Chapter V: The Orthodox Caliphate and the Umayyad Dynasty (1)

The Caliphate--_i.e._, the period of the Caliphs or Successors of Muḥammad--extends over six centuries and a quarter (632-1258 A.D.), and falls into three clearly-marked divisions of very unequal length and diverse character.

[Sidenote: The Orthodox Caliphate (632-661 A.D.).]

The first division begins with the election of Abú Bakr, the first Caliph, in 632, and comes to an end with the assassination of ‘Alí, the Prophet's son-in-law and fourth successor, in 661. These four Caliphs are known as the Orthodox (_al-Ráshidún_), because they trod faithfully in the footsteps of the Prophet and ruled after his example in the holy city of Medína, with the assistance of his leading Companions, who constituted an informal Senate.

[Sidenote: The Ummayyad Caliphate (661-750 A.D.).]

The second division includes the Caliphs of the family of Umayya, from the accession of Mu‘áwiya in 661 to the great battle of the Záb in 750, when Marwán II, the last of his line, was defeated by the ‘Abbásids, who claimed the Caliphate as next of kin to the Prophet. According to Moslem notions the Umayyads were kings by right, Caliphs only by courtesy. They had, as we shall see, no spiritual title, and little enough religion of any sort. This dynasty, which had been raised and was upheld by the Syrian Arabs, transferred the seat of government from Medína to Damascus.

[Sidenote: The ‘Abbásid Caliphate (750-1258 A.D.).]

The third division is by far the longest and most important. Starting in 750 with the accession of Abu ’l-‘Abbás al-Saffáh, it presents an unbroken series of thirty-seven Caliphs of the same House, and culminates, after the lapse of half a millennium, in the sack of Baghdád, their magnificent capital, by the Mongol Húlágú (January, 1258). The ‘Abbásids were no less despotic than the Umayyads, but in a more enlightened fashion; for, while the latter had been purely Arab in feeling, the ‘Abbásids owed their throne to the Persian nationalists, and were imbued with Persian ideas, which introduced a new and fruitful element into Moslem civilisation.

[Sidenote: Early Islamic literature.]

From our special point of view the Orthodox and Umayyad Caliphates, which form the subject of the present chapter, are somewhat barren. The simple life of the pagan Arabs found full expression in their poetry. The many-sided life of the Moslems under ‘Abbásid rule may be studied in a copious literature which exhibits all the characteristics of the age; but of contemporary documents illustrating the intellectual history of the early Islamic period comparatively little has been preserved, and that little, being for the most part anti-Islamic in tendency, gives only meagre information concerning what excites interest beyond anything else--the religious movement, the rise of theology, and the origin of those great parties and sects which emerge, at various stages of development, in later literature.

[Sidenote: Unity of Church and State.]

Since the Moslem Church and State are essentially one, it is impossible to treat of politics apart from religion, nor can religious phenomena be understood without continual reference to political events. The following brief sketch of the Orthodox Caliphate will show how completely this unity was realised, and what far-reaching consequences it had.

[Sidenote: Abú Bakr elected Caliph (June, 632 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Musaylima the Liar.]

That Muḥammad left no son was perhaps of less moment than his neglect or refusal to nominate a successor. The Arabs were unfamiliar with the hereditary descent of kingly power, while the idea had not yet dawned of a Divine right resident in the Prophet's family. It was thoroughly in accord with Arabian practice that the Moslem community should elect its own leader, just as in heathen days the tribe chose its own chief. The likeliest men--all three belonged to Quraysh--were Abú Bakr, whose daughter ‘Á’isha had been Muḥammad's favourite wife, ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭáb, and ‘Alí, Abú Ṭálib's son and Fáṭima's husband, who was thus connected with the Prophet by blood as well as by marriage. Abú Bakr was the eldest, he was supported by ‘Umar, and on him the choice ultimately fell, though not without an ominous ebullition of party strife. A man of simple tastes and unassuming demeanour, he had earned the name _al-Ṣiddíq, _i.e._, the True, by his unquestioning faith in the Prophet; naturally gentle and merciful, he stood firm when the cause of Islam was at stake, and crushed with iron hand the revolt which on the news of Muḥammad's death spread like wildfire through Arabia. False prophets arose, and the Bedouins rallied round them, eager to throw off the burden of tithes and prayers. In the centre of the peninsula, the Banú Ḥanífa were led to battle by Musaylima, who imitated the early style of the Koran with ludicrous effect, if we may judge from the sayings ascribed to him, _e.g._, "The elephant, what is the elephant, and who shall tell you what is the elephant? He has a poor tail, and a long trunk: and is a trifling part of the creations of thy God." Moslem tradition calls him the Liar (_al-Kadhdháb_), and represents him as an obscene miracle-monger, which can hardly be the whole truth. It is possible that he got some of his doctrines from Christianity, as Professor Margoliouth has suggested,[344] but we know too little about them to arrive at any conclusion. After a desperate struggle Musaylima was defeated and slain by 'the Sword of Allah,' Khálid b. Walíd. The Moslem arms were everywhere victorious. Arabia bowed in sullen submission.

[Sidenote: Islam a world-religion.]

[Sidenote: Conquest of Persia and Syria (633-643 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Moslem toleration.]

Although Muir and other biographers of Muḥammad have argued that Islam was originally designed for the Arabs alone, and made no claim to universal acceptance, their assertion is contradicted by the unequivocal testimony of the Koran itself. In one of the oldest Revelations (lxviii, 51-52), we read: "_It wanteth little but that the unbelievers dash thee to the ground with their looks_ (of anger) _when they hear the Warning_ (_i.e._, the Koran); _and they say, 'He is assuredly mad': but it_ (the Koran) _is no other than a_ WARNING UNTO ALL CREATURES" (_dhikrun li ’l-‘álamín_).[345] The time had now come when this splendid dream was to be, in large measure, fulfilled. The great wars of conquest were inspired by the Prophet's missionary zeal and justified by his example. Pious duty coincided with reasons of state. "It was certainly good policy to turn the recently subdued tribes of the wilderness towards an external aim in which they might at once satisfy their lust for booty on a grand scale, maintain their warlike feeling, and strengthen themselves in their attachment to the new faith."[346] The story of their achievements cannot be set down here. Suffice it to say that within twelve years after the Prophet's death the Persian Empire had been reduced to a tributary province, and Syria, together with Egypt, torn away from Byzantine rule. It must not be supposed that the followers of Zoroaster and Christ in these countries were forcibly converted to Islam. Thousands embraced it of free will, impelled by various motives which we have no space to enumerate; those who clung to the religion in which they had been brought up secured protection and toleration by payment of a capitation-tax (_jizya_).[347]

[Sidenote: The Caliph ‘Umar (634-644 A.D.).]

