The Arabic Historical Tradition & the Early Islamic Conquests

Folklore, Tribal Lore, Holy War

Boaz Shoshan

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9781138918948
• eBook ISBN: 9781317420255
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Middle Eastern History
• Index: History

The early Arab conquests pose a considerable challenge to modern-day historians. The earliest historical written tradition emerges only after the second half of the eighth century- over one hundred years removed from the events it contends to describe, and was undoubtedly influenced by the motives and interpretations of its authors. Indeed, when speaking or writing about the past, fact was not the only, nor even the prime, concern of Muslims of old.

The Arabic Historic Tradition and the Early Islamic Conquests presents a thorough examination of Arabic narratives on the early Islamic conquests. It uncovers the influence of contemporary ideology, examining recurring fictive motifs and evaluating the reasons behind their use. Folklore and tribal traditions are evident throughout the narratives, which aimed to promote individual, tribal and regional fame through describing military prowess in the battles for the spread of Islam. Common tropes are encountered across the materials, which all serve a central theme; the moral superiority of the Muslims, which destined them to victory in God's plan.

Offering a key to the state of mind and agenda of early Muslim writers, this critical reading of Arabic texts would be of great interest to students and scholars of early Arabic History and Literature, as well as a general resource for Middle Eastern History.

1 Tribal lore on the conquests

DOI: 10.4324/9781315688145-3

Contrary to a retrospective image of the young Islamic umma as a united body already operating as such during the early conquests, Muslim armies were organized in tribe-based formations. Quoting Sayf and his other sources, al-Ṭabarī states it clearly: “The Muslims did all their fighting under separate banners, each division and its commander [operating independently], with no one in overall command.” At least it was so until Khālid b. al-Walīd came to Syria, following his removal from Iraq, as the Muslims organized themselves near the Yarmūk Valley.¹ That divisions were to a large extent along tribal affiliation is further stated on different occasions. Take, for example, al-Muthannā b. Ḥāritha and his tribesmen of the B. Shaybān. They contend with Madhʿūr b. ʿAdī and his B. ʿIjl over the command somewhere in Iraq and Abū Bakr has to solve the conflict: he bids the ʿIjlīs to leave Iraq and march with Khālid to Syria.² On another occasion, Ribʿī b. Ḥusayn al-Riyāḥī arrives at the head of his Ḥanẓala clansmen to fight at the obscure al-Buwayb.³ Most significantly, Saʿd b. Abī Waqqāṣ, the supreme commander at al-Qādisiyya, at one point, before retiring to bed, expresses tribal division as a rather productive factor and confirms his confidence in its value: “If the Muslims persist in proclaiming their tribal affiliation, do not wake me up, because [this means that] they are stronger than their enemy.”⁴ Accounts in which the tribal organization of the armies is specified are too numerous to mention.⁵

As such, tribes had their preference as to which other tribes they wished to join forces with. When asked by ʿUmar to which of the fronts they would prefer to be sent, the Bajīla leaders opt for Syria, and they explain: “[O]ur brethren by marriage are in it.” When the Kināna and Azd are being asked this question, they also prefer Syria for an identical reason. As it turns out, the Bajīla end up in Iraq, not in Syria, but still specify to the caliph a list of clans with whom they wish to march to battle.⁶

Initially, the military conduct of a tribe or a clan bore practical consequences and had been used as a foremost criterion in the distribution of wealth according to the roster known as diwān.⁷ However, by the time our narratives were being molded and put into writing, the financial aspect attached to military prowess was on the wane or already lost. What mattered now was how to memorialize one's tribe and carve out for it a niche in the community's collective memory. A tribe's performance – real or imagined – became an important matter. To that end, all sorts of materials and “proofs” were preserved or invented, and, perhaps no less important – as in a sort of a “zero sum game” – the failure of rival clans and tribes to stand up to the highest standards was crucial. The activity that went into this tribal enterprise of carving out a memory was far from marginal. Its product may be defined as the tribal lore of the early conquests.⁸

Scholars, although some are suggestive, have been thus far extremely brief about it. Amikam Elad has pointed out the existence of a genre of books composed by tribal transmitters whose concern was the heroic acts of their tribesmen.⁹ Donner speaks of accounts intending to supply individuals, families and tribes with proofs about their participation in battles, and to provide models of behavior for later generations. He detects a “Euphrates Arab tradition” of sub-tribes of the Rabīʿa, which was designed to accredit them with conquests and give them better press after initially resisting Islam.¹⁰ Robinson has interpreted certain accounts, such as on the conquest of Takrīt – whereby the Christian Arabs in the Byzantine army have a change of heart, convert to Islam and cause Byzantine defeat – as expressing tribal apologetics.¹¹ Kennedy sees in a specific anecdote about the conquest of Egypt a means of emphasizing the important role that the Yemenites had played. Mind you, in all likelihood, the anecdote was produced in the ninth century, when they were losing their influence to Turkish troops.¹² Like the Gola tribe on the Liberian coast in our own time, for example, where the view of the past as put forward by an elder would be the most advantageous to him, his family and his ancestors,¹³ the early Muslim Arabs have developed a tribal tradition in which the conquests must have occupied an important share. The aim of this chapter is to dig out some samples of its debris. Regardless of whether these are based on facts, only partly so, or mostly fabricated for the sake of the “invention of tradition,” Arab tribal accounts must be given their due place in an analysis of the narratives of the conquests.¹⁴ Penetrating into the deeper stratum of the conquest narratives that some second-tier, identifiable, as well as obscure, sources provide – occasionally with specified tribal affiliation – we may catch a glimpse of some precious and extremely relevant materials.

