Fourth Fitna
Fourth Fitna | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
"The victory of Maʿmun over Amin". Folio from a manuscript of Nigaristan, Iran, probably Shiraz, dated 1573–74. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
Belligerents | ||||||||
al-Amin's forces | al-Ma'mun's forces | Local rulers & rebel leaders | ||||||
Commanders and leaders | ||||||||
|
|
The Fourth Fitna or Great Abbasid Civil War
Al-Ma'mun chose to remain in Khurasan, however, rather than coming to the capital. This allowed the power vacuum which the civil war had fostered in the Caliphate's provinces to grow, and several local rulers sprang up in
Historians have interpreted the conflict variously; in the words of the Iranologist Elton L. Daniel, it has been regarded as "a conflict over the succession between a rather incompetent, besotted al-Amin and his shrewdly competent brother al-Ma'mun; as the product of harem intrigues; as an extension of the personal rivalry between the ministers al-Fadl b. Rabi and al-Fadl b. Sahl; or as a struggle between Arabs and Persians for the control of the government".[2]
Background
The origins of the civil war lie in the succession arrangements of
While al-Ma'mun's origin was less prestigious than the purely Arab al-Amin, his ties to Khurasan and the
In 802, Harun and the most powerful officials of the Abbasid government made the
Almost immediately after it returned to Baghdad, in January 803, the Abbasid court witnessed the abrupt fall of the Barmakid family from power. On the one hand, this decision may reflect the fact that the Barmakids may have become indeed too powerful for the Caliph's liking, but its timing suggests that it was tied to the succession issue as well: with al-Amin siding with the abnaʾ and al-Ma'mun with the Barmakids, and the two camps becoming more estranged every day, if al-Amin was to have a chance to succeed, the power of the Barmakids had to be broken.[4][13][14] Indeed, the years after the fall of the Barmakids saw an increasing centralization of the administration and the concomitant rise of the influence of the abnaʾ, many of whom were now dispatched to take up positions as provincial governors and bring these provinces under closer control from Baghdad.[14]
This led to unrest in the provinces, especially Khurasan, where, according to
Civil war between al-Amin and al-Ma'mun, 809–813
Upon Harun's death, al-Amin ascended the throne in Baghdad, where his popularity was great, while al-Ma'mun remained at Marv, from where he planned to campaign against the remaining rebels. However, al-Amin recalled the army and treasury from the east, leaving al-Ma'mun with little in the way of military forces. It was in this time that al-Ma'mun came to rely upon his wazir, the former Barmakid protégé al-Fadl ibn Sahl, who began to implement a policy of conciliation and cooperation with the local elites, whose autonomy and privileges were guaranteed.[1][4] The covenant of 802 however soon began to fall apart over Baghdad's centralizing ambitions and the dispute over the status of Khurasan: the abnaʾ, led by Ali ibn Isa, whom Harun had imprisoned but who was now set free and appointed head of the Caliph's bodyguard, were joined by other influential officials, chief amongst them al-Fadl ibn al-Rabi, in demanding that Khurasan and its revenue return to the direct control of the central government, even if that meant breaking the stipulations of the Mecca agreement.[1][20][21]
Some modern scholars have tried to interpret the conflict between the two brothers as a confrontation between the Arab and Iranian elements of the caliphate, represented by the two contenders' mothers.[22] It is true that the Iranian-dominated East generally backed al-Ma'mun, but neither was al-Amin a conscious champion of "Arabism",[22] nor was the support for al-Ma'mun the result of his Iranian origin, although his supporters did make propaganda among the local population for the "son of their sister". Al-Ma'mun enjoyed the support of the local elites of Khurasan mainly because they saw in him a champion of their newly won autonomy, and because he himself assiduously cultivated that support. Later, during the war, the prospect of his victory also offered the Khurasanis the promise of a yet more privileged position in the new regime.[23] However, the conflict was first and foremost a dynastic dispute, with al-Amin attempting to institute a direct patrilineal succession. In this he did nothing but follow the footsteps of his predecessors since al-Mansur, all of whom struggled against the claims of brothers or cousins. Harun al-Rashid himself was imprisoned during the brief reign of his elder brother al-Hadi (r. 785–786).[24] Given to indolence and lacking any political ability himself, al-Amin entrusted this project to al-Fadl ibn al-Rabi, who is generally portrayed as the "evil genius" behind al-Amin,[22] and one of the main instigators of the conflict.[25] Very quickly, al-Amin moved to sideline the youngest brother, Qasim. Initially, Qasim was removed from his governorship of the Jazira, but soon after he was stripped altogether of his place in the succession and placed under guard at Baghdad.[4][26] It was only because al-Ma'mun resided far from the Caliph's immediate area of control that he escaped sharing this fate.[24]
