Introduction To Thomas Arnolds Preaching

Introduction
to
Thomas Arnold’s Preaching of Islam
by
Dr. Sabrina Lei

Introduction to Thomas Arnold’s Preaching of Islam
by
Dr. Sabrina Lei
An Objective Look at the Distortions of the History of Islam and the

Orientalist Discourse
One of the significant events in the history of the world, which still baffles
historians and the other students of the growth of human civilisation, is the
rapid spread of Islam in its early history, without any historical parallel,
before or after. Within a century after the death of the Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him), Islam, which was still confined more or less to the
Arabian Penin- sula at his death, established an empire that stretched from
the distant Spain to the boarders of China. As Islam advanced, kingdom after
kingdom collapsed and became part of the nascent, but strong Muslim
Empire. At another level, countless number of communities also embraced
Islam. Obviously historians and philosophers needed an explanation to
unlock this phenomenal advancement of a religion, both at religious and
political levels, whose original bearers were disorganised Bedouins and a
small town people of Arabia, who were, until the emergence of Islam, at
each other’s throats. However, unfortunately, an influential approach to
scholarship called Orientalism, that still shapes the Western approach to
Islam and Muslims, explains this in terms of Islam’s violent subjugation of
the conquered people.
To put in the classical Orientalist parlance, Islam offered only two
choices, either the sword or conversion to non-Muslims, and the
Orientalists, looking retrospectively from this binary worldview at one of
the verses of the Quran, which talks about a specific historical context
existed in the light of the com- plicated situation between the Arab pagans
and early Muslim, describe it as the verse of the sword.
However, nothing is far from the truth than this portrayal of Islam as a
violent religion that carried on converting people by force. The question,
however, remains: how and when and why did such hateful vision of Islam
emerge and how is that it still persists in many circles of Western thinkers
and scholars? In fact, the Western non-Muslim scholars have themselves
documented the historical prejudices against Islam and discussed the reasons
1
for the origins of such prejudices.
1
At the core of this hostile vision lies the prejudice generated in the
Western mind during the Crusades. The peaceful and gradual spread of
Muslim faith is amply demonstrated by the history of the Christian
communities of Middle East and North Africa, and all the tales about the
forced conversions and the persecutions of the religious minorities by the
Muslim power could be referred back to the period immediately before the
Crusades, a time when the distorted images of Islam and Muslim gained
currency in the medieval West, obviously due to political and religious
reasons, and in fact, these constructions, for centuries, contributed and still
contribute to the distortion of Islamic history among the Europeans.
In fact, as Professor R.W. Southern proves in his classic study Western
Views of Islam in the Middle Ages (1962), the distorted image of Islam and
its Pro- phet were both introduced and expanded in the Western Europe
roughly at the beginning of the Crusades. In fact, at the beginning, the
medieval Church authorities needed the double justifications to preserve
the supposed unity of Christian community under the authority of the Pope,
and the misleading in- terpretation of the Islamic doctrine and history, and
thus Islam became the Other or the perceived real enemy.
About this issue Norman Daniel, in Islam and the West, writes: “Every
Chri- stian reference to lands that had once been Christian, and particularly
the Holy Land, must be understood to have been made on the assumption
that these were not lost provinces that belonged by right to the Latin Church.
Christians were still thought to be or have been a single nation which by the
rise of Islam had been robbed of a third of its provinces1”.
Pope Urban II, in the Discourse of Clermont, made an attempt to morally
justify the necessity of the First Crusade, actually, he used the concept of the
supposed unity of Christendom, when he said: “Dearest brethren, I, Urban,
invested by the permission of God with the Papal tiara and spiritual ruler
over the whole world, have come here in this great crisis to you, servants of
God, as a messenger of divine admonition”2; “You must hasten to carry aid
to your brethren dwelling in the East, who need your help, which they often
have asked.”3
Though most of the medieval prejudices against many other religious and
ethnic communities seem to have really disappeared in the Western public
space, and the studies of foreign cultures appear to have become objective
and balanced, when it comes to Islam the old prejudices still persist. In fact,
Orien- talist discourse, especially after Edward Said’s influential criticism in
4
his
5
Orientalism, though seems to have nearly discredited, still plays a crucial
role in perpetuating the demeaning portrayal of Islam and its history, has
entered a new phase in the form of Islamophobia, which is currently
increasingly visible in many Western countries, in spite of their multi
religious and multicultural public space.
T.W. Arnold and the Refined Scholarship on Islam
However, in spite of the overwhelming Orientalist discourse of power that

perpetuates the reductionist views of Islam and its history, there is another
story of a refined objective scholarship, championed by some of the eminent
Western historians like Norman Daniel, Professor R. W Southern in the
1960s, and at present, Professor Richard Bulliet of Columbia University,
Prof. John Esposito, etc. However, Prof. T. W Arnold can be considered as
one of the pioneers in this field, as he produced some of the finest and
objective works on Islam and its place in history, almost a century ago.
These works and thoughts of independent and objective scholars like
Arnold and Normal Daniel are supremely important in the current Western
space, as an extreme form of both popular and academic Orientalism is
gaining currency in the form of a virulent Islamophobia that is oriented
towards dehumanising Islam, its people and civilisation.
It is within this background that Prof Arnold’s The Preaching of Islam that
contains an objective reflection on one of the most important aspects of
Islam’s relationship with outside world, that is, the spread of its message
among the people of the world, from early the centuries of its history, to
many countries across the continents of Asia, Africa and Europe, is
presented here as a way of giving the readers a fine example for non-
partisan scholarship.
Born in London in 1864, and trained in philosophy, Arabic and Persian,
Arnold went on to become one of the most insightful and sympathetic
Western scholars of Islam in the last decade of the ninetieth and early
twentieth centuries. Arriving in India, while still in his 20s, Arnold
accepted a professorship in philosophy at the famous MAO College in
Alighar, where he worked from 1888 to 1898, teaching philosophy,
befriending and benefiting from Muslim scholars of Alighar like Shibli
6
Nomani and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. Another important phase of Arnold
academic life unfolded in Lahore where he worked
7
as the principal of the Government College, apart from teaching philosophy,
from 1898 to1904.
It was in Lahore that Arnold met, taught and philosophically mentored
Iqbal, who was then studying Philosophy, Arabic and English there, and later
he went on to become the most famous philosopher of South Asia. And, a
few years later when Iqbal went to Europe for his higher studies, Arnold
continued to guide him. The relationship between Arnold and Iqbal was
rooted in mutual respect and appreciation, or in other words, it was a
meeting between two insightful scholars representing the world of Islam
and the West, ultimately beneficial to both worlds.
Even after leaving British India, Arnold continued his engagement with the
East, working closely with Indian students in the UK. He also produced
some other important works on Islam and the Arab world. Some of them are
The Caliphate (Oxford, 1924; reprinted in London, 1965); The Encyclopedia
of Islam, as its first English editor; The Legacy of Islam (Oxford, 1931,
edited with A. Guillaume); and finally with R. A. Nicholson, he edited the
Volume of Oriental Studies Presented to Edward G. Browne (Cambridge,
1922).
As it is known from the preface of its first edition in 1896, it was in
Alighar that Arnold completed The Preaching of Islam: A History of the
Propagation of the Muslim Faith (London, 1896, republished in 1913 and
1935). Apart from the two brief notes that he wrote to thank those who
supported academically and emotionally to complete the work, Arnold
seems to have not discussed the reason for producing such a book, an
almost defence of Islam and Muslim history. However, the book speaks for it
self in the sense it was written as a powerful and academically authentic
treatise mounting a well-grounded attack on the centuries old unfavourable
projections of Islam.
Apart from his intellectual honesty, a deep awareness of Islam and
Muslims that he gained through his direct interactions with Muslims and
many of Islam’s outstanding scholars of the time in India must have
definitely contributed to the writings of the book. However, in spite of his
sympathy and appreciation of Islam and the Muslim culture, his book is
highly objective, and his opinions and conclusions are based on solid
historical proofs rooted in Christian, Jewish and Muslim historical sources
in different languages like Latin, Arabic, German, English, French, etc.
In the two comparatively small introductory chapters that look at the
8
Quranic concept of religious propagation, along with presenting the Prophet
(peace be upon him) as the first model presenter or caller to Islam, Arnold,
while stres-
9
sing the fact that though Islam can be considered a missionary religion or the
one that is interested in actively propagating its message, makes it clear that
there is no place for compulsion or forceful conversion in Islam, as clearly
underlined by the Quran and the life examples of the Prophet. After
clarifying this theoretical position of Islam, Arnold examines the history of
the peaceful spread of Islam in the territories of the Middle East, North
Africa, Spain and the Far East, China, India, etc.
