What did 'Islamic' Spain give us? 8th-14th century.

In 2010, during a speech about the natural environment and Islam, Prince Charles heaped praise on Islamic history. In particular, he made a link between Europe and the orient, claiming that ‘many of the traits on which modern Europe prides itself came from Muslim Spain’. One of these traits could surprisingly to some, be religious tolerance. For example, while in Western Europe, Jews especially were a marginalised minority being compared to a ‘cancer attacking a Christian baby’ and therefore being expelled from many parts of Europe, a flourishing Muslim Spain became home to jews, Christians and Muslims who all lived together in relative harmony, in Convivencia. However, it was not just tolerance and liberal values that were transferred from Southern to Northern Europe via the bridge that was Andalucia. In fact, many common commodities whose origins are neglected today, took their root in the East, some of which I shall list below.

transmission of knowledge

1)      Knowledge – In Islamic teaching, knowledge that will advance and enrich humanity Is valued intensely. Therefore under the Muslim rule of Spain, scholars recovered the ‘lost’ Greek knowledge of such philosophers such as Aristotle and translated old works of wisdom in Toledan language labs where members of all 3 religions worked together. This resulted in advancements in Geography (pilgrimage and travel is/was very important to Muslims), law, philosophy and most obviously – science. *Search Ibn Al Haytham. Not only did Muslims translate and collect this knowledge to be passed onto the west but they also created new knowledge e.g. Averroas, a prominent Muslim Scholar added commentaries to the works of Aristotle which were then used by later figures such as Aquinas. Books were also sent from Baghdad to Spain!

water wheels aided gardens and fruits

2)      Water wheels. Whilst the Romans boasted the technology of Aqueducts, the Moors *Muslims of Spain, improved upon this and created the water wheel which aided agricultural cultivation and the growth of fruits. Moreover these ‘celestial spheres’ as one contemporary described them also helped provide running warm water into most Spanish homes, something which was a luxury in western Europe and wasn’t seen till centuries after.

3)      Fruit – citrus fruit was also brought into Spain by Muslim leaders who enjoyed the smell and used them to decorate their gardens. Such fruits such as lemons, orange, pomegranates and commodities such as artichoke, ginger and saffron further improved the health of Spaniards in an age where bubonic plague was devouring the rest of Europe.

Ziryab

4)      Health and hygiene – one cultural icon who greatly improved health and hygiene was Ziryab who introduced toothpaste/hairstyles from Baghdad (cultural capital of the world at that point). Perfume was another innovation as was shampoo made of salt and rose water, crystal glasses, certain clothing associated with seasons etc.

5)      Streetlights – The streetlights in Cordoba were described by one poet ‘as a string of pearls’ adorning the night sky.

6)      Music – did you know that the mournful melodies in the background of Flamenco music have Arabic influences? The guitar also had it’s origins in Moorish Spain.

7)      Medicine – Moorish physicians between the 9^th and 12^th century came up with instruments to cut veins and also instruments to aid in childbirth. They further came up with treatments for eye diseases which were used right up until world war one. Avicenna also came up with the medical textbook of ‘cannon’ which was used in Europe for 500yrs! Ibn Haytham – ‘the father of optics’ was the first to explain how light is projected to the back of the eye. He further came up with the experimental

approach to science moving science from it’s pure basis to a practical version we know today.

Those who claim that Islam has given ‘nothing valuable’ to the world can be shown the above. In fact It was because of Islams command to ‘seek knowledge’ that such innovations *especially in regards to knowledge’ were possible. Islamic Spain was arguably a bridge which connected this knowledge and innovations to the rest of Europe.

**I’ve had to try my hardest to condense this post to be brief. However, I’ve written a full 5000+ document on Moorish Spain and what it gave to the world where everything I’ve written here + much more is explained in significantly more depth– this was written a couple of years back so if you would like to read it please email me on: alysha2912@gmail.com and I will be more than happy to send you a copy. 

The Islamic viewpoint on leadership & government

Following on from the theme of my previous couple of posts, I yesterday discovered this piece of writing which lays down the Islamic viewpoint on leadership and government. In an age where many sections of society feel alienated from politics and find it an unrepresentative institution, It's interesting to see how leadership and government was envisaged in the early centuries such as the suggestions set down by the Caliph - Ali who was Caliph between the 656 - 661AD. These suggestions are set out below. 

