No More Learning

The principal point however seems to be that under this ruler it
was first recognised that Omar's fiscal system was untenable, and that
both in principle and in form it must cease. Hitherto the Muslims
had remained exempt from taxation and the subjected peoples had pro-
vided the necessary revenue. At the outset they had forgotten that
through the extension of Islam as a religion the number of taxpayers
would of necessity become smaller and smaller, so that thereby religion
would sap the foundations of the Arabian State. With the foundation
of the military camps, which soon grew into large towns, the natives had
on the spot a much better source of income than in the country, where
the peasants had to pay their quota of tribute. Thus an exodus from
the country began, and at the same time the number of converts to
Islam increased. As the new believers ceased to be subject to taxes, the.
result of this process on the state treasury may easily be imagined. At
the same time it became thus evident that the form of Omars regula-
tions was unsuitable, for this exodus from the country simply necessitated
an individual treatment of the districts liable to pay duty, and these
conditions compelled the Arabs to concern themselves with details. But
in doing so the Arabian upper class was of necessity deeply concerned
with the construction of the whole system of government. This process
commences under 'Abd-al-Malik. His representative Hajjaj sought
to avoid the evil consequences for the treasury by including the newly
converted believers as liable to taxation, thus deviating from Omar's
system.
The increasing settlement of Arabs in the fertile country, which had
been liable to tribute whilst in the possession of non-Muslims, had the
same result as the change of religion in the subjected peoples. Omar II


## p. 363 (#395) ############################################

705-744] Later Umayyad Caliphs 363
sought to obviate this by forbidding the sale of such country. It was
not however till later, and probably by degrees, that it was decided,
principally under the Caliph Hisham, to alter the principle of taxation,
though the alteration is much obscured by tradition. The tribute,
which was principally drawn from the ground tax, was converted into a
ground tax pure and simple, and was levied irrespective of creed on all
property owners; the tribute intended to demonstrate the dominion of
the Arabs was resolved into an individual poll-tax of the old sort, which
was only payable by non-Muslims and ceased in the event of conversion.
This state of affairs is regarded by tradition as Omar's work, but it is
the result of gradual development extending over a century. This very
energetic manner in which the Arabs applied themselves to the adminis-
tration commenced with 'Abd-al-Malik and found its termination under
the Abbasids.
Under 'Abd-al-Malik and his viceroys, his brother 'Abd-al-'AzIz
in Egypt and Hajjaj in 'Irak, an executive authority was founded,
which, although occasionally shaken by serious revolts, was nevertheless
strong, so that his successor Walid (705-715) was again able to consider
the question of an extension of the boundaries. Under his rule the
Arabian Empire attained its greatest expansion; Spain was conquered,
and the Arabs penetrated into the Punjab and far into Central Asia,
right to the borders of China. These incursions however do not fall
within the range of our present observation. Under 'Abd-al-Malik and
Walid the empire, and above all Syria, stands on the pinnacle of
prosperity; the most stately buildings were erected, such as the Omar
Mosque in Jerusalem, and the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus. Poetry
flourished at the brilliant Syrian court, and, guided by Christian learning,
Arabian science begins to make its appearance.
Now however the traces of impending collapse begin to appear.
It was only with difficulty that Hajjaj suppressed a powerful military
. revolt. The supremacy of the State could only be maintained in 'Irak
with the assistance of Syrian troops. In the eastern provinces the Kais
and Kalb wage constant warfare with each other, and the reign of the
later Umayyads is occupied in a struggle with these permanently
mutinous eastern districts. Most of the later Umayyads enjoyed but
a brief reign, Sulaiman 715-717, Omar II till 720, Yazid II till 724.
Hisham, 724-743, who grappled seriously with the problem of agrarian
policy, and secured once again in Khalid al-Kasri a viceroy for the
East after the style of Ziyad and Hajjaj, was the only one capable
of restoring once more a certain amount of quiet.
Thereupon however followed the irretrievable decline of the Umayyad
State. The political opposition of Kais and Kalb converted the Caliph
into the puppet of inter-tribal feuds; Umayyads fought against Umay-
yads. The rulers succeeded each other in rapid succession. History
records four Umayyad Caliphs in the period of 743 to 744. It would
CH. XI.


## p. 364 (#396) ############################################

364 The Abbasids [744-750
occupy too much space here to trace all these disturbances. When
Marwan II, the last of the Umayyads, a man by no means personally
incapable, ascended the throne in the year 744^ the game was already
lost. Particularism had won the day. The general fight between all
parties was however essentially a fight against Syria and the Umayyads.
In this cause the new combination, which made its first efforts in the
far east, in Khorasan, attained success. In no other place were the
Arabs so intermingled with the subject peoples as here, and here too the
religious opposition against the Umayyads was taken up more vigorously
than anywhere else. It has already been indicated above that the ShPa
was destined to prevail in Persia. In their fight for the family of the
prophet, the Abbasids, under their general Abu Muslim, were victorious,
and then, supported by the Persian element, they conquered first the
eastern Arabs and subsequently the Syrians. In the year 750 the
Umayyad rule was at an end.
The victory of the Abbasids was a victory of the Persians over the
Arabs. The subjected classes had slowly raised themselves to a level
with the Arabs. When Christians and Persians first accepted Islam it
was not possible to include them in the theocracy in any other way than
by attaching them as clients (Mawali) to the Arabian tribal system.
They were the better educated and the more highly cultivated of the
two races. In the numerous revolts they fought on the side of the
Arabs. The contrast between the Arabs and the Mawali had its cause
in the constitution of the State as founded by Omar. The more the
Mawali increased in importance and the more they permeated the
Arabian tribes, so the universalistic, i. e. , the democratic tendency of
Islam was bound in corresponding degree to force its way into wider
circles. On the other hand the continuous fights of the Arabian tribes
against the authority of the State and against each otljer led to a
dissolution of the political and ethnical conditions under which Islam
had caused the preponderance oFthe Arabian element. Thus grew more
and more a tendency to level Arabs and non-Arabs. Both became
merged in the term Muslim which even to this day represents for many
peoples their nationality. The Persians were much more religious than
the Arabs, and they accepted the political ideal of the ShJ'a, which was
tinged with religion, more than actually religious. This religious move-
ment then swept away the dominion of the Umayyads, and thereby the
international empire of the Abbasids took the place of the national
Arabian Empire. The Arabian class disappeared and was superseded
by a mixed "official aristocracy, based no longer on religious merit and
noble descent, but on authority delegated by the ruling prince. Thus
arose out of'the patriarchal kingdom of the Umayyads the absolutist
rule of the Abbasids and therewith Persian civilisation made ife
entrance into Islam. The ancient East had conquered.