The rift between the two camps manifested in 810, when al-Amin added his own son, Musa, to the line of succession.[24] Al-Amin then sent a delegation to Marv, asking al-Ma'mun to return to Baghdad. After al-Ma'mun, fearing for his safety, refused, al-Amin began to interfere with his brother's domain: he protested al-Ma'mun's pardon to Ibn al-Layth after his surrender and asked for tribute from the governors of the western provinces of Khurasan as a sign of submission. He then demanded of his brother the cession of the western regions of Khurasan, the admission of caliphal tax and postal agents into the province, and the forwarding of Khurasan's revenue to Baghdad.[1][24][27] Al-Ma'mun, who could not rely on large military forces and whose position was consequently weak, was at first inclined to accede to his brother's demands, but al-Fadl ibn Sahl dissuaded him from this course and encouraged him to seek support among the native population of Khurasan, who also opposed control by the caliphal court.[24][28]
Al-Ma'mun, who was already favourably regarded after the excesses of Ali ibn Isa, consciously set about to cultivate the support of the local population, reducing taxes, dispensing justice in person, conceding privileges to the native princes, and demonstratively evoking episodes from the beginnings of the Abbasid movement in the province. He now became a "political magnet for Iranian sympathisers" (El-Hibri) refused to cede his province or return to Baghdad, and began to gather around him those dissatisfied with Baghdad's centralizing policies or who had simply been left out of the share of spoils and power after the Abbasid Revolution.[29][30]
Under the influence of their respective chief ministers, al-Amin and al-Ma'mun took steps that further polarized the political climate and made the breach irreparable. After al-Ma'mun symbolically removed al-Amin's name from his coins and from the
Despite the reservations of some of his senior ministers and governors, two months later, in January 811, al-Amin formally began the civil war when he appointed Ali ibn Isa governor of Khurasan, placed him at the head of an unusually large army of 40,000 men, drawn from the abnaʾ, and sent him to depose al-Ma'mun. When Ali ibn Isa set out for Khurasan, he reportedly took along a set of silver chains with which to bind al-Ma'mun and carry him back to Baghdad.
Tahir's unexpected victory was decisive: al-Ma'mun's position was secured, while his main opponents, the abnaʾ, lost men, prestige and their most dynamic leader.[34] Tahir now advanced westwards, defeated another abnaʾ army of 20,000 under Abd al-Rahman ibn Jabala after a series of hard-fought engagements near Hamadan, and reached Hulwan by winter.[25][34][35] Al-Amin now desperately tried to bolster his forces by alliances with Arab tribes, notably the Banu Shayban of Jazira and the Qays of Syria. The veteran Abd al-Malik ibn Salih was sent to Syria to mobilize its troops along with Ali ibn Isa's son, Husayn. However, al-Amin's efforts failed due to the long-standing intertribal divisions between the Qays and the Kalb, the Syrians' reluctance to get involved in the civil war,[a] as well as the unwillingness of the abnaʾ to cooperate with the Arab tribes and to make political concessions to them.[25][34] These failed efforts to secure Arab tribal support backfired on al-Amin, as the abnaʾ began to doubt whether their interests were best served by him.[34] In March 812, Husayn ibn Ali led a short-lived coup against al-Amin in Baghdad, proclaiming al-Ma'mun as the rightful Caliph, until a counter-coup, led by other factions within the abnaʾ, restored al-Amin to the throne. Fadl ibn al-Rabi, however, one of the main instigators of the war, concluded that al-Amin's case was lost and resigned from his court offices.[25] At about the same time, al-Ma'mun was officially proclaimed caliph, while Fadl ibn Sahl acquired the unique title of Dhu 'l-Ri'asatayn ("he of the two headships"), signifying his control over both civil and military administration.[25]
In spring 812, Tahir, reinforced with more troops under
