The Prophet's Wars: Arab Conquests and Empire of Faith

1. Battling for Islam (622-652): January 16-20

2. ‘The Prophet’s Wars’ This Week: ‘Arab Conquests’ during time of Muhammad*, First Three Caliphs [Abu Bakr (632-4), ‘Umar I (634-44), ‘Uthman (644-56)]**Monday: I ‘The Prophet’s Wars’ (622-43)**Wednesday: II Expansion: ‘Jewel in the crown –Egypt’Friday: III “Empire of Faith?”: conquest to governance *using Hoyland’s spelling. Also written in other ways in various sources – e.g. Muhammed, Mohmmad, Mohamed** Hoyland does not use the term ‘Rashidun’ used elsewhere (e.g. on maps); Umar’s battles subsumed here to first stage ‘Prophet’s Wars’

3. ‘The Prophet’s Wars’ Part I: ‘The Prophet’s Wars’ (622-43)**

4. “The Prophet’s Wars” Prophet Muhammad, 622–632  Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661 Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750

5. “The Prophet’s Wars” Prophet Muhammad, 622–632   Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661 Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750 (here 632-652)

6. ‘TheProphet’sWars’:(c.622 – 643)

7. ‘The Prophet’s Wars’ Islam: Empire of FaithVideo[excerpt 31:00 -44:30min]

8. The World of the Prophet Two Important Aspects of early 7th century: Commonality of ‘prophets’ History of ‘Arab’ raids/conquests

9. The World of the Prophet History of recent centuries prepared region for rise of Muhammad: Early Arabia under control of Himyarites: Christians, some Jews – Monotheists Presence of Christians attracted nearby Christian Ethiopians: half-century rule (c. 525-70) Himyarites attempted to re-establish power period of strife, weakness: Persia established influence c.570 – lasted another half century

10. The World of the Prophet Consequences: More than century external rule ‘erased’ history, traditional administration, laws, governance leaders emerging early 7th century not from any traditional dynasties no recognized power structure- ‘prophets’ of various sorts claimed power of God to recruit support: drew from both Christianity and Judaism

11. The World of the Prophet Precursors to ‘Arab Conquests’: evidence from early 7th c. that Arab or ‘Saracen’ armies actively raiding, attempting to exercise control (economic if not political)

12. The World of the Prophet Examples [Hoyland p.41]: c. 610: “a band of Arabs came out of Arabia into the regions of Syria: they pillaged and laid waste many lands, committed many massacres of men and burned without compassion or pity”

13. The World of the Prophet Examples [Hoyland p.41]: c. 614: Monk from Monastery in Judean desert reported that two months after the sack of Jerusalem by the Persians (614), monks were unwilling to return to their monasteries “for fear of the Saracens”

14. The World of the Prophet Examples [Hoyland p.41]: Monk from monastery near Jericho described depredations by bands of “Hebrews and Saracens” Even after Byzantines retook region, group of Arabs came to claim subsidies for keeping desert roads safe :”The emperor can barely pay his soldiers their wages, much less you dogs”

15. The World of the Prophet These observations are significant: reveal that so-called political control was largely illusory: clearly competition for various kinds of influence including military and economic ‘Arabs’ (Saracens, Hebrews) already established local armies that could both protect/defend (for payment) or loot, raid (for ‘booty’) leaders could and did draw on range of religions

16. The World of the Prophet This was the world in which The Prophet Muhammad emerged and the Religion of ‘Islam’ was Born

17. The Prophet’s Early Wars Muhammad and Islam: early days ‘no consequence to the outside world’ until after death: few contemporary sources Like other prophets: preached monotheism Saw Judaism’s ‘father’ Abraham as ‘ancestor’ [note from video: having followers pray towards Kabba –founded by Abraham in spite of presence of idols] Some controversy over how popular in Mecca: Hoyland says ‘not at all’

18. The Prophet’s Early Wars 622 forced to retreat to Medina (hijra) : gathered community followers (umma) around him: agreements made – all would support decided that ‘god’s word’ necessitated preaching be replaced by force- drew up agreement with different groups in Medina ‘umma (community): all agreed to support ‘cause’ (including military action)