The tide of foreign conquest, which had scarce begun to flow before the death of Abú Bakr, swept with amazing rapidity over Syria and Persia in the Caliphate of ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭáb (634-644), and continued to advance, though with diminished fury, under the Prophet's third successor, ‘Uthmán. We may dwell for a little on the noble figure of ‘Umar, who was regarded by good Moslems in after times as an embodiment of all the virtues which a Caliph ought to possess. Probably his character has been idealised, but in any case the anecdotes related of him give an admirable picture of the man and his age. Here are a few, taken almost at random from the pages of Ṭabarí.

[Sidenote: His simple manners.]

[Sidenote: His sense of personal responsibility.]

[Sidenote: The Caliph as a policeman.]

[Sidenote: His strictness towards his own family.]

[Sidenote: Instructions to his governors.]

One said: "I saw ‘Umar coming to the Festival. He walked with bare
feet, using both hands (for he was ambidextrous) to draw round him a
red embroidered cloth. He towered above the people, as though he
were on horseback."[348] A client of (the Caliph) ‘Uthmán b. ‘Affán
relates that he mounted behind his patron and they rode together to
the enclosure for the beasts which were delivered in payment of the
poor-tax. It was an exceedingly hot day and the simoom was blowing
fiercely. They saw a man clad only in a loin-cloth and a short cloak
(_ridá_), in which he had wrapped his head, driving the camels into
the enclosure. ‘Uthmán said to his companion, "Who is this, think
you?" When they came up to him, behold, it was ‘Umar b.
al-Khaṭṭáb. "By God," said ‘Uthmán, "this is _the strong, the
trusty_."[349]--‘Umar used to go round the markets and recite the
Koran and judge between disputants wherever he found them.--When
Ka‘bu ’l-Aḥbár, a well-known Rabbin of Medína, asked how he could
obtain access to the Commander of the Faithful,[350] he received
this answer: "There is no door nor curtain to be passed; he performs
the rites of prayer, then he takes his seat, and any one that wishes
may speak to him."[351] ‘Umar said in one of his public orations,
"By Him who sent Muḥammad with the truth, were a single camel to
die of neglect on the bank of the Euphrates, I should fear lest God
should call the family of al-Khaṭṭáb" (meaning himself) "to
account therefor."[352]--"If I live," he is reported to have said on
another occasion, "please God, I will assuredly spend a whole year
in travelling among my subjects, for I know they have wants which
are cut short ere they reach my ears: the governors do not bring the
wants of the people before me, while the people themselves do not
attain to me. So I will journey to Syria and remain there two
months, then to Mesopotamia and remain there two months, then to
Egypt and remain there two months, then to Baḥrayn and remain
there two months, then to Kúfa and remain there two months, then to
Baṣra and remain there two months; and by God, it will be a year
well spent!"[353]--One night he came to the house of ‘Abdu
’l-Raḥmán b. ‘Awf and knocked at the door, which was opened by
‘Abdu ’l-Raḥmán's wife. "Do not enter," said she, "until I go
back and sit in my place;" so he waited. Then she bade him come in,
and on his asking, "Have you anything in the house?" she fetched him
some food. Meanwhile ‘Abdu ’l-Raḥmán was standing by, engaged in
prayer. "Be quick, man!" cried ‘Umar. ‘Abdu ’l-Raḥmán immediately
pronounced the final salaam, and turning to the Caliph said: "O
Commander of the Faithful, what has brought you here at this hour?"
‘Umar replied: "A party of travellers who alighted in the
neighbourhood of the market: I was afraid that the thieves of Medína
might fall upon them. Let us go and keep watch." So he set off with
‘Abdu ’l-Raḥmán, and when they reached the market-place they
seated themselves on some high ground and began to converse.
Presently they descried, far away, the light of a lamp. "Have not I
forbidden lamps after bedtime?"[354] exclaimed the Caliph. They went
to the spot and found a company drinking wine. "Begone," said ‘Umar
to ‘Abdu ’l-Raḥmán; "I know him." Next morning he sent for the
culprit and said, addressing him by name, "Last night you were
drinking wine with your friends." "O Commander of the Faithful, how
did you ascertain that?" "I saw it with my own eyes." "Has not God
forbidden you to play the spy?" ‘Umar made no answer and pardoned
his offence.[355]--When ‘Umar ascended the pulpit for the purpose of
warning the people that they must not do something, he gathered his
family and said to them: "I have forbidden the people to do
so-and-so. Now, the people look at you as birds look at flesh, and I
swear by God that if I find any one of you doing this thing, I will
double the penalty against him."[356]--Whenever he appointed a
governor he used to draw up in writing a certificate of investiture,
which he caused to be witnessed by some of the Emigrants or Helpers.
It contained the following instructions: That he must not ride on
horseback, nor eat white bread, nor wear fine clothes, nor set up a
door between himself and those who had aught to ask of him.[357]--It
was ‘Umar's custom to go forth with his governors, on their
appointment, to bid them farewell. "I have not appointed you," he
would say, "over the people of Muḥammad (God bless him and grant
him peace!) that you may drag them by their hair and scourge their
skins, but in order that you may lead them in prayer and judge
between them with right and divide (the public money) amongst them
with equity. I have not made you lords of their skin and hair. Do
not flog the Arabs lest you humiliate them, and do not keep them
long on foreign service lest you tempt them to sedition, and do not
neglect them lest you render them desperate. Confine yourselves to
the Koran, write few Traditions of Muḥammad (God bless him and
grant him peace!), and I am your ally." He used to permit
retaliation against his governors. On receiving a complaint about
any one of them he confronted him with the accuser, and punished him
if his guilt were proved.[358]

[Sidenote: The Register of ‘Umar.]