Seperation of religion and politics

Please note that this information is copyright free and was taken from the website of prominent author/philosopher: Ahmed Hulusi, a highly acclaimed Islamic author of philosophy and religion. His website can be found here and offers free literature: http://www.ahmedhulusi.org/en/


Manifest religious tolerance: Amongst your subjects there are two kinds of people: those who have the same religion as you [and] are brothers to you, and those who have religions other than yours, [who] are human beings like you. Men of either category suffer from the same weaknesses and disabilities that human beings are inclined to; they commit sins, indulge in vices either intentionally or foolishly and unintentionally without realizing the enormity of their deeds. Let your mercy and compassion come to their rescue and help in the same way and to the same extent that you expect Allah to show mercy and forgiveness to you

Equity is best: A policy which is based on equity will be largely appreciated. Remember that the displeasure of common men, the have-nots and the depressed persons overbalances the approval of important persons, while the displeasure of a few big people will be excused... if the general public and the masses of your subjects are happy with you.

Ensure an honest judiciary

The rich always want more: They are the people who will be the worst drag upon you during your moments of peace and happiness, and the least useful to you during your hours of need and adversity. They hate justice the most. They will keep demanding more and more out of State resources and will seldom be satisfied with what they receive and will never be obliged for the favor shown to them if their demands are justifiably refused.

A healthy society is interdependent: The army and the common men who pay taxes are two important classes, but in a well faring state their well-being cannot be guaranteed without proper functioning and preservation of the other classes, the judges and magistrates, the secretaries of the State and the officers of various departments who collect various revenues, maintain law and order as well as preserve peace and amity among the diverse classes of the society. They also guard the rights and privileges of the citizens and look to the performance of various duties by individuals and classes. And the prosperity of this whole set-up depends upon the traders and industrialists. They act as a medium between the consumers and suppliers. They collect the requirements of society. They exert to provide goods.... Then comes the class of the poor and the disabled persons. It is absolutely necessary that they should be looked after, helped and provided.... at least the minimum necessities for well-being and contented living....

Ensure an honest judiciary: You must select people of excellent character and high caliber with meritorious records.... When they realize that they have committed a mistake in judgement, they should not insist on it by trying to justify it.... they should not be corrupt, covetous or greedy. They should not be satisfied with ordinary enquiry or scrutiny of a case but...must attach the greatest importance to reasoning, arguments and proofs. They should not get tired of lengthy discussions and arguments.They must exhibit patience and perseverance... and when truth is revealed to them they must pass their judgements.... These appointments must be made... without any kind of favoritism being shown or influence being accepted; otherwise tyranny, corruption and misrule will reign.... Let the judiciary be above every kind of executive pressure or influence, above fear or favour, intrigue or corruption.

Poverty leads to ruination: If a country is prosperous and if its people are well-to-do, then it will happily and willingly bear any burden. The poverty of the people is the actual cause of the devastation and ruination of a country and the main cause of the poverty of the people is the desire of its ruler and officers to amass wealth and possessions whether by fair or foul means.

poverty leads to ruination

Corruption undermines national well-being: I want to advise you about your businessmen and industrialists. Treat them well.... They are the sources of wealth to the country.... One more thing.... you must keep an eye over their activities as well. You know that they are usually stingy misers, intensely self-centered and selfish, suffering from the obsession of grasping and accumulating wealth. They often hoard their goods to get more profit out of them by creating scarcity and by indulging in black-marketing.

Stay in touch with the people: You must take care not to cut yourself off from the public. Do not place a curtain of false prestige between you and those over whom you rule. Such pretension and shows of pomp and pride are in reality manifestations of inferiority complex and vanity. The result of such an attitude is that you remain ignorant of the conditions of your subjects and of the actual cases of the events occurring in the State.

Peace brings prosperity: If your enemy invites you to a peace treaty...., never refuse to accept such an offer, because peace will bring rest and comfort to your armies, will relieve you of anxieties and worries, and will bring prosperity and affluence to your people. But even after such treaties be very careful of the enemies and do not place too much confidence in their promises, because they often resort to peace treaties to deceive and delude you and take advantage of your negligence, carelessness and trust. At the same time, be very careful never to break your promise with your enemy; never forsake the protection or support that you have offered to him, never go back upon your word and never violate the terms of the treaty.