The historian
Sahlid dominance and reaction, 813–819
Nevertheless, the regicide soured al-Ma'mun's victory. Tahir was soon transferred out of the public eye to an unimportant post in Raqqa, but his deed lastingly tarnished the prestige and image of the Abbasid dynasty.[31][41] According to Elton Daniel, "It shattered the sacrosanct aura which had surrounded the person of the Abbasid caliphs; For the first time, an Abbasid ruler had been humiliated and put to death by rebellious subjects".[42] As al-Ma'mun remained in Marv and made no signs of returning to the caliphal capital, a wave of Arab antipathy towards al-Ma'mun and his "Persian" supporters came to the fore in the western regions of the Caliphate, particularly in Baghdad and surroundings, which feared being degraded to a mere province. This was furthered when the new Caliph entrusted the governance of the state to Fadl ibn Sahl, who intended to permanently move the Muslim world's centre of power eastwards to Khurasan, where he and his circle could control the reins of power to the exclusion of other groups.[42][43][44] Fadl was also responsible for side-lining many other supporters of al-Ma'mun; thus, when Harthama ibn A'yan went to Marv to inform al-Ma'mun of the real situation in the west, the Sahlids turned the Caliph against him and he was executed on charges of treason in June 816. In response, Harthama's son Hatim led a short-lived revolt in Armenia.[45][46]
The result of these policies was that revolts and local power struggles erupted across the Caliphate, with only Khurasan and the frontier districts with the Byzantine Empire exempt from this turmoil.
In 816, to bolster his flagging prestige, al-Ma'mun assumed the title "God's Caliph". Taking note of the widespread Alid support in his western provinces, al-Ma'mun not only spared the lives of the various Alid anti-caliphs, but on 24 March 817 also named the Alid
Ibrahim moved to secure control of Iraq, but although he captured Kufa, Hasan ibn Sahl, who had made
In the meantime, back in Baghdad, Ibrahim faced desertions, rebellions and conspiracies, one of which involved his half-brother al-Mansur. Hasan ibn Sahl was able to use this turmoil and advance north, capturing Mada'in. As the months passed, discontent in Baghdad grew. Ibrahim's supporters, including Fadl ibn al-Rabi, began abandoning him, and in April and July 819 there was a plot to take Ibrahim captive and surrender him to al-Ma'mun's forces. Narrowly escaping from this conspiracy, Ibrahim abandoned the throne and went into hiding, opening the path for al-Ma'mun to reclaim Baghdad.[52] On 17 August 819, al-Ma'mun entered Baghdad without resistance, and the political turmoil quickly subsided.[43][50][51] Al-Ma'mun now set about to reconcile himself with the opposition: he rescinded the Alid succession, restored black as the dynastic colour, sent Hasan ibn Sahl into retirement, and recalled Tahir from his exile in Raqqa. Al-Ma'mun did however retain the title of imam, which became part of the standard caliphal titulature.[51][53]
During the 812–813 siege of Baghdad, Tahir had established close ties with the abnaʾ, which now proved useful in smoothing their acceptance of al-Ma'mun. Tahir was further rewarded with the governorship of Khurasan in September 821, and when he died in October 822, he was succeeded by his son,
Reunification and pacification of the Caliphate, 820–837
At the time al-Ma'mun entered Baghdad, the western provinces of the Caliphate had slipped away from effective Abbasid control, with local rulers claiming various degrees of autonomy from the central government. Egypt had become divided between two bitterly hostile factions, one under
To face these insurgencies, al-Ma'mun turned to another of Tahir's sons,
Elsewhere, however, the process of consolidation was harder, or failed completely: Aghlabid-controlled Ifriqiya was confirmed in its autonomous status, effectively slipping entirely from Abbasid control, while in Adharbayjan, al-Ma'mun's general Isa ibn Abi Khalid re-established control over the various local Muslim lords in the cities, but was unable to suppress the Khurramite revolt. Expeditions were sent against the Khurramites under
Aftermath and impact
The long civil war shattered the social and political order of the early Abbasid state, and a new system began to emerge under al-Ma'mun, which would characterize the middle period of the Abbasid Caliphate. The most tangible change was in the elites who supported the new regime: the abnaʾ, the old Arab families and the members of the Abbasid dynasty itself lost their positions in the administrative and military machinery, and with them their influence and power.