It was ‘Umar who first made a Register (_Díwán_) of the Arabs in Islam and entered them therein according to their tribes and assigned to them their stipends. The following account of its institution is extracted from the charming history entitled _al-Fakhrí_:--

In the fifteenth year of the Hijra (636 A.D.) ‘Umar, who was then
Caliph, seeing that the conquests proceeded without interruption and
that the treasures of the Persian monarchs had been taken as spoil,
and that load after load was being accumulated of gold and silver
and precious jewels and splendid raiment, resolved to enrich the
Moslems by distributing all this wealth amongst them; but he did not
know how he should manage it. Now there was a Persian satrap
(_marzubán_) at Medína who, when he saw ‘Umar's bewilderment, said
to him, "O Commander of the Faithful, the Persian kings have a thing
they call a _Díwán_, in which is kept the whole of their revenues
and expenditures without exception; and therein those who receive
stipends are arranged in classes, so that no confusion occurs."
‘Umar's attention was aroused. He bade the satrap describe it, and
on comprehending its nature, he drew up the registers and assigned
the stipends, appointing a specified allowance for every Moslem; and
he allotted fixed sums to the wives of the Apostle (on whom be God's
blessing and peace!) and to his concubines and next-of-kin, until he
exhausted the money in hand. He did not lay up a store in the
treasury. Some one came to him and said: "O Commander of the
Faithful, you should have left something to provide for
contingencies." ‘Umar rebuked him, saying, "The devil has put these
words into your mouth. May God preserve me from their mischief! for
it were a temptation to my successors. Come what may, I will provide
naught except obedience to God and His Apostle. That is our
provision, whereby we have gained that which we have gained." Then,
in respect of the stipends, he deemed it right that precedence
should be according to priority of conversion to Islam and of
service rendered to the Apostle on his fields of battle.[359]

[Sidenote: The aristocracy of Islam.]

[Sidenote: "'Tis only noble to be good."]

Affinity to Muḥammad was also considered. "By God," exclaimed
‘Umar, "we have not won superiority in this world, nor do we hope
for recompense for our works from God hereafter, save through
Muḥammad (God bless him and grant him peace!). He is our title to
nobility, his tribe are the noblest of the Arabs, and after them
those are the nobler that are nearer to him in blood. Truly, the
Arabs are ennobled by God's Apostle. Peradventure some of them have
many ancestors in common with him, and we ourselves are only removed
by a few forbears from his line of descent, in which we accompany
him back to Adam. Notwithstanding this, if the foreigners bring good
works and we bring none, by God, they are nearer to Muḥammad on
the day of Resurrection than we. Therefore let no man regard
affinity, but let him work for that which is in God's hands to
bestow. He that is retarded by his works will not be sped by his
lineage."[360]

It may be said of ‘Umar, not less appropriately than of Cromwell, that he

"cast the kingdoms old
Into another mould;"

and he too justified the poet's maxim--

"The same arts that did gain
A power, must it maintain."

[Sidenote: Foundation of Baṣra and Kúfa (638 A.D.).]

Under the system which he organised Arabia, purged of infidels, became a vast recruiting-ground for the standing armies of Islam: the Arabs in the conquered territories formed an exclusive military class, living in great camps and supported by revenues derived from the non-Muḥammadan population. Out of such camps arose two cities destined to make their mark in literary history--Baṣra (Bassora) on the delta of the Tigris and Euphrates, and Kúfa, which was founded about the same time on the western branch of the latter stream, not far from Ḥíra.

[Sidenote: Death of ‘Umar (644 A.D.)]

‘Umar was murdered by a Persian slave named Fírúz while leading the prayers in the Great Mosque. With his death the military theocracy and the palmy days of the Patriarchal Caliphate draw to a close. The broad lines of his character appear in the anecdotes translated above, though many details might be added to complete the picture. Simple and frugal; doing his duty without fear or favour; energetic even to harshness, yet capable of tenderness towards the weak; a severe judge of others and especially of himself, he was a born ruler and every inch a man. Looking back on the turmoils which followed his death one is inclined to agree with the opinion of a saintly doctor who said, five centuries afterwards, that "the good fortune of Islam was shrouded in the grave-clothes of ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭáb."[361]

[Sidenote: ‘Uthmán elected Caliph (644 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: General disaffection.]

[Sidenote: ‘Uthmán murdered (656 A.D.).]

When the Meccan aristocrats accepted Islam, they only yielded to the inevitable. They were now to have an opportunity of revenging themselves. ‘Uthmán b. ‘Affán, who succeeded ‘Umar as Caliph, belonged to a distinguished Meccan family, the Umayyads or descendants of Umayya, which had always taken a leading part in the opposition to Muḥammad, though ‘Uthmán himself was among the Prophet's first disciples. He was a pious, well-meaning old man--an easy tool in the hands of his ambitious kinsfolk. They soon climbed into all the most lucrative and important offices and lived on the fat of the land, while too often their ungodly behaviour gave point to the question whether these converts of the eleventh hour were not still heathens at heart. Other causes contributed to excite a general discontent. The rapid growth of luxury and immorality in the Holy Cities as well as in the new settlements was an eyesore to devout Moslems. The true Islamic aristocracy, the Companions of the Prophet, headed by ‘Alí, Ṭalḥa, and Zubayr, strove to undermine the rival nobility which threatened them with destruction. The factious soldiery were ripe for revolt against Umayyad arrogance and greed. Rebellion broke out, and finally the aged Caliph, after enduring a siege of several weeks, was murdered in his own house. This event marks an epoch in the history of the Arabs. The ensuing civil wars rent the unity of Islam from top to bottom, and the wound has never healed.

