Umayyads
Umayyads (Banu Umayya). Dynasty of caliphs which ruled the Islamic world (r.661-750). Their main capital was Damascus. Named after its founding father, Umayya, a member of the Prophet’s tribe. Founder of the dynasty was Muawiya I ibn Abu Sufyan (r. 661-680) who, as governor of Syria, emerged in 657 as an opponent of Caliph Ali and, following his murder, seized power, which he made inheritable. There followed ongoing conflicts with various Arab tribes and religious movements in early Islam. Political successes were the rule of Abd al-Malik (r. 685-705), who reorganized the state administration (including monetary reform) and developed Jerusalem as a religious center, and also that of al-Walid (705-715), who advanced Islamic conquests (in 711 as far as Spain in the west and Industal in the east, with Bukhara and Samarkand conquered in 715). There then followed rulers whose reigns were shortlived, as well as an increase in the number of rebellions among conquered populations protesting at the privileges enjoyed by the Arabs. Under Hisham (r. 724-743) there was consolidation, but this was followed by political instability and uprisings by Kharijite and Shi‘ite groups, who helped the Abbasids rise to power. These expelled the last Umayyad caliph, Marvan II (r. 744-750) in 750 and removed the Umayyad family. One of Hisham’s grandsons who had fled established the rule of the Spanish Umayyads in Cordoba in 756.
The Banu Umayya were the principal clan of the Quraysh of Mecca, represented by two main branches, the A‘yas and the ‘Anabisa. ‘Affan, the father of the Caliph ‘Uthman, was descended from the A‘yas, as were the Caliph Marwan I ibn al-Hakam and the caliphs who came after him until the end of the dynasty. Marwan and his descendants formed the Marwanid line of the Umayyads. The amirs, later caliphs, of Muslim Spain were also descended from the A‘yas. The most illustrious family of the ‘Anabisa branch was that of Harb, whose son Abu Sufyan was the father of the first Umayyad Caliph Mu‘awiya I. His line became extinct with the death of Caliph Mu‘awiya II, the son of the Caliph Yazid I, and was followed by the Marwanid line.
If tradition, as established after their fall under the influence of the ideas dominant in pietist circles, has cursed the memory of the Umayyads, it nevertheless remains true that it was precisely under their regime and partly under their stimulus that Islam established itself as a universalist religion. The Umayyad caliphs, as descendants of the Meccan aristocracy which had fought Islam in its early stages, must have believed in good faith that the propagation of the Muslim faith and the expansion of their temporal power were one and the same thing. They must have been convinced that the enemies of their policy, whether Shi‘a or Kharijites, were also enemies of the true tradition of the Prophet.
The Umayyad party triumphed under the third caliph ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan at the expense of the first converts, of the Prophet’s son-in-law ‘Ali in the first place. The opposition between Mu‘awiya and ‘Ali raised an exceedingly delicate constitutional problem: that of the assumption of supreme power over the believers by one who was not among the earliest Companions of the Prophet. Rather than being the continuators of the sunna of the Prophet, the Umayyads became in fact, if not in official title, “kings” or rather “tyrants” in the Greek sense of the word. The Umayyad period is marked by a strong opposition between Syria and Iraq, due to Ziyad ibn Abihi’s merciless suppression in Iraq, so different from the policy practised by Mu‘awiya himself. The Iraqi population seems to have been justified in thinking that the Umayyad caliphate really represented the hegemony of Syria over the rest of Islamic territory and the memory of ‘Ali, which legend soon seized upon, was in a way bound up with the nationalism of Iraq.
The most tangible success of Mu‘awiya’s policy was that he made the caliphate hereditary after having succeeded in extracting from the tribal chiefs the oath of allegiance (in Arabic, bay‘a) for his son Yazid. This principle was continued under Marwan I ibn al-Hakam. The caliphate of the latter’s son ‘Abd al-Malik, under the driving power of al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi, was an attempt to establish an absolute monarchy. Al-Hajjaj reduced the Kharijite movement to temporary impotence, while Shi‘ism, defeated in the open field, took refuge in secret propaganda which was only to bear fruit much later. The vast conquests of Qutayba ibn Muslim in the east, begun in 705, brought about the conversion to Islam of the Turks, while in the west the Berbers, notwithstanding their opposition to the Arab conquerors, gradually also accepted the new religion. It was to these two races, placed at the two extremes of the Arab empire, that Islam owed the greater part of its future successes but also a profound change in its civilization.
The Caliph al-Walid I was the great builder of the dynasty, and the fiscal reforms of ‘Umar II ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz paved the way for the equal treatment of Arabs and non-Arab “clients” and contributed more than anything else to the fusion of the descendants of the conquerors and conquered.
Under the Caliph Hisham ibn ‘Abd al-Malik, the Umayyad caliphate experienced another period of splendor. But Hisham had exploited to the limit the fiscal reforms of ‘Umar II and exhausted his Muslim and non-Muslim subjects alike. The scandalous conduct of the Caliph al-Walid II also played an important part in the collapse of the established order. Misery brought about a revival of Kharijism, and the Shi‘a movement began again to show itself openly in Iraq. Neither Yasid III ibn al-Walid nor his brother Ibrahim ibn al-Walid succeeded in checking the anarchy which was spreading throughout the empire. Marwan II ibn Muhammad, the governor of Armenia, proclaimed himself caliph and subdued Syria, Egypt and Iraq. But in 747, the forces of Abu Muslim rapidly conquered Khurasan and Fars, and in 748 occupied Iraw where the ‘Abbasids suddenly put forward their claims and proclaimed Abu’l-‘Abbas al-Saffah caliph at Kufa. Marwan II was killed in 750.
