The Politics and Culture of an Umayyad Tribe

Conflict and Factionalism in the Early Islamic Period

Mohammad Rihan

• Publisher: I.B. Tauris
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781780765648
• eBook ISBN: 9780857736208
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Middle Eastern History
• Index: History

The Umayyad caliphate, ruling over much of what is now the modern Middle East after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, governe from Damascus from 661 to750CE, when they were expelled by the Abbasids. Here, Mohammad Rihan sheds light on the tribal system of this empir, by looking at one of its Syrian tribes; the 'Amila, based around today's Jabal 'Amil in southern Lebanon. Using this tribe as a lens through which to examine the wider Umayyad world, he looks at the political structures and conflicts that prevailed at the time, seeking to nuance the understanding of the relationship between the tribes and the ruling elite. For Rihan, early Islamic political history can only be understood in the context of the tribal history. This book thus illustrates how the political and social milieu of the 'Amila tribe sheds light on the wider history of the Umayyad world. Utilizing a wide range of sources, from the books of genealogies to poetry, Rihan expertly portrays Umayyad political life. First providing a background on 'Amila's tribal structure and its functions and dynamics, Rihan then presents the pre-Islamic past of the tribe.
Building on this, he then investigates the role the 'Amila played in the emergence of the Umayyad state to understand the ways in which political life developed for the tribes and their relations with those holding political power in the region. By exploring the literature, culture, kinship structures and the socio-political conditions of the tribe, this book highlights the ways in which alliances and divisions shifted and were used by caliphs of the period and offers new insights into the Middle East at a pivotal point in its early and medieval history. This historical analysis thus not only illuminates the political condition of the Umayyad world, but also investigates the ever-important relationship between tribal political structures and state-based rule.

CHAPTER 1

THE TRIBE ‘AMILA: BY WAY OF A DEFINITION

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

‘Amila in Modern Historiography

The only attempt by modern western researchers to sketch some of ‘Amila’s history was written, as far as I know, by H. Lammens and W. Caskel for the Encyclopedia of Islam.¹ This study represents what the modern western academic world had to say on this tribe. Other brief introductory texts were written by modern Arab scholars. One classical example would be Ahmad Rida.² Rida’s text is by no means the only one discussing the history of the tribe among modern Arab authors but it is the most elaborate and very representative of their approach.

The history of ‘Amila according to Lammens and Caskel is narrated in the following paragraph:

An old tribe in North-Western Arabia. The reports concerning their past are unworthy of belief. In the later genealogic system the ‘Amila tribe are reckoned as belonging to the South-Arabian Kahlan. At the time of the Muslim invasion we find them settled S.E. of the Dead Sea; they are mentioned among the Syro-Arabian tribes which joined Heraclius; but do not appear again in the history of the conquest. Shortly afterwards we find them established in Upper Galilee, which is named after them Djabal ‘Amila. They play a very unimportant part and are almost completely absorbed by the Banu Judham. ‘Adi b. al-Rika‘, the poet of al-Walid I, was their chief pride; he celebrated the Djudhamite Rawh b. Zinba‘, as the sayyid of his tribe; and thereby gives a further proof of their small importance. Ibn Durayd finds few notable men among them; satire rarely deals with them. After the 5^th/11^th the ‘Amila seem to have spread S. of the Lebanon in the present district of Bilad al-Shakif which is still called Djabal ‘Amila.

According to Yakut, they also occupied a part of the country of the Isma‘ilis, a day’s journey to the S. of Aleppo, which he says was named after them ‘Amila Mountain. This isolated reference is the most surprising in that the corresponding text of the Marasid gives ‘Amira instead of ‘Amila. To avoid the difficulty, G. le Strange supposes an emigration towards the N. during the crusades, but without giving references. The Arabic historians of this period are ignorant of this change of place, and continue to use the synonym ‘Amila-Djalil. The application to the ‘Amila of the passage from the Kur’an, by the poet Djarir is only a sneer of the Tamimite who was jealous of the favours enjoyed by Ibn al-Rika‘. The Djabal ‘Amil(a) in the Lebanon was, and is, an important Shi‘ite center, and several eminent Shi‘ite authors bear the nisba al-‘Amili.³

Lammens and Caskel defined ‘Amila as an ‘old tribe’. No additional information was provided concerning their tribal structure or their number. Their habitat was specified as being ‘North-Western Arabia’ (in the pre-conquests period). ‘Amila moved to ‘S.E of the Dead Sea’ at the time of the Muslim conquests then finally settled in the Upper Galilee which is named Jabal ‘Amila after them. This account is probably not accurate. Their presence in that region can only be confirmed as of the second Hijra century. In addition, these two scholars do not explain the factors which led the tribe to move from the edge of Northern Arabia to the heart of Bilad al-Sham. Their belief that two Jabal ‘Amila exist (the first one in Upper Galilee, the second in Bilad al-Shaqif) shows some unfamiliarity in the geography of the region. In fact, these two mountains are one and the same. Historically Bilad al-Shaqif is an integral part of Jabal ‘Amila and not the Jabal itself.