[Sidenote: ‘Alí elected Caliph (656 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Character of ‘Alí.]

[Sidenote: His apotheosis.]

‘Alí, the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law, who had hitherto remained in the background, was now made Caliph. Although the suspicion that he was in league with the murderers may be put aside, he showed culpable weakness in leaving ‘Uthmán to his fate without an effort to save him. But ‘Alí had almost every virtue except those of the ruler: energy, decision, and foresight. He was a gallant warrior, a wise counsellor, a true friend, and a generous foe. He excelled in poetry and in eloquence; his verses and sayings are famous throughout the Muḥammadan East, though few of them can be considered authentic. A fine spirit worthy to be compared with Montrose and Bayard, he had no talent for the stern realities of statecraft, and was overmatched by unscrupulous rivals who knew that "war is a game of deceit." Thus his career was in one sense a failure: his authority as Caliph was never admitted, while he lived, by the whole community. On the other hand, he has exerted, down to the present day, a posthumous influence only second to that of Muḥammad himself. Within a century of his death he came to be regarded as the Prophet's successor _jure divino_; as a blessed martyr, sinless and infallible; and by some even as an incarnation of God. The ‘Alí of Shí‘ite legend is not an historical figure glorified: rather does he symbolise, in purely mythical fashion, the religious aspirations and political aims of a large section of the Moslem world.

[Sidenote: ‘Alí against Mu‘áwiya.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Ṣiffín (657 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Arbitration.]

[Sidenote: The award.]

[Sidenote: The Khárijites revolt against ‘Alí.]

[Sidenote: Alí assassinated (661 A.D.).]

To return to our narrative. No sooner was ‘Alí proclaimed Caliph by the victorious rebels than Mu‘áwiya b. Abí Sufyán, the governor of Syria, raised the cry of vengeance for ‘Uthmán and refused to take the oath of allegiance. As head of the Umayyad family, Mu‘áwiya might justly demand that the murderers of his kinsman should be punished, but the contest between him and ‘Alí was virtually for the Caliphate. A great battle was fought at Ṣiffín, a village on the Euphrates. ‘Alí had well-nigh gained the day when Mu‘áwiya bethought him of a stratagem. He ordered his troops to fix Korans on the points of their lances and to shout, "Here is the Book of God: let it decide between us!" The miserable trick succeeded. In ‘Alí's army there were many pious fanatics to whom the proposed arbitration by the Koran appealed with irresistible force. They now sprang forward clamorously, threatening to betray their leader unless he would submit his cause to the Book. Vainly did ‘Alí remonstrate with the mutineers, and warn them of the trap into which they were driving him, and this too at the moment when victory was within their grasp. He had no choice but to yield and name as his umpire a man of doubtful loyalty, Abú Músá al-Ash‘arí, one of the oldest surviving Companions of the Prophet. Mu‘áwiya on his part named ‘Amr b. al-‘Áṣ, whose cunning had prompted the decisive manœuvre. When the umpires came forth to give judgment, Abú Músá rose and in accordance with what had been arranged at the preliminary conference pronounced that both ‘Alí and Mu‘áwiya should be deposed and that the people should elect a proper Caliph in their stead. "Lo," said he, laying down his sword, "even thus do I depose ‘Alí b. Abí Ṭálib." Then ‘Amr advanced and spoke as follows: "O people! ye have heard the judgment of my colleague. He has called you to witness that he deposes ‘Alí. Now I call you to witness that I confirm Mu‘áwiya, even as I make fast this sword of mine," and suiting the action to the word, he returned it to its sheath. It is characteristic of Arabian notions of morality that this impudent fraud was hailed by Mu‘áwiya's adherents as a diplomatic triumph which gave him a colourable pretext for assuming the title of Caliph. Both sides prepared to renew the struggle, but in the meanwhile ‘Alí found his hands full nearer home. A numerous party among his troops, including the same zealots who had forced arbitration upon him, now cast him off because he had accepted it, fell out from the ranks, and raised the standard of revolt. These 'Outgoers,' or Khárijites, as they were called, maintained their theocratic principles with desperate courage, and though often defeated took the field again and again. ‘Alí's plans for recovering Syria were finally abandoned in 660, when he concluded peace with Mu‘áwiya, and shortly afterwards he was struck down in the Mosque at Kúfa, which he had made his capital, by Ibn Muljam, a Khárijite conspirator.

With ‘Alí's fall our sketch of the Orthodox Caliphate may fitly end. It was necessary to give some account of these years so vital in the history of Islam, even at the risk of wearying the reader, who will perhaps wish that less space were devoted to political affairs.

[Sidenote: The Umayyad dynasty.]

[Sidenote: Moslem tradition hostile to the Umayyads.]

[Sidenote: Mu‘áwiya's clemency.]

[Sidenote: His hours of study.]

The Umayyads came into power, but, except in Syria and Egypt, they ruled solely by the sword. As descendants and representatives of the pagan aristocracy, which strove with all its might to defeat Muḥammad, they were usurpers in the eyes of the Moslem community which they claimed to lead as his successors.[362] We shall see, a little further on, how this opposition expressed itself in two great parties: the Shí‘ites or followers of ‘Alí, and the radical sect of the Khárijites, who have been mentioned above; and how it was gradually reinforced by the non-Arabian Moslems until it overwhelmed the Umayyad Government and set up the ‘Abbásids in their place. In estimating the character of the Umayyads one must bear in mind that the epitaph on the fallen dynasty was composed by their enemies, and can no more be considered historically truthful than the lurid picture which Tacitus has drawn of the Emperor Tiberius. Because they kept the revolutionary forces in check with ruthless severity, the Umayyads pass for bloodthirsty tyrants; whereas the best of them at any rate were strong and singularly capable rulers, bad Moslems and good men of the world, seldom cruel, plain livers if not high thinkers; who upon the whole stand as much above the ‘Abbásids in morality as below them in culture and intellect. Mu‘áwiya's clemency was proverbial, though he too could be stern on occasion. When members of the house of ‘Alí came to visit him at Damascus, which was now the capital of the Muḥammadan Empire, he gave them honourable lodging and entertainment and was anxious to do what they asked; but they (relates the historian approvingly) used to address him in the rudest terms and affront him in the vilest manner: sometimes he would answer them with a jest, and another time he would feign not to hear, and he always dismissed them with splendid presents and ample donations.[363] "I do not employ my sword," he said, "when my whip suffices me, nor my whip when my tongue suffices me; and were there but a single hair (of friendship) between me and my subjects, I would not let it be snapped."[364] After the business of the day he sought relaxation in books. "He consecrated a third part of every night to the history of the Arabs and their famous battles; the history of foreign peoples, their kings, and their government; the biographies of monarchs, including their wars and stratagems and methods of rule; and other matters connected with Ancient History."[365]

[Sidenote: Ziyád ibn Abíhi.]