It can be said that the intellectual and moral unification of the Muslim world, accomplished by the ‘Abbasids, had already begun under the Umayyads.
The Umayyads were the self-described heirs to the orthodox or patriarchal caliphate which existed from 632 to 661. From their capital in Damascus, the Umayyads extended the borders of the Islamic empire to India in the east and to Spain in the west. The early Umayyad caliphs were adept military tacticians and effective bureaucrats; they also left a rich legacy in poetry, Greek to Arabic translations, and architectural monuments.
The Umayyads never solved the problem of how to deal with non-Arab converts to Islam (the mawali). The mawali, together with Arab discontents looking for a return to pristine Islam, supported the ‘Abbasid forces, who defeated the Umayyads in 750. A lone Umayyad dynast escaped to Spain and established in Spain a regional dynasty that lasted until 1031.
The Umayyad caliphs (661-750) played only a brief and rather indirect, yet nonetheless critical, role in the history of Iran and Central Asia. Generally, the Umayyad central government was more interested in affairs affecting the western portions of the empire (wars with Byzantium and expansion around the Mediterranean basin) than with the east. After consolidting the eastern areas conquered earlier by the Arabs, the Umayyads tended to entrust matters in Iraq, and its Iranian dependencies to governors and sub-governors, often chosen from prominent Arab families settled in the respective provinces, who then followed whatever policy they felt best.
One of the most effective and important of these Umayyad officials in Iran was the governor of Khurasan, Qutaiba ibn Muslim al-Bahili (705-715), a protégé of the powerful Umayyad governor of Iraq, al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf. Qutaiba effectively suppressed a revolt, led by Nizak (or Tirek) of Badghis, of the semi-autonomous princes of Tocharistan (on the eastern borders of Khurasan); conquered the city of Bukhara and its environs; invaded and subdued Sogdiana, taking its most important city, Samarkand; conquered Khwarazm and settled a colony of Arabs there; and mounted expeditions against several remote principalities along the Syr Darya as far as what is now Tashkent. All this military activity served a number of useful functions. It diverted the energies of the Arab tribesmen from factional struggles against each other into the new campaigns, thus encouraging cooperation between the Arab and Iranian military elites; it brought in much-needed booty to bolster the local economy; it provided a vehicle for re-organizing and stabilizing the provincial government; and it checked, at least temporarily, the growing power of the Turkic tribes on the far eastern borders of the Islamic empire. Unfortunately, this energetic governor fell from favor with the central government after the death of al-Hajjaj and was killed by his own former soldiers when he attempted to revolt. (Interestingly, the Sogdians he had conquered remained loyal to him to the very end.)
After Qutaiba’s death, the authority of the Umayyads in the east deteriorated steadily. The reasons for this are complex but can be reduced to three main points. First, the Umayyads failed to find a permanent means of containing the rivalries, antagonisms, and competition for political and material rewards among their Arab tribal supporters in the provinces. They were thus ultimately confronted with a bitter intra-Arab civil war in Khurasan. Second, they based their power more and more on a narrow elite of Arab tribal warriors, many of them newcomers to the east, and the indigenous Iranian military aristocracy. This alienated the non-Arab peasantry, their village leaders, and the semi-assimilated Arab colonists who had become landowners and resided permanently in the region. Third, as both Arabs and Iranians came to think more of their common Islamic, rather than their separate ethnic, identity, the Umayyads were unable to find any convincing justification for the legitimacy of their rule that could appeal to the religious sentiments of the pious-minded Muslim masses in the cities and countryside. These sources of discontent in Khurasan were shrewdly manipulated by various opponents of Umayyad rule, especially by partisans of the Abbasid family who engineered a revolutionary conspiracy in Khurasan that toppled the authority of their governor in that province and subsequently brought down the dynasty itself.
The Umayyad Caliphs at Damascus were:
* Muawiyah I ibn Abi Sufyan, 661–680
* Yazid I ibn Muawiyah, 680–683
* Muawiyah II ibn Yazid, 683–684
* Marwan I ibn al-Ḥakam, 684–685
* Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, 685–705
* al-Walid I ibn Abd al-Malik, 705–715
* Suleiman ibn Abd al-Malik, 715–717
* Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, 717–720
* Yazid II ibn Abd al-Malik, 720–724
* Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik, 724–743
* al-Walid II ibn Yazid II, 743–744
* Yazid III ibn al-Walid, 744
* Ibrahim ibn al-Walid, 744
* Marwan II ibn Muhammad (ruled from Harran in the Jazira) 744–750
The Umayyad Emirs of Córdoba were:
* Abd ar-Rahman I, 756–788
* Hisham I, 788–796
* al-Hakam I, 796–822
* Abd ar-Rahman II, 822–852
* Muhammad I of Córdoba, 852-886
* Al-Mundhir, 886 - 888
* Abdallah ibn Muhammad, 888–912
* Abd ar-Rahman III, 912–929
The Umayyad Caliphs at Córdoba were:
* Abd ar-Rahman III, as caliph, 929–961
* Al-Hakam II, 961–976
* Hisham II, 976–1008
* Mohammed II, 1008–1009
* Suleiman, 1009–1010
* Hisham II, restored, 1010–1012
* Suleiman, restored, 1012–1017
* Abd ar-Rahman IV, 1021–1022
* Abd ar-Rahman V, 1022–1023
* Muhammad III, 1023–1024
* Hisham III, 1027–1031
Banu Umayya see Umayyads
Umayyads (Banu Umayya). Dynasty of caliphs which ruled the Islamic world (r.661-750). Their main capital was Damascus. Named after its founding father, Umayya, a member of the Prophet’s tribe. Founder of the dynasty was Muawiya I ibn Abu Sufyan (r. 661-680) who, as governor of Syria, emerged in 657 as an opponent of Caliph Ali and, following his murder, seized power, which he made inheritable. There followed ongoing conflicts with various Arab tribes and religious movements in early Islam. Political successes were the rule of Abd al-Malik (r. 685-705), who reorganized the state administration (including monetary reform) and developed Jerusalem as a religious center, and also that of al-Walid (705-715), who advanced Islamic conquests (in 711 as far as Spain in the west and Industal in the east, with Bukhara and Samarkand conquered in 715). There then followed rulers whose reigns were shortlived, as well as an increase in the number of rebellions among conquered populations protesting at the privileges enjoyed by the Arabs. Under Hisham (r. 724-743) there was consolidation, but this was followed by political instability and uprisings by Kharijite and Shi‘ite groups, who helped the Abbasids rise to power. These expelled the last Umayyad caliph, Marvan II (r. 744-750) in 750 and removed the Umayyad family. One of Hisham’s grandsons who had fled established the rule of the Spanish Umayyads in Cordoba in 756.