## p. 365 (#397) ############################################

366
CHAPTER XII.
THE EXPANSION OF THE SARACENS (continued).
AFRICA AND EUROPE.
We are dividing the history of the expansion of the Saracens into
an Asiatic-Egyptian and an African-European order of development.
This division is founded not on outward, but on internal reasons. Even
at the present time Islam in Northern Africa presents an appearance
quite different from the Islam of Asia and Egypt. The reason for this
must be sought in the totally different composition of the population.
The Aramaic element of Nearer Asia and Coptic Egypt offered much less
resistance to the Arabian nationality and the Arabian language than did
the Persian element in Mid-Asia. The Berbers or Moors of Northern
Africa take up a middle position between these two; they certainly
accepted Islam and Arabian culture, but they remodelled them, and
preserved their own nationality in their customs and to a large extent
also in their language. Moreover, an encroachment of Islam into Europe
in so significant a form as that experienced in the Middle Ages would
have been scarcely conceivable without the great masses of the Berbers,
who were always on the move. Later too the Saracens of Southern
Europe continually appear in political relations with Africa. The
history of Islam in Europe, is therefore indissolubly connected with its
history in Northern Africa, whilst on the other hand it is in reality
merely associated with the history of the Eastern Caliphate by a certain
community of culture and religion.
The commixture of Arabs and Berbers, which gave the impress to
the whole of the Islam of the West, was a slow process. Centuries
passed, but in the end Islam has attained what Phoenicians and
Romans strove for in vain. These two great colonising nations
always settled principally in the towns on the coast, and doubtless
assimilated the Berbers crowding round them; in spite however of all
the settlements of colonists by Rome, the flat country and especially
the hinterland remained in Berber hands. As Mommsen says, the
Phoenicians and Romans have been swept away, but the Berbers
have remained, like the palm trees and the desert sand. With the


## p. 366 (#398) ############################################

366 Occupation of Alexandria [640-6«
destruction of the Roman power the influence of the widespread organ-
isation of the Berber tribes grew and the Byzantine restoration under
Justinian was limited by the growth of the Berber element. The
exarchs had continually to deal with insurrections of the Berbers, and
were probably scarcely able to exercise authority outside the limits of
the ever decreasing number of towns held by garrisons which commanded
respect. It is therefore clear from the beginning that it was not the
Byzantines who made the occupation of Northern Africa difficult for the
Arabians, but the Berbers, who in their time of need made common
cause with their former tyrants against the new intruder. The Arabs
had much trouble to make it clear to the Berbers at the point of the
sword that their real interest lay with Islam and not against it. As
soon as they had once realised this fact they accepted the Arabs for their
leaders and flooded Southern Europe, while in Africa the nascent civilisa-
tion of Islam effected an entrance, though it received a Berber national
colouring.
The continued occupation of Alexandria called for a screening of
the flank by occupying also the adjoining territory of Barka1. Barka
was the leading community of the ancient Pentapolis. The rich towns
of this group at once experienced the consequence of the occupation of
Egypt when the Arabians appeared before them. It has been already
mentioned that the Arabs through 'Amr made peace with Barka im-
mediately after the occupation of Alexandria. That took place as earlv
as the autumn of the year 642 and the winter thereupon following,
under the leadership of 'Ukba ibn Nafi', of whom more is yet to be said.
The Pentapolis belonged thenceforward permanently to the Empire of
Islam, although retaining in the first instance administrative inde-
pendence. Bordering on Barka was the ancient Proconsular Africa,
the eastern half of which, lying between the Greater and the Lesser
Syrtis, was clearly distinguished by the Arabs under the title of Tripolis,
from the northern half, with the capital Carthage, this latter territory
being termed by them simply Africa (Ifrlklya). After the occupation
of Barka various raids took place even under 'Amr (642-643), these
extending throughout the whole territory of Tripolis, while individual
detachments went southward into the desert. There can be little doubt
that even at that time 'Ukba pushed forward as far as Fezzan (Zawlla)
and another Amir of the name of Busr penetrated to the Oasis of Jufra
(Waddan). This latter incident took place while 'Amr was besieging
Tripolis, which he finally occupied at least temporarily. At the Nafusa
mountains 'Amr turned back, as the Caliph was averse to pushing forward
any further. In spite of these successes there was for the time being no
question of any permanent settlement of the Arabs westward of Barka.
'Ukba may have undertaken some small isolated expeditions with Barka
1 The following exposition is based on a critical re-examination of the sources of
the works of Caudel and Wellhausen.


