Oxford, 1986), 237-8. F. Millar, The Roman Near East (Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press, 1993), 433. J. Ryckmans, Le texte Sharafaddin, 44 cited in Sartre, Trois études, 135. See Yaqut, Mu‘jam, vol. 1, 559; al-Tabari, vol. 1, 331. Maurice Sartre, D’Alexandrie à Zénobie (Paris, 2001), 987; De Vries, 238. R. Dussaud, ‘Inscription nabatéo-arabe d’En-Namara,’ Revue Archéologique, (1902): 409-20. Ibid. The translation of this inscription has undergone several versions which reflected differences in interpretation. See for example, W. Caskel, ‘Die Inschrift von en-Nemara-Neu gesehen,’ Mélanges de l’Université SaintJoseph 45 (1969): 367-79. The main difficulty is found in the word (frsw) which could in Arabic means horsemen or Persians. Dussaud and Shahid believe it is horsemen while Caskel, M. Sartre, G. W. Bowersock believe it means Persians. The existence of the trio Jadhima, ‘Adi and Imru’ al-Qays is validated by modern studies. The studies of Nöldeke in ‘Der Araberkönig von Namara,’ Florilegium Melchior de Vogue (Paris, 1909); the publication of E. Hertzel, Paikuli, (Berlin, 1924); the publication of the Coptic Manichaean Papyri, see ‘Ein Mani-Fund aus Agypten,’ in Gnomon, 9 (1933). For a detailed analysis and reconstruction of the events related in the inscription see, I. Shahid BAFOC, 31-52; Their chronology of the events is established by M. Sartre, Trois études, 137. He argues that Jadhima lived under the Persian Shapur I (241-72) as the leader of the pro-Persian troops stationed in Hira, his son ‘Adi replaced the father in AD 273 under the Persian king Varahran. These studies have established strong evidence supporting the Arabic tradition represented by Ibn al-Kalbi. Daniel Schlumberger, La Palmyrène du Nord-Ouest (Paris, 1951), 153. A second English translation of the French version may not reflect the exact meaning, however, the nearest adaptation would be: ‘In memory of the sons of . . .’ Jurken Stark, Personal Names in Palmyrene Inscriptions (Oxford, 1971), 106. Stark’s work presents an elaborate treatment of Semitic names in Palmyrene inscriptions, most of which are honorific or sepulchral and consist mainly of long lists of genealogies. J. Starcky and M. Gawlikowski, Palmyre (Paris, 1985), 31. Ibid., 153.

168

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

41. Ibid., 62. 42. G. Ryckmans, Les Noms Propres Sud-Sémitiques ( Louvain, 1934), vol. 1, 166. 43. Ferdinand Wüstenfeld, Register zu den Genealogischen Tabellen der Arabischen Stämme und Familien (Göttingen, 1853), 62. 44. J. Cantineau, Grammaire du Palmyrénien Épigraphique (Le Caire, 1935), xi. 45. J. Cantineau, Le Nabatéen (Paris, 1932) vol. 2, 132. 46. Muhammad b. Durayd, Ibn Doreid’s Genealogisch-Etymologisches Handbuch. Ed. F. Wüstenfeld (Göttingen, 1854), 98. 47. Ibid. 48. Millar, 430. 49. Richard Stoneman, Palmyra and its Empire (University of Michigan, 1992), 60. 50. Millar, 330. 51. Altheim, F. and R. Stiehl, Die Araber in der alten Welt (Berlin, 1965) II, 256. 52. Gawlikowsky, ‘Les princes de Palmyre,’Syria, 62 (1985): 53-68; Sartre, D’Alexandre à Zénobie, 973; Stoneman, 78. 53. Stoneman, 90; Altheim and Stiehl, 268-9. 54. Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century (Dumbarton Oaks, 1995), vol. 1, 648. 55. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century, 392. 56. Walter Kaegi, Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests (Cambridge, 1992), 55. 57. Fred Donner, The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton, 1981), 95. 58. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century, 472; Aurelian was the emperor who destroyed Palmyra. 59. R. Brunnow and A. Domaszewski, Die Provincia Arabia (Strasburg, 1904-09); R. Brunnow, ‘Die Kastella des Arabischen Limes,’ Florilegium de Vogué (1909): 65-77. 60. A. Musil, Palmyra. American Geographical society and studies, 4. New York, 1928. and The Northern Hijaz (New York, 1927). The term limes is a technical term with many significations and Musil has given only one explanation. 61. A. Poidebard, La Trace de Rome dans le desert de Syrie (Paris, 1934). 62. G. W. Bowersock, ‘Limes Arabicus.’ Harvard Studies in Classical Philosophy, 80 (1976): 219-29. 63. I. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century, 478. 64. Philip Mayerson, ‘The Saracens and the Limes,’ Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 262 (1986): 35-47. 65. Ibid., 39.

NOTES

169

66. J. Trimingham, 159. 67. Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part 1, 430-1. Shahid gives an elaborate description of the Arab federates’ military organization; see also Trimingham, 122-3. 68. See Mauricius, Strate¯gikon: Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy. Trans. George T. Dennis. Philadelphia, 1984. 69. W. E. Kaegi, Some Thoughts on Byzantine Military Strategy. Ball State University Hellenic Studies Lecture (Brookline, 1983), 6. 70. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth century, I, part 1, 579. 71. Michael the Syrian, Chronique de Michel le Syrien, Patriarche Jacobite d’Antioche 1166-1199. Ed and Tr. J-B. Chabot (Paris, 1901) II, 269. 72. See for instance al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, v2, 82. For additional references see Kindermann, EI, s.v. ‘Tanukh,’ 229. 73. Caussin de Perceval remains till the present day one of the most important authorities on Tanukh, see his Essai. Shahid’s work Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century is a good source on the Tanukh. 74. See al-Baladhuri, Futuh, 118-25, al-Tabari, v2, 331-80. 75. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century, 384-5. 76. Ibid., 386. 77. Al-Ya‘qubi, Ahmad b. Abi Ya‘qub, Tarikh al-Ya‘qubi (Beirut, 1992) ,v1, 206. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 2, 82 related a similar story. 78. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 1, 206. 79. Khazanov, 21. This point was discussed in the first chapter. 80. Yaqut describes Hisma as the Land of Judham. See Yaqut, Mu‘jam al-Buldan, vol. 2, 298. 81. Al-Bakri, vol. 1, 26; Ibn Khaldun, vol. 2. 82. Narration of the raids launched by pagan Arab nomads in the fifth century did survive in a few Greek works. The Narrationes, in which the fortunes of Nilus and his son Theodulus with the nomads are described in their journey in Mount Sinai. This is cited in Irfan Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fifth Century, (Dumbarton Oaks, 1989), 134-9. 83. Shahid, 59- 113. The reign of Leo in the fifth century exemplifies the need for Arab federates due to the shortage of troops in the Orient. 84. For a detailed history of the Salihids in the fifth century, see Ibid., 242-71; Irfan Kawar (Shahid), ‘The Last days of Salih’ Arabica 5, 1958; the defeat of the Banu Salih and their replacement by the Ghassanids is narrated in alYa‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 1, 204-7. 85. See Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth century, I, part 1. 86. A.H.M. Jones, Late Roman Empire, I, 678. 87. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part1, 430.

170

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

88. Ibid., 431. 89. See on this point al-Mufaddal al-Dabbi, Kitab al-Amthal, 65; See Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh Madinat Dimashq. Ed. Muhib al-Din al-‘Amrawi, (Beirut, 1995) vol.56, 457; vol. 72, 292-4. He relates the same story adding that both brothers were poets. 90. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 193. 91. See EI (second edition), s.v ‘ ‘Amr b. Hind.’ 92. See, Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh, vol. 1, 488. 93. Mark Wittow, The Making of Orthodox Byzantium 600-1025 (London, 1996), 51. 94. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part 1, 396. 95. Michael the Syrian, II, 350-1. 96. Theodor Nöldeke, The Princes of Ghassan From the House of Gafna. Tr. Bandali Jouze and Costi K. Zurayq (Beirut: Catholic Press, 1933), 33-5. 97. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part 1, 543. 98. V. Langlois, Chronique de Michel le Grand. Venice, 1869, 213. 99. On this point, see Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth century, I, part 1, 544. 100. Nöldeke, 34. 101. Shahid based his argumentation after consultation with Father Michel van Esbroek who went through occurences of Kemir in the Armenian version which turnes out to be Himyar and not Cappadocia. See Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part 1, 546. 102. Ibid., footnote 57, 547. 103. Khazanov, 21-2. 104. Nöldeke, 34. 105. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part 1, 547. 106. Ibn Khaldun reports that ‘the Ghassanid king al-Ayham b. Jabala tried to instigate dissension among the tribes until they fought each other. The Banu ‘Amila and Banu Jisr suffered from his schemes.’ The period is not well documented and modern historiograpahy does not recognize a Ghassanid king by the name of al-Ayham. But the last Ghassanid king Jabala is the son of a certain al-Ayham. It is not unrealistic to claim that during the Persian invasion some clans of Ghassan could have elected alAyham as their tribal chief and that many of the other tribes suffered dissension as a result of the disappearance of the Ghassanid kingdom. 107. Theophylact Simocatta, The History of Theophylact Simocatta. Tr. Michael and Mary Whitby (Oxford, 1986). The author refers to Salihids and Hujr as Arab federates who participated in the campaign of Philillicus in 586 against the Persians.

NOTES

171

108. Trimingham, 123. 109. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part 1, 563. Enough evidence about this new Ghassanid ‘kingdom’is found in Jahili poetry of al-Nabigha al-Dhubyani and Hassan b. Thabit; see for instance, his Diwan, ed. Y. Eid (Beirut, 1992), 290-4 and 412-13; His Diwan is essential for any serious study on the Ghassanids. 100. Nöldeke, 46. 111. A. A. Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire (Wisconsin, 1952), 195. 112. Little is recorded in Byzantine sources on the Arab tribes during Persian occupation, except for a small note from Michael the Syrian mentioning that beduins from Arabia raided Syria pillaging and burning numerous places and killing people. See Michael the Syrian, II, 391, 401. There is no means to know who these beduins were? On the Conditions of the Christians and Jews under Persian occupation, see Michael Morony, ‘Syria Under the Persians,’ In Proceedings of the Second Symposium on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the Early Islamic Period,’ ed. M. Bakhit, 87-95. 113. ‘Ali b. Ahmad b. Hazm, Jamharat Ansab al-‘Arab. Ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Harun (Cairo, 1962), 419-20; Ibn al-Athir, al-Lubab fi Tahdhib al-Ansab (Beirut, 1980), vol. 2, 307. ‘Amila like other tribes has no accurate genealogy. I used the most widely circulated and most accepted version by historians. The exact genealogy is impossible to trace. The elaboration of the genealogical scheme of the Arab tribes falls mainly within the first Hijra century and is probably connected with the system of registers introduced by the Caliph ‘Umar for the control of the pensions and pay distributed among the believers from the spoils of the infidel. The pension system afforded a direct stimulus to genealogical research and also, it must be added, to genealogical fiction. Every ambitious chief therefore was anxious to include as wide a kinship as possible among his dependents and allies, while a weak group found it advantageous to discover some bond of connection with a stronger neighbour. On this topic see, W. Robertson Smith, Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia and I. Goldziher, Muslim Studies. 114. Ahmad b. ‘Ali al-Qalqashandi, Subh al-A‘sha fi Sina‘t al-Insha. Ed. Muhammad Husayn Shams al-Din (Beirut, 1987), vol. 1, 370-89; Ibn Khaldun, Kitab al-‘Ibar, vol. 2, 524-37. 115. Several sources were investigated in order to find the highest number of clans of Banu ‘Amila in the early Islamic and Umayyad periods. Ibn al-Kalbi’s Jamharat al-Nasab as edited by Caskel is the major reference; however others were consulted such as Muhammad b. Durayd, al-Ishtiqaq. Ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Harun; Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, al-‘Inbah ‘ala Qaba’il al-Ruwat. Ed.I.

172

116. 117.

118.

119.

120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126.

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

al-Abyari (Beirut, 1985); Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim b. Sallam, Kitab al-Nasab. Ed. M. al-Diri‘; al-Mufaddal al-Dabbi, Kitab al-Amthal; ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan. Ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin; Muhammad b. Habib, Mukhtalaf al-Qaba’il wa Mu’talafuha Ed. F. Wüstenfeld (Gottingen, 1850); Yaqut, al-Muqtadab. Ed. Naji Hasan; Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add wa al-Yaman alKabir. Ed. N. Hasan. This last book is considered to be the second volume of Jamharat al-Nasab and was found in a unique manuscript in Spain’s Escurial Library. It focuses mainly on the Qahtanids and the Yamani tribes. However, some differences were noted between Caskel’s, Yaqut’s and Naji’s works. In Caskel’s the Banu Mawhaba had an alternative name al-Rajjaz, in Yaqut, the alternative is al-Zajjan, in Naji the alternative is al-Wahhan. These mistakes could be attributed to the transcribers, but the genealogical tree of ‘Amila’s clans is not subject to controversy. The major clans are well documented. Al-Ra‘i al-Numayri, Diwan, ed. Muhammad Tarifi (Beirut, 2000), 101. See H. Lammens, Yazid I, 28. He argued for a multitude of common interests: ‘Ce n’était pas la moins bonnes des guaranties généalogiques: la similitude d’intérêts et d’aspirations. S’unir dans la poursuite d’un même but, partager le même ideal, les Banu ‘Amila formaient une sous-division de Godam.’ See also Isaac Hasson, ‘Judham entre la Jahiliyya et l’Islam,’ Studia Islamica 81(1995), 5-42. Yaqut, al-Muqtadab, 268; Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add ed. N. Hasan, I, 198. The ‘Amila-Kalb alliance will be discussed in depth in another chapter ‘ ‘Amila under the Umayyads.’ For an in-depth analysis of the rivalry between Rawh and Natil see I. Hasson, ‘Le Chef Judhamite Rawh b. Zinba‘.’ Studia Islamica 77 (1993): 95-122; for a fuller discussion of the issues of tribal identities see, Agha and Khalidi, ‘Poetry and Identity in the Umayyad Age’, Al-Abhath 50-5 (2002-3): 55-119. Al-Isfahani, vol. 9, 308. Mus‘ab al-Zubayri, Kitab Nasab Quraysh. Ed. E. Levi-Provencal (Cairo, 1953), 9. As previously explained in a separate note in this chapter. Pierre Guichard, ‘Nomadisme et Tribalisme,’ 114 . al-Azdi, Futuh al-Sham, 150. Al-Jahiz, Kitab al-Hayawan ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Harun (Cairo, 1938-45) vol. 7, 216. Hisham b. Muhammad al-Kalbi, Kitab al-Asnam. Ed. Wahib ‘Atallah (Paris, 1969), 32, 40; ‘Umar Rida Kahhala, Mu‘jam Qaba’il al-‘Arab (Beirut, 1968), vol. 2, 714. The pilgrimage, according to Ibn al-Kalbi, consisted

NOTES

173

of visiting the deity, shaving their heads and throwing their hair mixed with flour as alms. It is interesting to note that the name of the deity, alUqaysir, means little Caesar. The Roman origin of the name might reflect the strong bond between these tribes and the Byzantines. 127. On the pre-Islamic beliefs, see M. J. Kister, ‘Labbayka, Allahumma, Labbayka: On a monotheistic aspect of a Jahiliyya practice,’ Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 2 (1980): 33-49; See the various forms of the pre-Islamic talbiyat in al-Ya‘qubi’s Tarikh, 254-7; Muhammad b. Habib (d. 145 AH), al-Muhabbar. Ed. I. Lichtenstaedter (Hyderabad, 1942), 311-15; Muqatil b. Sulayman (d. 150 AH), Tafsir cited in Kister’s article; for beliefs of Judham, see Isaac Hasson, ‘Judham entre . . .’

Chapter 3. The Role of ‘Amila During the Islamic Conquests 1. It is worth mentioning that this pattern was repeated in other conquests of other regions, i.e. the help provided by local militias in Khurasan and Spain. 2. William Muir, The Caliphate: Its Rise, Decline, and Fall (London, 2000). 3. Leone Caetani, Studi di Storia Orientale (Roma, 1914) 1, 369-71. 4. Henri Lammens, le Berceau de l’Islam. L’Arabie occidentale à la veille de l’Hégire (Milano, 1911-14). 5. Carl Becker, ‘The expansion of the Saracens,’ in Cambridge Medieval History. Ed. H. M. Gwatkin, 1967. 6. G. H. Bousquet. ‘Obsérvations sur la nature et les causes de la conquête Arabe,’ Studia Islamica 6 (1956), 37-52. 7. Marius Canard, ‘L’éxpansion arabe: le problème militaire,’ L’occidente e l’Islam nell’Alto Medioevo, 12 (1965): 37-63. 8. Francesco Gabrieli, Muhammad and the Conquests of Islam Trans. V. Luling and R. Linell (London: Weinfeld and Nicholson, 1968). 9. M. A, Shaban, Islamic History, A.D. 600-750: A New Interpretation (Cambridge, 1987), 24-5. 10. M.J. De Goeje, Mémoire sur la conquête de la Syrie (Brill: Leyden, 1900), 30. 11. Fred Donner, The Early Islamic Conquests (Princeton, 1981), 98-9. 12. Ibid., 100. 13. Philip Mayerson, ‘The First Muslim Attacks on Southern Palestine,’ Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, XCV (1964): 165. 14. Donner, 102. 15. Ibid., 118. 16. Ibid., 147.

174

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

17. Ibid., 148. 18. He furthermore defines ‘Amila as a pro-Byzantine tribe at Yarmuk and this is probably false. 19. One of the few studies devoted to the role of Arab Syrians during the conquests is Muhammad Khuraysat, ‘Dawr al-‘Arab al-Mutanassira fil Futuhat.’ In the Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the early Islamic Period up to 40 A.H/ 640 A.D. Ed. Muhammad Bakhit and Ihsan ‘Abbas, v2, 135-164 (‘Amman, 1987). Khuraysat’s article failed to address the issue of how important the role of the Arab Syrians was during the conquests. The author has adopted the traditional Muslim view by which the Muslims would have won over the Byzantines with or without external help. The article suffers from serious anachronisms. For example, the author citing a fourth hijra century source, al-Hamadani, mentions that the home of ‘Amila during the conquests is nowadays Jabal ‘Amil, a typical misinterpretation used by the author on several occasions in his article. See also ‘Abd al-Mun‘im Majid, ‘Mawqif al-Rum al-‘Arab min al-Islam.’ In the Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Early Islamic Period up to 40 A.H/ 640 A.D. Ed. Muhammad Bakhit, v3, 177-94 (Jordan, 1987); See also Muhammad Disuqi, Al-Qaba’il al-‘Arabiyya fi Bilad al-Sham, (Cairo, 1998). 20. Donner, 269. 21. Walter Kaegi, Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests (Cambridge, 1997), 66-87. 22. Ibid., 271-2. 23. Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part 1, 582. 24. Hugh Kennedy, The Armies of the Caliphs: Military and Society in the Early Islamic State (London and New York, 2001), 2. 25. On a detailed history of the involvement of the Ghassanids with the Byzantines under Heraclius see Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I, part , 636-44. 26. Nöldeke, 46-7. Jahili poetry is quite informative on this topic. See for instance, Hassan b. Thabit, Diwan ed. Walid ‘Arafat (London, 1971); al-Nabighah al-Dhubyani, Diwan ed. I. Hawi (Beirut, 1970). 27. All the futuh literature mention this fact; see for instance, al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-Buldan, 71; Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi, Kitab al-Futuh. Ed. Muhammad ‘Abd al-Mu‘id Khan (Hyderabad, 1968). 28. Muhammad b. ‘Umar al-Waqidi, Kitab al-Maghazi. Ed. J. Marsden Jones (London, 1966), vol. 3, 1030-2. 29. Most of the Arabic primary sources refer to this alliance. See, for instance, al-Baladhuri, Futuh, 140; Al-Tabari, vol. 2, 343. 30. Kaegi, 52.

NOTES

175

31. Ibid., 40. 32. Greek and Syrian sources are even more ambiguous, since they deal with the Arabs in general terms, and refer to them as Arabes, Ishmaelitae, Hagarenoi, Barbaroi, Tayyaye or Saracenoi. The term barbaroi was applied as a synonymous word for Arabs confined to certain regions: the area stretching from Sinai till about Elusa, South of Egypt (where the Arab tribes were often confused with other nomadic people) and the nomad Arabs in and around Mesopotamia. Those who were in the service of Byzantium were not called barbaroi because of their alliance with the Empire and because they were Christianized; they were in general referred to as Christian Saracens. On this topic, see V. Christides, ‘Arabs as Barbaroi before the rise of Islam,’ Balkan Studies 10 (1969): 315-24. On the Term Saracenoi / Saraceni see Irfan Shahid, Rome and the Arabs: A Prolegomenon to The Study of Byzantium and the Arabs, (Dumbarton Oaks, 1984), 123-41, see also the valuable article on this topic by David F. Graf and M. O’Connor, ‘The Origin of the Term Saracen and the Rawwafa Inscriptions,’ Byzantine Studies, 4 (1977): 52-66. 33. For the details of this battle see Kaegi, Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests; Donner, Early Islamic Conquests; I. ‘Abbas, Tarikh Bilad al-Sham 600-661, (‘Amman, 1990); See also, al-Baladhuri’s futuh, al-Tabari, Ibn alA‘tham’s Kitab al-Futuh. 34. According to Yaqut, Mu’ta was an important centre for blacksmithing. This reference might be of considerable importance in the quest to find motives for the Muslim penetration to southern Palestine. The capture of Mu’ta might be interpreted as a means to acquire arms they needed. 35. Kaegi, Byzantium and Early Islamic Conquests, 73. 36. Theophanes, the Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor. Tr R. Scott and C. Mango (Oxford, 1996), 466. 37. See, Nöldeke, 79; Muhammad Khuraysat, ‘Dawr Ghassan fil Hayat al-‘Amma,’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit (‘Amman, 1987), vol 1, 191-217. 38. Ibn al-Kalbi, Jamharat al-Ansab. Ed. N. Hasan, 198-200; Ibn Durayd, Al-Ishtiqaq, 374; Ibn Hazm, Jamharat Ansab al-‘Arab; The Kalb -‘Amila alliance will be discussed in the next chapter ‘‘Amila under the Umayyads.’ 39. Al-Isfahani, vol. 17, 278. 40. Al-Waqidi, Kitab al-Maghazi, vol. 2, 763-4. 41. Theophanes, the Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor, 466. 42. De Goeje, La conquête de la Syrie, 7; J. Wellhausen, Reste Arabischen Heidentums, Gesammelt Und Erlautert, (Berlin, 1897), 62. 43. Yaqut, Mu‘jam, vol. 5, 255. 44. Ahmad b. Yahya al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf. Ed. I. ‘Abbas, V, 338 (Beirut, 1996).

176 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51.

52. 53. 54. 55. 56.

57.

58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63.