The Banu Umayya were the principal clan of the Quraysh of Mecca, represented by two main branches, the A‘yas and the ‘Anabisa. ‘Affan, the father of the Caliph ‘Uthman, was descended from the A‘yas, as were the Caliph Marwan I ibn al-Hakam and the caliphs who came after him until the end of the dynasty. Marwan and his descendants formed the Marwanid line of the Umayyads. The amirs, later caliphs, of Muslim Spain were also descended from the A‘yas. The most illustrious family of the ‘Anabisa branch was that of Harb, whose son Abu Sufyan was the father of the first Umayyad Caliph Mu‘awiya I. His line became extinct with the death of Caliph Mu‘awiya II, the son of the Caliph Yazid I, and was followed by the Marwanid line.
If tradition, as established after their fall under the influence of the ideas dominant in pietist circles, has cursed the memory of the Umayyads, it nevertheless remains true that it was precisely under their regime and partly under their stimulus that Islam established itself as a universalist religion. The Umayyad caliphs, as descendants of the Meccan aristocracy which had fought Islam in its early stages, must have believed in good faith that the propagation of the Muslim faith and the expansion of their temporal power were one and the same thing. They must have been convinced that the enemies of their policy, whether Shi‘a or Kharijites, were also enemies of the true tradition of the Prophet.
The Umayyad party triumphed under the third caliph ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan at the expense of the first converts, of the Prophet’s son-in-law ‘Ali in the first place. The opposition between Mu‘awiya and ‘Ali raised an exceedingly delicate constitutional problem: that of the assumption of supreme power over the believers by one who was not among the earliest Companions of the Prophet. Rather than being the continuators of the sunna of the Prophet, the Umayyads became in fact, if not in official title, “kings” or rather “tyrants” in the Greek sense of the word. The Umayyad period is marked by a strong opposition between Syria and Iraq, due to Ziyad ibn Abihi’s merciless suppression in Iraq, so different from the policy practised by Mu‘awiya himself. The Iraqi population seems to have been justified in thinking that the Umayyad caliphate really represented the hegemony of Syria over the rest of Islamic territory and the memory of ‘Ali, which legend soon seized upon, was in a way bound up with the nationalism of Iraq.
The most tangible success of Mu‘awiya’s policy was that he made the caliphate hereditary after having succeeded in extracting from the tribal chiefs the oath of allegiance (in Arabic, bay‘a) for his son Yazid. This principle was continued under Marwan I ibn al-Hakam. The caliphate of the latter’s son ‘Abd al-Malik, under the driving power of al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf al-Thaqafi, was an attempt to establish an absolute monarchy. Al-Hajjaj reduced the Kharijite movement to temporary impotence, while Shi‘ism, defeated in the open field, took refuge in secret propaganda which was only to bear fruit much later. The vast conquests of Qutayba ibn Muslim in the east, begun in 705, brought about the conversion to Islam of the Turks, while in the west the Berbers, notwithstanding their opposition to the Arab conquerors, gradually also accepted the new religion. It was to these two races, placed at the two extremes of the Arab empire, that Islam owed the greater part of its future successes but also a profound change in its civilization.
The Caliph al-Walid I was the great builder of the dynasty, and the fiscal reforms of ‘Umar II ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz paved the way for the equal treatment of Arabs and non-Arab “clients” and contributed more than anything else to the fusion of the descendants of the conquerors and conquered.
Under the Caliph Hisham ibn ‘Abd al-Malik, the Umayyad caliphate experienced another period of splendor. But Hisham had exploited to the limit the fiscal reforms of ‘Umar II and exhausted his Muslim and non-Muslim subjects alike. The scandalous conduct of the Caliph al-Walid II also played an important part in the collapse of the established order. Misery brought about a revival of Kharijism, and the Shi‘a movement began again to show itself openly in Iraq. Neither Yasid III ibn al-Walid nor his brother Ibrahim ibn al-Walid succeeded in checking the anarchy which was spreading throughout the empire. Marwan II ibn Muhammad, the governor of Armenia, proclaimed himself caliph and subdued Syria, Egypt and Iraq. But in 747, the forces of Abu Muslim rapidly conquered Khurasan and Fars, and in 748 occupied Iraw where the ‘Abbasids suddenly put forward their claims and proclaimed Abu’l-‘Abbas al-Saffah caliph at Kufa. Marwan II was killed in 750.