Arnold’s discourse is mainly developed on two different levels. First, the
facts are presented in the form of the historical, social and political
situations of the countries conquered by Muslims, after the death of the
Prophet (peace be upon him), and within the time span of the early centuries
of the Muslim expansion into those conquered lands. Second, Arnold tries to
reconstruct the history of the diffusion of the Muslim faith in these regions,
examining the social, cultural, and theological reasons for Islam’s spread.
One of Arnold’s key arguments here is that that the military conquest and
the conversion of the population to Islam are two different historical facts
that must be kept distinct, since they happened in different times and under
different modalities and conditions. In other words, though the military
conquest of non-Muslim lands definitely brought their citizens in contact
with Islam and Muslims, conversions to Islam in those early centuries had
nothing to do with the conquest in its real sense.
Even though the Muslim conquest of the Middle East, North Africa and
Spain had been very fast, occurred from within the early decades after the
death of the Prophet to a century, the conversion of the population, living in
those territories, has been a long and gradual process, without any active in-
volvement of the political power in the process, and it was undertaken by
peaceful missionaries.
10
Syria and Palestine: Muslims and the Byzantium people
Actually, long before the Muslim conquest of the territories of the Middle
East and North Africa, the unity of the Christian community has been put in
danger by several sects which, after the Council of Calcedonia in 451 A.D.,
became independent churches with separate clergy, places of worship and
ad- ministration.
An historian describes the situation of the Christian community of that pe-
riod as follows: “The Christians of Syria, Palestine and Egypt were sadly di-
vided when Islam rose. The Christological heresies of two centuries had
filled every rank of society with division and embitterment. Religious
oppression and the civil despotism of Constantinople reaped the same
reward on the same day, and whole nations laboriously won for Christ were
for centuries lost to religion and culture4 .”
After the 451 A.D. the Christian community of the Middle East and North
Africa was divided into different churches: the Orthodox Church, the Nesto-
rian Church and the Monophysite Church. The Nestorian Church5 , after the
conversion of Nu’man, king of Hira, in the sixth century, was the spiritual
ruler of all the territories of the kingdom. The Arab population that
embraced Christianity was administrated by the Nestorian clergy and was
using Syriac as liturgical language. Later, the missionary effort of the
Nestorian Church pushed on towards south as far as Wadi l-Qura, located
at North-East of Medina, however, the city of Najran, in Arabia, was mainly
Monophysite.
The Monophysite Church6 , after the pastoral work of Ya’qub of Tella,
controlled a vast area which included Syria, Egypt and Asia Minor. Also,
some Christian communities in Persia were Monophysite, since among the
centres of Monophysite influence there were the monasteries of Mar Mattai,
Tur ‘Abdin, on the Upper Euphrates and Qun-Neshre, near Edessa.
As a deeper historical analysis proves, in several cases the Christian com-
munities of the Middle East and North Africa welcomed the Muslim army,
since they hoped to be freed from the political and religious oppression of
the Byzantine power. The Muslim government, in fact, always granted the
different Christian churches that came under its domain freedom of belief
and security for the clergy and the places of worship and at the same time
prevented them from persecuting each other.
The life of the Christian communities of the Middle East and North Africa
11
was in a condition of perpetual insecurity and precariousness. In 614 A.D.
12
Chosroes, with his Persian army, invaded Aleppo, Antioch, Damascus and
Je- rusalem. At that time the general condition of the Christian Church was
marked by decadence and mourning. The historians argue that around
90.000 people died and the places of worship were completely destroyed.
Syria went under an intensive raid and the majority of the population was
taken into captivity. In Jerusalem, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was
heavily damaged and other places of worship were completely destroyed.
Several monks and priests were massacred by the invaders7 .
The situation didn’t improve under the oppressive religious policy of the
Emperor Heraclius, who tried in vain to resolve the differences between the
Christian churches with the Monothelite heresy, which provoked only an
embitterment of the religious controversies between the different churches
and increased the episodes of mutual persecution; besides, the condition of
part of the Middle East under the Byzantine Empire was very difficult to
bear for other reasons.
For example, the population of Syria under the Byzantine rule not only
had to endure several persecutions by the Orthodox Church, but also was
oppressed by the fiscal system, which paralysed every attempt to improve
their already miserable living conditions. For all these reasons the
population preferred to remain passive, when the Muslim army invaded their
territory, hoping that their situation could improve under the Arab
domination, which appeared to be more tolerant and less oppressive. After
the Muslim conquest, in fact, the Syrian Christians could enjoy full political
and religious freedom, which was unthinkable under the Byzantine rule.
Besides, there are several historical documents that prove that the Arab in-
vasion and successive conquest were seen by the people of the Middle East
as an opportunity of getting back again their lost political and religious
freedom. In the Twelfth century the Patriarch Jacobite of Antioch, Michael
the Elder, wrote: “This is why the God of vengeance, who alone is all-
powerful, and changes the empire of mortals as He wills, giving it to
whomsoever He wills, and uplifting the humble-beholding the wickedness of
the Romans who, throughout their dominions, cruelly plundered our
churches and our monasteries and condemned us without pity, brought from
the region of the south the sons
of Ishmael, to deliver us through them from the hands of the Romans”8 .
For example, the inhabitants of Edessa closed the doors of the town in
front of the army of the Emperor Heraclius, and said to the Muslims that
13
they preferred their just government to the unjust one of the Greeks. In 637
A.D., also,
14
Damascus signed an agreement with the Arabs, and immediately after other
towns like Arethusa and Hieropolis followed the example.
There are also some historical documents relating to the behaviour of some
Arab Christians at the time of the Muslim conquest of the territories of
Middle East. It seems that, among the other causes of Muslim success, there
was also a fatalistic attitude from the clergy and some members of the
Christian communities. For example, it has been related that Cedrenus
said: “While the Church was vexed by kings and godless priests, there rose
up Amelik of the desert to chastise us for our sins”9.
An historian comments on the attitude of these Christian Arabs towards
the Muslim army: “Many of these Christian Arabs fought to the last for the
empire and the cross; others were not proof against the contagion of race and
while some threw off a faith which sat loosely upon them at best, some also
observed cautious neutrality, till they could safely range their forces on the
winning side. Still the ties of race told largely in favour of the Muslims. One
more general remark might be interesting may be pardoned. Among the
causes of Muslim success must be mentioned the strange despondency
which seized the Chri- stians. (…) Luke the traitor of Aleppo was taught by
a priest that the Saracens were destined to conquer the country. Basil, the
traitor of Tyre, who owed his defection to the teaching of the monk Bahirah,
had himself preached the gospel of Islam through the empire10.”
The condition of the Christian Churches at the time of the Muslim
invasion was very far from being characterized by unity and harmony and
most probably also the continuous disputes among the different churches
and the behaviour of the clergy created in the most sincere members of the
Christian communities a feeling of dissatisfaction and doubt, which lead
some of them to embrace Islam.
Among the Arab tribes, who converted from Christianity to Islam, it is
worth to mention: the Banu Ghassan, the Banu Tayy and the Banu Namir. In
14 A.H, when the Persian army was defeated by the Arabs, several Bedouins
tribes, who were Christian before, converted to Islam, after having supported
the Mu- slim military efforts. For example, during the Battle of the Bridge
(13 A.H.), the head of the Christian Bedouin tribe of Banu Tayy helped
Muthannah, the Muslim general11. To the Banu Tayy, soon after, joined the
Banu Namir, who lived on the borders of the Byzantine Empire. And both
the tribes decided to convert to Islam.
15
But, there are also cases of other tribes who, even when they helped
Muslims in several battles, decided to keep their faith, as happened, for
example, with the Banu Taghlib. Arnold notes that the good relations
between Bedouins of both Muslim and Christian faith were based not only
on the awareness of the same ethnic identity but also on the enemity towards
the Byzantine Empire12. However, there are several examples of Bedouin
tribes who, under the religious tolerance of Muslims, had the possibility to
keep their faith along, centuries after the Arab conquest of the territories
inhabited by them. For example, Layard, quoted also by Arnold13, reports the
existence of a settlement of Christian Arabs near Kerak, on the Black Sea.
