The Origins of the Islamic State/Part 2/Chapter 13

by Aḥmad ibn Yaḥyá al-Balādhurī

CHAPTER XIII

Cyprus

The first conquest of Cyprus. According to al-Wâḳidi and others, the first expedition against Cyprus was led in sea by Muʿâwiyah ibn-abi-Sufyân. This was the first time the Moslems sailed in the Mediterranean. Muʿâwiyah had asked ʿUmar's permission to lead a naval expedition, but ʿUmar refused.^[1] When ʿUthmân ibn-ʿAffân became caliph, Muʿâwiyah wrote again asking permission to invade Cyprus, informing him about its proximity and the ease of acquiring it. In answer to this, ʿUthmân wrote, "I have seen the answer ʿUmar gave when thou madest the request from him to lead a sea-expedition." In the year 27, Muʿâwiyah again wrote to ʿUthmân, referring to the ease with which the sea could be crossed to Cyprus. ʿUthmân wrote back this time saying, "If thou sailest with thy wife, we allow thee to do so; otherwise, not." Accordingly, Muʿâwiyah embarked from Acre with a large number of ships, accompanied by his wife Fâkhitah daughter of Ḳaraẓah^[2] ibn-ʿAbd-ʿAmr ibn-Naufal ibn-ʿAbd-Manâf ibn-Ḳuṣai. Likewise, ʿUbâdah ibn-aṣ-Ṣâmit took his wife umm-Ḥarâm of the Anṣâr, daughter of Milhan. This took place in the year 28, after the cessation of the rainy season; others say, in the year 29. When the Moslems arrived in Cyprus and landed on its shore (Cyprus being an island 80x80 parasangs), its Archon [Urkûn] demanded to make terms of capitulation, which was considered unavoidable by the people. Muʿâwiyah made terms with them on 7,200 dînârs to be paid annually by them. Similar terms had been made with them by the Greeks. Thus the people of Cyprus pay two tributes. It was made a condition that the Moslems would not prevent them from paying the tribute to the Greeks; on the other hand the Moslems made it a condition that they would not fight^[3] those who may come after them to subjugate the Cyprians, and that the Cyprians would keep the Moslems informed regarding the movement of their enemy—the Greeks. Thus when the Moslems used to undertake an expedition by sea, they did not molest the Cyprians. They were not supported by the Cyprians; nor did the Cyprians support any one against them.

The second invasion by Muʿâwiyah. In the year 32, however, the Cyprians offered ships as an aid to the Greeks in an expedition in the sea. Consequently, Muʿâwiyah invaded them in the year 33 with 500 ships. He took Cyprus by force, slaughtering and taking prisoners. He then confirmed them in the terms that were previously made, and sent to the island 12,000 men of those whose names were recorded in the register [Ar. dîwân]^[4] and erected mosques in it. Moreover, Muʿâwiyah transplanted from Baʿlabakk a group of men, and erected a city on the island, whose inhabitants were assigned special stipends until the death of Muʿâwiyah. His son Yazîd, who succeeded him, sent the troops back and ordered the city destroyed.

According to other reports, the second invasion of Cyprus by Muʿâwiyah was carried out in the year 35.

Why Yazîd withdrew the troops. Muḥammad ibn-Muṣaffa-l-Ḥimṣi from al-Walîd:—Yazîd ibn-Muʿâwiyah was offered a large and considerable sum of money as bribe; and that was why he withdrew the troops from Cyprus, upon which the Cyprians destroyed their city and Mosques.

