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 Islām 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 Islām 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 Islām 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 destruction of the

366

Occupation of Alexandria

[640-643 Roman power the influence of the widespread organisation 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 civilisation 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 Barka.1 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 immediately after the occupation of Alexandria. That took place as early 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 Islām, although retaining in the first instance administrative independence. 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 (Ifrikiya). 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 ‘Uķba pushed forward as far as Fezzan (Zawīla) and another Amir of the name of Busr penetrated to the Oasis of Jufra (Waddān). This latter incident took place while 'Amr was besieging Tripolis, which he finally occupied at least temporarily. At the Nafūsa 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.

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

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 ‘Aķūba, 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 ‘Abdallāh therefore allowed himself to be persuaded to retire on payment of an enormous sum of money, stated to have been 300 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 Jalūlā 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.

368

Policy of Dinār

[670-682

Shortly afterwards 'Ukba ibn Nafi' appears to have become the successor 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 Başra and Kūfa, 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 Dinār Abu-l-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 Islām 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 Dinār 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, Dinār 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 Yazid 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 Dinār's policy, for the powerful Kusaila incited

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 Dīnār, 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 Dinār 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 Tahūdha, 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 confirms 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 Dinār's policy. Like Dinār 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. MED. H. VOL. II. CH. XII.

24