Besides, according to the Monks of Mount Sinai, in 1700 there were still
several families of Bedouin Christians, who didn’t convert to Islam. In the
village of Quratayn, near Pal- myra, the population equally distributed
between Christians and Muslims, living in peace and harmony. Also the
Banu Gjiassan, who converted to Christianity at the end of the fourth
century, in the 1800, still were keeping their Christian faith14.
Christians under the Muslim rule were allowed to keep the ownership of
their places of worships, and in several cases also had the chance to build
new ones. For example, after the conquest of Damascus, the cathedral of
Saint James was shared between Christians and Muslims, and for 80 years,
it has been the place of worship of the believers of both the religions.
After the conquest of Antioch, the majority of the Bedouin tribes
embraced Islam, but the inhabitants of the towns preferred to keep their
Christian faith. Even in this case the churches were neither confiscated nor
destroyed, while the Christian worship was completely allowed. The
inhabitants of Hira, conquered by the Arab army on 633 A.D., also decided
to remain Christians and enjoyed for several centuries the protection of the
Muslim government15 .
All these historical facts prove that the image of the Muslim army
committed to a holy war against the infidels, to whom only the choice was
between the conversion and the death has to be interpreted as totally false.
In reality, this was the behaviour which characterized the Crusaders and
their armies, according to what Pope Urban II said in the discourse of
Clermont: “Wherefore I exhort with earnest prayer to hasten to exterminate
this vile race from the lands of your brethren and to aid the Christians in
time16 .”
“Hence it is that you murder and devour one another, that you wage war
16
and that frequently you perish by mutual wounds. Let therefore hatred
depart from among you, let your quarrels end, let war cease, and let all the
dissentions and
17
controversies slumber. Enter upon the road of the Holy Sepulchre, wrest that
land from the wicked race, and subject it to your selves17 ”.
The concept of the Holy War appears very clear in the following words of
the Pope: “Most beloved brethren, today manifest in you what the Lord says
in the Gospel: “Where two or three are gathered together in my name there I
am in the midst of them. Unless the Lord God had been present in your
minds, all of you would not have uttered the same cry. For, although the cry
was one, therefore I say to you that God, who implanted this in your breast,
has drawn it forth from you. Let this then be your battle-cry in combat,
because this world is given to you by God. When an armed attack is made
upon the enemy, let this on cry be raised by all the soldiers of God: “God
wills it! God wills it!”18
. When for the first time Muslim army entered in Jerusalem, victorious, all
the churches and monasteries were left untouched and the Christian
population didn’t suffer any pillage or acts of violence by the Muslim
soldiers. In fact the Muslim army in all its military campaign was following
the orders-also entirely based on the Sunna of the Prophet- given by Abu
Bakr, the first Muslim ruler who succeeded the Prophet, when they started
the campaign of Syria: “Be just; break not your plighted faith; mutilate
none; slay neither children, old men nor women; injure not the date palm
nor burn it with fire, nor cut down any fruit-bearing tree; slay neither flocks
nor herds nor camels, except for food; perchance you may come across men
who have retired into monasteries leave them and their work in peace; you
may eat of the food that the people of the land will bring you in their
vessels, making mention thereon of the name of God; and you will come
across people with shaven crowns, touch them only with the flat of the
sword. Go forward now in the name of God and may He protect you in
battle and pestilence19.”
The Patriarch of Jerusalem, following the example of other cities of the
Middle East already conquered, signed an agreement with the Muslims. The
pact between Umar al-Khattab, Amir al-Muminin, and the Patriarch of Jeru-
salem granted to the Christians of different confessions personal security,
free possession of their goods, of their places of worship and their religious
sym- bols. Besides, according to the conditions of the agreement, the places
of worship would never be destroyed or changed in to private houses.
Besides, the Caliph, when the Patriarch invited him to offer his prayers in
the Church of the Resurrection, refused saying that, if he accepted his
18
invitation, Muslims could have unjustly claimed that place of worship for
themselves.
19
The text of the agreement between Amir al-Muminin and the Patriarch of
Jerusalem runs as follows:“In the name of God, the Merciful, the
Compassio- nate. This is the security which Umar, the servant of God, the
commander of the faithful, grants to the people of Ilya. He grants to all,
whether sick or sound, security for all their lives, their possessions, their
churches and their crosses, and for all that concerns their religion. Their
churches shall not be changed into dwelling places, nor destroyed, neither
shall they nor their appartenances be in any way diminished, nor the crosses
of the inhabitants nor anything of their possessions, nor shall any restriction
be placed upon them in the matter of their faith, nor shall any one of them be
harmed20”
Umar al-Khattab also granted to the Jews the right to come back to Jerusa-
lem. In fact, since then they started to create some small settled communities
not only in Palestine but also in Iraq. A historian, talking about the Muslim
conquest of Jerusalem by the Crusaders, instead wrote: “When we come to
the time of the Crusaders and observe the fanatical fury they exhibited while
rescuing the holy sites from the hands of the infidels it will be well to
recollect that the city had been transferred to the Muslims without any
resistance by the action of the Christian patriarch”21.
In fact, the Church of Resurrection, almost entirely ruined by the Persian
army in 614, and rebuilt by Modestus in 629, at the time of Muslim
conquest and later remained completely untouched. Mukaddasi, who wrote
one century before the first Crusade22, describes its beauty as follows: “So
enchantingly fair and so renewed for its splendour as almost to rival in
beauty the Dome of the Rock and the Great Mosque at Damascus”23 .
Other places of Christian worship in Jerusalem that remained untouched
during the Muslim domination, as demonstrated by historical records, are:
The Church of the Tomb of the Virgin, the Church of the Ascension, and the
Church of the Jacobites and the Church of Sion .
A modern historian describes the Muslim tolerance towards the Christians
and the Jewish communities, after the conquest of the Middle-East
territories: “Under these circumstances we can only admire the comparative
tolerance of the early Caliphs and their readiness to protect Jews and
Christians on the simple condition of the payment of tribute. Now look at
the state of the Christian world at this crisis. The church was torn with
internal factions. The strength of its best minds was given to the discussion
of the most difficult points of dogma. On account of heresy in regard to
20
these remote abstractions whole provinces were driven by persecution to
disaffection, and at the same time
21
the morals of the Empire were abominably corrupt. The saintly ideal of the
monks- not always realised by its own professors- left the mass of the
people, who frankly confessed that they could not attain to it, all the more
ready to abandon any strenuous endeavours after virtue. City life was
sinking into the slough of luxurious self-indulgence; and the government
was feeble and only spasmodically energetic by fits and starts24.”
Another misunderstood aspect of the Muslim domination is the Jizya, the
tax paid by Christians and Jews under the Muslim rule. The payment of
Jizya has been often interpreted as a form of punishment, in case of the
conquered people refusing to convert to Islam. But, in reality, it is only a tax
paid in ex- change for the military protection 25 against enemies. But in cases
where the Muslim army would be unable to grant this protection, the
conquered people were actually free from the payment of this tax. For
example, the Arab general Abu Ubaydah, when he knew that Heraclius was
ready to attack with his army, wrote to the conquered towns about the
Muslim government’s willingness to give back to them the amount of the
Jizya, since he was not sure to be able to grant them the promised military
protection .
But in several cases the Bedouin tribes, even when preferred to keep their
Christian faith, were exempted from the payment of the Jizya, since they de-
cided to give military support to the Muslims. The tribe of Jarajimah, for
example, who lived near Antioch, promised to fight with the Muslims
under the condition to be exempted from the payment of the Jizya. These
kinds of examples were very frequent and can be also found in the later
centuries of Islamic empire. For example, under the Ottoman Empire, the
inhabitants of Magaris, a community of Albanian Christians26, were
exempted from the payment of Jizya because they were supplying a body of
armed men to guard the passes of Mount Citaeron and Mount Geranea,
which lead to the isthmus of Corin- thus. Instead the Christian of Hydra
didn’t pay taxes to the Ottoman government, because they supplied a body
of 250 armed men to the Turkish Navy27. Also the Miriadi, a community of
Catholics, who lived near Scutari, were exempted in change of their help in
case of military effort28.
Besides, the Jizya was not paid by all the inhabitants of the conquered ter-
ritories, but only by men who were able to work and with the economic re-
sponsibility to maintain their families. Women, children, old people, sick
and poor people, and the monks were exempted from the payment. And, the
22
poor, the old and the sick, belonging respectively to the Muslim, Christian
and Je- wish community, in case of inability to work, were also maintained
directly
23
by the State. Another aspect of the Jizya is that it was always less than com-
pulsory tax called Zakat, paid by all Muslim citizens of the state having
certain amount of wealth. And the Zakat money was used for the welfare
programs of the state, beneficial to both Muslim and non-Muslims.