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Al-Baladhuri, Futuh, 71. Ibid., 70-1. Mayerson, ‘The First Muslim Attacks,’ 198. Theophanes 465-6; Kaegi, Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests, 33-9; Mayerson, ‘The First Muslim Attacks,’ 198. Theophanes, 466. Mayerson, ‘The First Muslim Attacks,’ 199. The importance of blood ties and cultural affinity is shown in several accounts of conquests. See, for example, Muhammad b. ‘Umar al-Waqidi, Futuh al-Sham. Ed. A. ‘Abd al-Rahman (Beirut, 1997), 156-60. Mayerson, ‘The First Muslim Attacks,’ 192. Al-Azdi, 150. His account is based on a Byzantine source. Al-Azdi specifies his name as Jurja who turned Muslim. Khuraysat, ‘Dawr al-‘Arab al-Mutanassira fil Futuhat,’ 135-64. Persian elite troops commanded by one of the Persian king’s senior commanders known to the Arab sources as Siyah al-Uswari. H. Kennedy, The Armies of the Caliphs, 5. For further details on this topic see, M. Morony, Iraq after the Muslim Conquest (Princeton, 1984); I. Hasson, ‘Les Muwali dans l’armée musulmane sous les premiers Umayyades,’ Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 14 (1991): 176-213, 185-91; K. Athamina, ‘NonArab Regiments and Private Militias during the Umayyad Period,’ Arabica, 40 (1998): 347-75. Al-Waqidi’s Futuh are of later origin and their ascription to al-Waqidi is probably false. See Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition) s.v. ‘al-Waqidi.’ The content of al-Waqidi’s futuh are widely circulated among historians, regardless of the original writer, and I consistently used his name rather than using a pseudo-Waqidi term. The account of al-Waqidi, due to its late origin (possible Mamluki), confirms the point I will try to illustrate below: the late ‘Abbasid historians purposefully neglected the role of the Arab Syrians in the conquests because of their strong links with the Umayyad dynasty. Al-Waqidi, Futuh 156-60. Ibid., 198. See pages 190-8, al-Waqidi describes the battle of Yarmuk where we find ‘Amila fighting on both sides. Ibid., 208. M. J. de Goeje, Mémoire sur le Foutouh Sham attribué à Abou Ismail al-Baçri, in Mémoire d’histoire et de Geographie orientales, n. 2 (Leiden, 1864). See Laurence I. Conrad, ‘Al-Azdi’s History of the Arab Conquests In Bilad al-Sham: Some Historical Observations,’ in Proceedings of the Second Symposium on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the Early Islamic Period up to 40 AH/640 AD, ed. Muhammad Bakhit (‘Amman, 1987), I: 28-62.

NOTES

64. 65.

66.

67. 68.

69. 70.

71. 72. 73. 74. 75.

177

Conrad has shown al-Azdi was Syrian from Hims and that he died late in the second century AH and that his text is a Syrian account of the conquests of Syria; see Suleiman Mourad, ‘On Early Historiography: Abu Isma‘il alAzdi and his Futuh al-Sham,’ Journal of the American Oriental Society, 120: 4 (2000), 577-93. Mourad confirms that al-Azdi’s text is authentic and is a late second century AH compilation based on a work having the same title by Abu Mikhnaf al-Azdi (d. 157/774). He argues that al-Azdi’s account represents an early narration of the conquest of Syria that implies no direct religious or political biases; see W. Kaegi who relied extensively on al-Azdi in building his argumentation, in Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests; see T. Khalidi who believed in the validity of Azdi’s history, Arabic Historical Thought in the Classical Period. Al-Azdi, Futuh al-Sham, 97. Few sources have mentioned ‘Amila’s conversion to Islam. Moreover these sources tend to be brief and vague. See Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Muntazam fi Tarikh alMuluk wal-Umam. Ed. M. A. ‘Ata (Beirut, 1992), v3, 382. He mentioned that in the year 10 AH a delegation of ‘Amila and Ghassan came to the Prophet in Ramadan. ‘qadima wafd Ghassan wa wafd ‘Amila kilahuma fi Ramadan.’ Al-Haytami, Mablagh al-Arab fi Fakhr al-‘Arab. He mentioned a meeting between the Prophet and ‘Amila in ‘Abir and a Prophet’s hadith: faith belongs to Lakhm, Judham and ‘Amila. ‘wal Iman ila Lakhm wa Judham wa ‘Amila.’ Shahid demonstrated how the Arab federates after so many years in association with the Byzantines became experts in fighting in the Roman method with a disciplined army. Their expertise even included, by the end of the sixth century AD, the necessary knowledge for siegecraft. The siege of Bostra by the Ghassanids is the strongest evidence at this. See Shahid, Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century, I. Part 1, 470-1. Al-Azdi, 114. It would be worth mentioning that it was notably in the interest of the Arab Syrian tribes, under the ‘Abbasids, to highlight their important roles in the outcome of the early campaigns. Ibid., 195 Al-Baladhuri established Tabuk as a city in Bilad al-Sham. This is an important note because as a part of Bilad al-Sham, this city should have been under the protection of the Arab Syrian tribes. Al-Baladhuri, Kitab al-Futuh, 71. Ibid., 122. Ibid., 140. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, 147. Although ‘Amila was not mentioned in the text, it is most certain to assume its existence alongside its sister tribes. Arab chronicles tended to include

178

76.

77.

78. 79.

80. 81. 82. 83.

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

them together. Sometimes they neglect to mention one of them, but in general any mention of two together means that the third one is also included. Some historians have provided us with an explanation of ‘Umar’s unfair treatment towards the Arab Syrians. ‘Umar as a young man was caught by the Judhamids while smuggling at the northern borders of Hijaz. It seems his negative attitude towards them grew after this incident. See, al-Mawardi, A‘lam al-Nubuwa, 137; ‘Izz al-Din Ibn al-Athir, Usd al-Ghaba fi Ma‘rifat alSahaba. ed. Muhammad al-Banna (Cairo, 1285 AH), vol. 1, 551. ‘Umar imposed on these tribes the double amount of sadaqa because they refused to convert to Islam. But since they were Arabs and ‘Umar was keen not to lose them to the Byzantines, as did the Ghassanid King Jafna, he resorted to this creative solution. See al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, 142, 147. Al-Tabari, vol. 2, 427-8. This poetry is a typical example of a late poetical insertion which marks a khabar as fiction. The poet is unknown, its period unknown. A different version of these verses is found in Abu al-Fida b. al-Hafiz b. Kathir, al-Bidaya wa al Nihaya (Beirut, 1966), 15. He attributes them to ‘Amr b. al-‘As, a man known probably for his political shrewdness but not his poetic talents. On this topic See, Franz Rosenthal, A History of Muslim Historiography (Leiden, 1968), 186-93. Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi, 144. Al-Baladhuri, Kitab al-Futuh, 155; al-Azdi, 37. Al-Waqidi, Maghazi, I, 395; III, 989. Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali al-Mas‘udi, al-Tanbih wal Ishraf Ed. M.J. De Goeje (Leiden: Brill, 1893), 248. See also on the role of the Nabateans Saleh K. Hamarneh, ‘The Role of the Nabateans in the Islamic Conquests,’ Hamdard Islamicus, 5 (1982): 21-8. It is worth mentioning that al-Nabat or al-Anbat appear to be Aramaic speaking ‘soil tillers’ and ‘hired workers,’ not the descendants of the Nabateans of Petra; on this topic see, EI (new ed.), s.v. ‘Nabat.’

Chapter 4. ‘Amila Under the Umayyads 1. Kennedy, The Armies of the Caliphs, 18. 2. Al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-Buldan, 135; Al-Baladhuri recorded several stories on the trade conducted by Abu Sufyan and Mu‘awiya with Bilad al-Sham. See Ansab al-Ashraf, Ed. I. ‘Abbas (Beirut, 1979) 4/1, 11. 3. Kennedy, The Armies of the Caliphs, 18. 4. Shaban, Islamic History, 74. 5. Agha and Khalidi, ‘Poetry and Identity in the Umayyad Age,’ 70.

NOTES

179

6. On this point see, ‘Abd al-Amir Dixon, The Umayyad Caliphate 65-86 AH/ 684-705 AD (London, 1971), 85. 7. Al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-Buldan, 133. 8. Ibid., 124, 133. He cited the Persians and Jews as newly settled communities. 9. Ibid., 182. He mentioned in particular the tribes of Tamim, Qays, Asad and Rabi‘a. 10. The division between Yaman and Qays was not as simple and manichaean as it seems to be. The Yaman included in their ranks some Qaysites and vice-versa. On the different interpretations of the Yamani-Qaysi schism, see M. A. Shaban, Islamic History who argued that Qays and Yaman were more like political parties than tribes. Qays being the group who supported the policies of expansionism and the exclusion of non-Arabs from positions of influence. Yaman were those who opposed them and supported a policy of stopping the expansion and of integrating non Arabs into the Muslim state. This argument was criticized by G. R. Hawting, The First Dynasty of Islam, the Umayyad Caliphate AD 661-750, (London and New York, 2000), 72-90; and R. Eisener, Zwischen Faktum und Fiktion. Eine Studie zum Umayyadenkalifen Sulaiman b. ‘Abd-almalik und seinem bild in den Quellen (Wiesbaden, 1987); and lately this argument was undermined by Patricia Crone, ‘Were the Qays and Yemen of the Umayyad Period Political Parties?’ Der Islam 71 (1994): 1-57: see also, Patricia Crone, Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity (Cambridge, 1980). A balanced interpretation on the origins of the schism between the two rival groups was offered by Hugh Kennedy, ‘The Origins of the Qays-Yaman Dispute in Bilad al-Sham.’ In the IVth international Conference on Bilad al-Sham up to the 40 AH/640 AD. Ed. M. A. Bakhit (‘Amman, 1987) v1, 168-74. He argued that the tribes who formed the Yaman group were all established in the provinces of al-Urdunn and Filastin and these tribal groups had been in the area before the Muslim conquests, unlike the Qays who served Mu‘awiya and had moved just after the conquests into the Jazira and the north of Bilad al-Sham. Kennedy argues furthermore that these Yamanis had served as allies of the Byzantines and many of them had been converted to Christianity before the conquests. This argument was previously endorsed by Dixon who argued that the development of the tribal feuds in the Umayyad period seems to be due to economic and social factors and goes back to the time of the conquests and the settlement of Arab tribes in the conquered land. The prior presence of the Yamanis and their numerical strength in addition to their previous contacts with the Byzantine empire that had raised their economic standards of living probably provided them with a sense of cultural and economic superiority over the newly settled Arabs. Dixon, The Umayyad Caliphate, 84.

180 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

11. On the political and personal skills used by Mu‘awiya with the tribes, see al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf, Ed. I. ‘Abbas, IV/ I, 13-136. 12. Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi, Kitab al-Futuh, vol. 3, 221. The author emphasizes the importance of liquid assets to Ahl al-Sham who did not own any lands due to the fact they were still semi-nomads. (Laysa lana diya‘ wala qura, innama nahnu ashab ibil wa ghanam fa nurid minka al-furud wal qata’i‘ wal ‘iqarat). 13. This point was discussed in a previous chapter, ‘ ‘Amila in the Pre-Islamic Period.’ 14. Al-Salah, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili, 129. 15. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, Ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 175-6. 16. Maysun, daughter of the Kalb chief Bahdal b. Unayf, was mother of the caliph Yazid. She took a great interest in the education of her son Yazid and accompanied him to the desert of the Kalb where the prince passed a part of his youth; this temporary separation from her husband gave rise to the legend of her repudiation by Mu‘awiya. She must have died before Yazid became Caliph. EI (second edition) s.v ‘Maysun’; See also Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh Madinat Dimashq, ed. ‘Umar al-‘Amrawi (Beirut, 1995) vol. 7, 130-4. 17. On the tribe Kalb and its influence in the Umayyad state, see A. A. Dixon, EI (second Edition), s.v ‘Kalb b. Wabra’; H. Lammens, Études sur le règne du Calife Omaiyad Mo‘awiya I, (Beirut, 1908), 50, 286-93, 309-12, 324-6, 418; Jawad ‘Ali, al-Mufassal fi Tarikh al-‘Arab Qabl al-Islam (Beirut and Baghdad); J. Wellhausen, The Arab Kingdom and its Fall (Calcutta, 1927). 18. Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih al-Andalusi, Kitab al-‘Iqd al-Farid, Ed. I. Al-Abyari (Beirut, n.d), vol. 3, 406; Ibn Hazm, Jamharat, Ed. A. Harun, 419-20. 19. Ibn Durayd, al-Ishtiqaq, Ed. A. Harun, 374. 20. Hisham b. al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add, ed. N. Hasan, vol. 1, 198-200. 21. By simple calculations we can estimate, with some margin of error, the epoch of Abu ‘Azm: AD 650 – (6 × 30) equals c. AD 470. 22. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan. Ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 194. 23. See EI (second edition), s.v ‘Imru’ al-Qays b. Hujr;’ Ibn Qutayba, al-Shi‘r wa al-Shu‘ara’, vol. 1, 215. 24. Zuhayr b. Janab al-Kalbi, Diwan, Ed. M. S. Bitar (Beirut, 1999), 62, 98. 25. See for instance, al-Isfahani, v18, 301-14; Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 19, 99-108; Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil, v1; Zuhayr b. Janab, Diwan, 29. It is estimated by the editor that this battle occurred in the mid sixth century AD. 26. Al-Qalqashandi, Subh al-A‘sha. Ed. Shams al-Din, vol. 1, 362. 27. Al-Isfahani, al-Aghani, v17, 278; Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh vol. 40, 66-99. Perhaps the ‘Amila-Kalb raid against Banu Tay’ in the pre-Islamic period pushed ‘Adi b. Hatim to support ‘Ali against Mu‘awiya and his ‘Amili supporters. 28. See ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan. Ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 57.

NOTES

181

29. Ibn Durayd, Al-Ishtiqaq, ed. Harun, 374; Ibn Hazm, 419-20; Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add ed. N. Hasan. 198-200. 30. On the territorial expansion of the Judhamids, see I. Hasson ‘Judham entre la Jahiliyya et l’Islam.’ Studia Islamica 81 (1995): 5-42. 31. See for instance, Yazid b. Mu‘awiya, Diwan, ed. W. al-Samad (Beirut, 1998); Al-Walid b. Yazid, Diwan, ed. H. ‘Atwan (Beirut, 1998). 32. Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add, Ed. N. Hasan, 200. 33. Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 17, 314; Ibn ‘Asakir reports that Duwayd was imprisoned by the Lakhmid king because of a financial dispute but the poet pleaded his innocence in poetry. 34. See Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 72, 292-4. 35. Yaqut, for instance, used the poetry of ‘Adi to locate 60 villages, towns and districts in Bilad al-Sham. See in Mu‘jam al-Buldan the following: Uthayda, al-Ahass, Irash, Dhat al-Aranib, al-Urdunn, al-Azariq, Usays, A‘amiq, al-Aqa‘is, al-Alalaha, al-Umayshit, Jasim, Jush, Jayhan, al-Hatha, al-Husaydat, al-Hila’a, Hawr, al-Hawa, Khala, Khunasira, Dar al-Maqta‘, Duluk, al-Dhu’ayib, Zujaij, Zahman, Sab‘an, Subay‘, al-Samawa, Shabik, alShubayka, Surkh, Tuwana, ‘Ajb, ‘Azam, ‘Ifra, Ghaba’, Ghurab, Ghurayfa, Ghamr, Filastin, al-Qutud, al-Qunayniyat, Kamam, KahAtan, al-Lahala, al-Mazahir, Mutayta, Maqad, Mukaymin, al-Mala, al-Manazir, al-Muwayqi‘, al-Muhazzam, al-Na‘im, al-Hudum, al-Hazim, al-Yatima. 36. Ya‘qub b. Sufyan al-Fasawi, Kitab al-Ma‘rifa wal Tarikh. Ed. Akram al‘Umari (Baghdad, 1974) v1, 354; the story is also related by Ahmad b. ‘Ali al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tarikh Baghdad aw Madinat al-Salam (Beirut, n.d) vol. 10, 390. 37. Yaqut, Mu‘jam al-Buldan, vol. 2, 78. 38. Ibid. 389. 39. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan. Ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 99-100. 40. Qutud and Gharb are mountains in the Banu Kalb region, according to Yaqut. Sahsahan, according to al-Bakri, Mu‘jam ma Ista‘jam, is a valley on the Sham road to Medina. These regions are not well indicated on the map. But it could be postulated that they are near the Ma’ab town on the Hajj road. This, again, is a clear indication of the good relations of the ‘Amila tribe with the Kalbites. The former used to live on the lands of the latter. 41. According to Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-‘Arab v3, 295: Halla means to stay in a place and it is the antonym of the verb to move (Halla bil makan wa dhalika nuzul al-Qawm bi mahalla wa huwa naqid al-Irtihal). 42. According to Khazanov: ‘a main feature of the nomadic community consists in its distinctive vertical structure. From the point of view of production, a single community comprises a small group (15-20 people) of independent

182

43.

44. 45. 46. 47. 48.

49.

50. 51.

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

households which move together all year round or for part of the year, which may jointly pasture livestock, and which, to a very great extent, are linked by other ties of mutual aid, and sometimes even of mutual responsibilities and for mutual defence,’ 132. Al-Ra‘i al-Numayri, Diwan. Ed. M. Tarifi (Beirut, 2000), 102; Baysan, identified as Beisan or Beth shean and classical Scythopolis, is situated on the west bank of the river Jordan south of the Lake Tabariyya. It is one of the most productive areas in Filastin. According to K. Salibi, the depression of Tabariyya was the nerve centre of Syria around which a complex network of coastal and inland routes were focused. It was the point which was most vulnerable to outside pressures and influences and whose security was indispensable to the security of the whole. See, Kamal Salibi, Syria Under Islam (New York, 1977), 8. The settlement of the ‘Amilis could not have been accidental in this area. Their importance to the Umayyad caliphate could be reflected in their settlement in this particular strategic area. Al-Isfahani, Al-Aghani, vol. 9, 300. Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 40, 126. T. Salah, ‘Adi b al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili, 29. Yaqut, Mu‘jam al-Buldan, vol. 3, 401. In addition to the ‘Amilis cited throughout the book, the ‘Amilis who lived in Damascus are: al-Hakam b.‘Abd Allah b. Khuttaf Abu Salma al-‘Amili (Muhaddith), Yazid b. ‘Uthman Abu Sufyan (Poet), and Ahmad b. Tha‘laba (Muhaddith). For more information see, Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 15, 11; vol. 65, 317; vol. 71, 47. In addition to Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (Heidar Abad, 1327 AH); Jamal al-Din Yusuf al-Mazzi, Tahdhib al-Kamal min Asma’ al-Rijal (Beirut, 1983). See, for instance, for a detailed account of the event: Nasr b. Muzahim al-Minqari, Waq‘at Siffin, ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Harun (Cairo, 1382 AH/AD 1962); Abu Hanifa b. Dawud al-Dinawari, al-Akhbar al-Tiwal ed. Hasan al-Zayn (Beirut, 1988); for contemporary interpretations, see: Martin Hinds, ‘The Banners and Battle Cries of the Arabs at Siffin (AD 657)’ al-Abhath 24 (1971): 3-42; Martin Hinds, ‘The Siffin Arbitration Agreement’ Journal of Semitic Studies 17 (1972): 93-113; Martin Hinds, ‘Kufan Political Alignments and Their Background in the Mid-Seventh Century AD’ International Journal of Middle East Studies 2 (1971): 346-67. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 89. Kennedy, The Armies of the Caliphs, 26; al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf, vol. 28, IV/ I, ed. Ihsan ‘Abbas, 17; it is reported that Mu‘awiya once said: ‘I was able to stand against ‘Ali because I kept my secrets and he did not; Ahl alSham were obedient to me and his followers were not; I used money and he did not.’

NOTES

183

52. Hinds, ‘The Banners and Battle Cries of the Arabs at Siffin,’ 18. 53. Kennedy, The Armies of the Caliphs, 11. 54. This list is based on al-Minqari and al-Dinawari. The former is more coherent than the latter whose list is prone to some confusion. 55. According to al-Dinawari the Quda‘a of al-Urdunn were led by Mukharriq b. al-Harith. 56. Al-Minqari; Hinds, ‘The Banners and Battle Cries of the Arabs at Siffin,’ 3-42. 57. Despite the absence of ‘Amila’s banners at Siffin, we know that it used to have one. It is described in one of ‘Adi’s poems, see his Diwan, ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 49-59: ‘In the hands of a powerful army the banner stands like a hawk, Beneath it there is a spear formed by twenty one junctions well pointed and brilliant like a star.’ 58. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj al-Dhahab, vol. 3, 129. 59. Ahmad b. Sahl al-Balkhi (al-Mutahhar b. Tahir al-Maqdisi), Kitab al-Bad’ wa al-Tarikh. Ed. and Tr. Clement Huart (Paris, 1916), vol. 5, 218. 60. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf, Ed. Mahmud al-Fardaws al-‘Azm (Damascus, 1999) vol. 2, 217; it is interesting to notice that Ibn al-Kalbi related also that he is a ‘Amili, see Hisham Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add wal Yaman al-Kabir ed. Y. F. al-‘Azm (Damascus, 1988), vol. 1, 141. 61. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 98; Minqari, 341-2. 62. ‘Amili devotion and power could be illustrated in the story of Abu al-‘Adiya with al-Hajjaj when the latter received the former in his headquarters in Wasit but refused to attend to Abu al-‘Adiya’s needs. Thus the ‘Amili answered him: ‘we subdue the world for them and they refuse to attend to our needs’ (nuti’u lahum al-dunnya wala y‘atunna minha’, See Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma’add, ed. Y. F. al-‘Azm, 144. However, Al-Hajjaj called upon his men to attend Abu al-‘Adiya’s funeral describing all those who do not attend as munafiq, see al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf, ed. Y.F. al-‘Azm, vol. 2, 217. 63. Muhammad b. Abi ‘Uthman al-Hazimi, ‘Ajalat al-Mubtada’ wa Fadalat alMuntaha fi al-Nasab, (Cairo, 1965), 54. 64. Al-Minqari, 507. 65. The two tribes belonged to the same Qahtan-Kahlan lineage, however it is impossible to verify this statement for lack of information on this topic. Sources sometimes refer to certain links which cannot be corroborated elsewhere. For instance, it is mentioned that ‘Amr b. Tha‘laba b. Mawda‘a of the Juhayna clan joined ‘Amila, see Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add ed. N. Hasan, 727. However, the traces of this ‘Amr are completely lost. 66. Al-Dinawari, 142-3; al-Minqari, 434-5. 67. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 166.