Mu‘áwiya's chief henchman was Ziyád, the son of Sumayya (Sumayya being the name of his mother), or, as he is generally called, Ziyád ibn Abíhi, _i.e._, 'Ziyád his father's son,' for none knew who was his sire, though rumour pointed to Abú Sufyán; in which case Ziyád would have been Mu‘áwiya's half-brother. Mu‘áwiya, instead of disavowing the scandalous imputation, acknowledged him as such, and made him governor of Baṣra, where he ruled the Eastern provinces with a rod of iron.

[Sidenote: Yazíd (680-683 A.D.).]

Mu‘áwiya was a crafty diplomatist--he has been well compared to Richelieu--whose profound knowledge of human nature enabled him to gain over men of moderate opinions in all the parties opposed to him. Events were soon to prove the hollowness of this outward reconciliation. Yazíd, who succeeded his father, was the son of Maysún, a Bedouin woman whom Mu‘áwiya married before he rose to be Caliph. The luxury of Damascus had no charm for her wild spirit, and she gave utterance to her feeling of homesickness in melancholy verse:--

"A tent with rustling breezes cool
Delights me more than palace high,
And more the cloak of simple wool
Than robes in which I learned to sigh.

The crust I ate beside my tent
Was more than this fine bread to me;
The wind's voice where the hill-path went
Was more than tambourine can be.

And more than purr of friendly cat
I love the watch-dog's bark to hear;
And more than any lubbard fat
I love a Bedouin cavalier."[366]

[Sidenote: Ḥusayn marches on Kúfa.]

[Sidenote: Massacre of Ḥusayn and his followers at Karbalá (10th Muḥarram, 61 A.H. = 10th October, 680 A.D.).]

Mu‘áwiya, annoyed by the contemptuous allusion to himself, took the dame at her word. She returned to her own family, and Yazíd grew up as a Bedouin, with the instincts and tastes which belong to the Bedouins--love of pleasure, hatred of piety, and reckless disregard for the laws of religion. The beginning of his reign was marked by an event of which even now few Moslems can speak without a thrill of horror and dismay. The facts are briefly these: In the autumn of the year 680 Ḥusayn, the son of ‘Alí, claiming to be the rightful Caliph in virtue of his descent from the Prophet, quitted Mecca with his whole family and a number of devoted friends, and set out for Kúfa, where he expected the population, which was almost entirely Shí‘ite, to rally to his cause. It was a foolhardy adventure. The poet Farazdaq, who knew the fickle temper of his fellow-townsmen, told Ḥusayn that although their hearts were with him, their swords would be with the Umayyads; but his warning was given in vain. Meanwhile ‘Ubaydulláh b. Ziyád, the governor of Kúfa, having overawed the insurgents in the city and beheaded their leader, Muslim b. ‘Aqíl, who was a cousin of Ḥusayn, sent a force of cavalry with orders to bring the arch-rebel to a stand. Retreat was still open to him. But his followers cried out that the blood of Muslim must be avenged, and Ḥusayn could not hesitate. Turning northward along the Euphrates, he encamped at Karbalá with his little band, which, including the women and children, amounted to some two hundred souls. In this hopeless situation he offered terms which might have been accepted if Shamir b. Dhi ’l-Jawshan, a name for ever infamous and accursed, had not persuaded ‘Ubaydulláh to insist on unconditional surrender. The demand was refused, and Ḥusayn drew up his comrades--a handful of men and boys--for battle against the host which surrounded them. All the harrowing details invented by grief and passion can scarcely heighten the tragedy of the closing scene. It would appear that the Umayyad officers themselves shrank from the odium of a general massacre, and hoped to take the Prophet's grandson alive. Shamir, however, had no such scruples. Chafing at delay, he urged his soldiers to the assault. The unequal struggle was soon over. Ḥusayn fell, pierced by an arrow, and his brave followers were cut down beside him to the last man.

[Sidenote: Differing views of Muḥammadan and European writers.]

[Sidenote: The Umayyads judged by Islam.]

[Sidenote: Character of Yazíd.]

Muḥammadan tradition, which with rare exceptions is uniformly hostile to the Umayyad dynasty, regards Ḥusayn as a martyr and Yazíd as his murderer; while modern historians, for the most part, agree with Sir W. Muir, who points out that Ḥusayn, "having yielded himself to a treasonable, though impotent design upon the throne, was committing an offence that endangered society and demanded swift suppression." This was naturally the view of the party in power, and the reader must form his own conclusion as to how far it justifies the action which they took. For Moslems the question is decided by the relation of the Umayyads to Islam. Violators of its laws and spurners of its ideals, they could never be anything but tyrants; and being tyrants, they had no right to slay believers who rose in arms against their usurped authority. The so-called verdict of history, when we come to examine it, is seen to be the verdict of religion, the judgment of theocratic Islam on Arabian Imperialism. On this ground the Umayyads are justly condemned, but it is well to remember that in Moslem eyes the distinction between Church and State does not exist. Yazíd was a bad Churchman: therefore he was a wicked tyrant; the one thing involves the other. From our unprejudiced standpoint, he was an amiable prince who inherited his mother's poetic talent, and infinitely preferred wine, music, and sport to the drudgery of public affairs. The Syrian Arabs, who recognised the Umayyads as legitimate, thought highly of him: "Jucundissimus," says a Christian writer, "et cunctis nationibus regni ejus subditis vir gratissime habitus, qui nullam unquam, ut omnibus moris est, sibi regalis fastigii causa gloriam appetivit, sed communis cum omnibus civiliter vixit."[367] He deplored the fate of the women and children of Ḥusayn's family, treated them with every mark of respect, and sent them to Medína, where their account of the tragedy added fresh fuel to the hatred and indignation with which its authors were generally regarded.