## p. 367 (#399) ############################################

643-664] Attacks on Byzantine Africa 367
as a base, but the main fighting forces of Egypt were concentrated round
Alexandria, which once more had temporarily fallen into the hands of
the Byzantines.
Only after Alexandria had been reconquered and 'Abdallah ibn Sa'd
had become governor of Egypt was a new expedition to the west on a
larger scale undertaken under his guidance, probably as early as the end of
647. The Byzantine state authority was now in complete dissolution.
The Patricius Gregory of Carthage had revolted the year before, probably
because, after the second fall of Alexandria, he considered himself safe
from any energetic steps on the part of the Greeks. Nevertheless
Carthage itself does not appear to have given him its adhesion, and he
based his rule in fact on the Berbers, for which reason he took up his
residence in the interior, in the ancient Sufetula, the present Sbeitla.
To how small an extent he must have been master of the situation is
proved by the fact that he did not even take the field against 'Abdallah.
The latter, with separated detachments, plundered the territory of
Tripolis, without being able to take the town itself; one Arab division
in fact appears at that time to have penetrated to Ghadames. When
'Abdallah arrived at the site of the subsequent Kairawan he turned and
marched on Sbeitla, where he annihilated Gregory's army. The fate of
the Patricius himself is uncertain; probably he fell in battle. This
battle is also named after 'Akuba, a place lying somewhat further to the
north. But here again no consolidation of the Arabian rule resulted.
A counter attack on the part of the still unconquered towns was to be
feared, and 'Abdallah therefore allowed himself to be persuaded to retire
on payment of an enormous sum of money, stated to have been 800 talents.
The whole expedition lasted somewhat more than a year (647-648).
Hereupon the confusion following on the assassination of the Caliph
Othman brought the expansion for the time being to a standstill.
When however Mu'awiya had asserted his authority and his faithful ally
'Amr had again become master in Egypt, the expeditions towards the
west were renewed, and in these 'Amr's nephew, the 'Ukba ibn Nafi' above
mentioned, appears to have been the moving spirit, operating from Barka
as a base. Along with him a number of other leaders are mentioned,
who undertook small excursions against various Berber tribes and against
such towns as the ancient Lepta (660-663). All details are dubious; of
the subsequent period too our knowledge is but scanty. Probably after
the death of 'Amr Africa was entrusted, at all events temporarily, as
a separate province to Mu'awiya ibn Hudaij, the head of Mu'awiya's
Egyptian party in his fight against Othman; this man was sent out
directly by the Caliph with a considerable army against the united
Byzantines and Berbers, and defeated them. The fortress of Jalula was
taken by him. Mu'awiya's expedition was in conjunction with a diversion
of the fleet against Sicily, of which more remains to be said. This event
may be dated with tolerable accuracy as having occurred in the year 664.


## p. 368 (#400) ############################################

368 Policy of Hindr [670-682
Shortly afterwards 'Ukba ibn Nafi' appears to have become the suc-
cessor of Ibn Hudaij. After a brilliant raid through the chain of oases
on the northern fringe of the Sahara, where he renewed the Arabian
dominion, he undertook in the year 670 an expedition against the
so-called Proconsular Africa, where he founded, as an Arabian camp and
strategical point of support, on the same lines as Basra and Kufa,
Kairawan, which became later so famous. Shortly afterwards, at most
in a few years, he was recalled.
Under Ibn Hudaij and 'Ukba Africa had grown into a province
independent of Egypt; now it was once more attached to Egypt. The
new governor-general Maslama ibn Mukhallad sent his freedman Dinar
Abu-1-Muhajir as 'Ukba's successor. By him 'Ukba was put in chains;
Maslama plainly disapproved 'Ukba's policy. He had good reason
for his disagreement, for 'Ukba was the type of the arbitrary, reckless
leader of the Arabian horsemen; proud as he was, he knew no such
thing as compromise, and in his view the Arabs were to conquer by the
sword and not by diplomacy; he punished all renegades without mercy.
Many Berbers had indeed accepted Islam as long as a contingent of
Arabian troops was in their neighbourhood, only to secede as soon as
the latter had withdrawn. 'Ukba treated with impolitic haughtiness the
proud leaders of the Berbers who allied themselves with him. His
much-renowned raids were displays of bravado without lasting success,
but they were in accordance with the taste of Arabian circles and as
later on he met his death on one of these expeditions in the far west,
his fame was still further enhanced by the martyr's crown. Thus even
at the present day Sidi 'Ukba is a popular saint in Northern Africa.
Tested by the judgment of history his less-known successor Dinar was a
much greater man, for it was he who first vigorously opposed the
Byzantines and at the same time he was the pioneer in paving the way
to an understanding with the Berbers.
After having proved his superior strength, Dinar appears to have won
over the Berbers, especially their leader Kusaila, by conciliatory tactics.
With their assistance he proceeded against the Byzantines of Carthage.
Though he could not yet take the town he occupied other neighbouring
portions of their territory. Thereupon he undertook an advance far to
the westward, right away to Tlemcen, which he could do without risk
owing to his relations with the Berbers.
In the meantime 'Ukba had succeeded in obtaining once more from
the Caliph Yazld the supreme command in Northern Africa (681-682).
He took revenge on Dinar by leading him around in chains on all his
expeditions. He again formed the main Muslim camp at Kairawan,
whence Dinar had removed it, and he approached the Berbers once
again with true Arabian haughtiness—in short, in all matters he acted
on lines diametrically opposed to those of his predecessor. The result
proves the correctness of Dinar's policy, for the powerful Kusaila incited


