Mu'awiya ibn abi Sufyan

From Arabia to Empire

Stephen Humphreys

• Publisher: Oneworld Academic
• Year: 2012
• eBook ISBN: 9781780742021
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

In this accessible study, Stephen Humphreys introduces the most elusive of the early caliphs, Mu'awiya ibn abi Sufyan (602-680). Notoriously guarded about his thoughts, motives and emotions, Mu'awiya was universally known as a figure of immense political acumen. Beyond this, opinions are deeply divided. Throughout history, some have accused him of being the first caliph to diverge from Muhammed's model of ideal Muslim leadership whilst others credit him with uniting an empire in disarray and transforming the Caliphate into a practicable form of government. In light of this, Humphreys critically analyses his sources, and seeks to get as close as possible to a historical account of the great man.

THE PROBLEM OF MU‘AWIYA

Of all the early caliphs, Mu‘awiya ibn Abi Sufyan is surely the most elusive and ambiguous. He is elusive because we know so very little about even the public facts of his career, including the almost twenty years in which he was the unchallenged head of the Muslim community and its immense empire. Of his inner beliefs and purposes we know even less. He is ambiguous because Muslims have never been sure what to make of him. In his lifetime, he was a symbol of the conflicts and anxieties that afflicted the community of believers and has so remained until the present day. However, Mu‘awiya is a decisive figure in the history of Islam. Without him, the political and religious evolution of early Islam seems opaque and unintelligible. Moreover, whatever we think of him as a ruler and a man (a point on which opinions differ sharply, to put it mildly), he was a political genius at a moment when nothing less could have saved the Islamic Empire from dissolution.

Mu‘awiya’s life and career fall into three phases of nearly equal length: the roughly thirty years, from infancy to early adulthood passed within the traditional family and religious structures of the Arab Quraysh tribe, twenty-five years spent as a member of the newly dominant Islamic military and political élite, and twenty-five years struggling for and then holding supreme authority as head of the Islamic Empire. Of the first phase we can say very little; he was simply there. In the second phase, especially his twenty years as governor in Syria under the caliphs ‘Umar (634–644) and ‘Uthman (644–656), the sources transmit a number of assertions and anecdotes about him, some of which are doubtless true, at least in substance. For the third phase, we have a mountain of information (none of which has come down to us in anything resembling its original form) on the civil war with ‘Ali but only a few highlighted moments from his twenty-year caliphate. In terms of concrete events and policies, we are told much more about Mu‘awiya’s governors in Iraq than we are about him.

We know, for example, that he sent at least one major military expedition every year into Byzantine Anatolia or along the Aegean coast. This represented a huge commitment of resources and was surely the thing about which he cared most, for if he succeeded in capturing Constantinople and ending Byzantine rule, he would be the successor of both Caesar and Muhammad – both universal emperor and guardian of the final revelation. Yet the Arabic sources tell us almost nothing about these expeditions apart from the names of their commanders. We do not know where they went or what were either their immediate or long-term objectives. For that, we must turn to the Greek (and occasionally Syriac) sources, whose people bore the brunt of these incursions. However, even these accounts are terse, confusing and often contradictory. Like the Arabic texts, they were composed at least a century after Mu‘awiya’s lifetime and their sources of information are obscure at best.

Nor do we learn much about how Mu‘awiya managed affairs in his home base, Syria. The Syrian Arab troops brought him to power and kept him there but how did he deal with them? Muslim writers tell us even less of how he dealt with the overwhelming majority of his subjects, who were not Muslims but Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians. Whatever we know must be gleaned from scattered references in Greek and Syriac texts. Among Syriac writers Mu‘awiya had a reputation for stability, justice and tolerance but they give few, if any, facts to support this judgment. Finally, Mu‘awiya himself did everything in his power – or so we are told by Muslim writers – to mask his own thoughts, motives and emotions. He was famed for his political acumen, embodied in the quality of hilm, a word best understood as “forbearance in the face of provocation.” He consulted widely and listened closely but did not show his hand. He could be eloquent but relied on wit and irony rather than the moving rhetoric ascribed to his rival ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. Neither his friends nor his enemies ever quite knew what he was thinking until it was too late to do anything about it.