History reveals all: Do not reserve for yourself anything which is a common property of all and in which others have equal rights. Do not close your eyes from glaring malpractice of officers, miscarriage of justice and misuse of rights, because you will be held responsible for the wrong thus done to others. In the near future your wrong practices and maladministration will be exposed and you will be held responsible and punished for the wrong done to the helpless and oppressed people.

ALI IBN ABOE TALIB

Source: http://www.ahmedhulusi.org/en/#ixzz3cC5B8Gei
Follow us: @AhmedHulusi on Twitter

Why did the early Islamic empire spread so quickly?

The spread of Islam is often seen as one that was initiated 'by the sword'. However, in this summary I will try and examine both external and internal factors within Islam which contributed to it's rise and spread between the 7th and 12th century, particularly with an emphasis on the early conquest of Byzantine territories. 

Byzantine theological differences

From one point of view, it could be argued that Islam spread not necessarily because of it's theological attraction or by the sword, but because of the social benefits it brought. For example, in a pre-Islamic world where tribal kinship was paramount and subsequent blood feuds characterised society, Islam brought a new way of life one which gave women the right to own property and divorce and one which brought a just rule of law. It was a way of life which did away with the concept of tribes and instead put emphasis on a community of believers who were monotheists (Ummah). Not only were tribal loyalties destroyed, but Islam and it's Qu'ran, unlike the preceding religions of Christianity and Judaism, claimed to be the culmination of God's message and offered order and stability in life with it's 5 pillars. This was theologically attractive to Christians especially, who were perhaps disillusioned with the theological division in the church between monophysites and dyophysites, which was concerned with the nature of the divinity of Jesus Christ. On the other hand Islam offered stability and a

Byzantine inspired Islamic Dome of the Rock and Calligraphy

revitalised form of monotheism, It claimed to be merely a successor to Christianity and Judaism. This fresh version of monotheism was best manifested in the construction of the Dome of the rock which was created using shimmering golden Byzantine mosaics and Orthodox Greek architectural style but was essentially new with it's calligraphic inscriptions of 'la ilaha ilala' - there is no god but god, and other inscriptions which claimed Jesus as being not the son of god, but merely a messenger. Therefore this newness and dynamism in itself could be one factor which encouraged the spread of Islam. 

Byzantine and Islamic coins

A further social reason to explain the spread of Islam would be that it offered significantly more tolerance to Christian sects such as the Copts and the Armenians who were routinely persecuted by the ruling Greek Byzantine Christians. For example, in return for a tax (Jizya) non Muslims being 'ahl-al dhimma' - (people of the book) including christians/Jews and in some cases Zoroastrians were allowed to live peacefully, practice their own religion and abide by their own laws. In fact, during the early centuries of Islam, the Umayyads continued using the Greek language in their administrative tasks and even used similar templates of Byzantine coins. However it could be said that this wasn't a show of tolerance, it was merely a strategic act which would ensure the stability of the territory that the Muslims acquired, until a later time where they could change the language and coinage etc, which was indeed done under Caliph Abd Al Malik. The concept of tolerance however was best encapsulated in Islamic Spain of the 8th- 14th century where multicultural interaction aided in the flourishing of a civillisation as well as in the Ottoman empire. However it could be argued that this 'tolerance' wasn't total equality between religions as Muslims still gained most of  the top beurocratic positions in administration. However this only provided impetus for the subject Christians and Jews to convert, hence allowing the spread of Islam. 

It could further be argued that it was tolerance which enticed people to the religion and therefore allowed for it's spread. This would contradict the common misconception that Islam was 'spread by the sword', which is inherently wrong due to the fact that in the Qu'ran itself it is stated that 'there is no compulsion in religion'. Moreover, the first dynasty of Caliphs - the Umayyads, who presided over the taking over of Byzantine territories were not all too interested in converting their christian subjects as they were a vital supply of financial income via the poll tax that non Muslims were obliged to pay. Therefore conversions to Islam would stop this stream of capital. Moreover, historical evidence has shown there to be very little case to argue that there were forced conversions, hence enhancing the need for a comprehensive study on the spread of Islam. 