However, Jizya was never a religious obligation, and it basically stemmed
from in lieu of the protection that the Islamic state offered to its non-
Muslim citizens, while exem- pting them from the military service
obligatory upon all able-bodied Muslim mail citizens.
Several archaeological proofs clearly demonstrated that in all the
territories of the Muslim Empire new places of Christian worship were built
not only during the reign of the Four Rightly-guided Caliphs, but also of
their succes- sors29 .During the Caliphate of Mu’awiyah (661-680 A.D.),
Christians have been allowed to rebuild the Great Church of Edessa 30 , and
during the Cali- phate of Abd al-Malik (685-705 A.D.), in the same town, a
new church was built, apart from other two in Egypt, respectively in Fustad
and Halwan31. In 711 A.D. the Caliph Walid gave the permission to build a
Jacobite Church in Antioch, and during the successive caliphate, Khalid al-
Kasri, the governor of Iraq, built a church in Baghdad for his mother, a
devoted Christian32. At the same time in Egypt the famous church of Abu
Sirjah was built in the fortress of Old Cairo33. During the reign of Al-Mahdi
(775-785 A.D.), in Baghdad a Church was built for the people taken
prisoner during the military campaign in Byzantine territory34.
During the caliphate of Harun ar-Rashid (786-809 A.D.), the Samalu, a
population which submitted to the rule of the Caliph in change of military
protection, was allowed to build a church in Baghdad 35. During the
Caliphate of al-Ma’mun (813-833 A.D.) a Church was built in al-Muqattani,
a hill in the surroundings of Cairo 36. At this time, several other churches
were built in Burah by a rich member of the Christian community, named
Bukam37. Also the Nestorian Patriarch Timotheus, who died in 820 A.D.,
had been granted the permission to build a Church in Takrit and a monastery
in Baghdad38. Around the tenth century the famous Coptic church of Abu
Sayfayn was built in Fustad39 . During the reign of az-Zahir (1020-1035
A.D.) and al-Mustabi (1170-1180 A.D.) built new churches both in Egypt
and in Jiddah40.
24
Egypt : Muslims, the Copts, etc.
The situation in Egypt was similar to that one of the other parts of the
Mid- dle-East. Years of heavy taxation and religious persecution weakened
in the Copts any feeling of loyalty towards the Byzantine power and this
was the reason why, at the time of the Muslim invasion, they reacted like the
Nestorian Christians of Syria, hoping to be finally free from the oppressive
Greek rule. For example, after becoming the governor of Alexandria,
Nicetas reorganized the civil and military services, but excluded completely
the native Egyptians who, deprived of political power, were reduced to the
condition of servants of a foreign ruling class41.
The history of Egypt from the kingdom of Heraclius to the Arab
conquests had been written mainly by ecclesiastical authors and this was the
reason why the condition of both the Coptic and Melkite communities were
widely described. At that particular historical point every religious
community was organized independently of other community settled in the
same territory, and the idea of a nation or national identity was completely
unknown at that epoch. The social and administrative divisions between the
two communities of Cop- tics and Melkites increased after the Council of
Chalcedony (451 A.D.), when the two churches started to be organized by
two different administrations and two patriarchs42.
The relations between the two communities were in a quite difficult
condition, and at the time of the Persian invasion only in Alexandria there
were around 600 monasteries, which were totally destroyed and the monks
who oc- cupied them killed43. According to Euthichius, an Egyptian
historian, all the peripheries of the districts of Alexandria were raided or
destroyed by fire . In all over the country there were only ruins and the
population that survived the raids of the Persians, later died due to the
severe famine that followed the invasion of the enemy. Most probably the
Coptic community and the clergy were those who suffered much because of
the invasion. In fact, some of the enemies of the community told the
Persians where the clergy was hidden and the invaders, hoping to find rich
spoils, killed all the priests and the monks44.
The biographer of the life of Saint Anba Shanudah describes the invasion
of the Persian army in the form of prophecy as follows: “The Persians shall
come down into Egypt and shall make great slaughter. They shall plunder
the goods of the Egyptians and shall sell their children for gold- so fierce is
25
their oppression and their iniquity. Great calamities shall they cause to
Egypt: for
26
they shall take the holy vessels from the churches and drink wine before the
altar without fear, and shall they dishonour women before their husbands.
The evil and the suffering shall be very great. And of the remnant one-third
shall perish in distress and affliction. Then after a while the Persians shall
leave Egypt45.”
But, when the Persians withdraw from Egypt, it became again a province
of the Byzantine Empire, the Coptic Church went under a severe persecution
from Cyrus, patriarch of the Melkite Church. When Cyrus arrived in
Alexan- dria, in 631 A.D., Benjamin the Coptic Patriarch left the city
secretly46 . But before leaving, he gathered several representatives of the
Coptic community and some high prelates, spurring them to remain faithful
to their creed, even if they had to face martyrdom 47 . The behaviour of
Benjamin proved that the coming of Cyrus was interpreted as a threat to the
Coptic community. At this time the Patriarch also wrote an encyclical
exhorting the bishops to search for the shelters on the mountains and in the
deserts until the divine wrath would have cooled down48.
The persecution against the Coptic Church lasted for ten years, during the
Patriarchate of Cyrus and started one or two months after the synod of Ale-
xandria, dated on 631 soon after Cyrus’s coming to Egypt. A passage from
Se- verus informs us the following: “These were years during which
Heraclius and Al-Mukaukas were ruling over Egypt and through the severity
of the persecution and the oppression and the chastisements which
Heraclius inflicted on the Orthodox, in order to force them to adopt the faith
of Chalcedony, an innumerable multitude were led astray- some by tortures,
some by promise of honours, some by persuasion and guilt49.”
An historian, speaking about this page of the history of severe religious
persecution in Egypt, writes: “Here we have a brief interlude between one
non- Christian invasion and another- between the pagan Persian and the
Muslim Arab invasion. During this short interval a Christian power is ruling
in Egypt. Yet it proves to be a time of misery for the national church. The
dominant party of Christians spends it in brutally persecuting their fellow-
Christians50”. The condition of the Coptic Church and the Egyptian
population at the time of Muslim invasion was quite distressful. Beyond the
beautiful city of Ale- xandria, there was a wide and desolate country, where
poverty, ignorance and squalor reigned. Even when Egypt filled the empire
with high quality agricul- tural products, the population was oppressed by the
fiscal system and was una-
27
ble to ameliorate the living condition and defeat the poverty, in which the
28
majority of Egyptian lived.
After ten years of persecution, all the churches inside Alexandria, which
par- tly belonged to the Coptic Church, came under the control of the
Melkite Church. The number of the members of the Coptic Church
diminished after the severe persecution and several episodes of apostasy,
which compromised the unity of the religious community of the native
Egyptians. The Monophysite creed was kept alive only by some small
communities dwelling on the mountains and in the remote monasteries in
the desert51 .
On 6 of April 641 A.D., a day before the Muslim victory, the Roman
generals killed all the Copts detained in the prisons. John of Nikiou
describes as the fury of the Romans: “Those enemies of Christ, who have
defiled the Church by an unclean faith and who have wrought apostasies and
deeds of violence such as neither pagan nor barbarian hath wrought. They
have despised Christ and his servants, and we have not found such evil-
doers even among the worshippers of false idols52 ”.
After the Muslim conquest the condition of the Coptic Church improved:
new churches were built, Patriarchs were free to visit the monasteries
scattered all over the country, and also the relation with the Melkite church
became more peaceful, since the Muslim power didn’t let the two churches to
persecute each other.
The treaty of Alexandria, signed the 8 November of 641, set that Christian
churches were free to profess their creed and keep their own places of wor-
ship53.
Amr, the Muslim general, speaking in the Mosque, reminded the Muslims
of the respect due to the Copts, as follow: “O you congregation, the twins
are hanging in the sky and Sirius is still covered, the heavens have begun
their early course, the sky is clear and there is no plague; the food is not
diminished, the pasture is good. Milk abounds from kids and lamps, and the
shepherd must watch well over his flock. Therefore go forth with the
blessing of God to your cultivated land, and enjoy its benefits- milk and
flock and herds and game. Feed your horses and fatten them, guard them
and better them, for they are your defence against the enemy and through
them you gain booty and wealth and take good care of your neighbours the
Copts. Omar, the Commander of the faithful, told me that he heard the
Apostle of God say: God will open Egypt to you after my death. So take
good care of the Copts in that country, for they are your kinsmen and under
29
your protection. Cast down your eyes therefore and keep your hands off
them”54.