MU‘AWIYA IN THE EYES OF LATER MUSLIMS

Mu‘awiya’s calculated reserve no doubt contributed to his ambiguous place in the Muslim imagination, but that is only the beginning. The real problem is that he did not fit neatly into the moral categories which later Muslims devised to evaluate a person’s religious standing – indeed, he subverted them – and so they could never quite decide what to make of him. It must be admitted that for two broad religio-political groupings, the Kharijites and Shi’ites, there was no ambivalence at all. For them, he was a figure of unmitigated evil, a man who knowingly and cynically worked to destroy the new covenant established by Muhammad and to return the world to the ignorant brutishness of the Jahiliyya, the time before Islam. The ‘Abbasid caliphs, who overthrew the Umayyad dynasty that he had put in power and who did everything they could to blacken its memory, publicly condemned him and his seed. The first ‘Abbasid, Abu al-‘Abbas al-Saffah (749–754), set the tone in his accession speech in Kufa:

Woe, woe to the Banu Harb b. Umayyah and the Banu Marwan!¹ In their space and time they preferred the ephemeral to the eternal, the transient abode to the everlasting one. Crime them obsessed; God’s creatures they oppressed; women forbidden to them they possessed, all honour grieving and by sin deceiving. They tyrannised God’s servants by their deport with evil custom where they sought disport, themselves with vice’s burdens decked and their idolatry unchecked, at management of every fault most lively, cheerful; withal to race on error’s course not fearful; God’s purpose in respiting sin not comprehending and trusting they had tricked Him by pretending! God’s severity came on them like a night raid when they were sleeping and at dawn they were only legends. They were torn all to tatters and thus may an oppressive people perish!

[Tabari, vol. XXVII, pp. 155–6]

Invective of this sort was repeated more than once in the reigns of al-Saffah’s immediate successors. Systematic public campaigns to vilify Mu‘awiya and the entire Umayyad clan, to label them not only as hypocrites and corrupt, bloody tyrants but even as apostates, were planned by the caliphs al-Ma’mun (813–833) and al-Mu’tadid (892–902), long after Mu‘awiya and the Umayyads could possibly have threatened ‘Abbasid power. Neither caliph went ahead with the project, since the political fallout was unpredictable. The unpublished decrees of al-Ma’mun and al-Mu’tadid were no doubt aimed less at the Umayyads than at re-energizing support for their own troubled dynasty. However, the two caliphs clearly believed that the Umayyads would be credible and effective symbols of the corrupt and godless alternative to ‘Abbasid rule, whatever its faults. The charges spelled out in these documents neatly summarize the most persistent and important criticisms of Mu‘awiya as a person and a ruler. Al-Mu’tadid’s decree (a revised version of al-Ma’mun’s) is revealing:

God cursed the Umayyads through His Prophet orally and by way of revealed scripture thus: ‘… the tree accursed in the Qur’an. We shall frighten them but it only greatly increases their rebelliousness’.

[Qur’an 17:60] (Nobody denies that the Umayyads are meant here.)

When the Prophet saw Abu Sufyan riding on an ass, with Mu‘awiya and his son Yazid driving it he said: ‘May God curse the leader, the rider and the driver!’.

The Messenger of God called for Mu‘awiya to take dictation (to copy down newly revealed verses of revelation as the Prophet recited them) but he refused to do so because he was eating. The Prophet then said, ‘May God never fill his belly!’. As a result, Mu‘awiya was always hungry and said, ‘By God, I do not stop eating because I have had enough but only because I can eat no more!’

The Messenger of God also said, ‘From this mountain pass, a man from my community is coming up who will be resurrected separately from my people’. Mu‘awiya was the one coming up.

There is also the report that the Messenger of God said, ‘When you see Mu‘awiya on my pulpit, kill him!’.

Then there is the famous hadith, traced back to the Prophet: ‘Mu‘awiya is in a casket of fire in the lowest layer of Hell, calling out, “O Clement One, O Generous One!” He is given the answer, “Now you believe but before this you sinned and wrought corruption”’.

[Qu’ran 10:91]

There is also his going to war against the most outstanding, earliest and most famous of Muslims, ‘Ali b. Abi Talib. With his false claim, Mu‘awiya contested ‘Ali’s rightful claim. He fought ‘Ali’s helpers with his own erring scoundrels. He attempted what he and his father never ceased attempting, namely ‘to extinguish the light of God’ (Qu’ran 9:32) and deny God’s religion … Mu‘awiya tried to seduce foolish men and confuse the ignorant with his trickery and injustice … Mu‘awiya preferred this fleeting world and denied the enduring other world. He left the ties of Islam and declared it permissible to shed forbidden blood, until in his rebellion … the blood of an uncountable number of the best Muslims was shed.