The authors curtly dismissed the reports written by al-Tabari and al-Isfahani concerning Amila’s past as being ‘unworthy of belief.’ Moreover they did not specify which period of the past they thought could not be reconstructed on the basis of the traditional accounts. I would tend to think they meant their pre-Islamic past and, in particular, their connection with Palmyra. However, these reports cannot be completely dismissed since epigraphic evidence and historical interpretation might support some of al-Tabari’s narrative.⁴ Lammens and Caskel stressed the fact that ‘Amila played an unimportant role during the Muslim conquests and the Umayyad era. This is not entirely accurate. Recent research literature has shown that ‘Amila and its sister tribes, Judham and Lakhm, played a significant role during that period.⁵ The note concerning the scant number of notable men found among them can also be ignored; Ibn ‘Asakir’s Tarikh Madinat Dimashq reveals that notable men from the ‘Amila tribe were not few.⁶ Lammens-Caskel, however, cannot be criticized for their conclusions since it is the discovery of new sources that has enabled us to modify their assertions on the history of ‘Amila.

This modern western version is not completely different from the traditional local story written by Rida and others. Rida too describes ‘Amila as an old tribe that migrated to the Syrian desert and Jabal ‘Amila in the pre-Islamic period. According to him, its genealogy probably went back to Kahlan and Qahtan, eponymous father of the south Arabians. ‘Amila’s relation with the ‘Amaliq in the pre-Islamic period is rejected by him as it had been by Lammens and Caskel. He too stressed the fact that their chief poet was ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ and that they settled in Jabal ‘Amila as of their arrival in the region.⁷ However they do differ on other points: Lammens-Caskel are more sceptical concerning the stories about the origins of the tribe, whereas the Arab historian accepts that the tribe left Yemen after the collapse of the Dam of Ma’rib.

Both versions leave many questions unanswered. What was the political and social milieu in which ‘Amila survived? Were the ‘Amila tribesmen nomads, semi-nomads or sedentary? Or could they have been all three? Where exactly was their home before reaching Jabal ‘Amila (South Lebanon today)? What was their status under the Byzantines and the Umayyads? All these questions and many others need to be answered if we have to write the history of the tribe ‘Amila. But most urgently we need to clarify the meaning of a fundamental term: what do we mean exactly by the ‘tribe ‘Amila?’ Is it the same monolithic body that existed for many centuries without any alteration in its structure and role? Did the tribe keep the same name, ‘Amila, throughout the centuries? Did the tribe ‘Amila in the pre-Islamic milieu coincide perfectly with the tribe ‘Amila established in the Umayyad state? No serious study can afford to leave such questions unanswered. This chapter will try to give a definition of the tribe ‘Amila as we intend to view it in this book and to sketch the tribal literature necessary for this study.

The concept of tribe is unclear and controversial.⁸ The word is used to refer to a kinship group, an extended family, or a coalition of related families. It may refer to the elite family from whom some larger confederation gets its name, to a cultural ethnic or other non-familial social group, or to conquest movements of pastoral peoples without regard for the internal basis of cohesion. According to Tapper, scholars and in particular anthropologists have failed to agree on a general definition of what constitutes a tribe. It seems impossible to find an analytical terminology that both takes account of indigenous categories and applies widely enough to be useful for comparison and classification.⁹ The definition of tribe and its application to a form of organization of peoples, societies and cultures remains confused.¹⁰

The tribe ‘Amila seems to have succeeded in keeping its name unaltered for centuries. It is well established that ‘Amila was the name of the tribe in the third and fourth centuries AH as corroborated by the classical Arab geographers.¹¹ The same tribe is reported to have existed in the pre-Islamic and early Islamic periods by the futuh literature written in the early third century AH.¹² It is true that the futuh literature is not contemporary to the period of the conquests, but it is nevertheless a well established source for the early Islamic conquests. The poetry of the Jahili poet al- A‘sha and the Umayyad ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ al-‘Amili, al-Ra‘i al-Numayri and Jarir attest to the presence of their contemporary tribe ‘Amila. Ibn Khaldun in the ninth century AH related some of the tribe’s fortunes in the pre-Islamic periods. It is therefore well established that ‘Amila was known under the same name for many centuries. How old is the tribe ‘Amila? According to the Arab genealogists the ‘Amila tribal group emerged as of the third century AD. Moreover there is a possibility that the tribe ‘Amila existed as early as the eighth century BC.¹³