30
The Coptic Patriarch Benjamin, who had been forced to leave Alexandria
and hide during the ten years of persecution, was free again to come back
and to oversee the care of his community. Also, 70000 monks from the
monastery of Wadyn Natrum went to meet Amr ibn Al-As, and most
probably after this episode, Amr granted the Patriarch the permission to
come back with the following words: “In whatsoever place Benjamin, the
patriarch of the Egyptian Christians, is living, to that place we grant
protection and security, and peace from God. Wherefore let the Patriarch
come hither in security and tranquillity, to administer the affairs of his
church and to govern his nation55”.
Severus reported the words attributed to Benjamin after he was back again
among his community: “I was in my city of Alexandria and found a time of
peace and safety after the troubles and persecutions caused by the
heretics56”. The Copts are described also as “rejoicing like young calves
when their bond is loosened and they are set free to suck their mother’s
milk57 ”.
Soon after the Coptic community not only started again their normal
pastoral activities but also could repair and rebuild the churches and the
monasteries, which fell into ruin in the seventh century, among them also
the monasteries of Wadi’n Natrun. Also, the patriarch was able to consecrate
the church of San Macarius. On that occasion Basil, the then bishop of
Nikiou, said: “Give thanks to the Lord who had made the patriarch worthy
to see that glorious desert once more, and those holy fathers and brethren
and the proclamation of the orthodox faith, who had saved him from the
heretics and had delivered his soul from the great and cruel dragon which
drowse him away and had granted him to behold his children once more
around him58.”
The condition of the Coptic Church was quite flourishing and peaceful for
several years. After his election, the Patriarch John Semnudaeus, in three
years, rebuilt the Church of Saint Mark59 . Unfortunately, during the
Patriarchate of Isaac (686 A.D.), the governor of Egypt, Abd el-Aziz, started
the persecution against Christians, mainly for political reasons. In fact, Isaac
was suspected of a secret correspondence with Nubia during the conflict
between Ethiopia and Nubia60. But, even when this had been a difficult time
for the Coptic Church, the patriarch was not only in the condition of
rebuilding the Church of San Marcus, called traditionally Kamseia, but also
of building a new one in Holwan, the place where the Patriarch and the
31
governor met for the first time61.
The building of new churches went on also under the following Patriarchs.
In fact, in 700 AD, during the Patriarchate of Simon, in Holwan two new
chur-
32
ches were built under the direction of Gregory, bishop of Kis62. After the
death of Patriarch Simon, the Coptic Church went under a difficult time and
the Pa- triarchal seat remained vacant for three years, even if we don’t know
the reasons why this happened. The succession to the Patriarchate became
regular again in 703, when Alexander, a monk of Nitria63, was elected.
But, when in 705 A.D. the Caliph Abd el-Malik put as governor of Egypt
his son Abdullah, the situation of the Coptic church was for two years a
very difficult one, even when there had been no problem in the Patriarchal
succes- sion64. However, between 726 and 728 A.D., Egypt was struck by
pestilence, famine and the invasion of 30.000 Bedouin warriors who spoiled
churches and monasteries, among them that one of S. Mary, near Tanis65.
After the death of Theodor the Patriarchate remained vacant for five years,
most probably due to the internal dissent about the appointment of a
successor.
After the election of Chail I (743 AD), the Christian communities, both
Mel- kite and Coptic, shared the political trouble, which accompanied the
end of the Caliphate of the Ummaidies66. In fact, the tyranny of the
Government of Abd el-Melik and the internal troubles of the Caliphate
pushed the Egyptian population towards the rebellion. The first region who
led the insurrection has been Thebais, Osiout and Lycopolis. Both the
Patriarchs, the Melkite and the Coptic, joined the rebels. But, when Marwan,
after Abd el-Malik, defeated also the rebels, both the Patriarchs were taken
prisoners. The Muslim power, however, didn’t show any sign of revenge
towards them, since after some time both of them were set free. Cosma I
paid for his own liberation a certain amount of money, while Chail I got
released after he mediated with the re- bels67.
With the Abassid Caliphate and the government of Abdullah, the
condition of the Copts improved68, as a proof that the past problems
involved political issues and not religious ones. However, the Coptic Church
was in trouble due to some internal conflicts. But the situation didn’t prevent
John VI to restore two churches- the Church of S. Michael and the Church
of the Penitence- after his election69 (776 A.D.). Besides, during the time of
pestilence and famine, the Patriarch has been able to help daily people in
need. After the death of John VI and the election of Eustachius (801), the
Church of the monastery of Alkosairi was restored70.
Between 819 and 837 at the head of the Coptic Church saw the
succession of three Patriarchs until Joseph, the Abbot of San Macarius71,
33
was elected . During his Patriarchate, the Emir of Egypt issued an edict
according to which
34
the Copts were not allowed to summon their patriarch 72. Joseph, even when
he had problems with some of the bishops, was free to establish several Epi-
scopal seats in some remote dioceses, once administrated by the Melkite
church73.
Some years later, respectively in 852 and 859, during the Patriarch of
Cosma II, Christians had been subjected to several limitations in their
personal freedom, even in such condition, it is not possible to speak about
a persecution, if with this word we mean the intention of using force to
convert people to Islam. At the same time, it cannot be denied that
Christians were in troubles, due mainly to the restriction about their
employments and careers74 . But, during the patriarchate of Chenouda I the
Copts took back several places of worships, which were confiscated before,
thanks to two rich Christians, who travelled to Baghdad at the court of the
Caliph Mustasim, in order to support the Coptic cause75. In 881, during the
Patriarchate of Chail III was built in the town of Denusmair the Church of S.
Ptolemeus76.
After the patriarchate of Chail III, the conditions of the Coptic Church
started decay due to some reasons, however, these did not seem to involve
directly the Muslim power and episodes of religious intolerance. In fact, one
of the plagues, which already affected other Christians churches both in the
East and in the West, was Simony, which corrupted also the Coptic churches
since the Patriarchate of Gabriel I, in 913 A.D., and involved respectively
several Pa- triarchs as, for example, Philoptheus (981 AD) and Chenouda II
(1032 A.D.). Those had been very difficult years for all the Egyptians and
all the Copts in particular. Egypt was struck by two severe famines77,
respectively in 972- 979 and 1045. Between these two natural calamities
Egyptians had to endure a cruel form of persecution during the reign of
Hakim. A historian describes Hakim’s persecution, which was reserved not
only to Christians, as follows: “The persecution became daily more severe.
Orders were issued for the destruction of all the churches. Christians were
forbidden to change their resi- dence from a place to another. Zachariah still
remained in prison. He was threatened, on the one hand, with being burnt
alive and promised, on the other, dignity and promotion. But the one and the
other proving ineffectual, he was at length restored to liberty, and, retiring
into the desert of San Macarius, re-
78
mained there for some years .
The general condition of the Coptic churches was also a very difficult
35
one:“It was the folly and wickedness of the Jacobites which arousing the
fury of this tyrant, involved both themselves and the Catholics not only in
the Egypt but
36
also in Syria, in one general persecution. The venality and ambition of their
bishops are allowed by their own historians: and these were but ill restrained
by Zacharias, a man of weak mind, and although desirous of seldom
permitted, to enjoy peace. The more turbulent of his suffragans controlled
his actions, and under the name of the patriarch actually governed the
diocese. The most scandalous disorder prevailed everywhere. There were
instances of a bishop who by extortion or falsehood had amassed the sum of
20000 pounds, the di- sposition of which formed the great care of his death
bed; of another prelate, who threw down an altar, which had been
consecrated in his diocese by the bishop of another see; of a priest, who
reserving to his own use the wine in- tended for the Holy Eucharist
employed water, scantly tinged with it, for the service of the altar, and of
others who refused, on account of the labour, to celebrate the Eucharist
daily79 .”
However, before being murdered, Hakim not only allowed Christians, who
converted to Islam due to his persecution, to go back to their Christian faith,
but also permitted to the Christians communities to rebuild their places of
worship, which were fallen in ruin80 .
It is quite surprising that, after years of severe persecutions and natural
calamities, during the patriarchate of Abdel el-Messiah (1049), only in
Alexandria the Patriarch consecrated six churches: S. John Evangelist, S.