Furthermore it could be said that Islam spread so rapidly purely by chance as potential rival powers at the time were weak. For example, the dominant empires of the Byzantines and the Persian Sassanids were locked in constant warfare with each other and were also engaged in proxy wars using the Gassanids and the Lakhmids as there client states. Therefore, they themselves were weak not only militarily but theologically. Byzantium was also suffering from a lack of morale in the sense that the heart of the empire- Constantinople had been targeted by both Persians, Slavs and Muslims. The Byzantines as a result began to question the pillars of their theology, for example, was decorating churches with icons permissable? Was this why the Byzantines were becoming weaker as the Muslims were growing stronger? Did God displease of icons and the growing ritualisation of orthodox Christianity in which people were mixing the ink of Bible verses into water to drink? The Muslims prohibited iconography? These were all questions that Emperor Leo III asked himself, before unleashing the iconoclasm in which he destroyed many churches and persecuted many christians who were undertaking such rituals. This shows the internal and theological weakness of the Byzantine empire at the time of Islamic expansion. It could therefore be said that Islam didn't spread so quickly primarily because of the religion itself but because of the weaknesses of it's once powerful neighbours. 

To conclude,  although Islam spread quickly because it was indeed theologically vibrant, new and a break from warring Christianity and the fact it offered social and economic opportunites for

advancement. Ultimately it was the weakness of the surrounding Byzantine and Sassanid empires which gave Islam the impetus to spread as Islamic rulers were able to apply their new principles of tolerance and community which appealed to persecuted minorities. Moreover, the efficiency of early Islamic empires also played a part in it's spread as well as the fact that in some ways early muslims merely built upon the existing structures of the Byzantine and Sassanid empires. It could be said that this helped in the spread of the Islamic empire as by not causing a sudden change to the status quo, the Umayyads and others were able to slowly adapt their society, avoid revolts and eventually expand the Islamic empire from Spain to China, Therfore ultimately it could be said that the spread of Islam was due to a combination of external weaknesses and the strength of Islamic principles to capitalise on those weaknesses.

A historical perspective of the Islamic 'schism'.

Unlike Christianity where different denominations are defined by separate theological principles, divisions in the religion of Islam, surprisingly to some, have been established because of disagreements not totally of faith but of politics. This is especially relevant in the split between Sunni and Shia Muslims. which this post will mostly address. Although there are certain theological differences between the two sects, this post is mostly here to inform anyone interested in the basic historical background to the resulting divisions which have plagued modern day sectarian violence in the Middle East.

calligraphic representation of Husayn at Hagia Sophia-istanbul

To begin, it's probably a good idea to start with a small overview of the family dynamics of the prophet Muhammed, as essentially the split between Sunni and Shia originated with the question: who should be the successor of Islam after the death of the Prophet? One contender of this position was Abu Bakr who was the father in law of Muhammed. The second contender was Ali the son in law of the prophet, who was married to Muhammed's daughter Fatimah and this marriage between Ali and Fatimah produced two sons- Husayn and Hasan.
Unlike in many western kingdoms at the time, where succession was usually hereditary e.g. would pass to the son of the ruler upon the death of the ruler; in Islam there was no set rule for succession. This is because it has to be remembered that Islam was still a relatively young movement at the time and there was no instructions in the Qu'ran on how do deal with succession. Indeed was a succession even permitted? It is also worth noting that no one was expecting Muhammed to pass away so soon, so the debate of who would bare the mantle of Islam after his death was not one that had been contemplated. Moreover, in relation to the common western notion of hereditary succession, the prophet himself although having 6 children (all with his first wife Khadijah who had since passed away), had zero male heirs which didn't make the situation much simpler.

As you can imagine, once the prophet died, there was plenty of dicussion over who should succeed him, which is where lies the main divisive point between Sunni's and Shias. Shia's maintain to this day that according to Hadiths, Muhammed had requested the presence of Ali on his death bed because he wanted him to succeed him after his death. Essentially Shias believe that the successor of Islam should have came from within the Prophets own bloodline as Ali was also the prophets cousin. Some also maintain that Ali coming to power was thwarted by the prophet's last wife - Aisha (daughter of Abu Bakr). The issue with Ali for the rest of the community was that he wasn't proven in battle nor charismatic. Eventually Ali didn't initially become Caliph and instead many of the prophets companions rallied around Abu Bakr to become the next leader of the Islamic community.
This leads us to the Sunni belief that the leadership should have been egalitarian and elected from the prophet's close companions. Eventually Abu Bakr go
t elected to become the successor of Muhammed, however inevitably this was met with some opposition in the form of Muhammed's influential Banu Hashim clan who wanted someone from their own tribe to become the leader, and indeed Fatimah tried to rally supporters away from Abu Bakr and towards her own husband Ali- a member of the Banu Hashim clan. Soon after, Fatimah dies and Ali ends up allying himself with Abu Bakr, perhaps in the hope that he would still gain some influence in the Islamic community? Or perhaps out of sincere loyalty to the prophet and Islam.