184 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

68. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 233. 69. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 3, 257. 70. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf, Ed. I. ‘Abbas, IV/ I, 323; Yazid b. Mu‘awiya, Diwan, 44. 71. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 251. 72. Al-Tabari, V3, 353; al-Baladhuri, Ansab, Ed. I. ‘Abbas, 322; al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-Wafa bi Akhbar Dar al-Mustafa (Cairo, 1326 AH/AD 1908) vol. 1, 90. 73. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, v2, 251; al-Dinawari, 196; al-Ya‘qubi added a battalion from Damascus led by ‘Abd Allah b. Mas‘ada al-Fazari and another from Qinnasrin led by Zufar b. al-Harith al-Kilabi. 74. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf, Ed. I. ‘Abbas, IV/ I, 325-6. 75. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 3, 71. 76. In addition to the cited references, see on the battle of Harra and the siege of Makka, Mus‘ab al-Zubayri, Nasab Quraysh; Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih, al-‘Iqd alFarid Ed. I. Al-Abyari, v4, 354-7; Ibn Qutayba (attrib.), al-Imama wal Siyasa (Beirut, 1997), v1, 168-177; For modern studies, see: M.J. Kister, ‘The Battle of the Harra: Some Socio-Economic Aspects,’ In Studies in Memory of Gaston Wiet, Ed. Myriam Rosen-Ayalon (Jerusalem, 1977), 33-49. 77. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 353. 78. The city of Medina, for instance, was open for looting, rape and murder for three consecutive days, as recorded by all the sources. 79. Al-Mas‘udi, vol. 3, 285; On the details and internal tribal policies and conspiracies conducted in this period, see Ibrahim Baydun, ‘Mu’tamar al-Jabiya,’ In The Fourth International Conference on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. M. Bakhit, v1, Arabic section, 143-89. Jordan, 1987. 80. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 386. 81. Ibid., vol. 3, 363. 82. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 3, 285; Ibn al-A‘tham relates a similar story regarding their attitude to Mu‘awiya, vol. 3, 321. 83. According to P. Crone, Slaves on Horses, 34-5, Ibn al-Zubayr was able to infiltrate the Syrian Yamani tribes because the tribal balance on which the Sufyanid system rested had become unstable. The three rival confederacies, the Quda‘a, ‘who were then considered of Ma‘add,’ Qahtan ‘a confederacy which had recently been formed for the benefit of Himyar and Hamdan in Him,’ and Qays was dominant in Qinnasrin. She adds that the Quda‘a and their allies supported an Umayyad caliph. Hassan b. Bahdal al-Kalbi gathered his tribal following in Jordan and joined the other pro-Quda‘a leaders (Kinda, Ghassan, ‘Akk, Ash‘ar) at Jabiya and elected Marwan b al-Hakam. The Qays and Qahtan, she continues, gave their allegiance to Ibn al-Zubayr. The antagonists met at Marj Rahit, where the Quda‘i supporters of Marwan

NOTES

185

won a signal victory. After Marj Rahit, she argues, a local feud broke out between Qays and Kalb in the region around Palmyra, and it is during this clash that the Quda‘a under the leadership of the Kalb changed their genealogy from Quda‘a b. Ma‘add to Quda‘a b. Himyar. Thus the confederacy of Ma‘add was dissolved and its members absorbed by the Qahtan who would be poised, as Yaman, against the Qays. The picture as drawn by Crone is not entirely accurate, and holds in it, may I add, some simplification. Were there really only three major parties competing against each other? I believe not, since tribal groups were much more complex and are to us more confused than ever thought before. How could we explain Crone’s statement that the Quda‘i leader who belonged to Ma‘add, Hassan b. Bahdal, is described by al-Mas‘udi before the battle of Marj Rahit, ‘the leader of Qahtan and its master in al-Sham’ (Kan Ra’is Qahtan wa Sayyidaha bi al-Sham)? How could we explain what al-Tabari mentioned on the split of the Yamanis between the pro-Zubayr Damascenes and pro-Marwanid ahl al-Urdunn? How could we explain the fact that the Qahtani ‘Amilis supported Quda‘a and that the Qahtani Judhamids were divided between Natil and Rawh? How could we explain the presence of the Qahtani Qayn and Sakasik alongside the Quda‘a tribes? The adherence of ‘Amila to Qahtan, as explained in a previous chapter, was prone to change under the pressure of Rawh, however, the issue was settled under Yazid I, and unlike Crone argues, it was not for the benefit of an alliance between Himyar and Hamdan in Hims. The Qahtanid ‘Amila kept its Quda‘a alliance with Kalb because of political and tribal alliances. Even Classical Arab historians and genealogists tended to confuse Qahtanis and Quda‘is and this confusion was reflected in the accounts of modern historians. The schism within Judham between Natil and Rawh is probably political and had nothing to do with tribal affiliations. Natil was the old leader of one faction while Rawh was the young leader of another Judhamid faction. According to J. Chelhod, (Les structures dualistes de la société bédouine’, L’Homme 9 (1969): 96) ‘La tribu est un groupement politique indépendent, aux dimensions variables, composé de plusieurs sous-groupes unis par des liens de parenté. Ses membres se disent issus d’un même ancêtre dont ils portent le nom, possèdent en commun une zone de paturage et sont administrés par un même chêf vieillard ou ancien.’ Selon Nuwayri: ‘La qabila est ainsi appelée parce que ses parties sont placées face à face et en nombre égal. Le nombre des fractions d’une tribu est variable. Mais il semble que le pluralisme tende à être ramené au bipartisme, autour des deux principaux chêfs tout un petit monde gravite comme des satellites.’ Ibn al-Kalbi defined the Qabila: It was called Qabila because they face each other (taqabuliha wa tanazuriha) (See Ibn ‘Abd

186

84. 85.

86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100.

101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106.

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Rabih al-Andalusi, Al-‘Iqd al-Farid, v3, 335). Thus it was not uncommon for tribes to split into two factions, and, under the severe political tension during the interregnum, it is only normal to witness the degradation of the split into a military conflict. This point was discussed in a previous chapter, ‘‘Amila in the Pre-Islamic Period.’ On this point see, Agha and Khalidi, ‘Poetry and identity in the Umayyad Age,’ 96. They argue that regional identity expressed itself in two basic forms: geography and habitat. Being an Urdunni for the ‘Amilis reflected probably by that time a sense of belonging to a certain homeland which was stressed by many of them by adding the appellation Urdunni to their ‘Amili names. On this see Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, v15, 11-14. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 255. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 379. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 3, 285. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 383; al-Mas‘udi reports a slightly different version. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 168-74. Muhammad b. Yusuf al-Kindi, Wulat Misr, ed. H. Nassar (Beirut, n.d), 65. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 382. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 257; Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 3, 288. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, 288. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 423. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 3, 298. Ibid., vol. 3, 309. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, ed. Nur al-Din, 59-60; Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 517; alMas‘udi, Muruj, vol. 3, 309. Al-Isfahani, vol. 19, 58; Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 65 The respect shown to the tribe ‘Amila is reflected in the position of ‘Adi among the Umayyad caliphs, and, in particular, al-Walid who described ‘Adi as ‘our poet, our panegyrist and our eulogist.’ (sha‘iruna, madihuna wal rathi li amwatina). See al-Isfahani, vol. 9, 300-11. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 530. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 266. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 540. Ibid. Ibid., vol. 3, 530. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 49-59. The superiority of the Syrian troops is usually due to their infantry and its complex military manoeuvres. It is seldom reported that the cavalry played a significant role in achieving victory. These verses however represent a rare description of

NOTES

107. 108. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113.

114. 115.

116.

117. 118. 119. 120. 121.

187

the Syrian horsemen and in particular the ‘Amilis. If we compare it with Kennedy’s opinion, Armies of the Caliphs, 4, ‘They were both infantry and cavalry but the distinction was blurred: the cavalry often fought on foot while the infantry were transported to meet the enemy on horses and camels.’ ‘Adi’s testimony reflects the fact that horsemen could sometimes fight on their horses. G. Hawting, The First Dynasty of Islam: The Umayyad Caliphate AD 661-750 (London and New York, 2000), 66. On Shabib see, EI (second edition), s.v ‘Shabib b. Yazid.’ Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 579. Ibid., vol. 3, 583. Ibid., vol. 3, 589. On Sufyan see, Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 21, 341. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab al-Ashraf. Ed. M.F. al-‘Azm, vol. 6, 546. The full text goes as follows: ‘Sufyan moved on and assigned as the leader of the army’s rear al-Bakhtari b. ‘Amir al-‘Amili who passed by al-Akhdar b. Warqa’ al-Kalbi and Masad b. Ziyad al-Qayni and al-Wazi‘b. Zu’ala al-Kalbi who were drunk and cursed al-Bakhtari, Sufyan told him to chop their heads off.’ Notice Sufyan’s reaction. He probably was furious because his men were drunk but most importantly they assaulted his ‘Amili officer who led an important section of the army. Crone, Slaves on Horses, 44. It is important to mention that Sufyan was a member of the same clan, Banu Haritha, to whom also belonged Hassan b. Bahdal, the leader of the Kalbites who supported the Marwanids against the Zubayrids in Marj Rahit, and Maysun the mother of Yazid b. Mu‘awiya. This clan is directly linked to the clan Thawr, son of the ‘Amili mother, Hayy. See, W. Caskel, Gamharat al-Nasab, Band I, 286; Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma‘add , Ed. N. Hasan, 595-7. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 6, 590-1. He reported that at least fourteen campaigns were launched against Shabib within four years. They were all defeated. Al-Hajjaj had to call for the Syrian troops by writing to ‘Abd al-Malik: ‘al-ghawth, al-ghawth, wajjih ilayya ahl al-Sham’; Ibn A‘tham al-Kufi, v7, 86. He mentioned that Shabib resisted al-Hajjaj for four years. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 6, 589. Ibid., vol. 6, 597. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 606. Ibid.; Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 6, 546. Al-Baladhuri states that his name is al-Sabbah b. Muhammad b. al-Ash‘ath. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 6, 547-51.

188

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

122. This point shall be discussed below under another section entitled ‘The West.’ 123. On this revolt see, Ridwan al-Sayyid, Die Revolte des Ibn al-As‘at und die Koranleser (Freiburg, 1977); EI (second edition), s.v. ‘Ibn al-Ash‘ath’. 124. Hawting, 67. 125. Ibid., 68. 126. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 624. 127. Ibid., vol. 3, 625. 128. Ibid., vol. 3, 627. Al-Tabari described how critical the situation was and how near the defeat was for al-Hajjaj. ‘Ahl al-‘Iraq defeated them [the Syrians] and they reached al-Hajjaj. Quraysh and Thaqif retreated . . . when al-Hajjaj saw them he knelt down and held on to his sword . . . suddenly Sufyan b. alAbrad al-Kalbi launched his attack on the right flank and defeated them.’ 129. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 607; Al-Baladhuri, Ansab, vol. 6, 439. 130. This place has not been accurately located but according to Yaqut, it is near Kufa. 131. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 631; Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 6, 459. 132. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 638. 133. Ibn Qutayba, al-Imama wal Siyasa, 215 (fa hamala ‘alayhim Sufyan wa hum mashghulun bil maysara qad tami‘u fiha wa kana bi idhn Allah al-fath min nahiyat Sufyan); the ability of Sufyan’s horsemen was indicated by his enemy, the poet al-A‘sha of Hamdan. See al-Tabari, vol. 3, 645. 134. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 290; al-Tabari, vol. 4, 29. Sources mention that the blind and the physically disabled, the destitute and the leper benefited from social benefits, in addition to the building of hospitals and mosques for the community. Although now these seem to be exaggerated in the sources, the benefits presumably went, to a large extent, to the elite of Muslim Arabs. 135. Kennedy, The Armies of the Caliphs, 18. 136. See for instance, Ibn Sallam al-Jumahi (d. 232 A.H), Tabaqat al-Shu‘ara’, ed. ‘Umar al-Tabba’ (Beirut, 1997), 235. He ranked Jarir in the first Tabaqa of the Islamic era while Ibn al-Riqa‘ was ranked in the seventh Tabaqa. (Tabaqa here indicates the degree of fuhula in poetry). 137. This point was discussed earlier under the section ‘Marj Rahit.’ 138. Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 40, Ed. ‘Umar al-‘Amrawi (Beirut, 2000), 128-9; Al-Isfahani, vol. 9, 301; Ibn Sallam, Tabaqat, 162. 139. Al-Isfahani, vol. 9, 301. 140. See for instance, Sharh Diwan Jarir, Ed. Muhammad al-Sawi (Cairo, n.d), 321-5; Sharh Diwan Jarir, Ed. I. Hawi (Beirut, 1982), 391-4. It seems that the poem is directed against the Yaman and Banu Taym in particular. But al-Isfahani and Ibn Sallam mentioned that some of the verses were directed

NOTES

141.

142. 143. 144. 145. 146.

147.

148. 149. 150.

151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156.

189

against ‘Adi. Most of the hija’ is directed against the tribal affiliation of ‘Adi: Ibn al-Labun (the one whose father is unknown), far‘ la’im wa asl ghayr maghrus. He is the son of al-Muhallab b. Abi Sufra who was the governor of Khurasan under al-Hajjaj’s governorate. Upon his death he was succeeded by Yazid. The relations between Yazid and al-Hajjaj deteriorated and al-Hajjaj eventually removed him from office and imprisoned him. But Yazid was able to escape and took refuge with Sulayman, governor of Filastin at that time. Sulayman eventually obtained Yazid’s pardon from the caliph. Sources are explicit on the identity of the prison guards of al-Muhallab: they were ahl al-Sham. Ibn ‘Abd Rabih, Al-‘Iqd al-Farid vol. 2, 148; Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 40, 129-30. Both Ibn ‘Abd Rabih and Ibn ‘Asakir pointed to the fact that this action took place upon his accession to power, Lamma atat al-Khilafat Sulayman. Al-Isfahani, vol. 21, 351-2. ‘Adi was not allowed to deliver his verses because, according to Sulayman, the verses of al-Farazdaq cannot be surpassed. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 37; He mentioned, for instance, the exact tribal affiliation of the Muqatila in Khurasan originating from Basra and Kufa: Tamim, Bakr, Azd, ‘Abd al-Qays and the mawalis. Al-Tabari, vol. 3, 644. In Dayr al-Jamajim al-Hajjaj, for example, offered pardons to the defeated supporters of Ibn al-Ash‘ath who accepted to join Qutayba in his conquests. Al-Baladhuri, Futuh, 424. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 296. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 49. He mentioned that they numbered 100,000, the mawalis and slaves not included; Al-Baladhuri, Futuh, 331. He stated the number 120,000 soldiers. Naturally these numbers are not exact and are exaggerated but perhaps reflect the huge number involved. Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi, al-Futuh, vol. 7, 288. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 53. ‘Abd al-Karim b. Muhammad al-Tamimi al-Sam‘ani, Kitab al-Ansab ed. R. Murad and M. Hafiz (Beirut, 1984), vol. 11, 199. Yaqut, Mu‘jam, vol. 1, 590. Yaqut described it as one of the largest cities in Khurasan (min a‘mar mudun Khurasan). Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 160. Yaqut, Mu‘jam, vol. 5, 132. This is Yaqut’s opinion who had visited Banjdih. Nasir-i Khusraw visited the city but did not give any details. But other sources do not mention Banjdih. See, for instance, Al-Muqqadasi, Ahsan al-Taqasim; Ibn Khurradadhbeh, Al-Masalik; Qudama b. Ja‘far Kitab al-Kharaj wa San‘at al-Kitaba ed. M. Makhzum (Beirut,

190

157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162.

163. 164. 165. 166.

167.

168. 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 178. 179.

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

1988); al-Ya‘qubi, al-Buldan. Perhaps Banjdih became a large city in Yaqut’s time. Note that Banjdih could also be pronounced Panjdih. Khalifa b. Khayyat, Tarikh, Ed. M. Fawwaz (Beirut, 1995), 204. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 48. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm vol. 7, 305. W. Caskel, Jamaharat al-Nasab, II, 244; Ibn al-Kalbi, Nasab Ma’add, Ed. N. Hasan, 199; Ibn Sallam, Kitab al-Nasab, 313. To this clan also belonged the poet ‘Adi and Qu‘aysis the ‘Amili leader in pre-Islamic times. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, ed. Nur al-Din, 65. They (Judham, Lakhm and ‘Amila) sealed the breach between Hims and Kahatin where there are no more intruders. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, ed. al-Qaysi and al-Damin, 197. Yaqut, Mu‘jam, vol. 4, 52. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 62. Al-Salah, Adi b. al-Riqa‘, 82. Sa‘id b. ‘Amr al-Harashi asked the permission to see Yazid in prison in order to retrieve his money from him. ‘Umar granted him the permission and Yazid paid fully his debt. ‘Adi was touched by Yazid generosity and righteousness. It is reported that ‘Adi once flattered the former governor of al-Urdunn, ‘Ubayda b. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sulami, who was imprisoned by the caliph alWalid. The caliph reprimanded ‘Adi for his behaviour but the latter convinced al-Walid of his action. ‘Ubayda was ‘Adi’s friend and benefactor and he could not abandon him in his hour of need. It seems that al-Walid was touched and released ‘Ubayda. See, ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, Ed. Nur al-Din, 69. Hawting, 76 Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm vol. 7, 261; Ibn al-A‘tham, Kitab al-Futuh, vol. 8, 12. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 86; al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 269. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 87; al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 261. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 88; Ibn al-A‘tham, Kitab al-Futuh, vol. 8, 23. On his biography see, Ibn Qutayba, Al-Shi‘ir wal Shu‘ara’, vol. 2, 527-527. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 89. Ibn Qutayba, al-Imama wal Siyasa, 278. ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘, Diwan, ed. Nur al-Din, 97-8. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 171; Ibn al-A‘tham, al-Futuh, vol. 8, 69. Mus‘ab al-Zubayri, Nasab Quraysh, 8-9; this point was discussed earlier under ‘The Tribal Structure of ‘Amila.’ Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 187.

NOTES

191

180. See Shihab al-Din Ahmad b. ‘Ali Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Lisan al-Mizan, v6, 733; Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 12, 387 speaks of Musa b. Ayyub al-‘Amili al-Basri; Abu Bakr Muhammad b. Yahya al-Suli, Akhbar Abi Tammam Ed. K. ‘Asakir, M. ‘Azzam and N. al-Hindi (Beirut, n.d), 253 speaks of Tha‘laba b. al-Dahhak al-‘Amili. 181. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 161. 182. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab, ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 446. 183. Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam, Futuh Misr, 218-220; Ibn Khaldun, Kitab al-‘Ibar, pt 1, vol. 6, 222. 184. Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Maqarri, Nafh al-Tib min Ghisn al-Andalus alRatib (Beirut, 1968) v3, 20-1. 185. Ibid., vol. 3, 22. 186. Ibid., vol. 3, 22; Ibn Kahldun, Kitab al-‘Ibar, I, vol. 4, 259. 187. Ibn Khaldun, Kitab al-‘Ibar, pt.1, vol. 4, 259. 188. See, for instance, Ibn al-Fardi, ‘Abd Allah b. Muhammad, Tarikh ‘Ulama’ al-Andalus Ed. R. al-Suwayfi (Beirut, 1997); Abu Muhammad b. Abi Nasr al-Azdi al-Hamidi al-Andalusi, Jadhwat al-Muqtabas fi Dhikr Wulat alAndalus ed. R. al-Suwayfi (Beirut, 1997); Abu al-Qasim Khalaf b. ‘Abd al-Malik b. Bashkwwal, Al-Sila (Cairo, 1966). 189. Lisan al-Din ibn al-Khatib, al-Ihata fi Akhbar Gharnata (Cairo, 1975), vol. 3, 410; al-Maqarri, Nafh al-Tib, vol. 1, 295. 190. Ibn Bashkwwal; al-Qadi ‘Ayyad, Tartib al-Madarik wa Taqrib al-Masalik li Ma‘rifat A‘lam Madhhab Malik. Ed. M. al-Tabkhi (Rabat, 1965); for a closer look at the establishment of the Syrians in al-Andalus see, Eduardo Manzano Moreno, ‘The Settlement and Organisation of the Syrian Junds in al-Andalus,’ In The Formation of al-Andalus: History and Society, ed. Manuela Marin (The Formation of the Classical Islamic World, vol. 46), (Aldershot: Variorum, 1998): 85-114. He clearly states how each jund was assigned to a particular district and spread over the territories of each of the districts’s Kuras. Each jund was involved in the administration of the districts where it was based. 191. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Hamad b. Zayd al-Mughiri al-Lami al-Ta’i, al-Muntakhab fi Dhikr Nasab Qaba’il al-‘Arab ed. I. Al-Zayd (al-Ta’if, 1985), 105; Ibn Khaldun, Kitab al-‘Ibar, pt1, vol. 6, 282. 192. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 227. Ahl al-Sham in particular had their stipends increased to double the amount given to the others. 193. Ibid., vol. 4, 226. 194. On the Qadariyya movement see, EI (second edition), s.v ‘Kadariyya’, J. Van Ess, ‘Les Qadarites et la Gailaniya de Yazid III’ Studia Islamica 31 (1970), 269-86.

192

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

195. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 236. 196. Ibid., vol. 4, 237. Hisham, for instance, had previously announced that he was not persecuting Khalid for ideological or tribal reasons (lasna nattahimuh fi ta‘a). See al-Tabari, vol. 4, 248, 250. 197. Ibid., vol. 4, 239; al-Baladhuri, Ansab, vol. 7, 518. 198. Ibid., vol. 4, 253. 199. Ibid., vol. 4, 252-4. 200. Ibid., vol. 4, 254. 201. Ibid., vol. 4, 255. 202. Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam, Futuh Misr, 223. 203. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 271. 204. Ibid., vol. 4, 256. 205. Ibid., vol. 4, 271. 206. Ibid., vol. 4, 280. 207. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab, ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 570. 208. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 272. 209. Ibid., vol. 4, 281. 210. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 282; Al-Baladhuri, Ansab, ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 574. 211. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm vol. 7, 653; al-Tabari, vol. 4, 282. 212. Crone admits that she was unable to figure out why Tha‘laba should have thrown in his lot with Marwan. See, Crone, Slaves on Horses, 171. I hope that this book has thrown some light over this issue. 213. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 282. 214. Ibid., vol. 4, 287-8; Al-Baladhuri, Ansab, ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 574. 215. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 288. 216. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 603 217. Ibid., vol. 7, 606. 218. Ibid., vol. 7, 606-14. 219. Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 59, 434-5. 220. Al-Baladhuri, Ansab ed. al-‘Azm, vol. 7, 654-6; Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 351. 221. Al-Tabari, vol. 4, 354. 222. Khazanov, 152.

Chapter 5. On ‘Amila, Jabal ‘Amila and Shi‘ism 1. Paul Cobb, White Banners: Contention in ‘Abbasid Syria, 750-880 (New York, 2001), 17; on the continuous involvement of Umayyads in the ‘Abbasid government, see: Irit Bligh-Abramski, ‘Evolution Versus Revolution: Umayyad Elements in the ‘Abbasid regime 133/750-320/932,’ Der Islam 65 (1988): 226-43.

NOTES

193

2. See Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, v10, 360; vol. 13, 20-1, 357-8; vol. 15, 11-14; vol. 41, 283-4; vol. 52, 154-7. 3. Ahmad b. Abi Ya‘qub al-Ya‘qubi, Kitab al-Buldan (Beirut, 1988), 88. 4. Yaqut, Mu‘jam al-Buldan, vol. 2, 183. 5. Ibid., vol. 3, 354; on the different interpretations concerning the origins and development of the Junds, see: Najdat Khammash, ‘Al-Ajnad wa Idaratuha.’ In the Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad Bakhit, v1, Arabic section, 285-301. (‘Amman, 1987); see also Irfan Shahid, ‘The Byzantine Origin of the Umayyad Ajnad System.’ In Abstracts of Papers, Fifth Annual Byzantine Studies Conference, 21, 1971; D. Sourdel, s.v. ‘Djund,’ EI (second edition); Moshe Gil, A History of Palestine 634-1099 AD (Cambridge, 1997), 110; For contrary conclusions see, I. ‘Abbas, Tarikh, 344-5. 6. For a full geographical description see, Mustafa al-Hayyari, ‘Jund al-Urdunn, Mulahazat Hawl Hududih al-Jughrafiyya,’ Al-Abhath, Arabic section, 35 (1987): 3-19. 7. Al-Ya‘qubi, al-Buldan, 90. 8. Abu Muhammad al-Hasan al-Hamadani, Sifat Jazirat al-‘Arab. Ed. David Muller (Leiden, 1968), 132. 9. Ibid., 129. 10. Al-Muqaddasi, Ahsan al-Taqasim, 161. 11. Ibid., 162. 12. Ibid., 179. 13. For useful information on some cities and towns in Jabal ‘Amila under the late Crusaders and the Mamalik, see, Muhyyi al-Din b. ‘Abd al-Zahir, Tashrif al-Ayyam wal-‘Usur fi Sirat al-Malik al-Mansur Ed. M. Kamil (Cairo, 1961); Ibn Fadl Allah al-‘Umari, Masalik al-Absar fi Mamalik alAmsar: Dawlat al-Mamalik al-Ula ed. D. Kravolsky (Beirut, 1986); Taqiyy al-Din Ahmad al-Maqrizi, Itt‘az al-Hunafa bi Akhbar al-A’ima al-Fatimiyyin al-Khulafa ed. J. al-Shayyal and M. Ahmad (Cairo, 1967): 71–3; Nasir Khusraw, Safarnamah; The Latin sources seldom refer to the Muslims and are not really adequate for our topic. On this issue see, Ronnie Ellenblum, Frankish Rural Settlement in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem (Cambridge, 1998); Benjamin Kedar, ‘The subjected Muslims of the Frankish Levant,’ In Muslims Under Latin Rule 1100-1300, ed. J. Powell (Princeton, 1990). Few useful sources are noted however: William of Tyre, A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea. Tr. Emily Atwater Babock and A.C. Krey (New York, 1943); Fulcher of Chartres, A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem (1095-1127), Tr. Frances Rita Ryan, ed. H. S. Fink (Tennessee, 1969); Benjamin of Tuleda, The itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela, Trans. and Commentary Marcus Adler

194

14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

19. 20.