It can be said that the intellectual and moral unification of the Muslim world, accomplished by the ‘Abbasids, had already begun under the Umayyads.
The Umayyads were the self-described heirs to the orthodox or patriarchal caliphate which existed from 632 to 661. From their capital in Damascus, the Umayyads extended the borders of the Islamic empire to India in the east and to Spain in the west. The early Umayyad caliphs were adept military tacticians and effective bureaucrats; they also left a rich legacy in poetry, Greek to Arabic translations, and architectural monuments.
The Umayyads never solved the problem of how to deal with non-Arab converts to Islam (the mawali). The mawali, together with Arab discontents looking for a return to pristine Islam, supported the ‘Abbasid forces, who defeated the Umayyads in 750. A lone Umayyad dynast escaped to Spain and established in Spain a regional dynasty that lasted until 1031.
The Umayyad caliphs (661-750) played only a brief and rather indirect, yet nonetheless critical, role in the history of Iran and Central Asia. Generally, the Umayyad central government was more interested in affairs affecting the western portions of the empire (wars with Byzantium and expansion around the Mediterranean basin) than with the east. After consolidting the eastern areas conquered earlier by the Arabs, the Umayyads tended to entrust matters in Iraq, and its Iranian dependencies to governors and sub-governors, often chosen from prominent Arab families settled in the respective provinces, who then followed whatever policy they felt best.
One of the most effective and important of these Umayyad officials in Iran was the governor of Khurasan, Qutaiba ibn Muslim al-Bahili (705-715), a protégé of the powerful Umayyad governor of Iraq, al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf. Qutaiba effectively suppressed a revolt, led by Nizak (or Tirek) of Badghis, of the semi-autonomous princes of Tocharistan (on the eastern borders of Khurasan); conquered the city of Bukhara and its environs; invaded and subdued Sogdiana, taking its most important city, Samarkand; conquered Khwarazm and settled a colony of Arabs there; and mounted expeditions against several remote principalities along the Syr Darya as far as what is now Tashkent. All this military activity served a number of useful functions. It diverted the energies of the Arab tribesmen from factional struggles against each other into the new campaigns, thus encouraging cooperation between the Arab and Iranian military elites; it brought in much-needed booty to bolster the local economy; it provided a vehicle for re-organizing and stabilizing the provincial government; and it checked, at least temporarily, the growing power of the Turkic tribes on the far eastern borders of the Islamic empire. Unfortunately, this energetic governor fell from favor with the central government after the death of al-Hajjaj and was killed by his own former soldiers when he attempted to revolt. (Interestingly, the Sogdians he had conquered remained loyal to him to the very end.)
After Qutaiba’s death, the authority of the Umayyads in the east deteriorated steadily. The reasons for this are complex but can be reduced to three main points. First, the Umayyads failed to find a permanent means of containing the rivalries, antagonisms, and competition for political and material rewards among their Arab tribal supporters in the provinces. They were thus ultimately confronted with a bitter intra-Arab civil war in Khurasan. Second, they based their power more and more on a narrow elite of Arab tribal warriors, many of them newcomers to the east, and the indigenous Iranian military aristocracy. This alienated the non-Arab peasantry, their village leaders, and the semi-assimilated Arab colonists who had become landowners and resided permanently in the region. Third, as both Arabs and Iranians came to think more of their common Islamic, rather than their separate ethnic, identity, the Umayyads were unable to find any convincing justification for the legitimacy of their rule that could appeal to the religious sentiments of the pious-minded Muslim masses in the cities and countryside. These sources of discontent in Khurasan were shrewdly manipulated by various opponents of Umayyad rule, especially by partisans of the Abbasid family who engineered a revolutionary conspiracy in Khurasan that toppled the authority of their governor in that province and subsequently brought down the dynasty itself.
The Umayyad Caliphs at Damascus were:
* Muawiyah I ibn Abi Sufyan, 661–680
* Yazid I ibn Muawiyah, 680–683
* Muawiyah II ibn Yazid, 683–684
* Marwan I ibn al-Ḥakam, 684–685
* Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, 685–705
* al-Walid I ibn Abd al-Malik, 705–715
* Suleiman ibn Abd al-Malik, 715–717
* Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, 717–720
* Yazid II ibn Abd al-Malik, 720–724
* Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik, 724–743
* al-Walid II ibn Yazid II, 743–744
* Yazid III ibn al-Walid, 744
* Ibrahim ibn al-Walid, 744
* Marwan II ibn Muhammad (ruled from Harran in the Jazira) 744–750
The Umayyad Emirs of Córdoba were:
* Abd ar-Rahman I, 756–788
* Hisham I, 788–796
* al-Hakam I, 796–822
* Abd ar-Rahman II, 822–852
* Muhammad I of Córdoba, 852-886
* Al-Mundhir, 886 - 888
* Abdallah ibn Muhammad, 888–912
* Abd ar-Rahman III, 912–929
The Umayyad Caliphs at Córdoba were:
* Abd ar-Rahman III, as caliph, 929–961
* Al-Hakam II, 961–976
* Hisham II, 976–1008
* Mohammed II, 1008–1009
* Suleiman, 1009–1010
* Hisham II, restored, 1010–1012
* Suleiman, restored, 1012–1017
* Abd ar-Rahman IV, 1021–1022
* Abd ar-Rahman V, 1022–1023
* Muhammad III, 1023–1024
* Hisham III, 1027–1031
Banu Umayya see Umayyads
Umayyads of Spain
Umayyads of Spain. Dynasty (r. 756-1031) on the Iberian peninsula with Cordoba as their capital. ‘Abd al-Rahman I al-Dakhil, “the Immigrant,” was recognized as amir in 756 in Cordoba, the traditional residence of the Arab governors. The main task of all his successors was to be the pacification of the new amirate. The Maliki law school was introduced at the end of the eighth century. Amir ‘Abd Allah gradually consolidated Umayyad authority. The most glorious period in the history of Muslim Spain was the reign of ‘Abd al-Rahman III.