Transmitting praise

How much of tribal lore, if any, emerged originally in written form is hard to say. At least one informant claimed that in return for the help received from al-Yaʿbūb b. ʿAmr b. Durays, in the conquest of Damascus, Khālid b. al-Walīd gave the B. Mashājaʿa clan (ḥayy) of the tribe of Quḍāʿa a document in which they were granted cultivated land at al-Quṣam, in the Damascus region. They kept it “to this very day,” the source assures us. More material of this sort is claimed to have existed.¹⁵ Yet it is most likely orally originating materials that we encounter more abundantly in our sources. To begin with, warriors must have reported, or at least were said to do so, about their own experiences and prowess, and their reports were then transmitted until they reached their final destination at the historian's desk. That a great deal of invention, if not total fabrication, was part and parcel of creating one tribe's lore is a possibility that may not be excluded. Take, for example, ʿAdī b. Ḥātim, a leader of Ṭayy’ and son of a famous pre-Islamic poet. His account, which was transmitted to Sayf and from him continued its way to al-Ṭabarī, is of the “eyewitness type” about the skirmish that took place at al-Muṣayyakh in Southern Iraq. While it glosses over the Muslim attack, it is rather concerned with the fate of one Ḥurqūṣ b. al-Nuʿmān, who was beheaded while drinking wine and singing its praise.¹⁶ Not so the case of Abū Umāma al-Bāhilī, who indulges in his own, quite daring, acts in the countryside near Damascus. Sent on a reconnaissance mission, he describes how he pried between houses and trees, then without any of his anxious companions advanced as far as the city and attacked its gatekeeper.¹⁷

Occasionally, conquest accounts passed from father to son. Ḥanash al-Nakhaʿī learns from his father (and others) that ʿUmar addressed their tribesmen before their march to Iraq and Syria: “Honor is abundant among you, O people of Nakhaʿ.”¹⁸ ʿĀbis hears from his father about the heroic conduct of their tribesmen, the Juʿfīs, at al-Qādisiyya. Initially, they had to retreat because their swords were ineffective. Then one Ḥumayda took the initiative, attacked a Persian warrior, broke his back with a spear and turned to his comrades exclaiming: “I am confident that they [i.e., Persians] will die and you will survive.” Indeed, Ḥumayda's conduct tipped the scale and the Juʿfīs were able to drive the Persians back to their lines. “I wish all my tribe were Ḥumaydas,” concludes one of them.¹⁹ Muḥāffiz b. Thaʿlaba al-ʿĀ’idhī²⁰ tells his son ʿUbaydallāh that, while in the vanguard near Ctesiphon, he comes across a large Persian statue. He decides to hand it over to those in charge of the booty, implying that he respected the norm not to seize booty individually. However, it turns out that the statue was not his major discovery. He later enters a deserted Persian tent and finds, hidden under blankets, a woman “like a gazelle, radiant as the sun.” This is too much for Muḥāffiz to give up. Eventually, the woman becomes his concubine and bears him a child.²¹

Informants told stories about their family members who excelled as warriors. A shaykh of the B. Abī al-Jʿad relates about his father's clever instructions given at the Yarmūk battle.²² Salmān b. Rabīʿa al-Bāhilī relates how the “Turks” at Bāb (Darband), on the shores of the Caspian Sea, held his brother ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, known also as Dhū al-Nūr, in great esteem. They believed the angels protected him, but perhaps changed their mind some years later, after they had been able to subdue him.²³ “My father stripped the tyrant of his crown and, pointing the edge of the spear, he boasted …,” recites Yazīd, the son of al-Ḥakam b. Abī al-ʿĀṣ the Thaqafī, in praise of his father overcoming Shahrak, the Persian commander at Iṣṭakhr.²⁴

Sayf b. ʿUmar, al-Ṭabarī's foremost authority, and thus – for...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• Introduction
• 1 Tribal lore on the conquests
• 2 Tropes of Islamic superiority
• 3 Yarmūk – another view
• 4 ʿUmar in Jerusalem
• 5 When Muslims meet infidels
• 6 The conquest of Egypt Ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥakam and beyond
• Epilogue
• Bibliography
• Index