21.

22. 23. 24.

25.

26. 27.

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

(New York, 1972); For a Translation of the Treaties between the Mamalik and the Christians, see P.M Holt, Early Mamluk Diplomacy (New York and Leiden and Koln: Brill, 1995); For some modern studies, see Emmanuel Sivan, ‘Réfugiés Syro-Palestiniens au temps des Croisades,’ Revue des Études Islamiques 35 (1967):135-47; Hans Mayer, ‘Latins, Muslims and Greeks in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem,’ History 63 (1978): 175-92. Ibn Khurradadhbeh, al-Masalik, 76-8. Ibid., 78. Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 10, 360-1. Yaqut, Mu‘jam al-Buldan, vol. 1, 178. ‘Ali Hussein Zayadeh, ‘Baysan: A City From the Ninth Century A.D.’ In The Fifth International Conference on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the ‘Abbasid Period. Ed. Bakhit and Schick, English and French section, vol. 2, 114-29. Al-Amin, Khitat, 84. The term Shi‘a, keeping in view its historical development, must be taken throughout this chapter in its literal meaning as ‘followers of ‘Ali,’ ‘supporters,’ ‘group.’ In the early years of Islamic history, one cannot speak of Sunna and Shi‘a as two distinct mature sects, but rather of two ill-defined points of view. On this see S.H.M. Jafri, The Origins and Early development of Shi‘a Islam, Beirut, 1990. See also al-Nawbakhti, Kitab al-Firaq wa al-Maqalat. Al-Hurr was an eminent Twelver scholar, born in Jabal ‘Amil, who passed his career in Persia. His principal work is a vast collection of Hadith: Tafsil Wasa’il al-Shi‘a ila Ahkam al-Shari‘a. Al-Hurr al-‘Amili, Amal al-Amil Fi ‘Ulama’ Jabal ‘Amil (Baghdad, 1385 AH), 13. Ibid. On the debate over the validity of khabar and tawatur in Arabic historiography, see Khalidi Arabic Historical Thought in the Classical Period, 137-51: Chase Robinson, Islamic Historiography (Cambridge, 2001). On the African oral traditions, see Jan Vansina, Oral Tradition as History (Wisconsin, 1985). Vansina holds that an oral tradition should be seen as a series of successive historical documents all lost except for the last one and usually interpreted by every link in the chain of transmission. However, he thought that this model does apply to historical gossip, 29. On Gossip, See also R. Rosaldo ‘Doing Oral History,’ Social Analysis 4 (1980): 89-99. Ahmad Rida, ‘al-Matawila aw al-Shi‘a fi Jabal ‘Amil,’ al-‘Irfan, 2 (1910), 237-42. Ahmad b. Hamdan Abu Hatim al-Razi (d.322 AH) was an early Isma‘ili author and missionary in Rayy. Of his books, the most famous is al-Zina, a

NOTES

28. 29.

30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37.

38. 39. 40.

195

dictionary of theological terms. For a short description of the book, see A.H. al-Hamadani, Actes XXI congrès des Orientalistes, 291-4. Rida, ‘al-Matawila,’ 240. Abu Dharr quarrelled with Ka‘b al-Ahbar concerning the interpretation of the Quran. ‘Ali b. Bakr al-Harawi (d. 611 AH) and ‘Abd al-Ghani Nabulsi (d. 1143 AH), wrote extensively on the shrines in Bilad al-Sham. Neither mentions any related to Abu Dharr in the region. Yet al-Awza‘i’s shrine on the Lebanese coast was referred to several times. The shrine in Sarafand could not have been established in the early years of Islam, since according to Robert Hillenbrand’s Islamic Architecture, the earliest surviving Islamic mausoleums date back to the mid-ninth century (see p.254). The shrine in Sarafand is a domed square in the middle of a graveyard. Hillenbrand has argued that the domed square probably appeared in Iran and witnessed a history of consistent popularity as of the early tenth century (p.287). According to him, it was quite common for the identity of the original tenant of a mausoleum to be forgotten and then replaced by a new attribution to a person with some religious associations (p.260). One might add that Abu Dharr, by consensus of classical historians, was buried in al-Rabadhah, in Hijaz. Rida, ‘al-Matawila,’ 241. Eminent Arab reformist, poet and writer. For more details on his life, see Sami al-Dahan, al-Amir Shakib Arslan: Hayatuh wa Atharuh (Cairo, 1960). Shakib Arslan, ‘Al-Shi‘a fi Jabal ‘Amil,’ al-‘Irfan, 2 (1910), 444-50. Ibid., 446. The exact words used by the editor were: ‘al-tawatur wa al-shaya‘.’ Ibid., 447. Ibid., 449. Ibid., 450. Muhsin al-Amin was a reformist religious figure and historian living in Jabal ‘Amil and in Damascus, known for his huge biographical dictionary: A‘yan al-Shi‘a. Al-Amin, Khitat, 47-50. Isma‘il ‘Ali, Al-Tuhfa al-Azhariyya fi Takhtit al-Kura al-Ardiyya, cited in alAmin, 70. A typical example of the Sunni view is to be read in Rashid Rida, al-Sunna wa al-Shi‘a (Cairo, 1947), 23: ‘Shi‘ism was full of fairy tales and illegitimate innovations, its leaders were preventing unity . . . It sprang from a doctrinal difference which did not exist in the time of the salaf, and was largely owing to the machination of the first jewish converts to Islam.’ See also Lammens, ‘Les Perses du Liban et l’origine des Matawilis,’ Mélanges de l’Université St-Joseph 14 (1929): 21-39.

196

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

41. Muhsin al-Amin, Al-Shi‘a fi Masarihim al-Tarikhi, Muqaddimat A‘yan alShi‘a ed. Hasan al-Amin (Beirut, 2000), 113-20. Al-Amin attempts to defend the Shi‘i dogmas against the criticism of several Arab writers such as: Ahmad Amin, Fajr al-Islam wa Duha al-Islam; Mustafa al-Rafi‘i, I‘jaz al-Qur’an wa al-Balagha al-Nabawiyya (Cairo, 1940); Muhammad Thabit, Jawla fi Rubu‘ al-Sharq al-Adna (Cairo, 1952), 107-11. 42. Al-Amin, Khitat, 83. 43. Ibid., 84. 44. Ibid., 85-90. 45. Muhammad Taqi al-Faqih, Jabal ‘Amil fi al-Tarikh (Beirut, 1986), 33-50. 46. Ibid., 42. 47. Ibid., 87-8. 48. Muhammad Jabir al-Safa, Tarikh Jabal ‘Amil (Beirut, 1981). 49. Ibid., 33. 50. Ibid, 26. 51. Hasan al-Amin, Da’irat al-Ma‘arif al-Shi‘iyya, v6 (Beirut, n.d), 133. 52. Ibid, 133. 53. Ibid., 136. 54. Muhammad K. Makki, al-Haraka al-Fikriyya wa al-Adabiyya fi Jabal ‘Amil (Beirut, 1982), 10-20. 55. Ibid., 17. 56. Ibid., 17-18. 57. Ja‘far al-Muhajir, al-Ta’sis li Tarikh al-Shi‘a fi Lubnan wa Suriyya (Beirut, 1992), 21-33. 58. Ibid., 27. 59. Ibid., 29. 60. Ibid., 31. 61. Ibid. 62. Ibid., 213. 63. Ibid., 214. 64. Ibid., 215. 65. See Anis Freyha, Mu‘jam Asma’ al-Mudun wa al-Qura al-Lubnaniyya (Beirut, 1972). Freyha establishes the Aramaic, Canaanite or Greek origin of most of the Lebanese village names among which, of course, are mentioned most of the villages in modern Jabal ‘Amil. 66. Many recent books deal with the modern history of Jabal ‘Amil: Sabrina Mervin, Un Reformisme Chiite: Ulemas et lettres dy Gabal ‘Amil de la fin de l’empire ottoman à l’independence du Liban (Beyrouth: CERMOC, 2000); Nawal Fayad, Safahat min Tarikh Jabal ‘Amil Fil-‘Ahdayn al-‘Uthmani Wal Faransi (Beirut, 1998); Jihad Banut, Harkat al-Nidal Fi Jabal ‘Amil (Beirut, 1993); Hasan Ghurayyib,

NOTES

67.

68. 69. 70.

71.

72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79.

80.

197

Nahwa Tarikh Fikri-Siyasi Li Shi‘at Lubnan (Beirut, 2000); ‘Ali Darwish, Jabal ‘Amil Bayna 1516-1697 Al-Hayat al-Siyasiyya Wal Thaqafiyya (Beirut, 1993); ‘Ali Mruwe, Al-Tashayu‘ Bayna Jabal ‘Amil Wa Iran (London, 1987); Hashim ‘Uthman, Tarikh al-Shi‘a fi Sahil Bilad al-Sham al-Shamali (Beirut, 1994). The next paragraph is based on the works of Moojan Momen, An Introduction to Shi‘ism: The History and Doctrines of Twelver Shi‘ism (Oxford, 1985); Alessandro Bausani, ‘Religion in Saljuq Period’, 283-302 in Cambridge History of Iran; Farhad Daftary, The Isma‘ilis: Their History and Doctrines (Cambridge, 1990); Paul Walker, Exploring an Islamic Empire: Fatimid History and its Sources (London, 2002); Claude Cahen, ‘The Seljuks,’ 135-75 in A History of the Crusades ed. Marshall Baldwin (Madison, Milwaukee and London, 1969), 135-75; Heinz Halm, Shi‘ism (Edinburgh, 1991). For useful Arabic sources on the origins of Shi‘ism in the region, see Shihab al-Din Abu Shama al-Maqdisi, Kitab al-Rawdatayn fi Akhbar al-Dawlatayn alNuriyya wa al-Salahiyya Ed. M. Ahmad (Cairo, 1956); Ibn al-Athir, al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh; ‘Umar b. Ibn al-‘Adim, Zubdat al-Halab min Tarikh Halab, ed. S. al-Dahhan (Damascus, 1968); Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya wa al Nihaya. Rida, ‘al-Matawila,’ 238. Khalidi, Arabic Historical Thought, 139-40. Shi‘ism, as I mentioned earlier, refers to a pro ‘Alid sentiment, or a protoShi‘ism ideology. Many Shi‘ite scholars, nevertheless, dealt with the topic with an anachronistic approach suggesting that Shi’ism from the beginning meant a distinguished community. Ibn Sa‘d Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra (Beirut, 1985), vol. 4, 219. A traditionist, his fame rests on his al-Tabaqat. It was intended to be an aid to the study of traditions by giving information on some 4250 persons, who, from the beginning of Islam had played a role as transmitters of traditions about the prophet’s sayings and doings. Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 66, 174. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, vol. 12, 90. Encyclopedia of Islam (second edition) s.v. ‘Abu Dharr al-Ghifari.’ Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam, Futuh Misr, 94. Al-Tabari, vol. 2, 588. Ibid., 600; al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-Buldan, 159. Ibn ‘Asakir, Tarikh, vol. 66, 176. Muhammad al-Nuwayri al-Iskandarani, Kitab al-Ilmam fima Jarat Bihi alAhkam wal Umur al-Maqdiyya fi Waq‘at al-Iskandariyy ed. E. Combe and A. Combe, vol. 1, 59. M. A. Shaban, Islamic History: A New Interpretation, A.D 600-750 (Cambridge, 1971), 69.

198

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

81. A. J. Cameron, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari: an examination of his image in the hagiography of Islam (London, 1973), 54. Cameron argued, rather persuasively, against the Shi‘i inclinations of Abu Dharr. See also Ulrich Haarmann, ‘Abu Dharr - Muhammad’s Revolutionary Companion,’ The Muslim World, 68 (1978): 285-9. 82. Al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, vol. 2, 172. 83. Cameron, 104. 84. Al-Mas‘udi, Muruj (Paris, 1877), IV, 268; al-Ya‘qubi, Tarikh, 173. 85. This incident reflects the mentality of early Muhajirin and companions of the Prophet who, according to Ibn Khaldun, were horrified by the idea of becoming beduin once again (i‘rabi). The act of migration to Medina (Hijra) was mandatory only for Makkan residents and not for beduins, in other words, by becoming beduins they would lose their advantage as the first adherents to Islam in Makka. On this topic, see Ibn Khadun, Kitab al-‘Ibar, I, 216-17. 86. Sayf b. ‘Umar, Kitab al-Ridda wal Futuh. Ed. Q. al-Samura’i (Leiden, 1995). 87. Abu Ja‘far Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. Husayn b. Babawayh, known as al-Saduq, is widely respected among the Ithna ‘Ashari Shi‘i scholars and traditionists. 88. Abu Ja‘far Muhammad b. ‘Ali b. Husayn b. Babawayh, Ma‘ani al-’Akhbar (Tehran, 1379 AH), 179. 89. ‘Izz al-Din Abu Hamid ibn Abi al-Hadid, a scholar of wide learning in the fields of Arabic language, poetry and adab, rhetoric, kalam and early history of Islam; in addition he was an usuli jurist and an eminent writer of prose and poetry. It is difficult to class this author in one or another of the great religious and political movements of Islam. It has been suggested that, at first a Mu‘tazilli, he later became a Shi‘i. It has also been said that he stood between the Shi‘i and the Sunni Parties (Bayn al-Fariqayn); and indeed in the discussion on dogma which he sets out in his Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, he often states that he is in agreement with al-Jahiz, a Mu‘tazilite Sunni figure. 90. Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Balagha (Beirut, 1996), vol. 8, 252-62. 91. Freddie Lökkegaard, Islamic Taxation in the Classic Period (Copenhagen, 1950), 20. 92. Ibid., 21. 93. Yaqut, Mu‘jam al-Buldan, vol. 3, 27. 94. Cameron, 108. 95. Ibid., 67. 96. Yaqut, vol. 2, 183.

BIBLIOGR APHY

Reference Works Encyclopedia of Islam, second edition, (Leiden, Brill, 1960-2002).

Primary Arabic Sources Abi ‘Abd al-Rahman ‘Adil b. Sa‘d, ed. Fada’il al-Sham. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 2001. Abu al-Fida’, Isma‘il b. ‘Ali (d.732 AH). Taqwim al-Buldan (Géographie d’Aboulfeda). Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1840. ——— Al-Mukhtasar fi Akhbar al-Bashar. Cairo, 1907. Abu Shama, Shihab al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Isma‘il al-Maqdisi (d. 660 AH). Kitab al-Rawdatayn fi Akhbar al-Dawlatayn al-Nuriyya wa al-Salahiyya. Ed. Muhammad Hilmi M. Ahmad. Cairo, 1956. ‘Adi ibn al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili ‘an Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad b. Yahya Tha‘lab al-Shibani. Diwan. Ed. Nuri al-Qaysi and Hatim al-Damin. Baghdad, 1987. ‘Adi ibn al-Riqa‘ (d. ca 102 AH). Diwan. Ed. Hasan Nur al-Din. Beirut, 1990. Al-Azdi al-Kufi, Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah (d. Third Hijra Century). Futuh al-Sham. Ed. W.N. Lees. Calcutta, 1853. Al-Bakri, ‘Abd Allah . Mu‘jam ma Ista‘jam. Ed. Mustafa al-Saqqa. Cairo, 1945. Al-Baladhuri, Ahmad b. Yahya (d.c.279 AH). Ansab al-Ashraf. Ed. Mahmud al-Fardus al-‘Azm. Damascus: Dar al-Yaqaza al-‘Arabiyya, 1999. ——— Futuh al-Buldan. Ed. Radwan Muhammad Radwan. Beirut: Dar al- Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1991. ——— Ansab al-Ashraf. Ed. I. ‘Abbas. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1979. ——— Ansab al-Ashraf. Ed. I. ‘Abbas. Beirut and Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1996. Al-Balkhi, Ahmad b. Sahl (Al-Mutahhar b. Tahir al-Maqdisi). Kitab al-Bad’ wa al-Tarikh. Ed. and Tr. Clement Huart. Paris, 1916.

200 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Al-Dabi, al-Mufaddal b. Muhamad. Kitab al-Amthal. Ed. ‘Abd al-Tawwab Ramadan. Damascus, 1974. Al-Dhahabi, Shams al-Din Muhammad b. Ahmad (d. 784 AH). Tarikh al-Islam wa Wafayat al-Mashahir wal A‘lam. Ed. ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Salam Tadmuri. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi, 1987. Al-Dinawari, Ahmad b. Daw-d (d. 282 AH). Kitab al-Akhbar al-Tiwal. Ed. Hasan al-Zayn. Beirut, 1988. Al-Fasawi, Abu Yusuf Ya‘qub b. Sufyan (d. 277 AH). Kitab al-Ma‘rifa wal Tarikh. Ed. Akram D. al-‘Umari. Baghdad: Matba‘t al-Irshad, 1974. Al-Hamadani, Abu Muhammad al-Hasan (d. 334 AH). Sifat Jazirat al-‘Arab. Ed. David Muller. Leiden, 1968. Al-Hamidi, Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad (d. 488 AH). Jadhwat al-Muqtabas fi Dhikr Wulat al-Andalus. Ed. Rawhiya al-Suwayfi. Beirut, 1997. Al-Harawi, ‘Ali b. Abi Bakr (d. 611 AH). Al-Isharat ila Ma‘rifat al-Ziyarat. Ed. Janine Sourdel-Thomine. Damascus, 1953. Al-Hazimi, Muhammad b. Abi ‘Uthman. ‘Ajalat al-Mubtada’ wa Fadalat al-Muntaha fi al-Nasab. Cairo, 1965. Al-Himyari, Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Mun‘im (d. Eight century AH). Al-Rawd al-Mi‘tar fi Khabar al-Aqtar. Ed. Ihsan ‘Abbas. Beirut: Maktabat Lubnan, 1975. Al-Hurr al-‘Amili, Muhammad b. Hasan (d. 1104 AH). Amal al-Amil fi ‘Ulama’ Jabal ‘Amil. Ed. Ahmad al-Husayni. Baghdad: Maktabat al-Andalus, 1385 AH. Ibn ‘Abd al-Bar, Yusuf b. ‘Abd Allah (d. 463 AH). Al-Anbah ‘Ala Qaba’il alRuwat. Ed. Ibrahim al-Abyari. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi, 1985. Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam, ‘Abd Allah (d. 257 AH). Futuh Misr wal Maghrib. Cairo, 1995. Ibn ‘Abd al-Zahir, Muhyi al-Din Abu al-Fadl ‘Abd Allah (d. 692 AH). Tashrif al-Ayyam Wal ‘Usur fi Sirat al-Malik al-Mansur. Ed. Muhammad Kamil. Cairo, 1961. Ibn ‘Abd Rabih al-Andalusi, Ahmad b. Muhammad (d. 328 AH). Kitab al-‘Iqd al-Farid. Ed. I. Al-Abyari. Beirut, n.d. Ibn Abi Hadid, ‘Izz al-Din Ab- Hamid (d. 655 AH). Sharh Nahj al-Balagha. Ed. Muhammad Ibrahim. Beirut: Dar al-Jalil, 1996. Ibn al-‘Adim, ‘Umar. Zubdat al-Halab Min Tarikh Halab. Ed. Sami al-Dahan. Damascus, 1968. Ibn ‘Asakir, ‘Ali b. al-Hasan (d. 571 AH). Tarikh Madinat Dimashq. Ed. ‘Umar al-‘Amrawi. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr al-‘Arabi, 1995. Ibn al-A‘tham al-Kufi, Ahmad (d.c.314 AH). Kitab al-Futuh. Ed. Muhammad ‘Abd al-Mu‘id Khan. Hyderabad: Da‘irat al-Ma‘arif al-‘Uthmaniyya, 1968. Ibn al-Athir, ‘Izz al-Din Abu al-Hasan (d. 1232 AH). Al-Kamil Fi al-Tarikh. Ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Tadmuri. Beirut, 1997. ——— Al-Lubab fi Tahdhib al-Ansab. Beirut: Dar Sadir, 1980. ——— Usd al-Ghaba fi Ma‘rifat al-Sahaba. Ed. Muhammad al-Banna. Cairo, 1285 AH.

BIBLIOGR APHY

201

Ibn Babawayh, Abu Ja‘far Muhammad (d. 381 AH). Ma‘ani al-Akhbar. Ed. ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghifari. Tahran, 1379 AH. Ibn Bashkwwal, Abu al-Qasim Khalaf (d. 578 AH). Al-Sila. Cairo, 1966. Ibn Batuta, Muhammad. (d. 770 or 779 AH). Tuhfat al-Nazar fi Ghara’ib alAmsar wa ‘Aja’ib al-Asfar. Beirut, 1960. Ibn Durayd, Muhammad (d. 321 AH). Al-Ishtiqaq. Ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Harun. Cairo: Mu’asasat al-Khanji, 1958. ——— Genealogisch-etymologisches Handbuch. Ed. Ferdinand Wüstenfeld. Göttingen, 1854. Ibn al-Faqih, Abu Bakr Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Hamadhani (d. 3rd AH). Kitab al-Buldan. Ed. M.J. de Goeje. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1885. Ibn al-Fardi, ‘Abd Allah b. Muhammad (d. 403 AH). Tarikh ‘Ulama’ al-Andalus. Ed. R. al-Suwayfi. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1997. Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Shihab al-Din Ahmad (d. 852 AH). Tahdhib al-Tahdhib. Haydarabad, 1327 AH. Ibn Hawqal, Muhammad b. ‘Ali (d.c.362 AH). Kitab Surat al-Ard. Beirut: Dar Maktabat al-Hayat, 1992. Ibn Hazm, ‘Ali b. Ahmad (d. 456 AH). Jamharat Ansab al-‘Arab. Ed. ‘Abd alSalam Harun. Cairo: Dar al-Ma‘arif bi Mi·r, 1962. ——— Al-Fasl Fil Milal wal Ahwa’ wal-Nihal. Cairo, 1929. Ibn al-Jawzi, Abu al-Faraj ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Ali (d. 597 AH). Al-Muntazam fi Tarikh al-Muluk wal Umam. Ed. Muhammad A. ‘Ata and Mustafa A. ‘Ata. Ibn Jubayr. Rihla. Leiden and London, 1907. Ibn al-Kalbi, Hisham b. Muhammad (d. 204 AH). Jamharat al-Ansab. Ed. N. Hasan. Beirut, 1986. ——— G˘amharat An-Nasab Das Genealogische Werk Des Hišam Ibn Muhammad al-Kalbi, ed. Werner Caskel. Leiden, 1966. ——— Kitab al-Asnam. Ed. Wahib ‘Atallah. Paris: Librairie C. Klincksieck, 1969. Ibn Kathir, Isma‘il b.‘Umar (d. 774 AH). Al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya. Cairo, 1932-9. Ibn Khaldun, ‘Abd al-Rahman (d. 808 AH). Kitab al-‘Ibar. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Lubnani, 1966-77. Ibn al-Khatib, Lisan al-Din. Al-Ihata fi Akhbar Gharnata. Cairo, 1975. Ibn Khurradadhbeh, ‘Ubayd Allah b. ‘Abd Allah (d.c.300 AH). Kitab al-Masalik Wal Mamalik. Ed. M. J de Goeje. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1889. Ibn Muzahim, Na·r (d. 212). Waq‘at Siffin. Ed. ‘Abd al-Salam M. Harun. Cairo, 1382 AH. Ibn Qutayba, ‘Abd Allah b. Muslim (d. 276 AH). Kitab al-Shi‘r Wal Shu‘ara’. Ed. Muhammad Y. Najm and I. ‘Abbas. Beirut, n.d. ——— (attrib.) Al-Imama wal Siyasa. Ed. K. al-Mansur. Beirut, 1997. Ibn Rusteh, Abu ‘Ali Ahmad b. ‘Umar. Kitab al-A‘laq al-Nafisa. Ed. M.J. de Goeje. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1891. Ibn Sa‘d, Muhammad (d. 230 AH). Kitab al-Tabaqat. Beirut: Dar Sadir, 1985. Ibn Sallam, Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim (d. 224 AH). Kitab al-Nasab. Ed. Mariam Kheyr al-Diri‘. Beirut, 1989. ——— Kitab al-Amwal. Ed. Muhammad Haras. Beirut, 1986.