At the same time, the willingness of al-Ma'mun and his successors to embrace the non-Arab populations of the Caliphate, especially in the Iranian East, as well as to entrust the governance of these provinces to local dynasties with considerable autonomy, helped to end a long series of religiously-motivated rebellions and reconciled these populations to Islam: the rate of conversion during al-Ma'mun's reign increased markedly, and that was the time when most of the local princely families of the Iranian lands finally became Muslims. As El-Hibri comments, "in time this development represented a prelude to the emergence of autonomous provincial dynasties in the east, which would relate to the caliphal centre in nominal terms of loyalty only".[60][69]
Notes
^ a: At the outbreak of the civil war, large parts of Syria threw off allegiance to the Abbasids. The governor in Damascus, the Abbasid prince Sulayman ibn Abi Ja'far, was expelled by pro-Umayyad forces with particular backing from the Kalb tribe. A descendant of the Umayyad caliph Mu'awiya I, Abu al-Umaytir al-Sufyani, was proclaimed caliph in Damascus in 811 and gained recognition in Homs and other parts of Syria.[70] He was less well-received by the Kalb's longtime rivals, the Qays, who mobilized against Abu al-Umaytir and the Kalb under the pro-Abbasid tribal chief, Ibn Bayhas al-Kilabi.[71][72] The latter toppled the Umayyad government in Damascus in 813 and was recognized as governor by al-Ma'mun. Ibn Bayhas ruled semi-independently, even minting his own coins. He remained in office until being dismissed in the mid-820s by al-Ma'mun's viceroy over Syria and the Jazira, Abd Allah ibn Tahir ibn al-Husayn.[73]
^ b: The relationship between the Abbasids and the Alids was troubled and underwent many changes. The Alids, claiming descent from Muhammad, had been the focal point of several failed revolts directed against the Umayyads–whose regime was widely regarded as oppressive and more concerned with the worldly aspects of the caliphate than the teachings of Islam–inspired by the belief that only a "chosen one from the Family of Muhammad" (al-ridha min Al Muhammad) would have the divine guidance necessary to rule according to the Quran and the Sunnah and create a truly Islamic government that would bring justice to the Muslim community. However, it was the Abbasid family, who like the Alids formed part of the Banu Hashim clan and hence could lay claim to be members of the wider "Family of the Prophet", who successfully seized the Caliphate.[74][75] Following the Abbasid Revolution, the Abbasids tried to secure Alid support or at least acquiescence through salaries and honours at court, but some, chiefly the Zaydi and Hasanid branches of the Alids, continued to reject them as usurpers. Thereafter, periods of conciliatory efforts alternated with periods of suppression by the caliphs, provoking Alid uprisings which were followed in turn by large-scale persecutions of the Alids and their supporters.[76][77]
References
- ^ a b c d Kennedy 2004, p. 147.
- ^ Daniel 1979, p. 17.
- ^ a b c d Kennedy 2004, p. 142.
- ^ a b c d e f g Rekaya 1991, p. 331.
- ^ a b El-Hibri 2010, p. 282.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, p. 301.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, p. 274.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 133–134.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, p. 135.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, pp. 281–282.
- ^ Daniel 1979, pp. 175–176.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, pp. 282–283.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 142–143.
- ^ a b c El-Hibri 2010, p. 283.
- ^ Daniel 1979, p. 168.
- ^ Daniel 1979, pp. 169–171.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, p. 144.
- ^ Daniel 1979, pp. 171–175.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 144–145.