## p. 369 (#401) ############################################

682-697] Saracen disasters in Africa 369
the Berbers against 'Ukba and fled on the earliest opportunity from his
camp. 'Ukba therefore proceeded westwards under much less favourable
conditions than Dinar, and though he advanced beyond Tlemcen to
Tangier and appears after crossing the Atlas to have even penetrated
right to the Atlantic Ocean, yet on the return journey both he and his
prisoner Dinar were cut down by mutinous Berbers. They could not
have been surprised if he had not fancied the whole of the west already
conquered, and therefore divided up his army into small detachments.
Or it may be that he was no longer able to keep together the troops,
who were laden with booty. And thus at Tahudha, not far from Biskra,
he suffered the martyr's death (683). This was the signal for a
general rising of the Berbers and the renewal of their co-operation with
the Byzantines. The Arabs were compelled to relinquish Africa, and
Zubair ibn Kais, the commandant of Kairawan, led the troops back.
Kusaila was enabled to wander unpunished with his bands throughout
all Africa. Thus at the time of the death of the Caliph Yazid the
whole of Africa beyond Barka was again lost. This fact further con-
firms our judgment of the vastly too much celebrated 'Ukba.
'Abd-al-Malik attempted as early as 688-689, if we may believe the
unanimous opinion of the Arabs, to restore the Caliph's authority in
Africa. He did not wait, as might have been expected, until after the
conclusion of the civil war against the opposition Caliph, 'Abdallah ibn
Zubair. This new expedition however, commanded by the same Zubair,
did not proceed against the Byzantines, but against Kusaila, for in
all these wars the Byzantine towns managed in a masterly way to make
use of the Berbers as a bulwark. First of all Kairawan which had
drifted under Berber rule was freed, and then a further advance was
made against the Mons Aurasius, Kusaila's base. Kusaila was defeated
in a bloody battle and fell, whilst Zubair's troops penetrated as far as
Sicca Veneria, the present Kef, and it may be even further. The energy
of the Arabs was however then exhausted. On the return march a fate
similar to 'Ukba's overtook Zubair, and from similar causes. The
Byzantines had in fact taken advantage of his absence to attack Barka.
Zubair with a few faithful followers was cut down by them.
Kairawan however remained in the hands of the Arabs and now
began from this point outwards the work of the real pacificator, Hassan ibn
an-Nu'man, though we do not quite know when the arrangement of the
conditions was placed in his hands. As the first Syrian Amir on African
soil he thoroughly understood how to combine severe discipline with
astute diplomacy. In all material points he adopted Dinar's policy.
Like Dinar he recognised in the first instance the Byzantines as his
main enemy. As soon as the arrival of the auxiliary troops sent by
the Caliph permitted him to do so, he advanced against the still
unvanquished Carthage, and conquered it in the summer of 697.
Following this up he defeated the united Byzantines and Berbers at
C. UED. H. VOL. II. C'H. XII. 24


## p. 370 (#402) ############################################

370 Pacification of Africa [698-703
Satfura, to the north-east of Tunis, but without being able to prevent
them from again concentrating at Bizerta. In the autumn of the same
year certainly the Arabs lost Carthage again to the Patricius Johannes,
but his powerful fleet was dispersed in the summer of 698 by a still
greater Arabian fleet, and thus the fate of the town was sealed. From
this time onward the Arabs were supreme at sea, so that it is by no
means the land troops only of Hassan which decided the final fate of
Northern Africa. In his policy towards the Berbers he was at first not
fortunate. A holy prophetess, the so-called Kahina, had roused the
Berber tribes to a united advance and had thus become the successor of
Kusaila. On the banks of the little river Nini, not far distant from
Bagai, on one of the spurs of Mons Aurasius, she defeated Hassan's
army, which was driven back as far as Tripolis. But in the long run
the Kahina was not able to maintain her position, and the clever
diplomacy of Hassan appears also to have won over several tribes and
leaders from her circle. Thus Hassan's final victory over the Kahina a
few years later at Gafes becomes at the same time the commencement
of a fraternisation with the Berbers. It is extremely difficult to fix the
chronological sequence of the fights against the Kahina in regard to
the expeditions against Carthage. If they are placed between the two
conquests of Carthage, as has been done, then the whole chronological
structure falls to pieces; it is therefore the simplest to assume the date
of Hassan's defeat as occurring only after the final fall of Carthage and
to date his victory as about 703. For in the end it was not the land
army but the fleet which rendered possible the occupation and retention
of the Byzantine coast towns. The peace with the Berbers however
led them into the camp of the Arabs and thus too the final fate of such
Byzantine towns as might still be holding out was sealed. And now,
with Islam as their watchword, heads of certain of the Berber tribes,
appointed by the Arabs, advanced against the tribes of the west, who
JAj^mained independent. The prospect of booty and land united the
formeren&nSJ68' wno were moreover so similar to each other in their
whole style oflrVrh2£r; *ne moment now approaches when Africa becomes
too confined for this rieV" wave of population, which the influx of Islam
has brought to flood level. . 3^ latinised and hellenised population of
the towns appears to a large Vxtent to have migrated to Spain and
Sicily, for in a remarkably shorT time Latin civilisation disappeared
from Northern Africa. ',
The Arabs onlv conquered Northern\Africa after they had relinquished
their first policy of plunder for that of as^ermanent occupation. The
commencement of the new policy was 'Ukba'fe foundation of Kairawan.
By that step however in the first place only fthe starting-place for the
raids was changed. Dinar was the first seriously ua consider the question
of not merely plundering the open country but on taking the fortified
towns; and in this design his Berber policy was to support him, These



## p. 371 (#403) ############################################

708-7ii] Invasion of Spain 371
plans however could only be carried out when more troops became
available for Africa after the restoration of unity in the empire by
'Abd-al-Malik, further when the fleet began also to co-operate, and when
simultaneously a clever diplomatist effected the execution of Dinar's
plans in regard to the Berbers in more extended style. This man
however was Hassan ibn an-Nu'man.
'His policy was continued by Musa ibn Nusair, who is regarded in
history as the actual pacificator of Northern Africa and the conqueror
of Spain. Musa appears to have assumed office in the year 708, though
tradition on the point is rather shaky. The first years of his govern-
ment were occupied with the subjection of the western Berbers, the
latter years being devoted to the conquest of Spain, in which work his
freedman and military commander Tarik had paved the way for him.
The conquest of Spain must be ascribed less to the craving of the
Arabs for expansion than to the fact that the newly-subjected tribes
of Moors, whom the prospect of booty had lured to the banner of Islam,
had to be kept employed.
At the seat of the Caliphate these far-
reaching enterprises were followed with a certain amount of misgiving.
There certainly was little time available to intervene, for events
followed one after the other in precipitate haste, and the frail kingdom
of the Goths fell into the hands of the conquerors like a ripe fruit by a
windfall. The actual cause is obscure. History tells of disputes in
regard to the succession, and that the last king of the Goths, Roderick,
who succumbed to the Arabs, was a usurper (cf. Chap. vi). Tradition
tells of a certain Count Julian, the Christian ruler of Ceuta, whose
daughter had been violated by Roderick, and who therefore led the
Arabs and Berbers to Spain to satisfy his vengeance. Few characters in
the earlier history of Islam have interested the historians to such an
extent as this Julian, of whom it is not definitely known to which
nation he belonged and to which sovereignty he owed allegiance.
According to the reconstruction of Wellhausen and Codera he was not
named Julian at all, but Urban; he was probably of Moorish ancestry
and a vassal of the Gothic kings, but all beyond this is pure hypothesis.
Induced apparently by the struggles for the throne in the Gothic
kingdom, and probably less with a view to conquer than to plunder,
Tarik crossed into Spain in the year 711 with 7000 Berbers, who were
subsequently supplemented to a total of 12,000, and landed near to the
rock which still bears his name. (Gibraltar = Gebel Tarik = Mount
Tarik. ) After having collected his troops, Tarik appears to have
practised highway robbery along the coast from Gibraltar west-
wards and to have gone around the Laguna de la Janda in the
south. King Roderick opposed him in the valley of the WadI Bekka,
nowadays called Salado, between the lake and the town of Medina
Sidonia. According to the earliest Spanish tradition the site is also
named after the neighbouring Transductine promontory (Cape Spartel).