202 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Ibn Shaddad, ‘Izz al-Din Abu ‘Abd Allah Muhammad (d. 684 AH). Al-A‘laq alKhatira fi Dhikr ’Umara’ al-Jazira. Ed. D. Sourdel. Damascus, 1953. Al-Isfahani, Abu al-Faraj ‘Ali (d. 356 AH). Kitab al-Aghani. Ed.‘Abd Allah al-‘Alayli and Musa Sulayman and Ahmad Abu Sa‘d. Beirut: Dar al-Thaqafa, 1973. Al-Istakhri, Abu Ishaq Ibrahim (d. Fourth century AH). Kitab Masalik al-Mamalik. Ed. M.J. de Goeje. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1870. Al-Jahiz, Abu ‘Uthman b. Bahr (d. 255 AH). Al-Bursan wal ‘Irjan wal ‘Imyan wal Hulan. Ed. Muhammad al-Khawli. Cairo-Beirut, 1972. ——— Kitab al-Hayawan. Ed. ‘Abd al-Salam Haun. Cairo, 1938. Al-Jumahi, Muhammad Ibn Sallam. Tabaqat al-Shu‘ara’. Ed. F. al-Tabba‘. Beirut, 1997. Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Abu Bakr Ahmad b. ‘Ali. Tarikh Baghdad aw Madinat al-Salam. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyya. Al-Kindi, Muhammad b. Yusuf (d. 350 AH). Wulat Misr. Ed. Husayn Nasar. Beirut: Dar Sadir, n.d. Al-Maqarri, Ahmad b. Muhammad, Nafh al-Tib min Ghisn al-Andalus al-Ratib. Beirut, 1968. Al-Maqrizi, Taqi al-Din Ahmad (d. 845 AH). Kitab al-Suluk fi Ma‘rifat al-Muluk. Cairo, 1970. ——— Itt‘az al-Hunafa bi Akhbar al-A’ima al-Fatimiyyin al-Khulafa. Ed. J. al-Shayyal and Muhammad Hilmi Ahmad. 3 vls. Cairo, 1967, 71, 73. Al-Mas‘udi, ‘Ali b. al-Husayn (d. 345 AH). Muruj al-Dhahab wa Ma‘adin alJawhar. Ed. C. Pellat. Beirut, 1970. ——— Al-Tanbih wal Ishraf. Ed. M. J. De Goeje. Leiden: Brill, 1893. Al-Mazzi, Jamal al-Din Abi al-Hajjaj Yusuf (d. 752 AH). Tahdhib al-Kamal fi Asma’ al-Rijal. Ed. Bashar A. Ma‘rif. Beirut, 1983. Al-Mubarrad, Abu al-‘Abbas Muhammad b. Yazid. Nasab ‘Adnan wa Qahtan. Ed. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al-Rajikuti. India, 1936. Al-Mufid, Shaykh Muhammad b. Nu‘man (d. 413 AH). Al-Ikhtisas. Ed. ‘Ali Akbar al-Ghifari. Tehran, 1959. Al-Mughiri, ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Hamad al-Lami al-Ta’i. Al-Muntakhab fi Dhikr Nasab Qaba’il al-‘Arab. Ed. I. Al-Zayd. Al-Ta’if, 1985. Al-Muqaddasi, Muhammad b. Ahmad (d. 390 AH). Ahsan al-Taqasim fi Ma‘rifat al-Aqalim. Ed. M.J.de Goeje. Leiden, 1906. Mus‘ab al-Zubayri, Kitab Nasab Quraysh. Ed. E. Levi-Provençal. Cairo, 1953. Al-Nawbakhti, Abu Muhammad Hasan (d.c.300-10 AH). Firaq al-Shi‘a. Istanbul, 1931. Nabulsi, ‘Abd al-Ghani (d. 1105 AH). Al-Haqiqa wal Majaz fi Rihlat Bilad al-Sham wa Misr wal Hijaz. Ed. ‘Abd al-Hamid Murad. Damascus: Dar al-Ma‘rifa, 1989. Nasir-i Khusraw, Abu Mu‘in (d.c.465-71 AH). Safarnamah. Trans. By Yahya Khashab. Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Jadid, 1983.

BIBLIOGR APHY

203

Al-Nuwayri, Muhammad b. Qasim al-Iskandarani (d.c.775 AH). Kitab al-ilmam fima Jarat bihi al-Ahkam wal Umur al-Maqdiyya fi Waq‘at al-Iskandariyya. Ed. Etienne Combe and Aziz Combe. Al-Qadi ‘Ayyad. Tartib al-Madarik wa Taqrib al-Masalik li Ma‘rifat A‘lam Madhhab Malik. Ed. M. al-Tabkhi. Rabat, 1965. Al-Qalqashandi, Abu al-‘Abbas Ahmad (d. 821 AH). Nihayat al-Arab fi Ma‘rifat Ansab al-‘Arab. Ed. Ibrahim al-Abyari. Cairo: al-Sharqiyya al-‘Arabiyya lil Nashr, 1981. ——— Subh al-A‘sha fi Sina‘at al-Insha. Ed. Muhammad Shams al-Din. Beirut, 1987. Al-Ra‘i al-Numayri. Diwan. Ed. Muhammad Tarifi. Beirut, 2000. ——— Diwan. Ed. Reinhard Weipert. Beirut, 1980. Al-Sam‘ani, ‘Abd al-Karim al-Tamimi. Kitab al-Ansab. Ed. R. Murad and M. Hafiz. Beirut, 1984. Al-Samhudi, Nur al-Din ‘Ali (911 AH). Kitab Wafa’ al-Wafa Bi Akhbar Dar al-Mustafa. Egypt: Matba‘at al-Adab wal Mu’ayyid, 1326 AH). Sayf b. ‘Umar (d.180 AH). Kitab al-Ridda wal Futuh. Ed. Qasim al-Samura’i. Leiden, 1995. Shaykh al-Ta’ifa, Muhammad b. Hasan al-Tusi. (d. 1067 AH). Al-Fihrist. Mashhad, 1972. Al-Tabari, Muhammad b. Jarir (d. 310 AH). Tarikh al-Umam wal Muluk. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1995. Al-‘Umari, Ahmad b. Yahya b. Fadl Allah (d. 749 AH). Masalik al-Absar fi Mamalik al-Amsar. Ed. D. Kravolsky. Beirut, 1986. Al-Walid ibn Yazid (d. 744 AD). Diwan. Ed. Husayn Atwan. Beirut: Dar al-Jil, 1998. Al-Waqidi, Muhammad b. ‘Umar (d. 207 AH) (attrib). Futuh al-Sham. Ed. ‘Abd al-Latif ‘Abd al-Rahman. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1997. ——— Al-Maghazi. Ed. J. Marsden Jones. London, 1966. Al-Ya‘qubi, Ahmad b. ‘Abi Ya‘qub ( d.c.284 AH). Kitab al-Buldan. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi, 1988. ——— Tarikh. Beirut: Dar Sadir, 1992. Yaqut al-Hamawi (d. 626 AH). Mu‘jam al-Buldan. Ed. Farid ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Jundi. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, n.d. ——— Al-Muqtadab Min Kitab Jamharat al-Nasab. Ed. Naji Hasan. Beirut: Al-Dar Al-‘Arabiyya Lil Mawsu‘at, 1987. Yazid b. Mu‘awiya (d. 64 AH). Diwan. Ed. Wadih al-Samad. Beirut: Dar Sadir, 1998. Zuhayr b. Janab al-Kalbi. Diwan. Ed. M.S. Bitar. Beirut, 1999.

Primary Byzantine and Crusades Sources Benjamin of Tuleda. The Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela. Tr. and Commentary Marcus N. Adler. NewYork, Philipp Feldheim, Inc. 1965.

204 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Dennis, G.T. Three Byzantine Military Treatises. Ed. and Trans. G.T. Dennis. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, 1985. Fulcher of Chartres. A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem 1095-1127. Tr. Frances Rita Ryan. Ed. Harold S. Fink. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1969. Hoyland, Robert J. Seeing Islam as Others Saw it: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam. Princeton: Darwin Press, 1997. John, Bishop of Nikiu. Chronicle. Trans. R.M. Charles. Oxford, 1916. Luckenbill, Daniel David. The Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia. Trans. D.D. Luckenbill. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1926. Mauricius. Strategikon: Handbook of Byzantine Military Strategy. Trans. George T. Dennis. Philadelphia, 1984. Michel le Syrien. Chronique de Michel le Syrien, Patriarche Jacobite d’Antioche 11661199. Ed. and Trans. J-B. Chabot. Paris, 1901. Nikephoros. Nikephoros Patriarch of Constantinople Short History Ed. and Trans. C. Mango. Washington, 1990. Palmer, Andrew. The Seventh Century in the West-Syrian Chronicles. Ed. and Trans. Andrew Palmer and Sebastien Brock. Liverpool, 1993. Sebeos. The Armenian History Attributed to Sebeos. Trans. R.W. Thomson. Theophanes Confessor. The Chronicle of Theophanes Confessor. Trans. C.Mango and R.Scott. Oxford, 1997. Theophylact Simocatta. The History of Theophylact Simocatta. Tr. Michael Whitby and Mary Whitby. Oxford, 1986. William Archbishop of Tyre. A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea. Tr. Emily Atwater Babock and A.C. Krey. New York: Columbia University Press, 1943.

Secondary Arabic Sources ‘Abbas, Ihsan. Tarikh Bilad al-Sham Min ma Qabl al-Islam Hatta Bidayat al-‘Asr al-Umawi 600-661. ‘Amman: University of Jordan. Al-Afghani, Sa‘id. ‘ Mu‘awiya fil Asatir.’ In The second International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham. Ed. ‘Abd ‘Aziz al-Duri and ‘Abd al-Karim Ghrayibah and ‘Umar al-Madani, 39-55. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1974. ‘Ali, Jawad. Al-Mifsal fi Tarikh al-‘Arab Qabl al-Islam. Beirut and Baghdad: Dar al-‘Ilm and Maktabat al-Nahda, Al-Amin, Muhsin. ‘Ayan al-Shi‘a. Dimashq: Ibn Zaydun, 1940. ——— Al-Shi‘a fi Masarihim al-Tarikhi. Ed. Hasan al-Amin. Beirut: Markaz al-Ghadir Lil Dirasat al-Islamiyya, 2000. ——— Khitat Jabal ‘Amil. Ed. Hasan al-Amin. Beirut: al-Dar al-‘Alamiyya, 1983. ‘Aqil, Nabih. ‘Mawqif Sukkan Bilad al-Sham min al-Fath.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the

BIBLIOGR APHY

205

Early Islamic Period up to 40 AH/640 AD. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, vol 3, 149-73. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1987. Al-Asad, Nasir al-Din. Masadir al-Shi‘r al-Jahili wa Qimatuha al-Tarikhiyya. Beirut, 1956. ‘Atwan, Husayn. Al-Jughrafiya al-Tarikhiyya Li Bilad al-Sham Fil ‘Asr al-Umawi. Beirut, 1987. ‘Awad, Kurkis. ‘Masadir al-Futuhat al-‘Arabiyya li Bilad al-Sham.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Early Islamic Period up to 40 AH/640 AD. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit and Ihsan ‘Abbas, vol 2, 25-64. ‘Amman: University of Jordan. Banut, Jihad. Harakat al-Nidal fi Jabal ‘Amil. Beirut: Dar al-Jadid, 1993. Baydun, Ibrahim. Malamih al-Tayyarat al-Siyasiyya fil Qarn al-Awwal al-Hijri. Beirut: Dar al-Nahda al-‘Arabiyya, 1979. ——— ‘Mu’tamar al-Jabiya.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, Vol 1, Arabic section, 143-89. Jordan: University of Yarmuk, 1987. Darwish, ‘Ali. Jabal ‘Amil Bayna 1516-1697: al-Hayat al-Siyasiyya wal Thaqafiyya. Beirut: Dar al-Hadi, 1993. Disuqi, Muhammad. Al-Qaba’il al-‘Arabiyya Fi Bilad al-Sham Mundhu zuhur alIslam ila Nihahat al-‘Asr al-Umawi. Cairo: al-Hay’a al-Amma Lil Kitab, 1998. Dixon, ‘Abd al-Amir. ‘ Mazhar min Mazahir al-Hukm al-Umawi fi Bilad alSham.’ In The Second International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham. Ed. ‘Abd ‘Aziz al-Duri and ‘Abd al-Karim Ghrayibah and ‘Umar al-Madani, 57-66. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1974. Dawud, Nabila ‘Abd al-Mun‘im. Nash’at al-Shi‘a al-Imamiyya. Baghdad, 1968. Al-Duri, ‘Abd ‘Aziz. ‘Al-‘Arab wal Ard fi Bilad al-Sham fi Sadr al-Islam.’ In The second International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham. Ed. ‘Abd ‘Aziz al-Duri and ‘Abd al-Karim Ghrayibah and ‘Umar al-Madani, 25-37. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1974. ——— Bahth fi Nash’at ‘Ilm al-Tarikh ‘ind al-‘Arab. Beirut, 1960. Al-Faqih, Muhammad Taqi. Jabal ‘Amil fi al-Tarikh. Beirut: Dar al-Adwa’, 1986. Fayyad, Nawal. Safahat min Tarikh Jabal ‘Amil fil ‘Ahdayn al-‘Uthmani wal Faransi. Beirut: Dar al-Jadid, 1998. Ghurayyib, Hasan. Nahwa Tarikh Fikri-Siyasi li Shi‘at Lubnan. Beirut: Dar alKunuz al-‘Arabiyya, 2000. Al-Hayyari, Mustafa. Al-Imara al-Ta’iyya fi Bilad al-Sham. ‘Amman, 1977. Al-Hurani, Yusuf. Al-Majhul wal Muhmal min Tarikh al-Janub al-Lubnani min Sijillat al-Fara‘ina lil Alf al-Thani Qabla al-Milad. Beirut: Dar al-Hadatha, 1999. Hurr, ‘Abd al-Majid. Ma‘alim al-Adab al-‘Amili fi Bidayat al-Qarn al-Rabi‘ alHijri Hatta Nihayat al-Qarn al-Thani ‘Ashar. Beirut, n.d. Al-Kafrawi, Muhammad. Tarikh al-Shi‘r al-‘Arabi. Cairo, 1961. Kahhala, ‘Umar Rida, Mu‘jam Qaba’il al-‘Arab. Beirut, 1968.

206 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Al-Kashif al-Ghita’, Muhammad Husayn. Asl al-Shi‘a wa Usuliha. Najaf, 1962. Khammash, Najdat. ‘Al-Ajnad wa Idaratuha.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, vol 1, Arabic section, 285-301. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1987. ——— ‘Al-Jaysh al-Shami fil ‘Asr al-’Umawi.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, vol 1, Arabic section, 349-67. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1987. Khuraysat, Muhammad. ‘Dawr Ghassan fil Hayat al-‘Amma.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, vol 1, 191-217. ‘Amman, 1987. ——— ‘Dawr al-‘Arab al-Mutanassira fil Futuhat.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the The Early Islamic Period up to 40 AH/ 640 AD. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit and Ihsan ‘Abbas, vol 2, 135-64. Jordan: University of Jordan, 1987. Majid, ‘Abd al-Mun‘im. ‘Mawqif al-Rum al-‘Arab min al-Islam.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the The Early Islamic Period up to 40 AH/ 640 AD. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, vol 3, 177-94. Jordan: University of Jordan, 1987. Makki, Muhammad ‘Ali. Lubnan Min al-Fath al-‘Arabi ila al-Fath al-‘Uthmani. Beirut: Dar al-Nahar lil Nashr, 1991. Makki, Muhammad Kazim. Al-Haraka al-Fikriyya wal Adabiyya fi Jabal ‘Amil. Beirut: Dar al-Andalus, 1982. Al-Muhajir, Ja‘far. Al-Ta’sis Li Tarikh al-Shi‘a fi Lubnan wa Suriyya. Beirut: Dar al-Malak, 1992. ——— Jabal ‘Amil Taht al-Ihtilal al-Salibi. Beirut: Dar al-Haq, 2001. ——— Al-Hijra al-‘Amiliyya Ila Iran Fil ‘Asr al-Safawi. Beirut: Dar al-Rawda, 1989. Rida, Rashid. Al-Sunna Wal Shi‘a. Cairo, 1947. Al-Safa, Muhammad Jabir. Tarikh Jabal ‘Amil. Beirut: Dar al-Nahar lil Nashr, 1981. Al-Salah, Tahsin Muhammad. ‘Adi ibn al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili: Hayatuhu wa Shi‘ruhu. ‘Amman, 1999. Al-Shak‘a, Mustafa. Rihlat al-Shi‘r min al-Umawiyya ila al-‘Abbasiyya. Beirut, 1979. Tadmuri, ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Salam. ‘Al-Fath al-Shami wa Siyasat al-Iskan li Sahil Dimashq ‘Lubnan’.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During The Early Islamic Period up to 40 AH/ 640 AD. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit and Ihsan ‘Abbas, vol 2, 333-73. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1987. ——— ‘Thughur Bilad al-Sham.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham during The Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, vol 1, Arabic section, 315-48. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1987.

BIBLIOGR APHY

207

‘Uthman, Hashim. Tarikh al-Shi‘a fi Sahil Bilad al-Sham al-Shamali. Beirut, 1994. Zakariyya, A.W. ‘Asha’ir al-Sham. Beirut and Damascus, 1997. Ziadah, Nuqula. ‘ Jughrafiyyat al-Sham ‘ind Jughrafiyyi al-Qarn al-Rabi‘ al-Hijri.’ In The Second International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham. Ed. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz al-Duri and ‘Abd al-Karim Ghrayibah and ‘Umar al-Madani, 139-79. ‘Amman: University of Amman, 1974. ——— ‘Al-Marakiz al-Idariyya wal ‘Askariyya fi Bilad al-Sham fi al-‘Asr alUmawi.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad alSham During The Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit, vol 1, Arabic section, 303-14. ‘Amman: University of Jordan.

Secondary Western Sources Altheim, F and Stiehl R. Die Araber in der alten Welt. Berlin, 1965. Anspacher, Abraham. Tiglath Pileser III. New York, 1966. Asad, Talal. ‘The Beduin as a military Force: Notes on Some Aspects of Power Relations Between Nomads and Sedentaries in Historical Perspective.’ In The Desert and the Sown: Nomads in the Wider Society. Ed. C. Nelson, 61-73. Berkeley: University of California, 1973. Becker, Carl. ‘The Expansion of the Saracens.’ Cambridge History of Islam. Ed. H.M. Gwatkin, 1967. Berkey, Jonathan. The Formation of Islam: Religion and Society in the Near East, 600-1800. Cambridge University Press, 2003. Brockelmann, Carl. History of The Islamic Peoples. Trans. Joel Carlmichael and Moshe Perlmann. New York, 1960. Brünnow R. and Domaszewski A. Die Provincia Arabia. Strasburg: Trübner, 1904-9. Brunschvig, Robert. ‘Les Usul al-Fiqh Imamites à leur Stade Ancien.’ In Le Shi‘isme Imamite. Ed. Toufic Fahd and Jean Aubin, 201-13. Paris, 1970. Bulliet, Richard. The Camel and the Wheel. New York: Columbia University Press, 1990. Caetani, Leone. Annali dell’Islam. Milan, 1905-26 ——— Studi di Storia Orientale. Milan, 1911-14. Cahen, Claude. La Syrie du Nord a l’Époque des Croisades et la Principauté Franque d’Antioche. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, 1940. ——— ‘The Seljuks.’ In A History of the Crusades. Ed. Marshall Baldwin. Madison, Milwaukee and London: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1969. Cameron, A.J. Abu Dharr al-Ghifari: An Examination of his Image in the Hagiography of Islam. London: Luzac, The Royal Asiatic Society, 1973. Caskel, Werner. ‘The Bedouinization of Arabia.’ In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Ed. F.E. Peters, v3, 34-44. Ashgate: Aldershot, Great Britain, 1999.

208 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Cantineau, J. Grammaire du Palmyrénien Épigraphique. Le Caire: Imprimerie de l’Institut Français d’Archéologie Orientale, 1935. ——— Le Nabatéen. Paris: Librairie Ernest Leroux, 1928-32. Cauvin, Jacques. ‘The Emergence of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Pastoral Nomadism in the Near East.’ In The Transformation of Nomadic Society in the Arab East. Ed. M. Mundy and B. Musallam, 17-23. Cambridge, Chelhod, Jean. Introduction à la Sociologie de l’Islam. Paris, 1958. Cobb, Paul. White Banners: Contention in ‘Abbasid Syria, 750-880. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2001. Conrad, Laurence. ‘Al-Azdi’s History of the Arab Conquests in Bilad al-Sham: Some Historical Observations.’ In The proceedings of The Second Symposium on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the Early Islamic Period up to 40 AH/ 640 AD. Ed. Muhammad Bakhit, I: 28-62. Jordan: University of Jordan, 1987. Crone, Patricia. ‘The Tribe and the State.’ In States in History. Ed. John A. Hall, 48-77. Basil Blackwell, 1989. ——— Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of The Islamic Polity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Crone, Patricia and Cook Michael. Hagarism: The Making of The Islamic World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980. Daftary, Farhad. The Isma‘ilis: Their History and Doctrines. Cambridge, 1990. Dahhan, Sami. ‘The Origins and Development of the Local Histories of Syria.’ In Historians of the Middle East. Ed. B.Lewis and P.M Holt. London, 1964. De Goeje, Michael. Mémoire sur le Foutouh Sham attribué à Abou Ismail al-Baçri. Leiden, 1864. ——— Mémoire sur la Conquête de la Syrie. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1900. Dennett, D. Conversion and the Poll-Tax in Early Islam. Cambridge, 1950. Dietrich, M. Die Aramäer Sudbabyloniens in der Sargonidenzeit. Neukirchen, 1970. Dixon, ‘Abd al-’Amir. The Umayyad Caliphate 65-86/684-705 (A Political Study). London: Luzac & Company, 1971. Donaldson, Dwight. The Shi‘ite Religion. London: Luzac & co, 1933. Donner, Fred. The Early Islamic Conquests. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981. ——— ‘The Shurta in Early Umayyad Syria.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During the Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit and Robert Schick, vol 2, English section, 247-62. Jordan: University of Jordan, 1987. ——— ‘The Role of Nomads in the Near East in Late Antiquity (400-800 CE).’ In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Ed. F.E. Peters, v3, 21-33. Ashgate: Aldershot, Great Britain, 1999. Dostal, Walter. ‘The Evolution of Bedouin Life.’ In L’Antica Societa Beduina. Ed. F. Gabrieli. Roma: Centro Di Studi Semitici, 1959. Dussaud, René. La Pénétration des Arabes en Syrie avant l’Islam. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1955. ——— Topographie Historique de la Syrie Antique et Médiévale. Paris: Geuthner, 1927.