Umm-Ḥarâm dies in Cyprus. Muḥammad ibn-Saʿd from ʿAbd-as-Salâm ibn-Mûsa's father:—When Cyprus was invaded for the first time, umm-Ḥarâm, daughter of Milḥân, sailed with her husband, ʿUbâdah ibn-aṣ-Ṣâmit. On their arrival in Cyprus, she disembarked and was offered a mule to ride upon. As she was riding, the mule stumbled; and she was killed. Her tomb in Cyprus is called "the Tomb of the Righteous Woman."^[5]

Some of those who took part in the campaign. Among those who joined the campaign with Muʿâwiyah were the following:—Abu-Aiyûb Khâlid ibn-Zaid ibn-Kulaib al-Anṣâri, abu-ad-Dardâʾ, abu-Dharr al-Ghifâri, ʿUbâdah ibn-aṣ-Ṣâmit, Faḍâlah ibn-ʿUbaid al-Anṣâri, ʿUmair ibn-Saʿd ibn-ʿUbaid al-Anṣâri, Wâthilah ibn-al-Asḳaʿ al-Kinâni, ʿAbdallâh ibn-Bishr al-Mâzini, Shaddâd ibn-Aus ibn-Thâbit (a nephew of Ḥassân ibn-Thâbit), al-Miḳdâd, Kaʿb al-Ḥabr ibn-Mâtiʿ^[6] and Jubair ibn-Nufair al-Ḥaḍrami.

Muʿâwiyah makes permanent peace. Hishâm ibn-ʿAmmâr ad-Dimashḳi from Ṣafwân ibn-ʿAmr:—Muʿâwiyah ibn-abi-Sufyân personally carried out the invasion of Cyprus and was accompanied by his wife. Its conquest, effected by Allah, was complete; and the booty he brought to the Moslems was great. The raids of the Moslems were repeated until Muʿâwiyah in his caliphate concluded permanent terms with the Cyprians to the effect that they pay 7,000 dînârs and give advice and warnings to the Moslems regarding their enemy, the Greeks. This or something like it was agreed upon.

The Cyprians expelled and returned. Al-Walîd ibn-Yazîd ibn-ʿAbd-al-Malik expelled many of the Cyprians to Syria, because of a charge of suspicion brought against them. When the Moslems disapproved of the act, Yazîd ibn-al-Walîd ibn-ʿAbd-al-Malik returned them to their home. In the caliphate of ar-Rashîd, an invasion was led against them by Ḥumaid ibn-Maʿyûf al-Hamdâni because of a rebellion they had started; and many were carried off as prisoners. Later they behaved properly towards the Moslems; and, by ar-Rashîd's orders, their prisoners were returned.

The tax increased. Muḥammad ibn-Saʿd from al-Wâḳidi:—The terms between Muʿâwiyah and the Cyprians were kept in force until the time of ʿAbd-al-Malik ibn-Marwân who added 1,000 dînârs to their tax. That was the case until the caliphate of ʿUmar ibn-ʿAbd-al-ʿAzîz who cancelled the addition. When Hishâm ibn-ʿAbd-al-Malik, however, came to power, he restored it; and it was kept until the caliphate of abu-Jaʿfar al-Manṣûr, who expressed himself as follows: "We shall, above everyone else, do justice to them, and not enrich ourselves by oppressing them." Accordingly, he restored the terms made by Muʿâwiyah.

ʿAbd-al-Malik wants to annul the treaty. The following was communicated to me by certain Syrian scholars and abu-ʿUbaid al-Ḳâsim ibn-Sallâm:—During the governorship of ʿAbd-al-Malik ibn-Ṣâliḥ ibn-ʿAli ibn-ʿAbdallâh ibn-ʿAbbâs over the frontier cities [Ar. thughûr], the Cyprians started a rebellion; and he, therefore, desired to break the covenant made with them. The canonists were numerous, among whom were the following whose opinions he sought: al-Laith ibn-Saʿd, Mâlik ibn-Anas, Sufyân ibn-ʿUyainah, Mûsa ibn-Aʿyan, Ismâʿil ibn-ʿAiyâsh, Yaḥya ibn-Ḥamzah, abu-Isḥâḳ al-Fazâri, and Makhlad ibn-al-Ḥusain. They all answered him.