24—2


## p. 372 (#404) ############################################

372 Conquest of Spain [711-m
It was here, not at Vejer (or Jerez) de la Frontera, that the great decisive
battle was fought in July 711, in which the Gothic army, thanks to the
treachery of Roderick's political enemies, was defeated by Tank's troops.
The king himself probably fell in the battle, for he disappeared at all
events from this day forward1.
This great success led to an unexampled triumphal procession, which
can only be explained by the fact that the rule of the Goths was deeply
hated among the native population. As on Byzantine ground, so here
too had political and religious blunders set the various elements of the
population at variance, and thus prepared the way for the invasion.
The Jews especially, against whom an unscrupulous war of extermination
had been waged by the fanatical orthodox section, welcomed the Arabs
and Berbers as their deliverers. The towns alone, in which the Gothic
knighthood held predominance, offered any effective resistance. Tarik
must have been very accurately informed of the condition of the country;
the authorities represent him as advised in his arrangements for the
whole of the further campaign by Julian (Urban). The sequel certainly
justified the daring plan of pushing forward to Toledo, the capital of
the Gothic kings; the more important cities of the south, e. g. Seville,
were left to themselves, others, as Malaga and Archidona, were subdued
by small detachments; the main body of the army proceeded by Ecija
and Cordova to Toledo. It was only at Ecija that Tarik met with any
vigorous resistance, and at this point a battle ensued, which is described
as the most severe and stubborn of the whole campaign. Cordova and
Toledo fell by treachery. The aristocracy and the higher ranks of the
priesthood did not even await the arrival of the Muslims, but either
repaired to places of safety or sought union with the conquerors.
Tarik was thus master of the half of Spain by the end of the summer
of 711. His unprecedented successes aroused the jealousy of Musa, his
superior officer and patron, who had remained passively in Northern
Africa, because a systematic conquest of Spain was not intended in
Tank's expedition—only one of the customary summer raids of the
Muslim troops. Tarik had however now destroyed the Gothic kingdom.
Musa nevertheless, desiring for himself the fame and the material
advantages attending on the conquest of wealthy Spain, advanced
thither also with 18,000 troops in the following spring, and landed in
June. Purposely avoiding Tank's tracks, he first of all conquered the
towns which still held out, prominent among which were Medina Sidonia.
Carmona and Seville. Seville was the intellectual centre of Spain; it
had been the seat of government for centuries under the Romans, and
under the Goths it had not lost its former splendour. It was only
captured after a siege of several months' duration. From the campaign
of Musa. it can be seen that Tank's stratagem had by no means
destroyed all resistance, but that the heavy work of the conquest of the
1 Another view is fliven in Ch. ti. p. 185.


## p. 373 (#405) ############################################

712-718] Crossing of the Pyrenees 373
country had to follow the rapid occupation of the capital. The Arabs
would scarcely have succeeded in the conquest of Spain without the internal
disorders which had preceded their arrival, and the consequent want of
discipline and unity. Even as it was, after the fall of Seville, Musa
still met with obstinate resistance before Merida, whose impregnable
walls resisted all attempts at undermining. The inhabitants however
finally recognised their advantage in peacefully surrendering the town
(30 June 718). Seville too rose once more in revolt, but was finally
subjugated by Musas son, 'Abd-al-'AzIz. It was only after all these
successes that Musa could enter Toledo, where Tank awaited him.
Musa now vented his anger on his too-successful subordinate, but
soon afterwards the same fate overtook himself. His letter of recall,
signed by the Caliph Walld (713-714), reached him 15 months after
his landing, and but few weeks after his entry into Toledo. The
victorious old man slowly made his way overland, towards Syria, taking
enormous treasures with him. Arabian papyri in the British Museum
have preserved various data in regard to the expenses of provisioning
his princely train during his temporary stay in Egypt. In Damascus he
fell into disfavour and does not again appear in the foreground. His
sons too, of whom he had left 'Abd-al-'Aziz as governor in Spain, and
the others in Africa, did not long enjoy the fruits of their father's great
deeds, for they also were soon either deposed or murdered.
This account of events in the conquest of Spain is chiefly based on
Arabian sources, the importance of which, as compared with the certainly
valuable Latin historians, has been decidedly undervalued in recent
times. According to the latter Musa, and not Tarik, was the actual
conqueror of Spain; they represent Tarik as merely the victor in the
battle at the Transductine promontory, whilst Musa consummated his
triumphal march by the conquest of Toledo; of any opposition between
Musa and Tarik there is no mention. Both groups of authorities agree
in recording that under Musa, or at least by his direction, Saragossa also
was taken. Notwithstanding contradictory reports, it is certain that
Musa did not also cross the Pyrenees.
The crossing of this range did not take place until a few years later
(717 or 718), under the leadership of Musfi's fourth successor, Hurr.
North of the Pyrenees, in the same way as to the south, the quarrels of
the various races offered the Arabs an inducement to invade the country,
and with the then prevalent lack of geographical knowledge the seemingly
possible idea of reaching Constantinople by land from Gaul may have
haunted their brains, for was not the fall of the proud imperial city the
ardently desired end and aim of the foreign policy of the Caliphs? The
leaders of the expeditions sent out from Spain had however more obvious
designs; it was the booty, which might reasonably be looked for in the
rich treasures of the convents and churches of Gaul, which lured them
onwards. The daring march, which subsequently led to the celebrated