BIBLIOGR APHY

209

Ellenblum, Ronnie. Frankish Rural Settlement in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. Cambridge, 1998. Eph‘al, Israel. The Ancient Arabs: Nomads on the Borders of the Fertile Crescent 9th-5th Centuries BC. Leiden, 1982. Fried, M. The Notion of the Tribe. Menlo Park: Cumming Publishing House, 1975. Gabrieli, Francesco. Muhammad and the Conquests of Islam. Tr. V. Luling and R. Linell. London: Weinfeld and Nicholson, 1968. ——— L’Antica Societa Beduina. Roma, 1959. Gawlikowski, M. and Starcky, J. Palmyre. Paris: Librairie d’Amerique et d’Orient, 1985. Gil, Moshe. A History of Palestine, 634-1099. Cambridge University Press, 1997. Goldziher, Ignaz. Muslim Studies. Trans. by C.R. Barber and S.M. Stern. Ed. S.M. Stern. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1967. Grunebaum, G.E. ‘The Nature of Arab Unity Before Islam.’ In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Ed. F.E. Peters. Aldershot, Brookfield USA, Singapore, Sydney: Variorum, 1999. Guichard, Pierre. ‘Nomadisme et Tribalisme.’ In Etats, Societés et Cultures du Monde Musulman Médiéval X-XV. Ed. J.C Garcin. Paris, 2000. Halm, Heinz. Shiism. Trans. By Janet Watson. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1991. Hasan, Naji. The Role of the Arab Tribes in the East During the Period of the Umayyads. Baghdad: Baghdad University, 1975-6. Hawting, G.R. The First Dynasty of Islam: The Umayyad Caliphate AD. 661-750. London & New York: Routledge, 2000. Henninger Joseph. ‘Pre-Islamic Bedouin Religion.’ In The Arabs and Arabia on the Eve of Islam. Ed. F.E. Peters, v3, 109-128. Ashgate, 1999. ——— ‘La Société Bédouine Ancienne.’ In L’Antica Societa Beduina. Ed. F. Gabrieli. Roma: Centro Di Studi Semitici, 1959. Hillenbrand, Robert. Islamic Architecture. Edinburgh, 1994. Holt, P.M. Ed. Early Mamluk Diplomacy. New York and Köln: Brill, 1995. Hoyland, R. ‘Sebeos, the Jews and the Rise of Islam.’ In Medieval and Modern Perspectives on Muslim-Jewish Relations. Ed. R. L. Nettler, 89-102. Luxembourg: Harwood Academic Publishers, 1995. Jabbur, Jibrail. The Bedouins and the Desert: Aspects of Nomadic Life in the Arab East. Trans and ed. L. Conrad and S. Jabbur. New York, 1995. Jafri, Husayn. Origins and Early Development of Shi‘a Islam. Beirut: Librairie du Liban, 1979. Jaussen, Antonin. Coutumes des Arabes au Pays de Moab. Paris, 1908. Kaegi, Walter. Byzantium and The Early Islamic Conquests. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Kedar, Benjamin. ‘The Subjected Muslims of the Frankish Levant.’ In Muslims Under Latin Rule 1100-1300. Ed. James M. Powell, 135-74. Princeton, 1990.

210

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Kennedy, Hugh. The Armies of The Caliphs: Military and Society in The Early Islamic State. London and New York: Routledge, 2001. ——— The Early Abbasid Caliphate: A Political History. London, 1981. ——— ‘Nomads and Settled People in Bilad al-Sham in the Third/Ninth and Fourth/Tenth Centuries.’ In The Fifth International Conference on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the ‘Abbasid Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit and Robert Shick, English and French Section, v2, 105-13. ‘Amman, 1990. ——— ‘The Origins of the Qays-Yaman Dispute in Bilad al-Sham.’ In Proceedings of the Second Symposium on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the Early Islamic Period Up to 40 AH/640 AD. v1, 87-95. Ed. M.A. Bakhit. ‘Amman, 1987. Kister, M.J. ‘The Battle of the Harra. Some Socio-Economic Aspects.’ In Studies in Memory of Gaston Wiet. Ed. M. Rosen-Ayalon, 33-68. Jerusalem, 1977. Khalidi, Tarif. Arabic Historical thought in The Classical Period. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. Khazanov. A.M. Nomads and the Outside World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. Kohlberg, Etan. Belief and Law in Imami Sh‘ism. Variorium: Hampshire and Vermont, 1991. ——— ‘Some Imami Shi‘i Interpretations of Umayyad History.’ In Studies on the First Century of Islamic Society. Ed. G.H.A Juynboll, 145-159. Carbondale, 1982. Lammens, Henri. L’avènement des Marwanides et Le Califat de Marwan I. Melanges de L’Universite Saint- Joseph. Beirut: Imprimerie Catholique, 1927. ——— Études Sur Le Siècle des Omayyades. Beirut: Imprimerie Catholique, 1930. ——— Le Berceau de l’Islam. L’Arabie occidentale à la veille de l’Hégire. Rome, 1914. Lapidus, Ira. ‘Tribes and State Formation in Islamic History.’ In Tribes and State Formation in the Middle East. Ed. P. S. Khoury and J. Kostiner, 25-47. Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford, 1990. Lewis, Bernard, and Holt P.M. Ed. Historians of The Middle East. London: Oxford University Press, 1964. Littman, E. Publications of the Princeton Archaeological Expedition to Syria, 1904-5 and 1909. Leyden, 1914-41. Lökkergaard, Freddie. Islamic Taxation in the Classical Period. Copenhagen, 1950. Madelung, Wilferd. ‘Imamism and Mu‘tazilite Theology.’ In Le Shi‘ism Imamite. Ed. T. Fahd and J. Aubin, 13-30. Paris: Presses Universitaires, 1970. Malamat, A. ‘The Arameans.’ In Peoples of Old Testament Times. Ed. D.J. Wiseman. Oxford, 1973. ——— Religious Schools and Sects in Medieval Islam. London: Variorum Reprints, 1985. Millar, Fergus. The Roman Near East (31 BC – AD 337). Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1993. Momen, Moojan. An Introduction to Shi‘ism: The History and Doctrines of Twelver Shi‘ism. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1985.

BIBLIOGR APHY

211

Moreno, Eduardo Manzano. ‘The Settlement and Organization of the Syrian Jund in al-Andalus.’ In The Formation of Al-Andalus, v46, pt1, 85-114. Ed. Manuela Marlin. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1998. Morony, Michael G. Iraq After the Conquest. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984. ——— ‘Syria Under the Persians.’ In Proceedings of the Second Symposium on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the Early Islamic Period Up to 40 AH/640 AD. v1, 87-95. Ed. M.A. Bakhit. ‘Amman, 1987. Muir, William. The Caliphate: its Rise, Decline and Fall. Beirut: Khayat, 1963. Mundy, M. and Musallam, B. The Transformation of Nomadic Society in the Arab East. Cambridge, 2000. Musil, A. The Northern Hijaz. New York, 1927. ——— Palmyra. New York, 1928. ——— The Manners and Customs of the Rwala Bedouins. New York: American Geographical Society, 1928. Nelson, Cynthia, ed. The Desert and the Sown: Nomads in the Wider Society. Berkeley: University of California, 1973. Nöldeke, Theodor. The Princes of Ghassan from the House of Gafna. Tr. Bandali Jouze and Costi K. Zurayq. Beirut: Catholic Press, 1933). Poidebard, A. La Trace de Rome dans le Desert de Syrie. Paris, 1934. Rabbat, Edmond. L’Orient Chrétien à La veille de L’Islam. Beyrouth: Publications de L’Université Libanaise, 1989. Riley-Smith, Jonathan. The Feudal Nobility and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, 1174-1277. London and Basingstoke: The Macmillan Press Ltd, 1973. Rosenthal, Franz. A History of Muslim Historiography. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1968. Ryckmans, G. Les Noms Propres Sud-Semitiques. Louvain, 1834. Saleh, Abdel Hamid. ‘The Bedouins of Egypt During the First Centuries of the Hijra.’ In Agricultural Production and Pastoralism, v.11. Ed. Michael Morony, 93-114. Ashgate, 2002. Salibi, Kamal. Syria Under Islam: Empire on Trial, 634-1097 AD. New York: Caravan, 1977. Sartre, Maurice. Trois études sur l’Arabie romaine et byzantine. Bruxelles: Latomus Revue d’Etudes Latines, 1982. ——— D’Alexandre à Zénobie: Histoire du Levant antique. Paris: Fayard, 2001. Schick, Robert. ‘The Fate of The Christians in Palestine During the ByzantineUmayyad Transition, 600-750 AD.’ In The Fourth International Conference on The History of Bilad al-Sham During The Umayyad Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit and Robert Schick, vol 2, English section, 37-48. ‘Amman: University of Jordan, 1987. Shaban, M.A. Islamic History: A New Interpretation AD. 600-750. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. ——— Islamic History: A New Interpretation AD. 750-1055. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

212

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Shahid, ‘Irfan. Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fourth Century. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1984. ———Byzantium and the Arabs in the Fifth Century. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1989. ———Byzantium and the Arabs in the Sixth Century. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 1995. ——— Rome and the Arabs: A Prolegomenon to the Study of Byzantium and the Arabs. Dumbarton Oaks, 1984. ——— ‘The Byzantine Origin of the Umayyad Ajnad System.’ In Abstracts of Papers, Fifth Annual Byzantine Studies Conference, 21, 1979. ——— ‘Ghassanid and Umayyad Structures: A case of Byzance Après Byzance.’ In La Syrie de Byzance à l’Islam. Ed. Pierre Canivet et J.Paul Rey-Coquais. Damas: Institut Francais de Damas, 1992. Shlumberger, Daniel. La Palmyrene du Nord-Ouest. Suivi par Recueil Epigraphique H.Ingholt and J. Starcky. Paris: Librairie Orientaliste, 1951. Smith, W. Robertson. Kinship and Marriage in early Arabia. Beirut: United Publishers, 1973. Stark, J. Personal Names in Palmyrene Inscriptions. Oxford, 1971. Stoneman, Richard. Palmyra and its Empire: Zenobia’s Revolt against Rome. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1992. Tapper, Richard. ‘Anthropologists, Historians, and Tribespeople on Tribe and State Formation in the Middle East.’ In Tribes and State Formation in the Middle East. Ed. P.S. Khoury and J. Kostiner, 48-73. Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford, 1990. Tonkin, Elizabeth. Narrating our Pasts: The Social Construction of Oral History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Trimingham, J. Spencer. Christianity Among the Arabs in Pre-Islamic Times. London and Beirut: Longman and Librairie du Liban, 1979. Vansina, Jan. Oral Tradition as History. Wisconsin, 1985. Vasiliev, A.A. History of the Byzantine Empire. Wisconsin, 1952. Vogue, M. De. Syrie Centrale: Architecture Civile et Religieuse du Ier au 7em. Paris, 1865-77. Vries De, B. ‘Umm al-Jimal in the First Three Centuries AD.’ In The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East. Ed. Freeman and Kennedy. Oxford, 1986. Walker, Paul. Exploring an Islamic Empire: Fatimid History and Its Sources. London, 2002. Watt, Montgomery. ‘The Reappraisal of ‘Abbasid Shi‘ism’. In Arabic and Islamic Studies in Honor of Hamilton A.R.Gibb. Ed. George Maqdisi. Leiden, 1965. Wellhausen, Julius. The Arab Kingdom and its Fall. Trans. By Margaret Weir. Calcutta: University of Calcutta, 1927. ——— Reste Arabischen Heidentums Gesammelt und Erlautert. Berlin, 1897. Whittow, Mark. The Making of Orthodox Byzantium, 600-1025. London, 1996.

BIBLIOGR APHY

213

Wüstenfeld, Ferdinand. Register zu den Genealogischen Tabellen der Arabischen Stämme und Familien. Göttingen, 1853. Zeyadeh, Ali Hussein. ‘Baysan: A City from the Ninth Century AD.’ In The Fifth International Conference on the History of Bilad al-Sham During the ‘Abbasid Period. Ed. Muhammad A. Bakhit and Robert Shick, English and French Section, v2, 114-29. ‘Amman, 1990. Zwettler, Michael, The Oral Tradition of Classical Arabic Poetry: Its Character and Implications. Columbus, 1978.

Periodical Literature Agha, Salih S. ‘The Arab Population in Khurasan During the Umayyad Period.’ Arabica 46 (1999): 211-29. Agha, Salih Said and Khalidi, Tarif. ‘Poetry and Identity in the Umayyad Age.’ Al-Abhath 50-55 (2002-3): 55-119. Arnold, Leon. ‘Le Credo du Shi‘ism Duodecimain.’ Travaux et Jours 17 (1965): 35-54. Arslan, Shakib. ‘Al-Shi‘a fi Jabal ‘Amil.’ Al-‘Irfan 2 (1910): 444-50. Ashkenazi, Touvia. ‘La tribu arabe: ses éléments.’ Anthropos XLI-XLIV (1946-9): 657-72. ‘Athamina, Khalil. ‘Non-Arab Regiments and the Private Militias During the Umayyad Period.’ Arabica 45, nbr 4 (1998): 347-78. ——— ‘Arab Settlement During the Umayyad Caliphate.’ Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 8 ( 1986): 185-207. Bacon, Elizabeth. ‘Types of Pastoral Nomadism in Central and Southwest Asia.’ Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 10 (1954): 44-68. Beg, Muhammad ‘Abd al-Jabbar. ‘The Reign of Mu‘awiya: A Critical Study.’ Islamic Culture 51 (1977): 83-107. Biebuyck, Daniel. ‘On the Concept of Tribe.’ Civilisations 16 (1966): 500-11. Blachère, Regis. ‘Regards sur L’Acculturation des Arabo-Musulmans Jusque Vers 40/661.’ Arabica 3 (1956): 247-65. Bligh-Abramski, Irit. ‘Evolution Versus Revolution: Umayyad Elements in the ‘Abbasid Regime 133/750-350/932.’ Der Islam 65 (1988): 226-43. Bosworth, Clifforde. ‘Baha’ al-Din al-‘Amili and his literary Anthologies.’ Journal of Islamic Studies 9-11 (1986-88). ——— ’Military Organization in Early Islam.’ Irish Arab News 3ii (1978): 14-16. Bowersock, G.W. ‘Limes Arabicus.’ Harvard Studies in Classical Philosophy 80 (1976): 219-29. Bousquet, Georges Henri. ‘Obsérvations sur la nature et les causes de la conquête Arabe.’ Studia Islamica 6 (1956): 37-52. Brock, S. ‘Syriac Sources for Seventh Century History.’ Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies ii (1976).

214

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Canard, Marius. ‘L’éxpansion arabe: le problème militaire.’ L’Occidente e L’Islam nell’Alto Medioevo 12 (1965): 37-63. Chelhod, Joseph. ‘Les Structures Dualistes de la Société Bédouine.’ L’Homme 9, nbr2 (1969): 89-112. Christides, V. ‘Arabs as Barbaroi Before the Rise of Islam.’ Balkan Studies 10 (1969): 315-24. Crone, Patricia. ‘Were the Qays and Yemen of the Umayyad Period Political Parties?’ Der Islam 71 (1994): 1-57. Djait, Hichem. ‘Les Yamanites à Kufa au Ier Siécle de l’Hégire.’ Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 19, II (1976): 148-81. Donaldson, Dwight. ‘The Shiah doctrine of The Imamate.’ The Moslem World 21 (1931): 14-23. Dussaud, R. ‘Inscription nabatéo-arabe d’en-Namara,’ Revue Archéologique (1902): 409-20. Elad, Amikam. ‘The Southern Golan in the Early Muslim Period: The Significance of Two Newly Discovered Milestones of ‘Abd al-Malik.’ Der Islam 76 (1999): 33-88. Friedlander, Israel. ‘The Heterodoxies of the Shiites in the Presentation of Ibn Hazm.’ Journal of the American Oriental Society 28 (1907): 1-80. ——— ‘The Heterodoxies of the Shiites in the Presentation of Ibn Hazm.’ Journal of the American Oriental Society 29 (1908): 1-183. Gaube, Heinz. ‘Arabs in Sixth Century Syria: Some Archaeological Observations.’ British Society for Middle Eastern Studies Bulletin 8 (1981): 93-9. Gawlikowski, Michel. ‘Les Princes de Palmyre.’ Syria 62 (1985): 251-61. Graf, David. ‘Saracens and the Defense of the Arabian Frontier.’ Belletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 229 (1978): 1-26. Graf, David and O’Connor, M. ‘ The Origin of the Term Saracen and the Rawwafa Inscriptions.’ Byzantine Studies 4 (1977): 52-66. Haarmann, Ulrich. ‘Abu Dharr- Muhammad’s Revolutionary Companion.’ The Muslim World 68 (1978): 285-9. Hamarneh, Saleh. ‘The Role of the Nabateans in the Islamic Conquest.’ Hamdard Islamicus 5, nbr 3 (1982): 21-8. ——— ‘Marwan b. al-Hakam and the Caliphate.’ Der Islam 65, Heft 2 (1988): 200-25. Hasson, Isaac. ‘Le Chef Judhamite Rawh ibn Zinba‘.’ Studia Islamica 77 (1993): 95-122. ——— ‘Judham entre la Jahiliyya et l’Islam’. Studia Islamica 81 (1995): 5-42. ——— ‘Les Mawali dans l’Armée Musulmane Sous les Premiers Umayyads.’ Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 14 (1991). Hayyari, Mustafa ‘Ali. ‘Jund al-Urdunn, Mulahazat Hawl Hududih alJughrafiyya.’ Al-Abhath, Arabic section, 35 (1987): 3-19. Hinds, Martin. ‘The Banners and Battle Cries of The Arabs at Siffin’. Al-Abhath 24 (1971): 3-42.

BIBLIOGR APHY

215

——— ‘Kufan Political Alignments and Their Background in the Mid-Seventh Century AD.’ International Journal of Middle East Studies 2 (1971): 346-67. ——— ‘The Siffin Arbitration Agreement.’ Journal of Semitic Studies 17 (1972): 93-113. Hoteit, Ahmad. ‘Influence des Croisades sur les Diverses Communautés Religieuses Libanaises.’ Hallesche Beitrage Zur Orient Wissenchaft 22 (1996): 63 Hourani, Albert. ‘From Jabal ‘Amil to Persia.’ BSOAS 49 (1986): 133-40. Ivanow, Vladimir. ‘ Early Shi‘ite Movements.’ Journal of the Bombay Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 17 (1941): 1-23. Ja‘fariyan, Rasul. ‘Shi‘ism and its Types During the Early Centuries.’ Al-Tawhid 14, nbr 3 (1997): 155-76. Kaegi, Walter. ‘Heraklios and the Arabs.’ Greek Orthodox Theological Review 27 (1982): 109. Kennedy, D. ‘The Roman Frontier in Arabia.’ Journal of Roman Archaeology 5 (1992): 473. ——— ‘From Oral Tradition to Written Record in Arabic Genealogy.’ Arabica 44 (1997): 531-44. ——— ‘Central Government and Provincial Elites in The Early Abbasid Caliphate.’ BSOAS 44 (1981): 26-38. Kister, M.J. ‘Labbayka, Allahuma, Labbayka . . . On a Monotheistic Aspect of a Jahiliyya Practice.’ Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, II (1980): 33-57. ——— ‘Al-Hira: Some Notes on its Relations With Arabia’. Arabica 15 (1968): 143-69. Kister M.J and Plessner M. ‘ Notes on Caskel’s Gamharat An-Nasab.’ Oriens 25-26 (1976): 48-68. Kohlberg, Etan. ‘ From Imamiyya to Ithna ‘Ashariyya.’ BSOAS 39 (1976): 521-34. ——— ‘ The Evolution of the Shi‘a.’ The Jerusalem Quarterly 27 (1983): 109-26. Lammens, Henri. ‘Mo‘awia II ou Le Dernier des Sofianides.’ Rivista Degli Studi Orientali 7 (1915): 1-49. ——— ’Les Perses du Liban et l’Origine des Matwalis.’ Melanges de l’Universite St-Joseph 14 (1929): 21-39 and al-Mashriq 30: 633. Lecerf, Jean. ‘Note sur La Famille Dans Le Monde Arabe et Islamique.’ Arabica 3 (1956): 31-60. Lewis, Bernard. ‘An Arabic Account of the Province of Safed.’ BSOAS 15, part 3 (1953): 477-88. Marx, E. ‘ The Tribe as a Unit of Subsistence: Nomadic Pastoralism in the Near East.’ American Anthropologist 79 (1977): 343-63. Madelung, Wilfred. ‘Apocalyptic Prophecies in Him· in The Umayyad Age.’ Journal of Semitic Studies 31 (1986): 141-85. Mardam, Khalil. ‘ ‘Adi b. al-Riqa’.’ Majma‘ al-Lugha al-‘Arabiyya 15. Mayerson, Philip. ‘The First Muslim Attacks on Southern Palestine.’ Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 95 (1964): 155-99.