The Spanish Umayyads were founded by Abd al-Rahman I (756-788), a grandson of the Umayyad caliph Hisham, the only survivor of the Abbasid massacre of the Umayyads (in 750), who fled to Spain and seized power there. He and his successors, Hisham I (788-796) and al-Hakam I (796-822), created a stable state structure, brought political conciliation to the country and conducted successful border battles against the Christians in the north. The first cultural flowering came under Abd al-Rahman II (r. 822-852) through the patronage of literature and science and the refinement of customs and traditions. Al-Andalus became the center of western Islam. Next, central power was relinquished in favor of regional government, which led to the successes of the Christian Reconquista. After government was re-centralized and the political zenith achieved under the rule of Abd al-Rahman III (r. 912-961), who assumed the title of caliph in 929 and restored sovereignty in Spain. He was able to expand the Umayyad territory towards the Fatimids in North Africa (becoming overlord of Fez and Mauritania in 932) and ruled over the Idrisid state. Al-Andalus experienced another period of cultural creativity under his learned son, al-Hakam II (r. 961-976), who was able to continue his father’s policy. During the subsequent decline of the caliph’s office under his young son Hisham II (r. 976-1013), power was transferred to the victorious Amirids under the regent at al-Mansur (r. 978-1002). The period after 1009 saw civil war and anarchy in the warring between different pretenders and also against the Hammudids of Malaga. In 1031, the last caliph, Hisham III (r. 1027-1031), resigned his position and al-Andalus split into taifa kingdoms.
The decline and fall of the Spanish Umayyads became evident under the successors of Hisham II. Between 1009 and 1031 no less than nine caliphs are listed, their reigns being continuously interrupted by the Hammudids of Malaga. From this time onwards civil war reigned in Cordoba and the caliphate, the Berber element playing a more and more disastrous part in the troubles. All the provinces of Muslim Spain proclaimed their independence under a Spanish, Slav or Berber chief. These rulers, known as Party Kings (in Arabic, muluk al-tawa’if), lasted until the end of the eleventh century, when the Almoravids conquered Muslim Spain.
The following is a list of the Spanish Umayyads:
756 ‘Abd al-Rahman I al-Dakhil
788 Hisham I
796 Hisham II
822 ‘Abd al-Rahman II
852 Muhammad I
886 al-Mundhir
888 ‘Abd Allah
912 ‘Abd al-Rahman III
961 al-Hakam II
976 Hisham II al-Mu’ayyad (first reign)
1009 Muhammad II al-Mahdi (first reign)
1009 Sulayman al-Musta‘in (first reign)
1010 Muhammad II al-Mahdi (second reign)
1010 Hisham II al-Mu’ayyad (second reign)
1013 Sulayman al-Musta‘in (second reign)
1016 Hammudid ‘Ali al-Nasir
1018 ‘Abd al-Rahman IV
1018 Hammudid al-Qasim al-Ma’mun (first time)
1021 Hammudid Yahya al-Mu‘tali (first time)
1022 Hammudid al-Qasim al-Ma’mun (second time)
1023 ‘Abd al-Rahman V
1024 Muhammad III
1025 Hammudid Yahya al-Mu‘tali (second time)
1027-1031 Hisham III
Muluk al-Tawa’if
Umayyads of Spain. Dynasty (r. 756-1031) on the Iberian peninsula with Cordoba as their capital. ‘Abd al-Rahman I al-Dakhil, “the Immigrant,” was recognized as amir in 756 in Cordoba, the traditional residence of the Arab governors. The main task of all his successors was to be the pacification of the new amirate. The Maliki law school was introduced at the end of the eighth century. Amir ‘Abd Allah gradually consolidated Umayyad authority. The most glorious period in the history of Muslim Spain was the reign of ‘Abd al-Rahman III.
The Spanish Umayyads were founded by Abd al-Rahman I (756-788), a grandson of the Umayyad caliph Hisham, the only survivor of the Abbasid massacre of the Umayyads (in 750), who fled to Spain and seized power there. He and his successors, Hisham I (788-796) and al-Hakam I (796-822), created a stable state structure, brought political conciliation to the country and conducted successful border battles against the Christians in the north. The first cultural flowering came under Abd al-Rahman II (r. 822-852) through the patronage of literature and science and the refinement of customs and traditions. Al-Andalus became the center of western Islam. Next, central power was relinquished in favor of regional government, which led to the successes of the Christian Reconquista. After government was re-centralized and the political zenith achieved under the rule of Abd al-Rahman III (r. 912-961), who assumed the title of caliph in 929 and restored sovereignty in Spain. He was able to expand the Umayyad territory towards the Fatimids in North Africa (becoming overlord of Fez and Mauritania in 932) and ruled over the Idrisid state. Al-Andalus experienced another period of cultural creativity under his learned son, al-Hakam II (r. 961-976), who was able to continue his father’s policy. During the subsequent decline of the caliph’s office under his young son Hisham II (r. 976-1013), power was transferred to the victorious Amirids under the regent at al-Mansur (r. 978-1002). The period after 1009 saw civil war and anarchy in the warring between different pretenders and also against the Hammudids of Malaga. In 1031, the last caliph, Hisham III (r. 1027-1031), resigned his position and al-Andalus split into taifa kingdoms.