## p. 374 (#406) ############################################

374 Battle of Tours [718-759
defeat of Tours or Poitiers, is directly attributed by the authorities to
this lust of booty. The chief officers of the Merovingians were engaged
in fighting with the dukes of Aquitaine. While the France of the future
was gradually gaining ground in the north in the midst of heated
fighting, the dukes of Aquitaine were threatened on all sides. The
Duke Eudo of Aquitaine had to sustain the first onslaught of the
Arabs, and this was finally broken against Eudo's iron-willed adversary,
Charles Martel.
Details of the raids made by Hurr are not known. They were
continued by his successor Samh, who captured Narbonne in 720,
and this formed the base of operations for the Spanish attacking
forces until 759. The further undertakings of Samh however were a
failure. He endeavoured to conquer Toulouse in 721 by attacking it
with battering rams. But Duke Eudo relieved the distressed town and
won a decisive victory. The leader of the Muslims fell in battle. This
was the first great success of a Germanic prince over the Muslims, so
long accustomed to victory. It was not the last; for the later ex-
peditions of the Muslims were no longer crowned with success; in fact
Eudo began to utilise to his own ends the growing difficulties between
the Arabs and the Berbers. After a pause the Spanish Amir 'Abd-ar-
Rahman prepared to strike a great blow. He proceeded in 782 over the
Pyrenees, defeated Duke Eudo between the Garonne and the Dordogne,
and followed to the vicinity of Tours, attracted by the church treasures
of the town. Here he was met by Charles Martel, whom Eudo had
called to his assistance, and was vanquished in the battle of Tours or
Poitiers, 732, which lasted several days. Here the complete superiority
of the northern temperament over that of the southerners displayed
itself. According to the report of the historians the Frankish warriors
stood firm as a wall, inflexible as a block of ice. The light cavalry of the
Caliphs failed against them. It was however not only the temperament,
but also the physical superiority of the Teutons, which asserted itself in
any fighting at close quarters, that won the battle. When the Teutons
after the last day's fighting, in which the Muslims had lost their leader,
wished to renew the struggle, they found that the Arabs had fled. The
entire camp, with the whole of the munitions of war, fell into the hands
of the victors.
The battle of Tours or Poitiers has often been represented as an
event of the first magnitude in the world's history, because after this
the penetration of Islam into Western Europe was finally brought to •
standstill. The Arabs certainly undertook occasional raids, in regard to
which we have but scanty information; they occupied, for instance.
Aries and Narbonne, until they were expelled thence by Charles Martel
and Pepin. In these expeditions however the Arabs only appear as
allies of the grandees of Southern Gaul, who desired with their help to
ward off the advance of Charles. The Caliph Hisham, at that time in


## p. 375 (#407) ############################################

732] Saracen Failures in Gaul 375
power, certainly encouraged a vigorous expansion in connexion with his
policy of restoration; but the attack of the Saracens was no longer
successful, and as early as 759 the Arabs had to relinquish Narbonne,
their last base north of the Pyrenees, to Pepin. The Saracen assault
was therefore apparently broken by the battle of Tours or Poitiers—but
only apparently, for that which might be regarded as cause and effect was
but a chronological coincidence. Every movement has its limits, and the
migration of the Arabs would not have been enough to place the requisite
forces of men in the field for a permanent occupation even of Spain if
they had not sought them outside their own limits among the Berbers.
By joining the Arabs and conquering Spain for them, the Berbers carried
the Saracen movement into another new country, but at the same time
they made it heterogeneous, and as an addition to the internal Arabian
feuds they created a new one, that between Arabs and Berbers. This
strife, still latent during the first years of victory, came to light about
the time of the battle of Tours or Poitiers. But a further cause
rendered additional Saracen raids into Gaul impossible. In the northern
corner of Spain a remnant of the opposition against the penetration of
Islam had preserved its independence as a State; year by year this small
State grew in size, and in a short time it inserted itself like a wedge
between the Arabian magnates and the Pyrenees. On this was founded
the legend of St Pelagius, which is treated more fully in another part of
this work.
Under these circumstances the expansion of the Muslims came to a
natural standstill from internal causes, and the consequences of the
battle of Tours or Poitiers must therefore not be exaggerated. The
plundering of these towns would decidedly not have resulted in a
permanent occupation of Gaul by the Saracens. Their defeat before
Constantinople was of vastly greater significance. The fall of Constan-
tinople would have entirely remodelled the history of the East, as in
fact it did, seven centuries later.
The battle then of Tours or Poitiers marked the extreme point of
advance of the Saracens into Western Europe, but it was not the cause
of the sudden stoppage, or rather recess of the movement. That fact
lay, as above stated, in the feud between Arabs and Berbers. This strife
was bound to be so much the more fatal for the Arabs, as at the same
time the discord between Kais and Kalb in the East made its influence
felt in the West also, and thus broke up the compact unity of the
hitherto paramount nationality. The details of this process have little
value for the history of the Saracen expansion treated in these chapters.
A brief description of the principal events will suffice to explain the
other great advance of the Saracens against Mid-Europe (Sicily, Sardinia
and South Italy).
The whole of the western portion of the empire of the Caliph, the
so-called Maghrib, i. e. Northern Africa and Spain, was placed after the