God made it obligatory to curse him for killing, while they could offer no resistance, the best of the men around Muhammad and the men of the second generation (of Muslims) and excellent and religious people, such as ‘Amr b. al-Hamiq and Hujr b. ‘Adi and their like.

Furthermore, there is Mu‘awiya’s disdainful attitude toward the religion of God, manifested by his calling God’s servants to (acknowledge) his son Yazid (as heir apparent), that arrogant drunken sot, that owner of cocks, cheetahs and monkeys. With furious threats and frightful intimidation, he forced the best of Muslims to give the oath of allegiance to Yazid, although he was aware of Yazid’s stupidity and was acquainted with his ugliness and viciousness … his drunkenness, immorality and unbelief.

[Tabari, XXXVIII, pp. 53–58]

For Sunnis who were not part of the ‘Abbasid establishment (and these ultimately constituted the majority of Muslims), judgments had to be rather more subtle.² Even the ‘Abbasid caliph al-Mansur (754–75) respected Mu‘awiya’s political acumen and talents as an empire-builder (but then al-Mansur was famously hard-nosed and unsentimental). Ultimately, for the Sunnis, Mu‘awiya was not only a Companion of the Prophet but also a scribe of the Qur’an, one of the small group whom Muhammad trusted to receive the dictation of the revelations he had received.² Apart from this, he was a distant relative of Muhammad and, like all four of his predecessors on the caliphal throne, related to him by marriage (in his case, through his sister Umm Habiba, whom the Prophet married after he occupied Mecca in 630). He had been named governor of Syria (in around 639) by the second caliph, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, and was confirmed in that office by the third caliph, ‘Uthman. Mu‘awiya had demonstrated his formidable military, political, and administrative talents for twenty years by the time he became caliph and he restored peace and stability to a Muslim community tormented by five years of civil war.

On the other side of the ledger, the Sunni historical memory recalls that Mu‘awiya’s clan bitterly opposed Muhammad and harassed his followers during his Meccan years and led the war to oust him from Medina. The leader of the opposition in the years between Badr (624) and the occupation of Mecca (630) was Mu‘awiya’s father, Abu Sufyan. Although Mu‘awiya eventually joined the Prophet’s cause, most believed that he did so only after the latter entered Mecca in 630 – a conversion of convenience if ever there was one. Fortunately for the Umayyads, Muhammad was a man who sought reconciliation with his enemies once they had recognized his status as Prophet. Moreover, he made use of talent wherever he found it, hence his decision to use Mu‘awiya as a scribe of the new revelations he received and dictated. Tradition has it that Mu‘awiya was one of only eighteen (seventeen men and one woman) literate members of the Quraysh tribe. Muhammad’s marriage to Umm Habiba was no love match but a political alliance with the still large and influential Umayyad clan. After Muhammad’s death, ‘Umar’s appointment of Mu‘awiya as governor of Syria might suggest that the redoubtable caliph found him reliable. However, the office came to him only after three earlier appointees had died in rapid succession during a plague epidemic, leaving him the most senior military commander in Palestine. In short, his appointment represented an ad hoc solution to an immediate crisis of leadership. Mu‘awiya remained in office under ‘Uthman partly because this caliph, his second cousin, tried to reinforce his authority over the provinces by appointing members of his own clan as governors. Finally, the Sunni consensus believed, if Mu‘awiya restored peace to the Muslims he had been a major protagonist in the civil war that first sundered the community. Indeed, Mu‘awiya had deliberately provoked the second phase of this struggle by his refusal to recognize ‘Ali as the lawful successor to the Prophet unless ‘Ali surrendered ‘Uthman’s killers to him for vengeance.

All these threads are nicely woven together in two short but characteristic anecdotes in the Genealogies of the Nobles, a massive historical and biographical compendium composed by Ahmad b. Yahya al-Baladhuri (died 892) at roughly the same time as the decree of the caliph al-Mu‘tadid. One anecdote, recalling the words of a pious critic, emphasizes Mu‘awiya’s worldliness and his indifference to religion; the other, attributed to Mu‘awiya himself, explains in a few terse phrases why he won the day over ‘Ali. As we shall see, judgments concerning Mu‘awiya’s conduct and character are often more complex but these two reports, with their directness and simplicity, are a good place to begin.