The opinion of al-Laith. The following is a quotation from the letter of al-Laith ibn-Saʿd: "The Cyprians are being constantly charged by us with infidelity to Moslems and loyalty to Allah's enemies, the Greeks. Allah himself has said:^[7] 'Or if thou fear treachery from any people, cast off their treaty in like manner.' He did not say, 'cast not off their treaty until thou art sure of their treachery.' I, therefore, consider it best that thou castest off their treaty and givest them a respite of one year for enforcing the law. Those of them who desire to go and settle in a Moslem land and become dhimmis, paying the kharâj, may do so; those who desire to emigrate to the land of the Greeks may do so; and those who desire to remain in Cyprus, with the understanding they are hostile, may do so and be considered an enemy to be fought and attacked. To give them a respite of one year would be enough to refute any protest they may make, and to prove our loyalty to the covenant."

The opinion of Mâlik. The following statement was written by Mâlik ibn-Anas:—"Our peace with the Cyprians is of old standing and carefully observed [? Ar. mutaẓâhar] by the governors placed over them, because they considered the terms a humiliation and belittlement to the Cyprians, and a source of strength to the Moslems, in view of the tax paid to them and the chance they had of attacking their enemy. Yet I know of no governor who broke their terms or expelled them from their city. I, therefore, consider it best to hesitate in breaking their covenant and casting off their treaty until the evidence [of disloyalty] is well established against them, for Allah says:^[8] 'Observe, therefore, the engagement with them through the whole time of their treaty.' If, after that, they do not behave properly and abandon their deceit, and thou art convinced of their perfidy, then thou mayest attack them. In that case, the attack would be justified and would be crowned with success; and they would suffer humiliation and disgrace, by Allah's will."

The opinion of Sufyân ibn-ʿUyainah. This is what Sufyân ibn-ʿUyainah wrote: "We know of no one who made a covenant with the Prophet and violated it, without having the Prophet consider it legal to put him to death, except the people of Makkah. Their case was a favor on the part of the Prophet. Their violation consisted in rendering aid to their allies against the Khuzâʿah, the Prophet's allies. One of the terms stipulated against the people of Najrân was not to practise usury; but when they did practise it, ʿUmar decreed that they be expelled. Thus by 'the consensus of opinion' [Ar. ijmâʿ], he who violates a covenant forfeits the right of being entitled to security."

The opinion of Mûsa ibn-Aʿyan. Mûsa ibn-Aʿyan wrote:—"Similar cases took place in the past, but in each case the governors would grant a period of respite; and so far as I know, none of the early men ever broke a covenant with the Cyprians or any other people. It may be that the common people and the mass among the Cyprians had no hand in what their leaders did. I, therefore, consider it best to abide by the covenant and fulfil the conditions thereof, in spite of what they have done. I have heard al-Auzâʿi say regarding the case of some, who, after making terms with the Moslems, conveyed information about their secret things and pointed them out to the 'unbelievers': 'If they are dhimmis, they have thereby violated their covenant and forfeited their claim on security, making it right for the governor to kill or crucify them, if he so desires; but if they had been taken by capitulation and are not entitled to the Moslem's security, then the governor would cast off their treaty, for Allah loveth not the machinations of the deceivers.'^[9]"

Ismâʿîl ibn-Aiyâsh's opinion. The following is what Ismâʿîl ibn-ʿAiyâsh wrote: "The people of Cyprus are humiliated and oppressed and they are subjugated, together with their wives, by the Greeks. It is therefore proper for us to defend and protect them. In the covenant of the people of Taflîs, Ḥabîb ibn-Maslamah wrote, 'In case something should arise to divert the attention of the Moslems from you and some enemy should subjugate you, that would not be a violation of your covenant, so long as ye keep loyal to the Moslems.' I, therefore, consider it best that they be left on their covenant and the security promised them, especially because when al-Walîd ibn-Yazîd expelled them to Syria, the Moslems considered the act outrageous, and the canonists disapproved of it; so much so that when Yazîd ibn-al-Walîd ibn-ʿAbd-al-Malik came to power, he restored them to Cyprus, which act was approved of by the Moslems and considered just."