19. The Prophet’s Early Wars Began with small-scale raids on neighbouring groups: aim to recruiting for his army main goal: Mecca 628: in position to achieve this by ‘combination of diplomacy and force’ ‘force’: attack (as depicted in “Islam” video) ‘diplomacy’: married daughter of powerfulman of Quarysh tribe (same tribe as his uncle)

20. The Prophet’s Early Wars Had coalition Medina and Mecca: Sought third partner: Ta’aif (controlled by different powerful clan, equal to Quarysh ) By 630 constructed formidable ‘Arab’ (and Arabic speaking) military base [see map] SO: what next?

21. Emergence of original Muslim Coalition underMuhammad

22. The Prophet’s Expansion What were Muhammad’s goals c.630? Traditional narrative: ‘now he turned to take Islam to the rest of the world’ [e.g. video] Hoyland questions this assumption: no contemporary evidence undoubtedly pressure within coalition to build on power, if not from Mohamed himself to spread religion (although had achieved goal of reaching “Arabic speakers intended in ‘the message’ “ . . .

23. The Prophet’s Expansion Whatever the ‘push’ factor: his army turned north towards Jerusalem -- centre widely revered as a centre of ‘monotheism’ other armies (of coalition) moved in different directions, continuing to recruit for Mohammed’s army and ‘Islam’ in general Difficult to know which was central goal!

24. The Prophet’s Expansion Why is issue important? Traditionally recounted that Muhammed succeeded in bringing all Arab tribes together under Islam Therefore, those who were not followers after the prophet’s death in 632 presented as ‘apostates’ Muhammad’s successor Abu Bakr had first to ‘bring them back’ under banner of Islam [‘Ridda Wars’]

25. ‘The Prophet’s Wars’: Ridda Wars 632

26. The Prophet’s Expansion Hoyland argues: If we jettison: assumption that all warfare after 630 was aimed at ‘conquering’ in name of Islam (and allow for variations noted above, including purely political aims of some coalition members) and that all battles were successful A more realistic likelihood emerges. . .

27. The Prophet’s Expansion Abu Bakr was not ‘re-conquering’ but conquering for the first time Arab tribes who had not, in fact, followed Muhammad Hoyland cites source strongly suggesting that that it was only AFTER expansion to the north [discussed below] that armies were able to consolidate support in the ‘original homeland’

28. The Prophet’s Expansion Brings up final point of significance: geography Points to ‘Empty Quarter’ (particularly hostile part of Syrian Desert): tribes to east not part of original coalition – no evidence they were ever brought into ‘Prophet’s conquests’ Remain independent; autonomy plays role in movement into Iraq [see below]

29. ‘Empire of Faith?’ Why does Hoyland’s very focused, detailed analyses of these early ‘conquests’ matter? speaks to ‘Islam: empire of faith’ [video] as representative of larger narrative Point is: was it reallyin these early years an ‘empire of faith’ ? This analysis raises some doubts about that assumption

30. ‘Empire of Faith?’ If this is, on the other hand, part of ‘9th century imagining’: how does that change our understanding of early Islamic societies? And how does changing our idea of those societies affect our larger historical understanding of this era and this region? These questions are about history, not Islam. But the reality of Islam’s “birth” shaped history itself.

31. Conquest of Byzantine Levant c.630 – 643: armies expand north and north west into Byzantine-controlled areas AND north east into Persian-held territories – into heart of Sassanid Empire itself

32. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Byzantine Arabia, Palestine, Syria: begins 630 Movement possibly in response to rumours of planned attacks on coalition by pro-Byzantine Arab tribes To extent the case, reflects ambiguity around question of Muhammad’s aims: ‘conquer the world for Islam’ OR military response to ‘protect and defend’ existing Islamic homeland?