Mu‘awiya said to Ibn al-Kawwa’ al-Yashkuri³: ‘I demand that you tell me under oath what you think of me’. Ibn al-Kawwa’ responded, ‘Since you have compelled me to swear by God’s name, I will tell you that I think that to me you seem to abound in the goods of this world but to be poor in the next life, that you have gifts close at hand but keep the final destination [presumably the next life] far distant, that you are one who regards the dark as light and the light as dark’.

[Baladhuri, Ansab, LDV, 6–7]

Mu‘awiya said, ‘I triumphed over ‘Ali because I held my secrets close while he revealed his, because the Syrians obeyed me while his followers disobeyed him, because I spent my wealth generously while he was miserly with his’.

[Baladhuri, Ansab, LDV, 7]

Sunni ambivalence about Mu‘awiya went further than his sometimes dubious political role. It was also a matter of culture. By the ninth century, Islamic society valued piety and religious knowledge above all else (though there was plenty of room for poetry, courtly literature and scientific and philosophic discourse); in this context, Mu‘awiya was problematic. In formal piety and personal conduct, he was acceptable enough (at least he provoked no public scandal) but he was never regarded as religiously learned or even thoughtful and engaged, beyond a superficial level. He believed in God and was publicly correct in his observances but no more. Many regarded him as indifferent to Islam and some noted suspiciously pro-Christian sympathies. Mu‘awiya’s great passion was for the folklore and poetry of ancient Arabia, the culture he had known as a boy, before the coming of Islam. He was the last caliph other than Marwan ibn al-Hakam (684–5) to have reached adolescence before Muhammad’s preaching threw everything into question. Thus he represents the human bridge between the old order of manly virtue (muruwwa) and tribal solidarity (‘asabiyya) and the new order of Islam.

HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT WE CLAIM TO KNOW: THE SOURCES FOR MU‘AWIYA’S LIFE

There is no need for an elaborate review of the sources for Mu‘awiya’s life in a book of this kind but it is important to have some sense of what we do and do not know. It is best to build from original documents – diaries, letters, tax registers, decrees, inscriptions, and so on – together with monuments, artworks, coins and the like. Regrettably, very little of that kind has come down to us. There is a considerable quantity of silver and bronze coins minted in Mu‘awiya’s reign but these do not carry his name and use Byzantine and Persian designs from the pre-Conquest era. There are a few Greek and Coptic papyri from Egypt and from Nessana in the Negev, but no written documents of any kind have reached us in their original form from the key provinces of Syria (that is, Damascus and Hims), Iraq or Iran. We know that such documents were produced in profusion, since the literary sources constantly allude to them, but very rarely do they give transcripts or even summaries of them; worse, the few documents they do claim to reproduce are of doubtful authenticity.

As to monuments, Mu‘awiya was apparently not a great builder and what he did build has mostly disappeared. There was a dam near the town of Ta’if in the Hijaz, attested by one of the two inscriptions to survive from his reign. A second inscription comes from a bath (Hammam Jadar) near Tiberias which was built by one of Mu‘awiya’s district governors on his behalf. Coin finds and stylistic evidence suggest that a residential compound (Khirbat al-Karak) on the Sea of Galilee just south of Tiberias may have been built for Mu‘awiya’s occasional use. He is said to have erected a palace in Damascus, just south of the vast walled enclosure which later became the Umayyad Mosque. (The location of this palace is now the silversmiths’ market, which in its present form dates from late Ottoman times.) This “pa...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Dedication page
• Contents
• Preface and Acknowledgments
• 1 THE PROBLEM OF MU‘AWIYA
• 2 THE FIRST THREE DECADES (600–632)
• 3 LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS OF POWER: MU‘AWIYA AS MASTER OF SYRIA (632–656)
• 4 THE FIRST CIVIL WAR AND MU‘AWIYA’S RISE TO POWER (656–661)
• 5 COMMANDER OF THE FAITHFUL (661–680)
• 6 THE PRINCE OF OUR DISORDER: MU‘AWIYA AS A SYMBOL OF CULTURAL TENSION
• Bibliography
• Index