The decline and fall of the Spanish Umayyads became evident under the successors of Hisham II. Between 1009 and 1031 no less than nine caliphs are listed, their reigns being continuously interrupted by the Hammudids of Malaga. From this time onwards civil war reigned in Cordoba and the caliphate, the Berber element playing a more and more disastrous part in the troubles. All the provinces of Muslim Spain proclaimed their independence under a Spanish, Slav or Berber chief. These rulers, known as Party Kings (in Arabic, muluk al-tawa’if), lasted until the end of the eleventh century, when the Almoravids conquered Muslim Spain.
The following is a list of the Spanish Umayyads:
756 ‘Abd al-Rahman I al-Dakhil
788 Hisham I
796 Hisham II
822 ‘Abd al-Rahman II
852 Muhammad I
886 al-Mundhir
888 ‘Abd Allah
912 ‘Abd al-Rahman III
961 al-Hakam II
976 Hisham II al-Mu’ayyad (first reign)
1009 Muhammad II al-Mahdi (first reign)
1009 Sulayman al-Musta‘in (first reign)
1010 Muhammad II al-Mahdi (second reign)
1010 Hisham II al-Mu’ayyad (second reign)
1013 Sulayman al-Musta‘in (second reign)
1016 Hammudid ‘Ali al-Nasir
1018 ‘Abd al-Rahman IV
1018 Hammudid al-Qasim al-Ma’mun (first time)
1021 Hammudid Yahya al-Mu‘tali (first time)
1022 Hammudid al-Qasim al-Ma’mun (second time)
1023 ‘Abd al-Rahman V
1024 Muhammad III
1025 Hammudid Yahya al-Mu‘tali (second time)
1027-1031 Hisham III
Muluk al-Tawa’if
Umayya ibn ‘Abd Shams
Umayya ibn ‘Abd Shams. Ancestor of the Umayyads, who were the principal clan of the Quraysh in Mecca. Like his father, Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf, he commanded the Meccan army in time of war.
Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf was a prominent member of the Quraysh (Quraish) tribe of Mecca in modern-day Saudi Arabia. The Banu Abd Shams sub-clan of the Quraish tribe and their descendants take its name from him.
Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf was, presumably, the oldest son of Abd Manaf ibn Qusai. His younger brothers were Muttalib, Nawfal and Hashim, after whom the Banu Hashim tribe was named.
The Banu Umayyad clan was named after his son Umayya ibn Abd Shams. Abd Shams was the great-great-grandfather of the sahabi Uthman ibn Affan (d.656), the third Caliph of the Muslim Ummah (community).
Umayya ibn ‘Abd Shams. Ancestor of the Umayyads, who were the principal clan of the Quraysh in Mecca. Like his father, Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf, he commanded the Meccan army in time of war.
Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf was a prominent member of the Quraysh (Quraish) tribe of Mecca in modern-day Saudi Arabia. The Banu Abd Shams sub-clan of the Quraish tribe and their descendants take its name from him.
Abd Shams ibn Abd Manaf was, presumably, the oldest son of Abd Manaf ibn Qusai. His younger brothers were Muttalib, Nawfal and Hashim, after whom the Banu Hashim tribe was named.
The Banu Umayyad clan was named after his son Umayya ibn Abd Shams. Abd Shams was the great-great-grandfather of the sahabi Uthman ibn Affan (d.656), the third Caliph of the Muslim Ummah (community).
Umayya ibn Abi’l-Salt
Umayya ibn Abi’l-Salt (d. 629). Arab poet, contemporary of the Prophet. He is said to have refused to recognize the Prophet’s claim to be God’s Messenger. There are similarities, and divergences, between the Qur’an on the one hand and the recognition of one personal God, the eschatological conceptions of the Last Judgment, Hell and Paradise, and the appeals for a moral life found in Umayya’s poems on the other. The agreement between the Qur’an and Umayya’s poems may be explained from the fact that before and at the Prophet’s time currents of thought related to the concept of monotheism had attracted wide circles, especially in Mecca and Ta’if.
Umayya ibn Abi’l-Salt (d. 629). Arab poet, contemporary of the Prophet. He is said to have refused to recognize the Prophet’s claim to be God’s Messenger. There are similarities, and divergences, between the Qur’an on the one hand and the recognition of one personal God, the eschatological conceptions of the Last Judgment, Hell and Paradise, and the appeals for a moral life found in Umayya’s poems on the other. The agreement between the Qur’an and Umayya’s poems may be explained from the fact that before and at the Prophet’s time currents of thought related to the concept of monotheism had attracted wide circles, especially in Mecca and Ta’if.
Umma
Umma (Ummah). Arabic term for the political, social, and spiritual community of Muslims. The term umma refers to the whole of the brotherhood of Muslims.