The Umayyads had indeed ample cause to rue the day of Karbalá. It gave the Shí‘ite faction a rallying-cry--"Vengeance for Ḥusayn!"--which was taken up on all sides, and especially by the Persian _Mawálí_, or Clients, who longed for deliverance from the Arab yoke. Their amalgamation with the Shí‘a--a few years later they flocked in thousands to the standard of Mukhtár--was an event of the utmost historical importance, which will be discussed when we come to speak of the Shí‘ites in particular.

[Sidenote: Medína and Mecca desecrated (682-3 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Rebellion of Mukhtár (685-6 A.D.).]

The slaughter of Ḥusayn does not complete the tale of Yazíd's enormities. Medína, the Prophet's city, having expelled its Umayyad governor, was sacked by a Syrian army, while Mecca itself, where ‘Abdulláh b. Zubayr had set up as rival Caliph, was besieged, and the Ka‘ba laid in ruins. These outrages, shocking to Moslem sentiment, kindled a flame of rebellion. Ḥusayn was avenged by Mukhtár, who seized Kúfa and executed some three hundred of the guilty citizens, including the miscreant Shamir. His troops defeated and slew ‘Ubaydulláh b. Ziyád, but he himself was slain, not long afterwards, by Mus‘ab, the brother of Ibn Zubayr, and seven thousand of his followers were massacred in cold blood. On Yazíd's death (683) the Umayyad Empire threatened to fall to pieces. As a contemporary poet sang--

"Now loathed of all men is the Fury blind
Which blazeth as a fire blown by the wind.
They are split in sects: each province hath its own
Commander of the Faithful, each its throne."[368]

[Sidenote: Civil war renewed.]

[Sidenote: Rivalry of Northern and Southern Arabs.]

Fierce dissensions broke out among the Syrian Arabs, the backbone of the dynasty. The great tribal groups of Kalb and Qays, whose coalition had hitherto maintained the Umayyads in power, fought on opposite sides at Marj Ráhiṭ (684), the former for Marwán and the latter for Ibn Zubayr. Marwán's victory secured the allegiance of Syria, but henceforth Qays and Kalb were always at daggers drawn.[369] This was essentially a feud between the Northern and the Southern Arabs--a feud which rapidly extended and developed into a permanent racial enmity. They carried it with them to the farthest ends of the world, so that, for example, after the conquest of Spain precautions had to be taken against civil war by providing that Northerners and Southerners should not settle in the same districts. The literary history of this antagonism has been sketched by Dr. Goldziher with his wonted erudition and acumen.[370] Satire was, of course, the principal weapon of both sides. Here is a fragment by a Northern poet which belongs to the Umayyad period:--

"Negroes are better, when they name their sires,
Than Qaḥṭán's sons,[371] the uncircumcisèd cowards:
A folk whom thou mayst see, at war's outflame,
More abject than a shoe to tread in baseness;
Their women free to every lecher's lust,
Their clients spoil for cavaliers and footmen."[372]

Thus the Arab nation was again torn asunder by the old tribal pretensions which Muḥammad sought to abolish. That they ultimately proved fatal to the Umayyads is no matter for surprise; the sorely pressed dynasty was already tottering, its enemies were at its gates. By good fortune it produced at this crisis an exceptionally able and vigorous ruler, ‘Abdu ’l-Malik b. Marwán, who not only saved his house from destruction, but re-established its supremacy and inaugurated a more brilliant epoch than any that had gone before.

[Sidenote: ‘Abdu ’l-Malik and his successors.]

[Sidenote: Reforms of ‘Abdu ’l-Malik.]

[Sidenote: The writing of Arabic.]

[Sidenote: Ḥajjáj b. Yúsuf († 714 A.D.).]

‘Abdu ’l-Malik succeeded his father in 685, but required seven years of hard fighting to make good his claim to the Caliphate. When his most formidable rival, Ibn Zubayr, had fallen in battle (692), the eastern provinces were still overrun by rebels, who offered a desperate resistance to the governor of ‘Iráq, the iron-handed Ḥajjáj. But enough of bloodshed. Peace also had her victories during the troubled reign of ‘Abdu ’l-Malik and the calmer sway of his successors. Four of the next five Caliphs were his own sons--Walíd (705-715), Sulaymán (715-717), Yazíd II (720-724), and Hishám (724-743); the fifth, ‘Umar II, was the son of his brother, ‘Abdu ’l-‘Azíz. For the greater part of this time the Moslem lands enjoyed a well-earned interval of repose and prosperity, which mitigated, though it could not undo, the frightful devastation wrought by twenty years of almost continuous civil war. Many reforms were introduced, some wholly political in character, while others inspired by the same motives have, none the less, a direct bearing on literary history. ‘Abdu ’l-Malik organised an excellent postal service, by means of relays of horses, for the conveyance of despatches and travellers; he substituted for the Byzantine and Persian coins, which had hitherto been in general use, new gold and silver pieces, on which be caused sentences from the Koran to be engraved; and he made Arabic, instead of Greek or Persian, the official language of financial administration. Steps were taken, moreover, to improve the extremely defective Arabic script, and in this way to provide a sound basis for the study and interpretation of the Koran as well as for the collection of _ḥadíths_ or sayings of the Prophet, which form an indispensable supplement thereto. The Arabic alphabet, as it was then written, consisted entirely of consonants, so that, to give an illustration from English, _bnd_ might denote _band_, _bend_, _bind_, or _bond_; _crt_ might stand for _cart_, _carat_, _curt_, and so on. To an Arab this ambiguity mattered little; far worse confusion arose from the circumstance that many of the consonants themselves were exactly alike: thus, _e.g._, it was possible to read the same combination of three letters as _bnt_, _nbt_, _byt_, _tnb_, _ntb_, _nyb_, and in various other ways. Considering the difficulties of the Arabic language, which are so great that a European aided by scientific grammars and unequivocal texts will often find himself puzzled even when he has become tolerably familiar with it, one may imagine that the Koran was virtually a sealed book to all but a few among the crowds of foreigners who accepted Islam after the early conquests. ‘Abdu’l-Malik's viceroy in ‘Iráq, the famous Ḥajjáj, who began life as a schoolmaster, exerted himself to promote the use of vowel-marks (borrowed from the Syriac) and of the diacritical points placed above or below similar consonants. This extraordinary man deserves more than a passing mention. A stern disciplinarian, who could be counted upon to do his duty without any regard to public opinion, he was chosen by ‘Abdu ’l-Malik to besiege Mecca, which Ibn Zubayr was holding as anti-Caliph. Ḥajjáj bombarded the city, defeated the Pretender, and sent his head to Damascus. Two years afterwards he became governor of ‘Iráq. Entering the Mosque at Kúfa, he mounted the pulpit and introduced himself to the assembled townsmen in these memorable words:--