216

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

——— ‘The Saracens and the Limes.’ Bulletin of The American Schools of Oriental Research 262 (1986): 35-47. Montagne, Robert. ‘Notes sur la Vie Sociale et Politique de l’Arabie du Nord: les Shemmar du Negd.’ Revue des Etudes Islamiques (1932), Mourad, Suleiman. ‘On Early Historiography: Abu Isma‘il al-Azdi and his Fut-h al-Sham.’ Journal of the American Oriental Society 120 (2000): 577-93. Peters, F.E. ‘Byzantium and the Arabs of Syria.’ Les Annales Archeologiques Arabes Syriennes 27-8 (1977-8): 97-107. ——— ‘Romans and Bedouin in Southern Syria.’ Journal of Near Eastern Studies 37 (1978): 315-26. Piotrovsky, M. ‘The Arabic Version of Queen Zenobia’s (al-Zabba’) story.’ Palestinskii Sbornik LXXXIV (1970): 170-84. Poliak, A.N. ‘L’Arabisation de l’Orient Sémétique.’ Revue des Etudes Islamiques (1938): 35-63. Rida, Ahmad. ‘Al-Matawila aw al-Shi‘a fi Jabal ‘Amil.’ Al-‘Irfan 2 (1910): 237-42. ——— ‘Banu ‘Amila.’ Al-‘Irfan 31 (1945): 218-24. Rosen, Steven and Avni, Gideon. ‘The Edge of Empire: The Archaeology of Pastoral Nomads in the Southern Negev Highlands in Late Antiquity.’ Biblical Archaelogist 56 (1993): 189-99. Seyrig, Henri. ‘Les fils du Roi Odeinat.’ Les Annales Archeologiques de Syrie 13 (1963): 159-72. Shahid (Kawar), Irfan. ‘The Last Days of Salih.’ Arabica 5 (1958): 145-58. ——— ‘The Umayyad Ajnad. Byzance Après Byzance.’ ARAM 6 (1994): 1-11. Shboul, Ahmad. ‘ Change and Continuity in Early Islamic Damascus.’ ARAM 6 (1994): 67-102. Sivan, Emmanuel. ‘Réfugiés Syro-Palestiniens au Temps des Croisades.’ Revue des Etudes Islamiques 35 (1967): 135-47. Southall, A. ‘The Illusion of Tribe.’ Journal of Asian and African Studies 5 (1970): 28-50. Steward, D.J. ‘Notes on the Migration of ‘Amili Scholars to Safawid Iran.’ Journal of Near Eastern Studies 55 ii (1996): 81. Van Ess, J. ‘Les Qadarites et La Gailaniya de Yazid III.’ Studia Islamica 31 (1970): 269-86. Watt, Montgomery. ‘Shi‘ism under The Umayyads.’ Journal of The Royal Asiatic Society (1960): 158-72. ——— ‘The Rafidites: a Preliminary Study.’ Oriens 16 (1963): 110-21. ——— ‘Sidelights on Early Imamite Doctrine.’ Studia Islamica 30 (1970): 287-98. Whitcomb, Donald. ‘Amsar in Syria? Syrian Cities after the Conquest.’ Aram 6 (1994): 13-33. Will, Ernest. ‘Marchands et Chefs De Caravanes ã Palmyre.’ Syria 34 (1957): 262-77.

INDEX

al-‘Abbas (brother of Yazid III), 125 ‘Abbasids, 99, 129–130, 132, 134–136, 156–158 ‘Abbasid-Persian troops, 130 Chronicles, 3, 60, 68 Early ‘Abbasid period, 96–97, 132, 134, 142 Regime, 156 Revolt, 130 Revolution, 156 Rule, 156 Sources, 135 State, 145 ‘Abdallah b. al-Zubayr, 102–104, 108–109 ‘Abdallah b. ‘Amr b. al-‘As, 98, 100 Abil al-Qamh, 134 Abil al-Zayt, 134 ‘Abu al-Ghadiya, 99 Abu Sufyan (the family), 84 ‘Ad, 27 Adharbayjan, 121 ‘Adhnun, 134 Adhruh, 74 ‘Adi b. al-Rika, 3, 6, 8–9, 18, 20, 22–23, 33, 42, 49, 55–56, 87–91, 93–96, 105–109, 113–115, 118–119, 121, 139 ‘Adi b. Hatim al-Ta’i, 22, 70, 88–89, 91

‘Adiya al-‘Amili, Abu al- 99 ‘Adnan, 11 Adversaries, 90 Tribe of, 27 Africa, 62, 68, 144 ahl al-Jazira, 120–121 ahl al-Sham, 2–3, 84–85, 97, 100–103, 108–111, 115–121, 123–125, 127, 129, see also Syria ahl al-Urdunn, 92, 97, 106, 108, 117, 121–122, 125–126, 128 ahl Dimashq, 97, 108, 128 ahl Filastin, 108 ahl Hims, 108, 121, 126, 128 ahl Qinnasrin, 108 ahl Tayma’, 93–94 ahlu Dinina, 75 ‘Ajam, 75 Ajnadayn, 77–78 al-Akhtal, 2, 92, 113 ‘Akk (tribe), 98, 100, 102, 120 ‘Akka, 134–135 Algeria, 124 ‘Ali, 91, 101, 137, 147–148, 150–154 ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, 84, 97, 154 ‘Alids, 151, 156 Alis (river), 118 Allah b. ‘Ali, ‘Abd 130 Allah b. Rawaha, ‘Abd 70

218

THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

‘Amala, 35 ‘Amaliq, 8, 10, 27–31, 46 ‘Amaliq, al- 27–28 ‘Amara, 11 ‘Amela, 34 ‘Amil, see Jabal ‘Amil ‘Amila (tribe), 1–12, 15, 17–20, 22–40, 43–49, 52–59, 63, 66–81, 83–87, 89–106, 109–111, 113–115, 118–122, 124, 128–136, 141–142, 144, 146–147, 153, 155–158 ‘Amila b. Malik b. Wadi‘a b. Quda‘a, 10 ‘Amila Mountain, 6 Amila b. Saba’, 9 ‘Amila bin Wadi‘a (wife of Harith ibn ‘Adi), 35 ‘Amila–Djalil, 6 ‘Amilah, 34 ‘Amilat, 35 ‘Amili, 7, 29, 55, 86–89, 91, 99–100, 108–109, 113, 121, 124, 126, 129, 130, 131, 133, 142 ‘Amilis, 3, 22, 24, 28, 30, 32–33, 40, 45–49, 52, 71, 77, 88–90, 92, 94–97, 100, 104, 106–108, 110–113, 115, 117–119, 121–125, 127–132, 135–136, 155–158 ‘Amili-Kalbite alliance, 91 Battles of, 3 Troops, 118, 120, 126 ‘Amili-Syrian troops, 123 ‘Amili-Umayyad troops, 118 ‘Amili, Abu ‘Amir al- 99 al-Amin, Hasan, 141–142 al-Amin, Muhsin, 139–140, 146 ‘Amir, clan of, 91 ‘Amira, 6 ‘Amla, 33, 35 Amlatu (tribe), 25–27 Ammar (tribe), 145 ‘Ammar b. Yasir, 99–100, 143, 152

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Amorium, 148 ‘Amr (son of Malik b. Zuhayr), 30 ‘Amr b. ‘Adi 28, 32, 46 ‘Amr b. al-‘As, 72 ‘Amr b. Hind, 48 ‘Amr b. Sa‘id b. al-‘As, 106 ‘Amr b. Zarb al-‘Amili (or ‘Amr b. Zarb al-‘Amliqi ), King of the Arabs in al-Jazira, 27–28 ‘Amr ibn al-‘As, 147–148 ‘Amr, 28, 49, 90 Anbar or al-Anbar or ‘Anbar (tribe), 28–29, 117 al-Andalus, 123–124, 131–132, 157 Ansar, corps of, 148 ‘Arab al-Ba’ida, 28 ‘Arab al-Yaman, 124 Arabs, 13, 26–28, 32, 33, 38–46, 47, 51–53, 59, 60, 61, 65–67, 68, 71, 73–77, 81, 86, 92, 106, 136, 146, 153, 158 Allies, 39, 47, 69–71, 73, 80 Arab-Byzantine relations, 69 Arab-Christian parties, 74 Chronicles, 103 Conquests, 65–66, 142–143 Desert, 73 Federates, 40 Genealogists, 9–11, 27, 29, 54, 56 Geographers, 9 Geographical literature, 117 Groups, 38–39, 41 Kingdom, 158 Northern Arabs, 16 Nation, 71 Nomads, 42 Scholars, 9, 135 Shield, 40, 45, 65 Syrians, see Syria Tribal traditions, 91 Tribal world, 22 Tribes, 24, 37, 47, 53, 57, 59, 63, 65, 67, 69, 92, 133, 154–155, 158 Troops, 41

INDEX Arabia, 20, 26, 38–39, 44, 53, 61–62, 64, 68, 86–87, 94, 144, 155 Desert, 18, 21, 38, 62 North-western Arabia, 6–7 Northern Arabia, 7 Peninsula, 13, 26, 31, 38, 41–42, 45, 47, 51, 53, 63, 73, 79, 81, 93–94 South Arabia, 6, 8, 24, 26, 31, 51 South-Arabian Kahlan, 6 Tribes, 26, 35, 44 Arabic classical lexicographers, 10–11, 13, 26 Arabic poetry, 113 Arabic sources, 3, 28, 31–32, 36, 43–45, 54, 57, 64, 66–68, 70, 72, 77, 90, 97, 139 Arameans, 25–26 Ard Qawmi (the land of my people), 91 Ardashir (Sassanid Persian King), 29–30, 32, 37 Arethas (the Ghassanid king), 53 Arethas the Kindite, 48 Armenia, 68, 121, 128 Arslan, Shakib, 138–139 ‘Asabiyya (sentiment of group solidarity), 12–14 ‘Asakir, Ibn, 7, 96, 139, 147–148 Asawira, 75 Ash‘ar (tribe), 54, 98, 102 al-Ash‘ath, Ibn (commander of the ‘army of the peacocks’), 111–112 ‘Ashira, 10–11, 54 ‘Ashraqa, Ibn, 147 Asia Minor, 51 Assyiran kings, 26 ‘Atab (clan of), 54, 94 Atamaean beduins, 26 al-A‘tham al-Kufi, Ibn, 68, 76, 82 al-Athir, Ibn, 10, 27, 138 Aurelian, 38 ‘Awad (‘Amili poet of the pre-Islamic period), 92 Awhad, clan of, 94

219

Ayla, 38, 62–63, 67, 72, 74, 79 ‘Ayn al-Tamr, 28 Azd (tribe), 54, 79, 98, 119 al-Azdi, Abu Isma‘il Muhamad, 77 al-Azdi, 68–69, 74, 76–79, 98 al-Aziz b. ‘Amir, ‘Abd, 93 ‘Azm, Abu, 22, 89, 91 ‘Azm b. ‘Awkalan b. al-Zuhb b. ‘Amila, Abu, 89 Bab al-Safa, 108 Babawayh, Ibn, 151 Babylon, 26, 147 Badiyat al-Sham, 94, 101 Baghdad, 107, 144–145 Bahra’ (tribe), 44 Bahrayn, 145 Ba’ida, al- 27–28 Bajila, 119 al-Bakhtari b. ‘Amir al-‘Amili, 110 al-Bakri al-Andalusi, 29–30, 37, 46 Bakkar b. Bilal al-‘Amili, 135 Bakr (Banu), 90 Bakr, 119 Bakr, Abu, 62, 74, 148–149, 152 Ba‘labakk, 145 al-Baladhuri, 44, 68, 76, 79–80, 99 Bali (tribe), 44–45, 63, 71–72 Balj b. Bishr al-Qushayri, 123–124 Balkh, 121 Balqa’, 28, 69, 71, 75, 103 Balqayn (tribe), 44–45, 72 Banjdih, 117 Banu al-Ajdham, 54 Banu ‘Amal, 10 Banu ‘Amala, 10 Banu ‘Amila, 10, 25, 33, 35, 45, 56, 81, 143 Banu ‘Ammar, 145 Banu al-Aqra‘, 54 Banu Asad, 56–57, 122 Banu al-Ash‘ath, 111 Banu ‘Atab, 54 Banu Bahr (the Kalbite), 94

220 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

Banu Bakr, 90 Banu Ghassan, 81 Banu Ghifar, 147 Banu Hallaf, 54 Banu Hamadan, 98 Banu Hani’a, 54 Banu Hayy, 54 Banu Himyar, 29, 51, 79, 88, 98, 102, 109, 120 Banu ‘Ijl, 54 Banu Judham, 6–7, 18, 29, 38, 44–45, 47–48, 52, 54–58, 63, 66, 69–72, 76–82, 86–88, 94, 97–102, 104, 118, 120, 122, 128, 133 Banu Juray‘, 54 Banu Jurm, 26, 54 Banu Kahlan, 54 Banu Kalb, 22, 34, 38, 44, 55, 70, 85–86, 88–92, 94, 97–99, 101–102, 104–105, 120, 125, 128–129 Banu Kinana, 98, 119 Banu Mawhaba, 54 Banu Mu‘awiya, 54, 124 Banu Numayr, 23, 114 Banu Quda‘a, 16, 29–30, 32, 40, 44, 52, 58, 63, 71–72, 78–79, 85, 88, 97–101 Banu Qumyar, 93 Banu Qurra, 54, 95 Banu Sa‘d, 54 Banu Sa‘ida, 54 Banu Salama, 54 Banu Salih, 29–30, 37, 45–46, 48 Banu Salman, 54 Banu Sha‘l, 54, 89, 95 Banu Simak, 48, 92–93, 124 Banu Sufay, 54 Banu Taghlib, 57–58, 81, 90, 94 Banu al-Tamathan, 54 Banu Tay’, 29, 54, 70, 88–89, 91, 98 Banu Udhayna, 29–30, 36–37, 46, 54, 156

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Banu Zuhayr b. Janab al-Kalbi, 120 Baqbash, 84 Baqiya, al- 27 Baqqa, 28 Baraka b. Yazid al-‘Amili, 129, 135 Basra, 104, 112, 119, 122 Basus wars, 90 Batn (pl. Butun), 10–11, 54 Baysan, 92, 95–96, 135–136 Becker, C. H., 60 Beduins, 3, 11, 20, 26, 38, 72, 74 Berbers, 116, 123–124 Berber revolt, 116, 123 Biebuyck, 23 Bilad al-Shakif, 6–7 Bilad al-Sham, 1–3, 7, 12, 24, 27, 30, 44, 58, 62–63, 67–68, 74, 79, 83, 111, 118, 126, 135–136, 138, 141–142, 144 Bilharith b. Ka‘b, 29 Bishr b. Marwan, 110 Bishr, 89 Bostra, 32 Bousquet, G. H., 60 Bowersock, 39 Brünnow, 39 Bukhara, 121 al-Bukhari, 147 Burayr ibn Junadah, 147 al-Butayn (successor of Shabib b. Yazid), 110 Buwayhids, 144–145 Byzantium, 38–40, 43–47, 49, 53–54, 60–62, 64–67, 70–71, 73–75, 84, 143–144, 157 Empire, 38, 47, 49, 53, 58, 62, 68–69, 72–73, 79–80, 155 Orient, 38 Sources, 2, 43, 64, 71 Territories, 39, 69, 118 Byzantines, 2–3, 8, 19, 25, 37–38, 41–44, 47, 49, 51–53, 58, 60, 62–67, 69–73, 75–84, 86, 92, 100, 117–118, 143

INDEX Caesarea, 53 Caetani, L., 60 Canard, M., 61 Cantineau, J., 35 Cappadocia, 51, 69 Caskel, W., 3, 6–8, 18, 31–32, 155 Caspian provinces, 116 Central Asia, 113, 116, 130, 145 Chalcedonianism, 52 Chalcis, 48 Chaled (emir, called God’s sword), 71 Chamir (Kemir), 50–51 Chronicles, 33, 117 Companion, 108, 136, 138, 141, 151 Constantinople, 49, 116–118 Crusaders, 143, 145–146 Cyprus, 148 al-Dahhak b. Qays, 129 Dam of Ma’rib, 8 Damascus, 32, 84, 93, 96–97, 121, 125, 131–133, 148, 150, see also Syria Army, 126 Damascus-Hajj road, 93 Damascenes, 98, 125 Dimashq, jund of, 7, 86, 92, 96, 121, 129, 133, 135, 145 Dawmat al-Jandal, 28 Dayr al-Jamajim, 112 Dayr al-Jathaliq, battle of (near modern Baghdad), 3, 106–107 Dayr Mimas, 134 De Goeje, 61, 71, 77 Dead Sea, 67, 38, 62–63, 65, 67, 69–70, 72, 83, 94, 96, 133 Dharr al-Ghifari, Abu 1, 24, 136–144, 146–153 Dhat al-Salasil, battle of, 71–72 Dib‘an b. Zinba‘ al-Judhami, 126 Dinawari, al- 98, 100 Diocletian, 38 Ditch, battle of the, 147 Djabal ‘Amila, 6–7

221

Djarir, 7 Domaszewski, A., 39 Donner, F., 19, 21, 62–64 Duban, 134 Dujayl (river), 112 Duluk, 118 Dumat al-Jandal, 38 Durayd, Ibn, 6, 9, 35, 89 Durkayn b. Shajara al-‘Amili, 122 Dussaud R., 32 Duwayd al-‘Amili (‘Amili poet of the pre-Islamic period), 92 East of Jordan, 65 East Syrian (Nestorian) communion, 41 Egypt, 26, 106, 111, 141, 147, 149, 152 Encyclopedia of Islam, 6 Euphrates, the, 25–26, 36, 45, 107, 145 al-Fahl b. ‘Ayyash, 120 Fakhdh, 10–11 al-Faqih, Ibn, 33 al-Farazdaq, 2, 92, 113, 115 Fasila, 11 Fatimids, 142, 144–145 Fertile Crescent, 26, 41, 59, 61 Fida, Abu al- 138 Fihl, 44, 75, 77–78, 80 Fihr of Shullai, 31 Filastin, jund of, 45–46, 83, 86–87, 92–94, 96, 98, 100–102, 126, 132–134, 144, al-Fustat, 148 Futuh, Campaigns, 111 Literature, 9, 54 Gabrieli, F., 61 Galilee, 6–7, 53 Gallienus, 37 Gaza (Ghazza), 67, 73–74, 77, 133 Germanic barbarians, 46 Gharb, 95

222 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

Ghassans, 2, 17, 43, 44, 46–54, 57–58, 63, 66–67, 70, 75, 77–78, 80–81, 92, 98, 105, 155 Confederation, 47, 49 Federates, 47 Phylarchate, 52 Ghatfan, 58 Ghazala (wife of Shabib b. Yazid), 110 Ghuwayr, 28 Granada, 124 Gregory (Chalcedonian patriarch of Antioch), 53 Grunebaum, G.E., 16 Guichard, P., 15, 57 Gulf, 26, 32, 36 Habib b. ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Hakami, 109 Habib, Ibn 28, 31, 33, 100 al-Hadid, Ibn Abi, 151 Hadramawt, 51 Haifa, 133 Hairan, 36–37 Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Ibn, 139, 147 al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf al-Thaqafi, 108–112, 114–116, 120, 156 Hakam, 22 al-Hakam, Ibn ‘Abd, 147–148 Halab, 145 Hama, 145 al-Hamadani, 10, 98, 133, 142, 144 Hamadanis, 142, 144–145 Hamal b. ‘Abdallah al-Khath‘ami, 98 Hamarani (tribe), 25 Hamdan (tribe), 54, 79, 98 Hamza b. Malik al-Hamadani, 98 Hani’ b. ‘Umayr, 98 Hanzala b. Safwan al-Kalbi, 124 al-Harith b. ‘Adi or Harith b. ‘Adi, 10, 35 al-Harith b. ‘Adi b. al-Harith b. Murra b. Udad b. Zayd b. Yashjub b. ‘Arib b. Zayd b. Kahlan b. Saba’, 10, 35

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

al-Harith b. Jabala, 47 al-Harith b. Khalid al-Azdi, 98 al-Harith b. Surayj, 122 al-Harith b. ‘Umayr al-Azdi, 69 Harra, 101, 103 Hasan al-Amin, 141–142 Hashimiyya movement, 129 Hassan b. Bahdal, 106 Hassan b. Malik b. Bahdal, 103 Hatim al-Razi, Abu, 138 Hawar b. Urig b. Barnas, 124 Hayy (subtribe), 9–11, 13, 54, 105 al-Hazimi, 100 Heliopolis, 147 Heraclius, 6, 53–54, 65, 67–69, 73–74 Herder, 18 Hijaz, 25, 45, 62, 68, 71–72, 74–75, 84, 107, 133, 138, 140, 152 Hijazi tribes, 75 al-Hilli, 140 Hims (jund of), 86, 102, 129, 133, 135, 145 Himyar, 29, 51, 71, 88, 98, 102 Himyar tribe, 88 Hira, 28–30, 32, 36, 47–48 Hiranu, 25 Hisham b. ‘Abd al-Malik (the caliph), 117, 121, 127–128, 135 Hisham b. al-Kalbi or Hisham ibn al-Kalbi, 27, 89, 99 Hisma, 45 Historians, ‘Abbasid, 2, 99, 100 Arab, 27, 29–30, 76 Classical Arab, 156 Modern, 4, 6, 24, 59, 135–136, 146 Shi‘a, 24, 136, 140–141, 143, 146–147, 150–152 Historiography, Arab, 31 Classical Islamic, 146 Modern Arabic, 136, 146 Pre-modern Arabic, 146

INDEX

223

Hit, 28 Hubahib, Abu 89 Hubay or Hayy (daughter of Abu ‘Azm b. ‘Awkalan b. al-Zuhb b. ‘Amila and wife of Kalb b. Wabra), 22, 25, 89 Hubaysh b. Dalja al-Qayni Hubayy, 98, 100, 102 al-Hudurjan, 46 al-Hula, 134 Hunin, 135 al-Husayn b. ‘Ali, 101 al-Husayn b. Hammad al-Kalbi, 120 Husayn b. al-Numayr al-Sakuni, 102–103

Islamic, Conquests, 1, 4, 24, 44, 45, 54, 57, 59–61, 77, 144 Early Islamic conquests, 9 Period, 26 Early Islamic period, 1, 9, 55 Society, 58 Sources, 44 State, 62, 64 Isma‘ilis, 6, 139, 142, 145 Country of, 6 Power of, 145 Shi‘ism, 145 Italy, 68 Iyad, 29, 51

Ibn Battuta, 145 Ibn Khaldun, 9, 12, 14, 30 Ibrahim b. al-Walid, 127 Ibrahim b. Hisham, 129 Ibrahim b. Malik al-Ashtar al-Nakh‘I (Ibn al-Ashtar), 107–108 ‘Ijl tribe, 54, 98 Imru’ al-Qays (Lakhmid king of Hira), 32–33 Imru’ al-Qays (pre-Islamic Arab poet), 90 India, 36, 113, 116 Indian ocean, 46 Iran, 144–145 Iraq, 29–30, 48, 57–58, 61–62, 76, 84–85, 87, 101–102, 107, 109–113, 115–116, 118–119, 121–123, 129, 145, 152, 154 Iraqi conquests, 75 al-‘Irfan, 13 al-Isfahani, 7, 27–28, 31, 96 Ishaq b. Muhammad b. Al-Ash‘ath, 111 Ishok (priest), 50 Iskandaruna, 134 Islam, 1, 22, 24, 58–60, 62, 65, 68–69, 75–76, 78, 81, 84, 136, 141, 144, 151, 152, 155, 158

Jabal ‘Amil, 1, 4, 24, 96, 134, 137–143, 147, 152–154 Jabal ‘Amila, 7–8, 130–138, 140–146, 152, 157 Jabal al-Jalil (Jabal ‘Amila now), 10, 83, 133–134, 152–153 Jabala b. al-Ayham, 65, 75, 80 Jabiya, 86 Jadhima (King of the Tanukh), 27–28, 30–32 Jadhima al-Abrash (or al-Abras) (Lakhmid King), 28, 32–33 Jadhimat, 31 Jadis, 27 Ja‘far b. Abi Talib (cousin of the prophet), 70 Ja‘far al-Muhajir, 143–144, 147 Jafna, 53, 81 Jahiliyya, 3, 48, 90, 98 Jahili Poetry, 2, 42 al-Jahiz, 57 Janab (clan of), 91 Jarash, 133 al-Jarba’, 72 Jarir or Djarir, 2, 7, 9, 23, 92, 113–114 al-Jawhari, 11 Jawlan, 53, 66, 86, 92