## p. 376 (#408) ############################################

376 Disturbances under Hishdm [c. 730
completion of the conquest under various governors, who had their
seat of government in Kairawan. The Spanish sub-prefects however
often had an almost independent position. They resided at first at
Seville, but shortly afterwards chose as the seat of government
Cordova, which was thus destined for centuries to become the brilliant
residence of the western Caliphate. Until its secession from the eastern
main empire, and in fact for centuries afterwards, the destinies of Spain
were united in the closest manner with those of Northern Africa through
the Berbers, who were now settled on both sides of the Straits of
Gibraltar. Thus it came that Spain, on the outbreak of Berber unrest
in Northern Africa, was at once drawn into this fatal movement. The
only difference was that in Northern Africa the Berbers were the
subjects, who had however expected to attain an equal footing with
the Arabs by the adoption of Islam, whilst in Spain the Arabs and
Berbers had together conquered a foreign land, whose wealth and
territory they divided. At this stage the Arabs committed the great
mistake of shewing themselves too ostentatiously as the masters, i. e.
in Africa they proceeded arrogantly and violently against the proud
Berbers, who had cost so much trouble to subdue, whilst in Spain they
allotted the Berbers the worst portion of the booty. This caused a
first revolt, which was however but partial. The Berber Munusa in
Northern Spain declared his independence, and entered into friendly,
even family connexions with the Duke Eudo. His call however found
but little response among his countrymen, and he was put down with
little trouble (729 or 730).
More serious were the developments in Africa. It was at the
time of Caliph Hisham, under whom the revision of Omar's system
of taxation, which had gradually become a necessity, was enforced more
generally and energetically. The bureaucracy which accompanied this
revision, and the Asiatic despotism which was gradually creeping in,
were nowhere so unsuitable as in the mountain homes of the Berbers,
who were only held in check by diplomacy and the prospect of booty.
As with the Orientals in general and especially with the Berbers every
national or economical opposition easily assumes a religious tinge, so it
was in this case too. We have already spoken of the Kharijites, who
had detached themselves from Ali after the battle of Siffin. Their
doctrine was that of the absolute sovereignty of the people, who were
justified at all times in deposing an unjust Caliph or Imam. We have
already indicated that the Umayyads had much trouble with these
people. The profession of the doctrine of the Kharijites was one of
the most important forms in which the opposition against the growing
despotism and the bureaucracy found expression, especially among the
old-Arabian circles, just as, among the Persians, this opposition took
the form of the ShI'a. With the increasing tension betwixt Umayyad
ti'oops and the Berber populace, the Kharijite ideas had an unsuspected


## p. 377 (#409) ############################################

741-745] Fall of the Umayyads ',■ 377
spread among the latter. And as the Arabs had now lost their readiness
for battle by reason of their tribal feuds, the Berbers ventured, under
the Caliph Hisham, openly to secede. After local revolts, which were
quickly suppressed, a serious rebellion began in the extreme west. The
whole territory of what is now called Morocco within a short period
shook off the domination of the Arabs (741). Hisham hereupon sent
a powerful army, composed of the best Syrian troops, to Africa, and it
was intended that this force should co-operate with the garrisons already
there. But the feuds amongst the Arabs themselves more than counter-
balanced their better equipment, and in consequence the Berbers won a
mighty victory (741) at the river Sebu, or, as the best Latin authority
gives it, "super Huvium Nauam," and thus put in doubt the supremacy
of the Arabs. Later on numerous fugitives crossed over into Spain and
brought new confusion into the confusion there prevailing. But here as
there for a short period the authority of Damascus was once more
restored. Hanzala ibn §afwan, the new governor, managed by time-
honoured methods to prevent common action on the part of the Berbers,
and then later vanquished the main body of the Berber troops (742) at
Asnam, not far from Kairawan. His representative, 'Abu-1-Khattar,
then enforced order in Spain. The Berber revolt was thus broken, but
it was the Berbers notwithstanding, and not the Arabs, who decided the
destinies of the countries. Though the majority returned to Muslim
orthodoxy, remnants of the Kharijites have maintained their position
in Northern Africa even to the present day, under the name of Ibadites.
This peace lasted scarcely three years. Spain arose out of the new
tumults as an independent State, for which a period of high prosperity
was in prospect. In North Africa too a series of independent States was
gradually formed. After the residence of the Caliph had been removed
nearer to Central Asia it was probably natural that the Mediter-
ranean territories, inhabited by a vigorous population, should begin
a separate existence as States. After the fall of the Umayyads the
countries to the east of Barka, permeated by the Saracen expansion, only
occasionally and then only nominally held common cause with the
Eastern Empire. The first usurper preserved at least the appearance of
dependence. In the year 745 'Abd-ar-Rahman ibn Habib, of the tribe
of Fihr, declared himself in Tunis independent of the governor Hanzala,
who had conducted the affairs of the Maghrib since the revolt of
Kairawan. Belonging to a race long tried and approved on African
soil, 'Abd-ar-Rahman could count on followers by reason of the universal
discontent. By a brutal intrigue he compelled Hanzala to leave Africa
without drawing the sword. The last of the Umayyads, Marwan, sub-
sequently legalised the de facto authority of 'Abd-ar-Rahman. For this
'Abd-ar-Rahman paid a small tribute and named the Caliph in his pulpit
prayers, but he was otherwise his own master; and his position was not
influenced by the change in the dynasty in the East. When the rule of