- ^ Daniel 1979, p. 176.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 331–332.
- ^ a b c Gabrieli 1960, p. 438.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 331, 333.
- ^ a b c d e f Rekaya 1991, p. 332.
- ^ a b c d e f g Rekaya 1991, p. 333.
- ^ Fishbein 1992, pp. 20, 22, 27.
- ^ Daniel 1979, pp. 176–177.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 147–148.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, p. 284.
- ^ Daniel 1979, pp. 177–178.
- ^ a b c d El-Hibri 2010, p. 285.
- ^ a b c Kennedy 2004, p. 148.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 332–333.
- ^ a b c d e f Kennedy 2004, p. 149.
- ^ Daniel 1979, pp. 179–180.
- ^ a b c d Rekaya 1991, p. 334.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 149–150.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 333–334.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, p. 150.
- ^ Gabrieli 1960, pp. 437–438.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 150, 151.
- ^ a b c Daniel 1979, p. 180.
- ^ a b c d El-Hibri 2010, p. 286.
- ^ a b Kennedy 2004, pp. 150–151.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, p. 151.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 334–335.
- ^ a b c Kennedy 2004, p. 152.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 334, 335.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 151–153.
- ^ a b c d e Rekaya 1991, p. 335.
- ^ a b c Kennedy 2004, p. 153.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 335–336.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, p. 336.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, pp. 288–289.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 153–154, 159–160.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, pp. 286–287.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 154–155.
- ^ a b c El-Hibri 2010, p. 287.
- ^ a b c Kennedy 2004, p. 154.
- ^ a b c d e Rekaya 1991, p. 337.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, pp. 287–288.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 153–154, 165.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 337–338.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, p. 290.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, p. 155.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, pp. 288–290.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 156–166.
- ^ Rekaya 1991, pp. 336–337.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, p. 295.
- ^ Madelung 2000, pp. 327, 331, 333–334.
- ^ Cobb 2001, pp. 60–61.
- ^ Madelung 2000, p. 334.
- ^ Madelung 2000, pp. 339–340.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 123–127.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, pp. 269–271.
- ^ Kennedy 2004, pp. 130–131, 136, 139, 141.
- ^ El-Hibri 2010, p. 272.
Sources
- Cobb, Paul M. (2001). White Banners: Contention in 'Abbasid Syria, 750–880. SUNY Press. ISBN 978-0791448809.
- ISBN 0-88297-025-9.
- El-Hibri, Tayeb (2010). "The empire in Iraq, 763–861". In ISBN 978-0-521-83823-8.
- Fishbein, Michael, ed. (1992). The History of al-Ṭabarī, Volume XXXI: The War Between Brothers: The Caliphate of Muḥammad al-Amīn, A.D. 809–813/A.H. 193–198. SUNY Series in Near Eastern Studies. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press. ISBN 978-0-7914-1085-1.
- Gabrieli, F. (1960). "al-Amīn". In OCLC 495469456.
- ISBN 978-0-582-40525-7.
- Madelung, Wilferd (2000). "Abūʾl-Amayṭar al-Sufyānī". Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam. 24: 327–341.
- Rekaya, M. (1991). "al-Maʾmūn". In ISBN 978-90-04-08112-3.
Further reading
- Amabe, Fukuzo (1995). The Emergence of the ʿAbbāsid Autocracy: The Abbasid Army, Khurāsān and Adharbayjān. Kyoto: Kyoto University Press. ISBN 9784876980246.
- El-Hibri, Tayeb (1999). Reinterpreting Islamic Historiography: Hārūn al-Rashı̄d and the Narrative of the ʿAbbāsid Caliphate. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-65023-2.
- Yücesoy, Hayrettin (2002). "Between Nationalism and the Social Sciences: A History of Modern Scholarship on the Abbasid Civil War and the Reign of al-Ma'mun". Medieval Encounters. 8: 56–78. .
- Yücesoy, Hayrettin (2009). Messianic Beliefs and Imperial Politics in Medieval Islam: The ʻAbbāsid Caliphate in the Early Ninth Century. University of South Carolina Press. ISBN 9781570038198.