224 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

Jayhan (river), 118 Jazira, 27–28, 86–87, 98, 104, 116–117, 120–121 Jerusalem, 53, 80, 148 Ji‘al the son of Shihab (leader of the tribe ‘Amila, b. Burhum b. Ma‘qil al-‘Amili), 118–119 Jordan, 65–66, 76 Judham (tribe), 7, 17, 18, 29, 38, 44–45, 47–48, 52, 54–58, 63, 66, 69–72, 76–82, 86–88, 92, 94, 97–99, 101–102, 104, 118, 120, 121, 122, 127, 128, 130–131, 133, 157 Jund al-Urdunn, 27, 78, 83, 86, 92–94, 96–98, 100–102, 104–106, 108, 112, 115–117, 121–122, 125–126, 128–129, 132–135, 142, 157 Jundub ibn Junadah or Burayr ibn Junadah, 147 Jurm (tribe), 26 Jurum, 26 Justinian, 47 Ka‘b al-Ahbar, 138, 150 Kaegi, W., 42, 64–65 Kahlan, 6, 8 Kahlani-Qahtani descent, 17 Kalb (tribe), 22, 29, 34, 38, 44, 55, 70, 85–86, 88–92, 94, 97–99, 101–102, 104–105, 120, 125, 128–129 Kalb b. Wabra, 22, 55, 89 al-Kalbi, Ibn, 11, 28–33, 58, 89 Kalbites, 17, 88–90, 94, 109, 121, 125, 128, 130–131, 157 Karb, Abu 90 Karbala’, 101, 145 Kark, 135 Kennedy, H., 65 Khabib, Abu 102 Khalid al-Qasri (Yamani leader), 122, 125

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Khalid b. Al-Walid, 61, 70 Khalid b. Yazid or Khalid ibn al-Walid, 106 Kharijites, 109, 156 Khath‘am (tribe), 98, 109, 119 Khattar Husam b. Dirar al-Kalbi, Abu al- 124 Khawarij, 109–111, 119–120 Khawlan, 79 Khazanov A. M., 12, 14, 17, 19, 157 Khazars, 121 Khazaza, 118 Kheurbet Leqteir, 33 Khindif ibn Nizar, 56 Khuman b. Ma‘qil al-‘Amili, 22, 118, 120 Khurasan, 116–117, 121–122 Khurasanis, 116 al-Khurayba, 134 Khurradadhbeh, Ibn, 33 Khuzayma, 56 Kinda (tribe), 44, 51, 54, 79, 98, 111, 117, 133 Koutabas, 71 Kufa, 101, 104, 109, 111, 119, 131 Kugman, 27 Kulayb b. Rabi‘a, 90 Kulthum b. ‘Iyad al-Qushayri, 123 Labid, 46 Lake Tabariyya, 92, 96, 101, 128, 133–135, 143, 145 Lakhm (tribe), 7, 29, 31, 33, 38, 42, 44, 45–49, 52, 54, 56–58, 63, 66, 69–70, 72, 76–82, 87–88, 98, 100–102, 118, 122, 125, 128, 133 Lammens, Henri, 3, 5–8, 18, 31, 60, 142 Langlois, 50 le Strange, G., 6 Lebanon, 139, 145 South Lebanon, 1, 6, 8 Lokkegaard, 152

INDEX Ma’ab (previously known as Areopolis), 94–95 Ma‘add, 10, 32, 55–56 Ma‘add Qaysi lineage, 55 Ma‘an b. Salim al-‘Amili, 130, 155 Madhhij (tribe), 32, 54, 79, 98, 108–109, 120 Madina, 149 Madwa, 117 Madyan, 45 Majlis (tribal council), 22 Makka, 58, 62, 102, 104, 108, 147, 151 al-Mala, 48 Malik (‘Amili poet of the pre-Islamic period), 93 Malik (son of Fahm b. Zuhayr), 30 Malik, ‘Abd al-, 3, 22, 85, 105–108, 112, 115, 120, 135 Malik Abu Tayba al-Qayni, 78 Malik b. Hubayra al-Sakuni, 104, 106 Malik b. Marwan b. al-Hakam, ‘Abd al-, 23, 106, 109 Malik b. Qatan, ‘Abd al-, 123 Mansur b. Jumhur al-Kalbi, 129 Manzur, Ibn 9 al-Maqdisi, 99 Marasid, 6 Marj ‘Uyun, 135 Marj al-Safar, 77 Marj Rahit, battle of, 3, 99, 104–107 Marw al-Rawdh, 117 Marwan b. Muhammad, 125, 127–128 Marwan ibn al-Hakam or Marwan b.al-Hakam, 103–106, 128, 149 Marwan II, 126–130, 132, 135, 156 Marwanids, 1, 85, 103–107, 113, 156, 158 Forces, 111 House, 86, 93, 106, 109, 121, 125 Period, 103 Regime, 111 Mashghara, 135 Masisa, 118

225

Maslama b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 22, 116–121 Maslama b. Mukhlid, 98 al-Mas‘udi, 27–28, 99, 101, 103–104, 138, 150 Matawila, 137, 139 Maurice, 42, 49, 53, 65 al-Mawardi, 11 Mayerson, P., 40, 74 Mays al-Jabal, 138 Maysun (daughter of the Kalbite leader Bahdal, wife of Mu‘awiya and mother of Yazid), 85, 88 Mazyadids, 145 Medina, 62, 69, 82–83, 102, 137, 147–148, 150–152 Mediterranean, 46, 133 Melkite (Chalcedonian) communion, 41 Mentour, 50 Mesopotamia, 26, 45, 50, 157 Metz, Adam, 142 Michael the Syrian, 49–50 Mikhnaf, Abu, 99 al-Minqari, 100 Monophysitism, 52–53 Mosul, 145 Mothous, 71 Mouamed, 71 Mouchea, 71 Mount Abana, 55 Mount Sinai, 73 al-Mu‘addal, (son of Murra), 48 Mu‘awiya b. al-Harith b. ‘Adi, 10 Mu‘awiya I, 84–88, 97–99, 101, 104, 136–138, 147–154, 158 Mu‘awiya II, 103 Mu’ta, battle of, 63, 69–70 Mudar, 11, 16 Mudaris, 10, 113, 119, 122 Mudar-Yamani factionalism, 123 Mudari army, 114 Mudaris of Banu Asad b. Khazima, 122

226 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

Mudrik b. Dabb al-Kalbi, 120 Mufakhara, 16, 22, 88, 108 Muhalhil b. Rabi‘a of Taghlib, 90 Muhallabids, 119 Muhamad b. al-Qasim, 116 Muhammad (the prophet), 62, 67, 69, 71–74, 79, 91, 147, 149–150 Muhammad b. ‘Abd Allah al-Azdi, 74 Muhammad b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 126 Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Hurr al-‘Amili (al-Shaykh), 136 Muhammad Jabir al-Safa, 141 Muhammad K. Makki, 142 Muhammad Taqi al-Faqih (Shaykh), 140 Muhsin al-Amin, 134, 139–140 Muir, William, 60 al-Mukharriq b. al-Harith al-Zubaydi, 98 al-Mukhtar al-Thaqafi, 107 al-Mundhir or Mundhir, 48–49, 53, 92 al-Muqaddasi, 10, 33, 134–135, 144 Muqna, 72 Murad (tribe), 54 al-Murtada, 140 Murri, 99 Muruwwa, 12, 18, 90 Mus‘ab al-Zubayri, 56 Mus‘ab b. al-Zubayr (brother of ‘Abd al-Allah), 56, 107–108 Musa b. Nusayr, 113 Mushirk (polytheists), 74 Musil, A., 39 Muslim al-Khurasani, Abu, 130 Muslim, 59–60, 62–64, 66–72, 74–83, 85, 94, 146, 147, 151, 155 Armies, 60, 65, 78 Conquests, 7, 51, 59, 61, 67–68, 86, 88, 92, 94, 136, 149, 155 Empire, 103, 109 Rule, 58, 136 Rulers, 58 State, 83, 101, 156 Tribes, 128

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Troops, 44, 72, 78, 83, 86 World, 25, 84, 145 Muslim b. ‘Uqba al-Murri, 102 Mutanassira, 57 Muzahim, Ibn, 97 Na’ila, 28 Nabateans, 38, 41, 82–83 Najaf, 145 Najran, 51 Namara (Nabateo-Arabic inscription of), 32–33 Naqab, 73 Nasara (Christians), 57, 75 Nasir Khusraw, 145 Nasiru (tribe), 25 Nasor (Vaballath), 36–37 Natil b. Qays al-Judhami (the Juhamid leader), 56–57, 98, 104 al-Nawaqir, 135 al-Nawawi, 11 al-Nawbakhti, 137 Near East, 26, 155 Nimruds, Letters, 26 Slab, 25 Nizar, 32, 48 Nöldeke, 50–51, 53 North Africa, 84, 116, 123–124, 126, 132 al-Nu‘man b. al-Mundhir (Lakhmid king), 48–49, 52, 53, 92 Numayr (tribe), 23, 114 Nusayris, 139 al-Nuwayri, 148 Odenathus, Septimus (Udhayna), 33, 36–38 Orient, 38–39, 41, 47, 53, 64, 68 Ottomans, 136, 141 Palestina Secunda (Jawlan), 53 Palestina Tertia, 38, 40, 44–48, 55, 70

INDEX Palestine, 28–30, 37–38, 44–46, 49, 51, 58, 63, 66, 68, 70, 72–77, 80, 157 Southern Palestine, 30, 73–75 Palmyra, 3, 7, 28, 30–32, 33, 34, 35–38, 41, 58, 92, 155–158 Archaeology, 34 Epigraphs, 33 Language, 33–35 Merchants, 36 Names, 34 Script, 35 Trade, 36 Parthians, 37 Persia, 30, 31, 46, 48, 50, 53, 65–66, 69–70, 73, 76, 79, 84 Border of, 45 Empire, 39 Invasion, 53, 70 Occupation, 54, 58, 66, 70, 80 Origin, 139, 142, 146 Rule, 51 Sasanid, 47, 60–61 Troops, 64, 70, 76, 77 Wars, 65 Persian Gulf, 26, 32, 36 Petra, 38, 41, 155 Phocas, 53 Poidebard, A., 39 Post-Islamic period, 9, 12, 85, 92, 157 Pre-Islamic period, 3, 5, 7–9, 12, 22, 24, 31, 57, 85, 92, 157–158 Pro-Quda‘a tribes, 28 Pro-Zubayrid party, 106 Provincia Arabia, 44–45, 47 Pylarchate hierarchy, 46 Pylarchate, 49, 53, 80 Qa’id (Ra’is) (military commander of a tribe), 22 Qabila, 9–11 Qadariyya movement, 125 Qadas, 134–135, 143

227

Qadisiyya, al-, 75 Qahlani-Quda‘i lineage, 97 Qahtan, 8, 11, 24, 27, 29, 54–56 Qahtani tribe, 27 Qahtani-Yamani descent, 120 Qahtani-Yamani genealogy, 56 Qahtani-Yamani lineage, 56 Qal‘at Abi al-Hasan, 134 al-Qalqashandi, 11, 139 Qaramita, 142, 144–145 al-Qasim ‘Ubayd Allah b. Muhammad al-Madwini al-‘Amili, Abu, 117 Qasit, 10, 109 Qatan b. ‘Abd al-Malik b. Qatan, 123 Qatari, 111 Qawm, 13 Qawwal b. ‘Amr, 22 al-Qayn (tribe), 78, 105, 109 Qays, 98, 104, 106–107, 124 Qays movement, 125 Qays of Qinnasrin, 98 Qaysis, 55, 117 Qaysi-‘Adnani lineage, 55 Qaysi and Yamani poets, 2 Qaysi-Ma‘add branch, 56 Rhetoric, 23 Tribe, 86, 107, 156 Qaysi-Yamani struggle, 128 Qimasrin, 86–87, 98, 108, 121, 133 Qu‘aysis, 22, 88–89 Quda‘a, 10, 16, 29–30, 32, 40, 44, 52, 58, 63, 71–72, 78–79, 85, 88, 97–101 Quda‘a-‘Amila, 37 Quda‘a-Kahlan confederation, 86 Quda‘i-‘Amili troops, 11–12 al-Qunaynat, 94 Quran, 7, 149, 150 Quraysh (tribe), 62, 104, 119 Qurtuba (Cordoba), 124 Qutayba b. Muslim, 113 Qutayba, Ibn, 120 Qutquna, 28 al-Qutud, 95

228 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

al-Rabadha or al-Rabadhah, 147, 150–152 Rabi‘a, 16 al-Rahman b. al-Ash‘ath, ‘Abd, 111 al-Rahman b. Qays al-Qayni, ‘Abd, 98, 100 al-Ra‘i al-Numayri, 9, 54, 92, 95 Raider, 18–19, 41, 47 Raqqa, battle of, 43 Rawh b. Zinba‘ al-Judhami (the Juhamid leader), 6, 55–57, 102–104, 126 Rayy, 111, 116 Red Sea, 46–47, 62–63, 67, 72 Rida, Ahmad, 6, 8, 137–140, 146 Ridda wars, 61, 152 al-Rika‘, Ibn, 7 Riyya (Malaqa), 124 Romans, 26, 30–31, 37–38, 40, 44, 51, 82 Rome, 37, 39, 47 Ryckmans, 35 Sa‘d b. Zuhayr b. Jamal al-Kalbi, 91 Sa‘d, Ibn, 147–148, 152 Safad, 92, 134 Saffanah, 91 Sahsahan, 95 Sa‘id b. Zinba‘ al-Judhami, 126 al-Sakan, Ibn, 147 Sakasik, 100, 125 al-Saksaki, Ibn Juwayn, 99 al-Sakun (tribe), 29, 102 Sal‘, 148 Salama clan, 92 Salih (tribe), 38, 43, 44–46, 75 Salman al-Farisi, 142–143 Samarqand, 121 Saracen, 40, 71 Sarafand, 138, 142 Sarafanda, 134 Sasanid Persia, 47, 60–61 Empire, 19, 59, 64 Sasanids, 42, 62, 67 Troops, 75

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Sayf b. ‘Umar Abu Dharr, 150 Sayf ibn ‘Umar or Sayf b. ‘Umar, 150 Sayyid of the tribe (Shaykh under Islam), 6, 22, 118, 125 Schlumberger, D., 33–34 Seljuqs, 145 Sha‘b, 11 Sha‘l clan, 118 Shaban, M. A., 61, 149 Shabib b. Yazid, 109–110 Shahid, 39–40, 44, 50–51, 53, 65 al-Sham, 30, 44, 55, 58, 66, 72, 74, 93, 94, 102, 104–106, 137, 151 Shammar (king), 31 Shapur I, 36 Shaqif Arnun, 134 Shaqif Tayrun, 134 Shaqra’, 96 Shayban, 57 al-Shaykh al-Mufid, 140 al-Shaykh Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Hurr al-‘Amili, 136 Shaykh Muhammad Taqi al-Faqih, 140 Shi‘a, 1, 4, 132, 134, 136–140, 141–147, 151, 153–154 Authors, 7 Dynasty, 145 Emirs, 145 Hamadanis, 145 Scholar, 137, 142 Sources, 147, 151–152 Uqaylids of Mosul, 145 Shihab b. Burhum, 22 Shihab, 90, 118 Shu‘ayb b. Rabi‘ al-‘Ulaymi, 89 Shurayk al-Kinani, 98 Sicily, 53 Siddiq, 135 Siffin, battle of or waq‘at Siffin, 97–102 Sim‘an b. Hubayra, 56 Simak (‘Amili poet of the pre-Islamic period), 93 Sinai, 74–75 al-Sind, 116 al-Sinnabra, 101, 106

INDEX Sistan, 112 Smith, Roberston, 13 Spain, 113, 116, 130 Stark, J., 34 Stategikon of Maurice, 42, 49, 65 Sufyan b. ‘Amr al-Sulami, 98, 100 Sufyan b. al-Abrad al-Kalbi, 109–112 Sufyanid, 1, 86, 97, 101, 103, 141 Rule of, 101–103, 120 Sulayman b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 114–116, 126 Sulayman b. Hisham, 126–127, 129 Sulayman, 157 Sunni, 139, 145, 146, 149 Sunni community, 140 Suq al-Nabat, 82 Sur, 133–135, 142–143, 145 Syria, 1, 26, 28–29, 32, 35, 37–38, 43, 45, 51, 61–63, 66–68, 72, 74, 76–77, 80, 82, 84–87, 92, 104, 106, 109, 111, 115–116, 129, 131–133, 144–145, 147–149, 152, 154, see also ahl al-Sham, Damascus Arabs, 1, 4, 37–40, 51, 59–63, 65–74, 76–84, 86–87, 102–103, 109, 116, 120–121, 125–129, 132, 156, 158 Arab-Syrian counterparts, 156 Arab-Syrian Families, 132 Arab-Syrian Federates, 37–44, 46–47, 52, 58, 60, 65–66 Arab-Syrian Forces, 113 Army, 84, 85, 98, 104, 107, 113, 121, 154 Cities, 65 Coast, 86, 146 Conquests, 82 Desert, 1, 8, 24, 26, 62, 66 Early Islamic Syria, 77 Forces, 113, 123 Infantry, 97 Northern Syria, 28–29, 68, 129 Qays tribes, 107 Queen, 45

229 Soldiers, 118 Southern Syria, 63, 66 Syrian tribes of Yamani origin, 98 Syro-Arabian tribes, 6 Tribes, 1–2, 51, 63, 68, 74, 98, 109, 111, 123 Troops, 57, 84, 97, 102, 104, 107–108, 111–112, 116, 119, 121–122

al-Tabari, 7, 27–28, 30–32, 44, 68, 76, 81–82, 104, 108, 138–139, 148, 152–153 Tabaristan, 110–112 Tabariyya, 92, 96, 101, 128, 133–135, 143, 145 Tabuk, 66–67, 72, 79 Tadmor, 37 Taghlib, 57, 81 Tamim, 119 Tamimite, 7 Tanukh (tribe), 30–32, 37, 43–44, 75, 105 Tanukhids, 38, 43, 45 Tapper, 9, 18 Tarablus (Tripoli in Lebanon), 145 Tasm, 27 Tay’ (tribe), 54, 70, 98 Tay’ raid, 91 Tayâyê, 49 Tayma’, 92–94 Tayy’ (tribe), 44, 105 Tha‘lab al-Shibani, 3 Tha‘laba b. Salama al-‘Amili, 22, 123–124, 126 Thabit b. Nu‘aym al-Judhami, 126–129 Thabit Qutna, 120 al-Thaqafi, 107 Thawr (clan of), 89 Theodore, 71 Theophanes, 71, 73 Thughur, 116, 125 Tiberius (Emperor), 49 Tibnin, 134

230 THE POLITICS

AND

CULTURE

Tighlath-Pileser III (Assyrian king), 25–26 Trader, 18–19, 36, 83 Traditional chronicles, 2 Transoxania, 121 Trimingham, 52 Tubba, 29 Tulaytila (Toledo), 124 Turgesh tribes, 121 Turkish tribes, 145 Tuwana, 117–118 ‘Ubadah ibn al-Samit, 148 ‘Ubayd Allah b. Ziyad b. Abih, 101, 107 ‘Ubayda, Abu, 78 ‘Ubayda b. Hilal, 111 Udhayna, 29–30, 36–37, 46, 54, 156 ‘Udhra (tribe), 44, 71, 109 Udhruh, 72 ‘Ulaym clan, 89 ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, 23 ‘Umar b. al-Khattab (the Caliph) or ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, 74, 80–81, 87, 93, 147–149, 152, 171 ‘Umar b. Hubayra al-Fazari (Ibn Hubayra), 121 ‘Umar II (‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Aziz), 119 ‘Umayla, 35 ‘Umaylah, 35 ‘Umayr b. al-Habbab al-Sulami, 107 Umayyads, 2, 8, 17, 19, 22, 55, 57, 60, 69, 83–85, 91–92, 96, 99–100, 103–104, 106, 111, 113, 115–116, 119, 122, 125, 129–130, 133, 135, 141–142, 147, 151, 153, 156, 158 Army, 76, 84, 120 Authority, 85 Caliphate, 99, 112, 123 Court, 3, 93 Dynasty, 2, 85, 88 Early Umayyad period, 86, 96, 141

OF AN

UMAY YAD TRIBE

Empire, 2, 86, 115, 130 Family, 85, 87, 106, 127–128 House, 103, 115, 129–131 Late Umayyad period, 1 Order, 156 Poetry, 2 Political life, 2 Politics, 114 Regime, 84 Reign, 93 Rule, 55, 83–84, 86, 93, 106–107, 123, 141 Ruling family, 56, 156 Sources, 135 State, 1, 4, 8, 85, 97, 115–116, 124, 130–131, 136, 157 Tribal world, 1–2 Troops, 107 Umayyad-ahl-al-Sham alliance, 85 Umayyad-Marwanid rule, 113 Umm al-Jimal (in Hawran), 31 Upper Euphrates, 26 Upper Galilee, 6–7 Uqaylids, 145 Uqaysir, al-, 58, 71, 81 al-Urdunn, jund of, 22, 78, 83, 86, 92–94, 96–98, 100–102, 104–106, 112, 115, 117, 125–126, 129, 132–135, 142, 157 ‘Uthman, 137, 147–153 Vasiliev, A. A., 53 Wabar, 27 al-Walid b. ‘Abd al-Malik (the Caliph al-Walid I), 96, 116–117, 125 al-Walid b. Mu‘awiya b. ‘Abd al-Malik b. Marwan, 128 al-Waqidi, 76–77 Wasit, 113, 119 Wellhausen, Julius, 71, 142 West Syrian (Monophysite or Jacobites) communion, 41

INDEX Wujuh (notables of the tribe), 22 Wüstenfeld, 35 Yamani, 2, 9, 55, 56, 79, 98, 100, 103, 104, 106, 108, 110, 115, 120, 122, 125–127, 141 Allies, 86, 90, 107 Army, 114 Descent, 17, 93, 104 Elements, 120 Lineage, 55 Origin, 57, 79, 86, 98, 102, 120 Party, 88 Ruling, 55 Status, 57 Tribes, 10, 29, 86–87, 104, 107, 120, 132, 141, 156 Yamani-Qahtani ancestry, 55–56, 120 Yamani-Qaysi rift, 157 al-Ya‘qubi, 10, 44, 68, 76, 80–81, 104, 116, 133–134, 139, 150 Yaqut al-Hamawi (Yakut), 3, 33, 71, 93, 96, 117, 133–134, 152 al-Yarmuk, 44, 63, 65, 67–68, 76–77, 79–81 Yawm Marj Halim, 49 Yazid b. ‘Abd al-Malik, 119

231

Yazid b. Abi Sufyan, 87 Yazid b. Al-Harith, 98 Yazid b. al-Muhallab, 114–117, 119–120 Yazid b. Mu‘awiya (Yazid I the caliph), 55–56, 85, 88, 91, 101–104 Yazid II, 119–120 Yazid III, 125–128 Yemen, 8, 24, 29, 136, 144 Yusuf b. ‘Umar, 122, 125 al-Zabba’, (daughter of ‘Amr b. Zarb), 28, 41, 156 al-Zabba’, (Queen) (daughter of ‘Amr al-‘Amili min ‘Amila), 30–31, 44–46 al-Zabidi, 10 Zabulistan, 112 al-Zamakhshari, 11 Zarb b. Hassan b. Udhayna al-‘Imliqi, 46 Zayd b. ‘Ali, 123 Zayd b. Haritha (adopted son of the prophet), 70 Zaydis, 144 Zenobia, 3, 28, 30–31, 33 Zubayrids, 107, 156 Zuhayr b. Janab al-Kalbi, 90–91