33. ‘TheProphet’sWars’:634(the Levant)

34. ‘The Prophet’s Wars’: Khalid ibn al-Walid 634

35. ‘TheProphet’sWars’:634 - 636

36. Conquest of Byzantine Levant How were the conquests achieved? Traditional view: military victories – reflecting ‘Battle of Mecca’ in video Lack of contemporary accounts allows for latter ‘images’ to predominate Sources that do exist are largely religious: victory is ‘will of God’, defeat is ‘punishment of God’

37. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Reality? Victories gained in several ways: Notable overall how few straightforward battles there were as compared with medium and long-term sieges (this both in Syria and Iraq) Muhammad’s victories included many straightforward negotiations no real Byzantine control/administration present in most of initial confrontations: each community/clan left to ‘fend for itself’

38. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Examples of few battles for which there are chronicles (Christian and Muslim): 634: chronicle speaks of battle between Byzantines and ‘Arabs of Mohamed’ in Palestine, east of Gaza Byzantines fled “ leaving behind leader who Arabs killed

39. Conquest of Byzantine Levant “some 4000 poor villagers of Palestine were killed there, Christians, Jews and Samaritans, and the Arabs ravaged the whole region”. corresponds to brief notice in later Muslim sources of battle in spring 634 in Gaza village, general was killed’

40. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Another chronicle speaks to growing ‘banditry’ (by Arabs): Byzantine governor addressed threat Resulted in ambush: he was killed (chronicler notes his bravery) Muslim sources refer to battle July 634 in which high-ranking Byzantine official killed probably same one [note way in which Hoylandtries to reconcile different sources]

41. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Autumn 634: arrived Bostra, important southern Syrian city It surrendered (both Muslim and Christian sources agree): in return for promises of protection of people and property it would pay tribute. No apparent direct Byzantine administrators involved [significance of this discussed, below]

42. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Chronicles record few actual battles in region but other sources suggest despoliation and looting common: Former monk elevated to head of Palestinian church wrote: “The Saracens, who, on account of our sins, have now risen up against us unexpectedly and ravage all with cruel and feral designs, with impious and godless audacity” security so bad he could not travel to Bethlehem from Jerusalem for Christmas service.

43. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Gave sermon December (either 635 or 636): urged congregation to avoid sin for: “[this is the reason] why the vengeful and god-hating Saracens, the abomination of desolation clearly foretold to us by the prophets, overrun the places which are not allowed to them, plunder cities, devastate fields, burn down villages, set on fire the holy churches, overturn the sacred monasteries and oppose the Byzantine armies arrayed against them”

44. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Significance of last example: While not ‘literally true’[Hoyland], point is that this ‘high religious rhetoric’ meant to bring Christians into line in chaotic times -- at the same time demonized Muslims and Islam a reality that was more one of ‘Arab’ raids – not so dissimilar to those of earlier years – became a ‘Muslim vs Christian’ image. An important one.

45. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Last Key Battles reflect aspects of earlier ones: Yarmuk (636) ‘turned the tide’ in the conquest of Byzantium Byzantine Emperor Heraclius: worried about potential Arab attacks on Damascus (important Syrian city) Came himself; sent top general with army – upon hearing of growing Arab strength, brought in reinforcements (all he could recruit at the time)

46. (Leading up to. . .)The Battle ofYarmuk: 636

47. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Camped on banks of Yarmuk River: battle began July 636 Byzantines defeated led to internal disputes over leadership provided ‘moment of weakness’: Arabs attacked

48. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Defeat was horrible: physical environment contributed: mud flats made escape difficult many Byzantines slipped down river banks, were crushed under horses, and/or drowned defeat ‘heard’ as far away as Gaul (western Europe)

49. Conquest of Byzantine Levant Ultimate Victory: Damascus ‘most splendid city of Syria’ – the ‘jewel’ Heraclius had come to protect – after all became Arab with negotiated ‘agreement’ In region previously only raided (not controlled), Arabs now had wealthy administrative base Stepping stone for further ‘conquests’– clearly deliberate, not mere raids: Homs, Jerusalem and Caesarea (capital of Palestine, port)

50. ‘TheProphet’sWars’: Taking ofHoms (Emesa)JerusalemCaesarea