After 2 years of consolidating a growing empire and aiding with the collecting of the Qu'ran, Abu Bakr passes away and leaves the caliphate to Umar, another of the prophet's companions who had facilitated his rise to power. Umar further expanded the empire, taking Jerusalem and much of the Persian empire. it could be said that it was under the rule of Umar that the Islamic empire took shape, whereas under the prophet it had merely been a small community in Medina and Mecca.
Umar was killed and the Caliph to succeed him was Uthman who was also a close companion of the prophet. Again, it is important to note that whilst all this was going on and caliphs were being appointed, Ali still had not been given his chance of becoming caliph, and this to Shia's was an external conspiracy in which Ali had been prevented from becoming caliph by other companions of the prophet.

Umayyad mosque

Uthman's rule was generally considered corrupt as he gave ruling positions to his relatives and he was considered by some impious due to the actions of some of his relatives. (more of which can be heard on the podcast below). While this is going on, the prophets wife Aisha becomes concerned and politically active. Seeing herself as 'the mother of believers' she believes that she knows what is best for the Muslim community, more than Uthman. Uthman is eventually killed by discontented Egyptians who then elect Ali as the next caliph! However, the issue that arises here is that Aisha is not happy with Ali as she believes that he should reprimand those who killed Uthman, however it's difficult for him to do that as it is them who have elected him as Caliph. Aisha therefore beca
me active in rallying support against Ali. Ali further loses two more crucial supporters in the form of Zubayr and Talha who were also companions of Muhammed-perhaps they wanted political power for themselves as they were Aisha's cousins? What we do know is that they defect to Aisha's side.
So by now divisions between the Ali camp and that of Aisha have deepened and a war is fought between the two at a battle in Basra - titled 'the battle of the camel' because in the middle of it all Aisha sits on a camel and directs her side in the war - a totally unheard of role for a female in early Arabian society. Aisha surrenders in battle to Ali who is quite respectful towards her and he in fact remains caliph.

Later in 657 there is another civil war and Mu'awiya (a relative of the deceased caliph Uthman) wants to avenge his relatives death. This avenging death principle was pretty common in Arab society. Mu'awiya tries to reclaim the caliphate as he believes Ali is unjustly there, especially as he didn't condemn the death of Uthman. As Ali tries to negotiate, a small group of his followers reject his leadership and they are called the 'Kharijites'='those who walked out' and they are a distinct sect altogether. They then end up killing Ali whilst he is praying during a bloody war in 658. So it could be said the aspect which evokes so much emotion in the Shia camp is the fact that the one they assumed to be leader doesn't really get a stable period of time to present his leadership - he constantly appeared to be at war.

After the death of Ali, Mu'awiya becomes Caliph, and there starts the Umayyad era of Islamic history

Umayyad's renovate the dome of the rock and al Aqsa

in which the great Umayyad mosque of Damascus was created. It was also under this family that the dome of the rock was redecorated with Islamic inscriptions and a golden age in Al-Andalus (Spain) was established. In the meantime, Ali still has two sons. Hasan, one of the sons makes a deal with mu'awiyya and concedes defeat- he is then killed by his wife who supports Mu'awiya. Husayn, the second son, later tries to stand up against Yazid, a later Umayyad caliph. Husayn consequently leaves medina for mecca. On the way, people from Kufa ask for his help against what they deem an unjust regime. At Karbala, Husayn's caravan is intercepted and he and his family are beheaded by the Umayyads at the battle of Karbala in 6
80. This understandably caused outrage amongst the Shia community as they had now lost all descendants of Ali and indeed the event is remembered even today every year on day called 'Ashura'. The event is also poignant as it spurred a lot of other shia movements to take hold. Therefore the end result is not a question of w
ho will become the next successor but it is about the Ali dynasty versus other Islamic leaders.

Sources: For more in depth info listen to: http://15minutehistory.org/2014/10/29/episode-57-the-succession-to-muhammad/AND http://15minutehistory.org/2014/11/12/episode-58-islams-first-civil-war/
READ - lost islamic history by Firas Alkhateeb