Mercurius, S. Raphael, S. Mennas, S. George and S. Mark81 .
Ten years later (1059) Egypt was again overwhelmed by an earthquake and
a pestilence82 . Only in Ramla around 25.000 died because of the earthquake
and in Tanis, once a town with many thousand inhabitants, only one
hundred escaped from the fury of the pestilence. Even in this critical
situation, the Cop- tic Church remained strong. In fact in 1078, when Cyril
became the Patriarch and the Vizir was called by the bishops to exam his
behaviour, in the Synod of Misra there were 52 bishops83 - a number which
show the strength of the Coptic church still had, more than 400 years after
the Muslim domination.
An historian reports how the Vizir behaved at the end of the Synod: “He
had not read the collections of canons which they had put in his hands, nor
did he mean to read them. His duty was plain and so was theirs. He could do
nothing else but exhort them to unity and peace, as worshippers of the same
God, as professor of the same religion. He had heard complaints of the inor-
dinate love of money exhibited by some of them before him. He cautioned
37
them against avarice. The proper use a bishop should make of money was
neither to pamper his appetite nor to minister to his luxuries, but, as Christ
him-
38
self, had commanded, to give alms to the poors. The canons which they had
brought forward were doubles good, but it was better to practise than quote
them. The lives of some to whom he spoke far below the mark which they
prescribed charity, good faith and brotherly kindness, were virtues which he
could not to strongly recommend, nor they too strenuously follow84 .”
Between 1092 and 1146 the Coptic Church was also destabilised by
episodes of Simony and the dispute about Eucharist and the Confession85 .
The dispute about the Confession is important because it shows the real
situation of the clergy of the Coptic Church and the decadence of the
pastoral care: “The ignorant priests were not fit to be trusted with the
machinery of the confessional. Some of them were men of no character.
Discerning bishops might well di- scourage confession to such men, because
they saw that it was safer for simple souls to confess to the shocking censer,
which, if it could not give ghostly ad- vice, was at least free from any
corrupting influence86”.
After the death of the Patriarch John I, in 1216, the pastoral seat remained
vacant for almost twenty years and during this period the life of the Coptic
church was characterized by such a confusion that in several churches the
priests didn’t celebrate the Sunday of the Palms, one week before Easter.
When in 1235 Cyril III was elected Patriarch, most of the bishoprics were
vacant and the people were left without any pastoral care 87. During Cyril’s
Patriarchate, when the Coptic Church was weakened by the continuous
disputes between the Patriarch and the bishops, a noted event was the
conversion of the bishop of Sendala to Islam. During the last period of his
office, the Pa- triarch decided to reside in the monastery of Elcheman, but
after his death in 1243 the pastoral seat remained vacant for other eight
years.
After 1251, the year of the election of Athanasius III Patriarch, the
condition of the Coptic Church got worse but mainly for reasons which
didn’t seem to involve direct any Muslim interference. During the last
period of his office, the Patriarch decided to reside in the monastery of
Elcheman, but after his death in 1243 the pastoral seat remained vacant for
other eight years.
In fact, even when at the beginning of 14 century a new form of
persecution unleashed against Christians was mainly due to political and
social issues. For example, the capital penalty for having committed
adultery with a Muslim woman most probably was based on the fact that
39
several Christians were keeping Muslim women as concubines. However,
even when during this time Christians were subject to several restrictions in
their lives as for examples the ban to wear Muslim garments, to use bells in
the religious office, or to be
40
employed in the public office, it is not possible to speak of a religious perse-
cution. Also, the ban from public offices was most of the time only
temporary, since it was renewed in every period of political disorder. At this
stage, such seemed to have only applied to the new converts, most probably
to avoid the conversion for worldly reasons88 .
However, during this period, many conversion to Islam were recorded89.
For examples, only in the town of Kelious 450 people converted in just one
day. The same happened in other parts of Egypt and Thebais. This was the
reason why several churches were changed in to mosques, since in some
districts of Egypt Christian population was slowly decreasing while the
Muslim one was instead increasing progressively90 .
The Melkite Church, even when it was enjoying the same freedom of the
Coptic Church, after the Muslim conquest of Egypt, went under a period of
decadence, which reduced gradually its influence in all the territory. In 643
A.D., the Patriarch Peter III, after his election, didn’t reside in Egypt but
preferred to move to Constantinople91. Most probably after his transfer the
bonds with the community gradually slowed down and may be this was the
reason why, after the death of Peter III, the Patriarchal seat remained vacant
for 70 years92.
But, even without a Patriarch it seemed that the Melkite Church was able
to organize herself, since at this time a Church was built in Holwan, named
the Church of the Two Grooms of the Chamber93. The permission to build
this place of worship was given by the governor of Egypt, Abdel Aziz, to
two wealthy Christians who were employed by the Muslim government.
Then, in 691, they were also able to send a representative to Constantinople
to partici- pate in the Council94 organized by the Emperor Justinian.
In 727, when Cosma I was elected Patriarch of the Melkite Church95, the
situation of the community was very problematic. Several communities,
scattered in Thebais, Ethiopia and Nubia, almost abandoned Christianity
due to the lack of pastoral care, the reduced number of the clergy and the
places of worship. However, at this time, Cosma I was in the position to
travel to Damascus, where he was received with the honours due to his
position, by the Caliph Hi- sham, who later wrote to the Emir of Egypt
ordering to give back to the Pa- triarch the churches confiscated from the
Melkite community. Cosma I, returned from Damascus, took back the
possession of several churches, among them also the Church of Caesarea and
the Church of Angelium, even if they didn’t belong rightly to the Melkite
41
Church.
42
It seems that the situation of the Melkite church at this time was quite
steady, even when the numbers of the people who belonged to the
community decrea- sed gradually. We know in fact the name of all the
patriarchs who succeeded one after the other since the 805, the year of the
death of Cosma I and the election of Christopher, and 1059.
Later the history of the Melkite Church became vaguer and we know that
it was marked by a gradual decadence. In fact after the 1195 the Church of
Con- stantinople started having a direct influence in the election of the
Patriarch. Mark II was a member of the Church of Constantinople and in the
14 century two Patriarchs, Athanasius and Gregory II, choose to live after
their election in Constantinople96 . The decadence of the Melkite Church was
due to several reasons. First of all, the members of the Melkite Church were
mainly forei- gners, who had settled in Egypt, as representatives of imperial
power. The national church of Egypt was the Coptic one, whose
community was more numerous and closely have been related to the country
and its history, precisely because of this, its history has been vividly
recorded.
As the historical facts clearly demonstrate, the situation of Middle East
and North Africa at the time of the Muslim conquest and during the Muslim
domination was characterized by a religious freedom and respect for
minorities unthinkable under the Byzantine rule. In Egypt, for example, both
the Coptic Church and the Melkites have got the possibility to prosper and
enjoy full freedom under Muslim rule. Historical reports actually
demonstrate that Coptic Church, even in period of political troubles, was
free from any persecution due to religious reasons and for a long time could
enjoy the full freedom as it was proved by the existence of several places of
worship built by several Pa- triarchs under the Muslim power.
Spain: Christians and Jews Amongst Muslims: the Golden Age of Reli-
gious Tolerance
The history of Muslims in Spain was sadly different, since after the
Recon- quista of the territories governed by Muslims for almost seven
centuries, all the members who belonged to the Muslim community were
forcefully pushed to choose between conversion or exile. In Spain actually
the Islamic civilization had been able to create a climate of full religious
freedom and cooperation between different communities, which doesn’t
43
have any other good example in human history.
44
In 711 the Muslims introduced Islam in Spain and in 1502 an edict, signed
by Ferdinand and Isabella, prohibited the profession of Islamic faith in their
reign. During almost eight centuries, which elapsed between these two
dates, unfolded the events which marked the Muslim presence in Spain.
Rome had ruled Spain for around 600 years, since 200 A.D., but after the
invasion of the barbarian tribes from Northern Europe, Spain fell under the
rule of Goths. However, even when the Goths were Christian Arian, the ma-
jority of the rural population was still pagan and had a very superficial kno-
wledge of the Christian faith .
An historian, speaking about the religious feeling of the Goths, writes:
“The Goths remained devout indeed, but they regarded their acts of religion
chiefly as reparation for their vices, they compounded for exceptionally bad
sins by an added amount of repentance, and then they sinned again without
compunction. They were quite as corrupt and immoral as the Roman nobles
who had preceded them, and their style of Christianity did not lead
endeavour to improve the condition of their subjects. The serfs were in an
even more pi- tiable state than before. Not only were they tied to the land or
master, but they could not marry without his consent and, if slaves of
neighbouring estates in- termarry, their children were distributed between
the owners of the several properties. The middle classes bore, as in Roman
times, the burden of taxation, and were consequently bankrupt and ruined.