[Sidenote: His service to literature.]

"I am he who scattereth the darkness and climbeth o'er the summits.
When I lift the turban from my face, ye will know me.[373]

"O people of Kúfa! I see heads that are ripe for cutting, and I am the man to do it; and methinks, I see blood between the turbans and beards."[374] The rest of his speech was in keeping with the commencement. He used no idle threats, as the malcontents soon found out. Rebellion, which had been rampant before his arrival, was rapidly extinguished. "He restored order in ‘Iráq and subdued its people."[375] For twenty years his despotic rule gave peace and security to the Eastern world. Cruel he may have been, though the tales of his bloodthirstiness are beyond doubt grossly exaggerated, but it should be put to his credit that he established and maintained the settled conditions which afford leisure for the cultivation of learning. Under his protection the Koran and Traditions were diligently studied both in Kúfa and Baṣra, where many Companions of the Prophet had made their home: hence arose in Baṣra the science of Grammar, with which, as we shall see in a subsequent page, the name of that city is peculiarly associated. Ḥajjáj shared the literary tastes of his sovereign; he admired the old poets and patronised the new; he was a master of terse eloquence and plumed himself on his elegant Arabic style. The most hated man of his time, he lives in history as the savage oppressor and butcher of God-fearing Moslems. He served the Umayyads well and faithfully, and when he died in 714 A.D. he left behind him nothing but his Koran, his arms, and a few hundred pieces of silver.

[Sidenote: Walíd (705-715 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Moslem conquests in the East.]

[Sidenote: Conquest of Spain (711-713 A.D.).]

It was a common saying at Damascus that under Walíd people talked of fine buildings, under Sulaymán of cookery and the fair sex, while in the reign of ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azíz the Koran and religion formed favourite topics of conversation.[376] Of Walíd's passion for architecture we have a splendid monument in the Great Mosque of Damascus (originally the Cathedral of St. John), which is the principal sight of the city to this day. He spoke Arabic very incorrectly, and though his father rebuked him, observing that "in order to rule the Arabs one must be proficient in their language," he could never learn to express himself with propriety.[377] The unbroken peace which now prevailed within the Empire enabled Walíd to resume the work of conquest. In the East his armies invaded Transoxania, captured Bokhárá and Samarcand, and pushed forward to the Chinese frontier. Another force crossed the Indus and penetrated as far as Múltán, a renowned centre of pilgrimage in the Southern Punjaub, which fell into the hands of the Moslems after a prolonged siege. But the most brilliant advance, and the richest in its results, was that in the extreme West, which decided the fate of Spain. Although the Moslems had obtained a footing in Northern Africa some thirty years before this time, their position was always precarious, until in 709 Músá b. Nuṣayr completely subjugated the Berbers, and extended not only the dominion but also the faith of Islam to the Atlantic Ocean. Two years later his freedman Ṭáriq crossed the straits and took possession of the commanding height, called by the ancients Calpe, but henceforth known as Jabal Ṭáriq (Gibraltar). Roderic, the last of the West Gothic dynasty, gathered an army in defence of his kingdom, but there were traitors in the camp, and, though he himself fought valiantly, their defection turned the fortunes of the day. The king fled, and it was never ascertained what became of him. Ṭáriq, meeting with feeble resistance, marched rapidly on Toledo, while Músá, whose jealousy was excited by the triumphal progress of his lieutenant, now joined in the campaign, and, storming city after city, reached the Pyrenees. The conquest of Spain, which is told by Moslem historians with many romantic circumstances, marks the nearest approach that the Arabs ever made to World-Empire. Their advance on French soil was finally hurled back by Charles the Hammer's great victory at Tours (732 A.D.).

[Sidenote: ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azíz (717-720 A.D.).]

Before taking leave of the Umayyads we must not forget to mention ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azíz, a ruler who stands out in singular contrast with his predecessors, and whose brief reign is regarded by many Moslems as the sole bright spot in a century of godless and bloodstained tyranny. There had been nothing like it since the days of his illustrious namesake and kinsman,[378] ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭáb, and we shall find nothing like it in the future history of the Caliphate. Plato desired that every king should be a philosopher: according to Muḥammadan theory every Caliph ought to be a saint. ‘Umar satisfied these aspirations. When he came to the throne the following dialogue is said to have occurred between him and one of his favourites, Sálim al-Suddí:--

‘Umar: "Are you glad on account of my accession, or sorry?"

Sálim: "I am glad for the people's sake, but sorry for yours."

‘Umar: "I fear that I have brought perdition upon my soul."

Sálim: "If you are afraid, very good. I only fear that you may
cease to be afraid."

‘Umar: "Give me a word of counsel."