‘Amila in Classical Arabic Literature

What then is ‘Amila? How did the Arab scholars identify it? How should we identify it? According to the lexicographer Ibn Durayd, ‘Amila is an Arabic Hayy (subtribe).¹⁴ Ibn Manzur defined it also as a Hayy but added that it could be singled out as the Qabila to which the poet ‘Adi b. al-Riqa‘ belonged. Ibn Manzur was more specific than Ibn Durayd by saying that it is a Yamani Hayy and its name is ‘Amila b. Saba’. However, he added that Mudaris claimed that ‘Amila is of Ma‘add and quotes al-A‘sha, the poet:

Ô ‘Amila! Why do you keep on claiming descent from other than your noble father?

Your father is Qasit, return to your oldest descent.¹⁵

Al-Zabidi adopted practically the same view but tried to be more specific by providing the full genealogical descent of ‘Amila: ‘They are the sons of al-Harith b. ‘Adi b. al-Harith b. Murra b. Udad b. Zayd b. Yashjub b. ‘Arib b. Zayd b. Kahlan b. Saba’. They were named after their mother ‘Amila b. Malik b Wadi‘a b. Quda‘a, the mother of al-Zuhd and Mu‘awiya the sons of al-Harith b. ‘Adi.’ However al-Zabidi added one interesting remark; according to him there is one single false tradition, related by Ibn al-Athir, which linked ‘Amila to ‘Amaliq and this tradition was refuted by lexicographers.¹⁶ As a matter of fact, Ibn al-Athir is innocent of this accusation, and it seems that al-Zabidi did not check his sources thoroughly. Apparently Ibn al-Athir identified ‘Amila as al-Zabidi did and tried to rectify what was claimed about ‘Amila’s descent from the ‘Amaliq.¹⁷ Al-Zabidi, on the other hand, added more confusion by stating that another Yamani tribe, Banu ‘Amal could be the same tribe as Banu ‘Amala living in Jabal al-Khalil (Jabal al-Jalil).¹⁸ This reference is unique and not based on any historical reference. Obviously the individuals/groups living in Jabal al-Khalil are the Banu ‘Amila and not the Banu ‘Amala or the Banu ‘Amal, as corroborated by different sources among which are al-Hamadani, al-Muqaddasi and al-Ya‘qubi.

In summary, ‘Amila was identified by the Arabic classical lexicographers as a Hayy and seldom as Qabila,¹⁹ never as a ‘Ashira (clan) or Batn (subclan) or Fakhdh. No doubt it is impossible, as several scholars have noted, to write an exact definition for each tribal group. ‘La confusion règne dans cette terminologie,’²⁰ and ‘établir un tableau complet et définitif de la structure d’une confédération bédouine est le plus souvent impossible.’²¹ Despite the efforts of modern scholars to establish a certain order, one clear definition for each group has not been reached. But Arab genealogists tended to use quantity or volume as a common criterion in establishing order between different groups: Sha‘b, Qabila, Batn, Fakhdh, ‘Ashira in an ascending or descending order. However, even Arab genealogists did not agree on similar definitions for every group.

Al-Qalqashandi, in the fourteenth century AD, recognized the fact that the Arab genealogists did not agree on a specified order to rank every group. Thus he discussed this issue in the introduction of his book Nihayat al-Arab.²² He tried to introduce some definite order and thus ranked Sha‘b (nation) as the biggest unit then Qabila (tribe), ‘Amara (subtribe), Batn (sub-subtribe), Fakhdh and finally Fasila. Al-Qalqashandi supported his argument by quoting al-Mawardi and al-Zamakhshari but he acknowledged other versions mentioned by Ibn al-Kalbi who ranked Sha‘b as the biggest group, followed by Qabila, then, Fasila, ‘Amara and finally Fakhdh, while al-Nawawi included ‘Ashira before Fasila and al-Jawhari considered ‘Ashira to be the smallest unit.²³

Hayy was not included as a specific group by the Arab genealogists. In this case why was ‘Amila described as a Hayy? Al-Qalqashandi included a short interesting notice in the end of his text: ‘it is possible that one may substitute any group name by Hayy, either as a gene...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Author biography
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Dedication page
• Contents
• Note on Transliteration
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1. The Tribe ‘Amila: By Way of a Definition
• 2. ‘Amila in the Pre-Islamic Period
• 3. The Role of ‘Amila During the Islamic Conquests
• 4. ‘Amila Under the Umayyads
• 5. On ‘Amila, Jabal ‘Amila and Shi‘ism
• Epilogue
• Notes
• Bibliography