The land was still in the hands of few and the large estates were indifferently
cultivated by crowd of miserable slaves, whose dreary lives were brightened
by no hope of improvement or dream of release before death. The very
clergy, who preached about the brotherhood of Christians, now that they
had become rich and owned great estates, joined the traditional policy and
treated their slaves and serfs as badly as any Roman noble97. ”
During the Goth’s domination every kind of relation with the Greek and
Latin cultural heritage was completely lost and the population was living
under a deep decadence from the economic and cultural point of view.
Even when the knowledge of Christianity was very superficial, at the time
of the Muslim conquest, in Spain, the population professed exclusively the
Christian faith. In fact, during the sixth council of Toledo, it was settled that
all the kings had to swear that they would not permit in their kingdom the
profession of any other faith different from the Catholic one. The clergy
was able to interfere in the political life of the country and the council of
bishops and other high prelates of the Church had got the power of ratifying
45
the election
46
of the King or of deposing him, if his policy was against the decrees set by
the ecclesiastical authority. In this open climate of religious intolerance the
condition of the Jewish community- very numerous during both the Roman
and Gothic domination- became somewhat dramatic . Jews were suffering
from severe forms of persecution and they started living under an
economical and political condition completely disadvantage. When
Catholicism became the official religion of Spain, the condition of the Jewish
community, that until then lived in tranquillity in Spanish territory, started to
get worse day by day. Professor Prescott, in a passage from his Ferdinand
and Isabella, comments: “Under the Visigothic empire the Jews multiplied
exceedingly in the country, and were permitted to acquire considerable
power and wealth. But no sooner had their Arian masters embraced the
orthodox faith, than they began to testify their zeal by pouring on the Jews
the most pitiless storm of persecution. One of their laws alone condemned
the whole race to slavery and Montesquieu remarks, without much
exaggerating, that to the Gothic code may be traced all the maxim of the
modern inquisition98”; “Laws concerning the promulgation and ratification
of statutes against Jewish wickedness, and for the general ex- tirpation of
Jewish errors. That the Jews may not celebrate the Passover according to
their usage, that the Jews may not contract marriage according to their own
customs, that the Jews may not practise the Abrahamitic rite, that the Jews
bring no actions against Christians, that the Jews be not permitted to
bear witness against Christians”99
These anti-Semitic laws remained idle during the kingdom of Recaredo
but, when Sisebuto, successor of Recaredo, became the king, he made an
alliance with Heraclius in order to persecute the Jewish population of their
territories. Besides, a law passed according to which the members of Jewish
community had a year time to convert to Christianity and be baptized. In
case of refusal, their properties would be confiscated and they would be
compelled to leave as soon as possible the country100 .
During the fourth council of Toledo (633 A.D.), it was decided that the
children of the Jews, who converted to Christianity, had to be taken away
from their family in order to be educated in a Catholic environment. During
the sixth council of Toledo it was settled that every monarch, at the moment
of his coronation had to swear to apply himself for the application of all the
laws against Jewish community.
During the successive councils, the situation of the Jews got even worse,
47
until during the 12 council (681 A.D.) it was settled that the punishment for
48
the lack of observance of Catholic religious festivity was 100 stripes, the
arrest and the seizure of the properties. Besides, if a child would be
circumcised, the father was punishable by mutilation and the mother by the
cutting of the nose. The penalty for the protection given to a member of the
Jewish community was also the confiscation of the property. Besides no Jew
could be appointed to a role which involved the exercise of any form of
authority on the members of the Christian population101.
On the contrary, during the Muslim domination the Christian and Jews
communities enjoined the following rights: free profession of their faith,
independence in legal matter related with their community, which didn’t
involve the rights of the Muslims, right to build new churches, monasteries
and singago- gues. Besides, after the Muslim conquest, both the Christian
and the Jew communities didn’t suffer any seizure of their property. On the
contrary, the fiscal oppression, which at the time of Goth’s rule had been
almost unbearable and had been the cause of the lack of improvement of the
economical condition of the middle class, was reduced considerably102.
A careful examination of the work entitled Espana Sagrata demonstrates
that, after the Muslim conquest, the life of the Christian community and the
clergy of the Catholic Church proceeded almost without any interruption 103.
In fact, we know the names of the bishops of the town of Cordova between
850 and 988 104. Only in Cordova there were twelve churches: six inside the
city-walls and six outside, in the surroundings 105. It is also available a list of
13 bishops of Seville, who held the bishop seat until the middle of the 12
cen- tury106. Besides, between 713 and 1077 in Toledo, eleven bishops,
succeeded at the apostolic seat , seven in Coimbra, and nine in Viseu107.
In the middle of eight century the Church of the Crow was built in order to
collect the relics of Saint Vincent. The passage from the historian Idris, who
wrote in the middle of the 12 century, proved the condition of prosperity and
prestige enjoined by the Catholic clergy: “The church is served by priests
and monks. It possessed extensive lands and considerable revenues, the
greater part of which come from estates left to it in different parts of the
Algarbe. With these they attend to the needs of the church, of its ministers,
of all those atta- ched to it in any capacity, and of the strangers who come to
visit it108 ”.
The place of worship, which would became the Mosque of Cordova, was a
Christian basilica, built on the ruins of the temple of Janus109 . When Abd ar-
Rahman, after the conquest of Cordova, offered to the Christian community
49
a good amount to buy the basilica but the clergy refused to sell it, Muslims
didn’t
50
employ violence to achieve their purpose, but simply, as happened also
before in Syria, the basilica was divided in two parts, one dedicated to the
Christian worship and the other to the Muslim one. When, after the increase
of the number of the Muslim population of Cordova, the whole basilica
was changed in to the Mosque, and the Christians received the permission
to rebuild the church that was before dedicated to S. Faustus, S. Januarius
and S. Marcellus. The proof of the religious tolerance enjoyed by Christian
under the Muslim rule was visible in the nature of the relations between
Muslims and Catholics in eminently religious questions. When Sancho the
Fat sent ambassadors to Cordova to ask the relics of Saint Pelayo, they were
received with all the cour- tesy and their request was promptly granted. A
proof of Sancho’s faith in Abd ar-Rahman III is that, even before to receive
an answer about the relics of the
saint, he started to build in Leon a monastery to collect and keep them110.
When in 1063 A.D. Ferdinand I of Castilia sent two bishops in Seville to ask
to al-Motadid the return of the relics of Saint Justa, the king answered that he
didn’t know the place where they were buried but, if they were able to
discover it, they were free to take them111.
Also, Al-Mansur showed a great respect for the place, traditionally
considered as the sepulchre of Saint James. For this reason, he placed
around the fu- neral monument some soldiers in order to avoid any form of
desecration. Al-Makkari related also that, when Muslims entered in
Santiago, they find an old man sitting near the grave of Saint James, and Al-
Mansur ordered the soldiers to leave the old monk free to perform his
prayers112 .
When, between 995 and 996, Garcia, son of Sancho, was made prisoner,
gra- vely wounded, he was cured by Muslim doctors with all the care,
though he died few days later. Al-Mansur ordered to wrap his body in a
costly piece of cloth and to deposit it in a beautifully carved coffin. Then,
when some nobles came to take back Garcia’s body, Al-Mansur gave it to
them and refused all the gifts brought by them113.
When in 997 Abd al-Malik, son of Al-Mansur, wrote to his father that his
army had conquered the city of Fez, Al-Mansur, as a proof of his gratitude
towards God for such a victory, not only distributed riches gifts among the
poor and paid their debts, but also set free 15.000 Christian prisoners114. In
1214, during the dominion of al-Mohade, considered as characterized by a
certain amount of intolerance, the Church of Saint Lucas Mayor was built
29
between Seville and Niebla115.
29
Under the Muslim domination the Christian population was mainly subject
to the poll-tax. However, they could avoid paying the taxes, if they were too
poor or sick, simply remaining in their house on the day of the payment.