Sálim: "Our father Adam was driven forth from Paradise because
of one sin."[379]

Poets and orators found no favour at his court, which was thronged by divines and men of ascetic life.[380] He warned his governors that they must either deal justly or go. He would not allow political considerations to interfere with his ideal of righteousness, but, as Wellhausen points out, he had practical ends in view: his piety made him anxious for the common weal no less than for his own salvation. Whether he administered the State successfully is a matter of dispute. It has been generally supposed that his financial reforms were Utopian in character and disastrous to the Exchequer.[381] However this may be, he showed wisdom in seeking to bridge the menacing chasm between Islam and the Imperial house. Thus, _e.g._, he did away with the custom which had long prevailed of cursing ‘Alí from the pulpit at Friday prayers. The policy of conciliation was tried too late, and for too short a space, to be effective; but it was not entirely fruitless. When, on the overthrow of the Umayyad dynasty, the tombs of the hated 'tyrants' were defiled and their bodies disinterred, ‘Umar's grave alone was respected, and Mas‘údí († 956 A.D.) tells us that in his time it was visited by crowds of pilgrims.

[Sidenote: Hishám and Walíd II.]

The remaining Umayyads do not call for particular notice. Hishám ranks as a statesman with Mu‘áwiya and ‘Abdu ’l-Malik: the great ‘Abbásid Caliph, Manṣúr, is said to have admired and imitated his methods of government.[382] Walíd II was an incorrigible libertine, whose songs celebrating the forbidden delights of wine have much merit. The eminent poet and freethinker, Abu ’l-‘Alá al-Ma‘arrí, quotes these verses by him[383]:--

[Sidenote: Verses by Walíd II (743-4 A.D.).]

"The Imám Walíd am I! In all my glory
Of trailing robes I listen to soft lays.
When proudly I sweep on towards her chamber,
I care not who inveighs.

There's no true joy but lending ear to music,
Or wine that leaves one sunk in stupor dense.
Houris in Paradise I do not look for:
Does any man of sense?"

Let us now turn from the monarchs to their subjects.

[Sidenote: Political and religious movements of the period.]

In the first place we shall speak of the political and religious parties, whose opposition to the Umayyad House gradually undermined its influence and in the end brought about its fall. Some account will be given of the ideas for which these parties fought and of the causes of their discontent with the existing _régime_. Secondly, a few words must be said of the theological and more purely religious sects--the Mu‘tazilites, Murjites, and Ṣúfís; and, lastly, of the extant literature, which is almost exclusively poetical, and its leading representatives.

[Sidenote: The Arabs of ‘Iráq.]

The opposition to the Umayyads was at first mainly a question of politics. Mu‘áwiya's accession announced the triumph of Syria over ‘Iráq, and Damascus, instead of Kúfa, became the capital of the Empire. As Wellhausen observes, "the most powerful risings against the Umayyads proceeded from ‘Iráq, not from any special party, but from the whole mass of the Arabs settled there, who were united in resenting the loss of their independence (_Selbstherrlichkeit_) and in hating those into whose hands it had passed."[384] At the same time these feelings took a religious colour and identified themselves with the cause of Islam. The new government fell lamentably short of the theocratic standard by which it was judged. Therefore it was evil, and (according to the Moslem's conception of duty) every right-thinking man must work for its destruction.

Among the myriads striving for this consummation, and so far making common cause with each other, we can distinguish four principal classes.

[Sidenote: Parties opposed to the Umayyad government.]

(1) The religious Moslems, or Pietists, in general, who formed a wing of the Orthodox Party.[385]

(2) The Khárijites, who may be described as the Puritans and extreme Radicals of theocracy.

(3) The Shí‘ites, or partisans of ‘Alí and his House.

(4) The Non-Arabian Moslems, who were called _Mawálí_ (Clients).

[Sidenote: The Pietists.]

It is clear that the Pietists--including divines learned in the law, reciters of the Koran, Companions of the Prophet and their descendants--could not but abominate the secular authority which they were now compelled to obey. The conviction that Might, in the shape of the tyrant and his minions, trampled on Right as represented by the Koran and the _Sunna_ (custom of Muḥammad) drove many into active rebellion: five thousand are said to have perished in the sack of Medína alone. Others again, like Ḥasan of Baṣra, filled with profound despair, shut their eyes on the world, and gave themselves up to asceticism, a tendency which had important consequences, as we shall see.

[Sidenote: The Khárijites.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Nahrawán (658 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Khárijite risings.]

When ‘Alí, on the field of Ṣiffín, consented that the claims of Mu‘áwiya and himself to the Caliphate should be decided by arbitration, a large section of his army accused him of having betrayed his trust. He, the duly elected Caliph--so they argued--should have maintained the dignity of his high office inviolate at all costs. On the homeward march the malcontents, some twelve thousand in number, broke away and encamped by themselves at Ḥarúrá, a village near Kúfa. Their cry was, "God alone can decide" (_lá ḥukma illá lilláhi_): in these terms they protested against the arbitration. ‘Alí endeavoured to win them back, but without any lasting success. They elected a Caliph from among themselves, and gathered at Nahrawán, four thousand strong. On the appearance of ‘Alí with a vastly superior force many of the rebels dispersed, but the remainder--about half--preferred to die for their faith. Nahrawán was to the Khárijites what Karbalá afterwards became to the Shí‘ites, who from this day were regarded by the former as their chief enemies. Frequent Khárijite risings took place during the early Umayyad period, but the movement reached its zenith in the years of confusion which followed Yazíd's death. The Azraqites, so called after their leader, Náfi‘ b. al-Azraq, overran ‘Iráq and Southern Persia, while another sect, the Najdites, led by Najda b. ‘Ámir, reduced the greater part of Arabia to submission. The insurgents held their ground for a long time against ‘Abdu ’l-Malik, and did not cease from troubling until the rebellion headed by Shabíb was at last stamped out by Ḥajjáj in 697.

[Sidenote: Meaning of 'Khárijite.']

[Sidenote: Their political theories.]