The Arabic word umma means “people” or “community.” The term umma refers to the worldwid community of Muslims. Although the Arabic word jama’a is nearly synonymous with umma, the word jama’a is now associated almost exclusively with the Sunni branch of Islam, as in the expression ahl al-sunna wa-l-jama’a, “people of the custom and the community [of Muhammad],” while the word umma, both in meaning and in usage, encompasses the entire Muslim community, Shi‘ite as well as Sunni.
Umma is both a scriptural and theological concept and a descriptive historical reality. In both senses, the term has far-reaching importance.
The earliest Islamic usage of umma occurs in the Qur’an, where it is integral to Muhammad’s revelatory dicta on prophecy. Each community is defined by the presence in its midst of a prophetic or apostolic figure, whose function is to declare the divine intent for the community to which he has been sent {see Sura 6:42, 10:48, etc.}. While many of the prophets, including Muhammad, were not accepted without resistance, hostility, and often violent opposition to their teaching, it is they alone who provide the standard by which their respective communities will ultimately be judged on the Day of Reckoning.
The Qur’an extolls Muhammad as God’s chosen apostle to the Arabs; at the same time, it alludes to the intrinsic unity of all humanity as a single community {see Sura 10:19, 11:118}. The potential recovery of unitary identity is possible through common adherence to a revealed book (kitab). All People of the Book (ahl al-kitab), therefore, are esteemed because of their book, however much they may have reviled their respective prophets or distorted the true content of prophetic discourse. Muhammad is viewed as the final prophet, to whom was revealed a book without error or contradiction, the Qur’an. From a
Muslim perspective, the Qur’an surpassed all other books and Muhammad’s prophecy was the culmination of all prophecy. Nevertheless, the subsequent evolution of protected peoples in the expanding Muslim world partially derives from the Qur’anic appeal to the original social unity of mankind.
The notion of umma or community was variously interpreted by the Muslim rulers who succeeded Muhammad and tried to apply his revelatory utterances to changing circumstances. The decisive norm was established under the second Caliph, ‘Umar. At ‘Umar’s direction, a divan or register was compiled. Excluding Jews and Christians, the divan ranked members of Muhammad’s community by a strict chronological standard: the date of their profession of loyalty (bai’at) to the Prophet. Highest on the list were the Meccans who had been senior companions of Muhammad. Next were the loyal helper families of Medina, followed by later Meccan converts to Islam, and then Arab tribes, according to the date of their leaders’ profession of Islam. The Prophet’s wives and family were alos accorded a special albeit imprecise place of respect.
‘Umar’s divan was never abrogated, but it was challenged by some and ignored by others. Shi’ite Muslims, who recognize no legitimate successor to Muhammad before Ali, the fourth caliph, claim for themselves a relationship of supreme intimacy to Muhammad through Ali, the Prophet’s closest male relative among the sahaba -- the companions to the Prophet. Shi‘ites reject ‘Umar’s divan, along with ‘Umar. By contrast, the mawali, or clients to the Arabs in lands conquered beyond the peninsula, at first paired their own social ranking to an Arab tribe under the Umayyads, but then gradually came to seek an independent, regional identity under the ‘Abbasids and subsequent dynasties.
The proliferation of regional ruling groups under the later ‘Abbasids, the emergence of three major, often competing medieval Islamic empires, and finally the development of a series of Muslim nation-states in the present century -- all seem to undermine the validity of umma as a workable concern vital to the world view of Muslim peoples. Yet the ideal persists; its tenacity should not be minimized or disregarded because of historical circumstances, many of them beyond the control of Muslim leaders. The pan-Islamic movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and the current widespread revival of Islamic loyalties indicate that umma as a vision of religious solidarity continues to inspire Muslims when they react to threats -- whether perceived as Western, colonialist, secular, modernist, or communist -- against the traditional norms and values of Islam.
At the present time, the demographic profile of Islam is more non-Arab than Arab, more Asian and African than Middle Eastern. The total number of Muslims worldwide is not less than 650 million and perhaps as high as one billion. There are few authoritative sources on demographic statistics, in large part because few Muslim countries conduct a periodic census with the persistent attention to detail that characterizes the census process in Western Europe and the United States.
Today it is necessary to discard the common assumption that Islam is an ethnically Arab, regionally Middle Eastern religion. Muslims do face an Arabian city, Mecca, when they pray daily; they do believe in an Arabian prophet of the Quraysh tribe, Muhammad; and they do accord a unique role to Arabic as the language of the Qur’an and ritual prayer. However, Islam itself is a transregional, multilinguistic, polyethnic, culturally varied community. Muslims bow to Mecca from many directions of the planet Earth.
Umma is the denotation for the community of Muslims, that is, the totatlity of all Muslims. The term comes from a word that simply means “people.” In the Qur’an, the word is used in several senses, but it always indicates a group of people that are a part of a divine plan and salvation. There is even an example of the word being used for an individual, Abraham (Sura 16:120).
Umma when used for a group is often to be understood as confined by ethnicity or linguistics. However, in the Qur’an, this situation was not original:
Once the community of men was one; then they disagreed; if it was not for the word that had come from the Lord, their disagreements would have been settled {Sura 10:20}.
It appears that in the early days of Islam, umma was used for the population of Mecca, but with the development of Islam, the umma of Muhammad changed to become believers, and therefore excluded Meccans that had not converted. The umma term has without being a central theologifcal concept, been crucial to the Muslim understanding of unity.
Umma is an Arabic word meaning "community" or "nation". It is commonly used to mean either the collective nation of states, or (in the context of pan-Arabism) the whole Arab world. In the context of Islam, the word umma is used to mean the diaspora or "Community of the Believers" (ummat al-mu'minin), and thus the whole Muslim world.