Yaḥya ibn-Ḥamzah's opinion. The following was the statement issued by Yaḥya ibn-Ḥamzah: "The case of Cyprus is parallel to that of ʿArbassûs^[10] in which it has a good example and a precedent to be followed. This is the case of ʿArbassûs: ʿUmair ibn-Saʿd once came to ʿUmar ibn-al-Khaṭṭâb saying, 'here lies between us and the Greeks a city called ʿArbassûs, whose people disclose to our enemy our secrets, but do not disclose to us our enemy's.' ʿUmar replied, 'When thou goest there, propose to give them for every ewe they possess two; for every cow, two; and for everything, two. If they consent, give that to them, expel them from the city and raze it to the ground. But if they refuse, then cast off their treaty to them and give them one year at the expiration of which thou mayest destroy the city.' ʿUmair went to the city; and its people refused the offer. He, therefore, gave them one year at the expiration of which he destroyed it. The people of ʿArbassûs had a covenant similar to that of the people of Cyprus. To leave the Cyprians on the terms made with them and to have the Moslems use in their own cause what they receive [as tax] from the Cyprians is preferable. All holders of covenant, for the sake of whom the Moslems are not supposed to fight and on whom the Moslem regulations are not binding, are not dhimmis but 'people of tribute'^[11] to be spared so long as they are worthy, to be treated according to the covenant so long as they abide by it and consent to it, and to be forgiven so long as they pay their dues. It is reported that Muʿâdh ibn-Jabal always hated to have the enemy capitulate on definite terms unless the Moslems were by the force of circumstances compelled to make terms, because no one could tell whether such capitulation would be of value and strength for the Moslems."

The opinion of abu-Isḥâḳ and Makhlad. Abu-Isḥâḳ al-Fazâri and Makhlad ibn-al-Ḥusain wrote as follows:—"We can find nothing more similar to the case of Cyprus than the case of ʿArbassûs and the decision of ʿUmar ibn-al-Khaṭṭâb regarding it. ʿUmar gave them two alternatives to choose from: a double fold of what they possessed and the evacuation of the city, or a respite of one year after casting off their treaty. Having rejected the former proposition, they were given one year at the end of which the city was destroyed. Al-Auzâʿi repeated a tradition to the effect that when Cyprus was conquered, the status quo of the people was kept, and terms were made on 14,000 dînârs of which 7,000 should go to the Moslems and 7,000 to the Greeks; and it was stipulated that the Cyprians should not disclose to the Greeks the condition of the Moslems.^[12] Al-Auzâʿi used to say, 'The Cyprians did not abide by the terms they made with us.' But we consider them as 'people bound to us by covenant,' whose terms of peace involve rights to them and obligations on them, and the violation of which is legal only if they do some thing that shows their perfidy and treachery."

Footnotes

1. Ṭabari, vol. i, pp. 2820–2821.
2. Duraid, p. 55.
3. Athîr, vol. iii, p. 74.
4. And therefore received stipends; al-Muṭarrizi, al-Mughrib, p. 187.
5. JRAS, 1897, pp. 81–101.
6. Nawâwi, p. 523; ibn-Ḳutaibah, Kitâb al-Maʿârif, p. 219.
7. Kor., 8: 60.
8. Kor., 9: 4.
9. Cf. Kor., 12: 52.
10. Yâḳût, vol. iii, p. 633.
11. Ar. ahl fidyah, who are governed by their own laws and pay something to be let alone. For fidyah see at-Tahânawi, Kashf Iṣṭilâḥât al-Funûn, vol. ii, p. 1157.
12. Evidently there is a mistake in the text. The negative particle "la" is superfluous.