## p. 378 (#410) ############################################

378 Saracen Kingdoms in Northern Africa [754-800
the Abbasids had become consolidated and it was proposed to make an
energetic attack on him from Bagdad, he renounced his obedience to
the Abbasids and received fugitive Umayyads as honoured guests in
Kairawan (754-755). These Umayyad princes however brought discord
into 'Abd-ar-Rahman's family, in connexion with which he himself and
two of the princes met their deaths. A third prince, 'Abd-ar-Rahman
ibn Mu'awiya, forced his way through to Spain and became the founder
of the western Caliphate. In Africa the murder of Ibn Habib led to a
general disorganisation and set free all the tendencies towards decentral-
isation. Independent Berber dynasties arose in the extreme West, as
for instance the Banu Midrar in Sijilmasa (757) and Banu Rustam in
Tahert (761), the latter under the banner of the Kharijites; in the
nearer West the Arabs on the one hand and the Berbers, who had also
separated into parties, on the other, fought for the possession of
Kairawan, which did not again acknowledge the authority of the
Abbasids until 761, and then only for a short time; the province of
Africa, as far as to the border of Algeria, was once more restored,
though with disturbances and interruptions, but the whole of the far
West remained irretrievably lost.
Here in the far West a third State was soon founded. A descendant
of Ali named Idris, who had fled from the Abbasids, created for himself,
in the year 788, an independent kingdom, which soon extended eastward
to beyond the town of Tlemcen. Here again a clever leader managed to
unite the Berbers by a religious party-cry. The kingdom of the Idrisids
was the first Shi'ite State founded in the West.
The remainder of the province of Maghrib once so extensive was
moreover destined to make itself independent in the last decade of the
eighth century. The constant dissensions between the Arab leaders and
tribes could no longer be permanently controlled by the governors sent
from Bagdad. The Amir of Mzab (in the back-country of Algeria) Ibrahim
ibn Aghlab, who had grown up in Africa, and whose father had been
the means of reconquering the Mzab, was on the other hand the right
man in the right place to restore state authority (800). When he had
succeeded in this however he demanded from the Caliph the hereditary
investiture in return for payment of a tribute and the customary
naming of the Caliph in the pulpit prayers and on the coinage. This
amounted to complete independence. Thus arose the dynasty of the
Aghlabids of Kairawan, which gave to Africa a series of clever, but
also often worthless, rulers. In proportion to the smallness of their
kingdom they had a considerable naval force, and thus they became the
leaders of the expansion of Islam into Mid-Europe. It was under them
that Sicily was conquered.
Before turning however to Sicily, we must still sketch the further
destinies of Northern Africa, in as far as it is connected with the history
of Islam in Southern Europe. In spite of their brilliant performances


## p. 379 (#411) ############################################

909—H71] Idrisids and Fatimites 379
the authority of the Aghlabids was in a tottering state. The diversion
to Sicily of the generals and troops, always inclining towards insub-
ordination, gave them a respite for a considerable time; after lasting
for a century their kingdom was destroyed by the political lack of
discipline of the Berber tribes and by bloody quarrels within the dynasty
itself.
These conditions were cleverly utilised by the Shi'ite opposition,
which just at that time, after many ill-successes in Asia, had pushed
forward into Africa, where the propaganda of the Idrisids had paved
the way for them. The leader of the movement was named 'Ubaidallah,
whose descent from AH is by no means established beyond doubt; the
race itself however was called, after Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet,
the Fatimites. When 'Ubaidallah had become master of the situation
in the year 909, through the fortunate trend of circumstances and
his skill in recruiting, he assumed the cognomen Mahdi, i. e. the
directed one, a title in which the old claims of Alfs kinsmen to the
Caliphate found expression. Mahdi founded a new capital, Mahdiya,
and established a State which for centuries held the supremacy in the
eastern Mediterranean. For this end of course the possession of Egypt
was needed, but the acquisition of this was first effected by Mu'izz
(969), Mahdrs third successor, who was the founder of Cairo. The
centre of gravity of the Fatimite kingdom was now transferred eastward,
especially when Syria also was conquered. Africa soon attained inde-
pendence again as a State under Yusuf Bulukkin, a Berber of the
Sanhaja, the governor appointed by the Fatimites; Yusuf founded the
dynasty of the Zlrids (972-1148), alongside of whom the Hammadids
held their ground in the West, and specially in Algeria, from 1107 till
1152. The kingdom of the Idrisids in Morocco had in the meantime
been split up into a number of petty principalities. The Fatimites
however remained the rulers of the eastern territory, and under them
Egypt experienced its most brilliant times, but suffered also its worst
defeat. In 1171 the heir to the Fatimite kingdom was Salad in.
We were compelled to give an anticipatory sketch of the history of
North Africa until the commencement of the times of the Crusades, in
order to understand the second great advance of the Saracens against
Sicily and Southern Italy as one connected whole. Incidents from the
standpoint of individual countries, these regular attacks of the Muslims
on Mid-Europe are presented, in the light of universal history, as a
connected movement, which naturally closes with the occupation of
Sicily and also of parts of the Continent. As in Spain, the reaction of
the Christian world follows upon the action of Islam. Just as they
came, so the Muslims are gradually forced back. Here we have to do
with the forward action alone, and though from chance reasons this
took place much later in Sicily and Italy than in Spain or Asia Minor,
yet its description comes notwithstanding within the scope of a general


## p. 380 (#412) ############################################

380 First Raids on Sicily [c. 664
history of the expansion of the Saracens, for the conquest of Sicily is
connected in the most intimate way with the occupation of Northern
Africa, and could only succeed after the conditions in the latter territory
had somewhat improved. It is the same movement which took the
Saracens across the Straits of Gibraltar. The subsequent advance of
the world of Islam against Eastern Europe and the occupation of
Constantinople by the Turks are in no way connected with the original
movement as described here; the events now related below are the hut
ramification of the Arabian exodus.
As Michele Amari says in his classical work on the Muslims in Sicily,
only a glance at the map is needed to shew that Sicily must be
involved in continuous war with the Saracens after their occupation
of Africa. And yet this same great historian represents the first naval
expedition against Sicily not as starting from Africa but from Syria,
and that too at a time when the subsequent Caliph Mu'awiya was still
governor of Syria. The strongly contradictory reports about this event
may most easily be reconciled by regarding the first appearance of an
Arabian fleet in Sicily as taking place under the Caliphate of Mu'awiya,
and connecting it with the expedition of his African governor, Mu'awiya
ibn Hudaij, against the Byzantines (664). Arabian tradition also
accepts this Ibn Hudaij as the leader. It is quite probable that he
himself never saw Sicily, but that the raid was made under his orders by
his representative, 'Abdallah ibn Kais.