The phrase Umma Wahida in the Qur'an (the "One Community") refers to all of the Islamic world unified. The Quran says: “You [Muslims] are the best nation brought out for Mankind, commanding what is righteous (Ma'ruf - lit. "recognized [as good]") and forbidding what is wrong (Munkar - lit. "unrecognized [as good]")....” [3:110].
On the other hand, in Arabic Umma can also be used in the more Western sense of nation, for example: Al-Umma Al-Muttahida, the United Nations.
The Constitution of Medina, an early document said to have been negotiated by Muhammad in 622 with the leading clans of Medina, explicitly refers to Jewish and pagan citizens of Medina as members of the Umma.
The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is the main organization representing the whole Muslim Umma.
Ummah see Umma
People see Umma
Community see Umma
The notion of umma or community was variously interpreted by the Muslim rulers who succeeded Muhammad and tried to apply his revelatory utterances to changing circumstances. The decisive norm was established under the second Caliph, ‘Umar. At ‘Umar’s direction, a divan or register was compiled. Excluding Jews and Christians, the divan ranked members of Muhammad’s community by a strict chronological standard: the date of their profession of loyalty (bai’at) to the Prophet. Highest on the list were the Meccans who had been senior companions of Muhammad. Next were the loyal helper families of Medina, followed by later Meccan converts to Islam, and then Arab tribes, according to the date of their leaders’ profession of Islam. The Prophet’s wives and family were alos accorded a special albeit imprecise place of respect.
‘Umar’s divan was never abrogated, but it was challenged by some and ignored by others. Shi’ite Muslims, who recognize no legitimate successor to Muhammad before Ali, the fourth caliph, claim for themselves a relationship of supreme intimacy to Muhammad through Ali, the Prophet’s closest male relative among the sahaba -- the companions to the Prophet. Shi‘ites reject ‘Umar’s divan, along with ‘Umar. By contrast, the mawali, or clients to the Arabs in lands conquered beyond the peninsula, at first paired their own social ranking to an Arab tribe under the Umayyads, but then gradually came to seek an independent, regional identity under the ‘Abbasids and subsequent dynasties.
The proliferation of regional ruling groups under the later ‘Abbasids, the emergence of three major, often competing medieval Islamic empires, and finally the development of a series of Muslim nation-states in the present century -- all seem to undermine the validity of umma as a workable concern vital to the world view of Muslim peoples. Yet the ideal persists; its tenacity should not be minimized or disregarded because of historical circumstances, many of them beyond the control of Muslim leaders. The pan-Islamic movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and the current widespread revival of Islamic loyalties indicate that umma as a vision of religious solidarity continues to inspire Muslims when they react to threats -- whether perceived as Western, colonialist, secular, modernist, or communist -- against the traditional norms and values of Islam.
At the present time, the demographic profile of Islam is more non-Arab than Arab, more Asian and African than Middle Eastern. The total number of Muslims worldwide is not less than 650 million and perhaps as high as one billion. There are few authoritative sources on demographic statistics, in large part because few Muslim countries conduct a periodic census with the persistent attention to detail that characterizes the census process in Western Europe and the United States.
Today it is necessary to discard the common assumption that Islam is an ethnically Arab, regionally Middle Eastern religion. Muslims do face an Arabian city, Mecca, when they pray daily; they do believe in an Arabian prophet of the Quraysh tribe, Muhammad; and they do accord a unique role to Arabic as the language of the Qur’an and ritual prayer. However, Islam itself is a transregional, multilinguistic, polyethnic, culturally varied community. Muslims bow to Mecca from many directions of the planet Earth.
Umma is the denotation for the community of Muslims, that is, the totatlity of all Muslims. The term comes from a word that simply means “people.” In the Qur’an, the word is used in several senses, but it always indicates a group of people that are a part of a divine plan and salvation. There is even an example of the word being used for an individual, Abraham (Sura 16:120).
Umma when used for a group is often to be understood as confined by ethnicity or linguistics. However, in the Qur’an, this situation was not original:
Once the community of men was one; then they disagreed; if it was not for the word that had come from the Lord, their disagreements would have been settled {Sura 10:20}.
It appears that in the early days of Islam, umma was used for the population of Mecca, but with the development of Islam, the umma of Muhammad changed to become believers, and therefore excluded Meccans that had not converted. The umma term has without being a central theologifcal concept, been crucial to the Muslim understanding of unity.
Umma is an Arabic word meaning "community" or "nation". It is commonly used to mean either the collective nation of states, or (in the context of pan-Arabism) the whole Arab world. In the context of Islam, the word umma is used to mean the diaspora or "Community of the Believers" (ummat al-mu'minin), and thus the whole Muslim world.
The phrase Umma Wahida in the Qur'an (the "One Community") refers to all of the Islamic world unified. The Quran says: “You [Muslims] are the best nation brought out for Mankind, commanding what is righteous (Ma'ruf - lit. "recognized [as good]") and forbidding what is wrong (Munkar - lit. "unrecognized [as good]")....” [3:110].
On the other hand, in Arabic Umma can also be used in the more Western sense of nation, for example: Al-Umma Al-Muttahida, the United Nations.
The Constitution of Medina, an early document said to have been negotiated by Muhammad in 622 with the leading clans of Medina, explicitly refers to Jewish and pagan citizens of Medina as members of the Umma.
The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is the main organization representing the whole Muslim Umma.
Ummah see Umma
People see Umma
Community see Umma
No comments:
Post a Comment