During the time of Muslim rule, Spain was also economically developed
and the population both of the rural places and the towns increased, thanks
to the development of agriculture and trade. A contemporary historian
wrote: “It must not be supposed that the Moors, like the barbarian hordes
who preceded them, brought desolation and tyranny in their wake. On the
contrary, never was Andalusia so mildly, justly and wisely governed as by
the Arabs conque- rors. Under the Moors, on the other hand, the people
were on the whole con- tended and far better pleased than they had been
when their sovereigns belonged to the same religion as that which they
nominally professed116 ”.
About a century after the conquest by the army of Abd ar-Rahman,
Cordova, once an old town of the province of Gothic Spain, became a
modern commer- cial town in full expansion, with new buildings built
everywhere for the cultural and economic activities of its multicultural
social tissue.
The beauty and the splendour of Cordova are described by Arab historians
as follows: “Cordova is the bride of Andalusia. To her belong all the beauty
and the ornaments that delight the eye or dazzle the sight. Her long life of
Sul- tans form her crown of glory, her necklace is strung with the pearls
which her poets have gathered from the ocean of language; her dress is of
the banners of learning, well knit together by her men of science, and the
masters of every art and industry are the hem of her garments117 ”; “Cordova
is a fortified town, surrounded by massive and lofty stone walls, and has
very fine streets. (…) The inhabitants are famous for their courteous and
polished manners, their superior intelligence, their exquisite taste and
magnificence in their meals, dress and horses. There thou wouldst see
doctors shining with all sorts of learning, lords of nobility distinguished by
their virtues and generosity, warrior renow- ned for their expeditions into
the country of the infidels and officers experien- ced in all kinds of welfare.
To Cordova came from all parts of the world students eager to cultivate
poetry, to study the sciences, or to be instructed in divinity or law; so that it
became the meeting place of the eminent in all matters, the abode of the
learned, and the place of resort for the studious. Its inte- rior was always
filled with the eminent and the noble of all countries, its literary men and
soldiers were continually vying with each other the gain re- nown, and its
30
predicts never ceased to be the arena of the distinguished, the race course of
readers, the halting-place of the noble, and the repository of the
31
virtuous. Cordova was to Andalusia what the head is to the body, or what
the breast is to the lion118. ”
But, despite the improvement of the condition of the country, some
Christian theologians interpreted the Muslim domination as a punishment
for the sins of the Church . In a document, written in Latin, back to 745
A.D., we can note: “Sicut aliis gentibus hispanicae et provinciae et
burgimdionum populis conti- git, quae sic a deo recedentes fornicatae sunt,
donec index omnipotens valium criminum ultrices poenas per ignorantiam
legis dei et per saracenos venire et scevre permisit”119; “Et probare nostro
vitio inlatum flagellum. Nostra haec, frates, nostra desidia peperit mala,
nostra impuritas, nostra levitas, nostra morum obscoenitas…nostra tradidit
nos Dominus qui iustitiam diligit, et cuius vultus sequitatem decernit, ipsi
bestiae conrodendos120 ” ; “Peccatis ad haec devoluti sumus, ut paganorum
subiaceamus ditioni (…). Tantum hoc unum re- lictum est solatii, quod in
tantae calamitatis malo le gibus nos propriis uti non prohibent, qui quos
diligentes Christianitatis viderint observatores, colunt et amplectuntur,
simul ipsorum convictu delectantur. Pro tempore igitur hoc vi- demur121.”
The Christian population of Spain, fascinated by the Muslim civilization
which seemed to be superior and more cosmopolitan, started to assume Arab
habits, including the use of Arabic language and the style of Arabian
garments The study of the Arab language gradually replaced that one of the
Latin. About the gradual and slow decadence of the use of Latin language,
Alvarus wrote: “My co-religionists gladly read the history and the romances
of the Arabs, they study the writings of the Moslem theologians and
philosophers, not to confute them, but to learn to write correct and elegant
Arabic. Where is a lay- man to be found today who still reads the Latin
commentary on the sacred writings? Who among them is there who (can
write) studies on the Gospels, the prophets and the apostles? The Christians
have forgotten their own speech and among a thousand of them none can
write a correct Latin letter to a friend122. ”
The abandoning of the study of Latin was followed also by that one of
the works of the Fathers of the Church, written in this language. In a letter
written by Pope Adrian I to the bishops of Spain is fully described the
attitude of the Christians: “(…..) id est, quod multi dicentes se catholicos
esse, communem vitam generentes cum Judaeis et non baptizatis paganis,
tam in escis quamqe in potu et in diversis enoribus nihil pollui se inquiunt:
et illud quod inhibitum est, ut nulli liceat iugum ducere cum infidelibus, ipsi
32
enim filias suas cum alio
33
benedicent (…)”123; “Compositionem verborum, et preces omnium eius
mem- brorum quotidie pro eo eleganti facondia, et venusto confectas
eloquio, nos hodie per eorum volumina et oculis legimus et plerumque
miramur”124.
The Christians, who studied Arabic language and followed a life-style very
similar to the Arabian one, were commonly called Mozarabs (want to be
Arabs). However, in this open climate of religious and cultural tolerance,
there have been also some episodes of religious fanaticism, instigated by
that part of the clergy, who openly disapproved of the attitude of some high
prelates of the Catholic Church, who assumed a conciliatory approach
towards the Mu- slim power and were very often guests at the court of the
Caliph. This religious fanaticism, cultivated mainly by young people
destined to the cloistral life, reached its peak between 850 and 860 A.D .
During these ten years many young people and some priests and monks
tried to find the voluntary martyrdom, which Muslim authorities tried to
prevent, until the Christians bishops were compelled to condemn formally
the fanatics. In fact in 852 A.D. the high dignitaries of the Catholic Church
gathered in a Council in order to discuss the best way to repress these acts of
fanaticism.
An historian, while discussing about these episodes of voluntary
martyrdom, wrote:“The very tolerance of the Moors only exasperated such
fervent souls. They preferred to be persecuted, like the saints of old; they
longed to be martyrs and they were indignant with the Moslems, because
they would not “persecute them for righteousness’ sake and ensure them
the kingdom of heaven (…..). What happened was, in truth, nothing but the
manifestation of the ascetic or monastic form of Christianity among the
subject population. Indeed there was no rational way of getting martyred,
since Christians were allowed free exercise of their religious rites, might
preach and teach, they could not find a legal ground for being persecuted
unless they left the paths of the Gospel and set aside the great lesson of
Christ. (….) “… voluntary to transgress a law which carries with it capital
punishment is not martyrdom but suicide, and the pity we cannot help
feeling for the martyrs of Cordova is the same that one entertains for many
less exalted form of hysterical disorder”125.
The soul of the martyrs in Cordova was Eulogius, a monk who belonged to
one of the most ancient and important Catholic families of the city.
Eulogius, who spent his youth in ascetic practices and after becoming priest,
34
lead a life of prayer, fasting and penitence, at a certain age started to preach
the martyrdom among the young Christians of Cordova and some monks.
One of his di- sciples was Flora- born in a mixed marriage and raised in the
Christian faith
35
secretly by her mother- who following the teachings of Eulogius, decided to
go to the Qadi in order to abuse Muslim religion and the person of Prophet
Muhammad. However, the Qadi didn’t condemn her to death neither put her
in prison, may be noticing her abnormal behaviour, but called her brother,
who was a pious Muslim, and order him to bring her back home and to teach
her Islam126.
But nothing seemed to have the power to dissuade the young Flora, who
meanwhile received letters from Eulogius urging her to face the martyrdom.
Soon after she and her friend Mary got imprisoned and condemned to death,
on the 24 November of 851. On this occasion, Eulogius, who was
imprisoned, wrote a Peana celebrating what he called “a great victory for the
Catholic Church127”. However soon after, as a proof of the tolerance of Abd
ar-Rahman II, Eulo- gius and other monks were released from the prison.
But during the reign of Muhammad, son of Abd ar-Rahman, even if the
government decided to put pressure on the fanatics, Eulogius was appointed
as bishop of Toledo. However neither this important office was enough to
dissuade him from his intention and, after an other provocation, he was
condemned to death the 11 March of 859. With the death of Eulogius the
fanaticism came to an end128 .
About this issue, it is important to note that the majority of the Catholic
population reacted with surprise and fear to the provocation of their co-
religionists. In fact many Christians, even when were influenced by Arab
culture, remained faithful to their religious belief, and through the study of
the Arabic language they integrated successfully into the new political and
cultural environment of Spain. Even the majority of the clergy tried to stop
these episodes reminding the Christian population of the tolerance and the
respect shown by the Muslim authorities towards Catholic religion and their
places of worship. In fact Recafred, bishop of Seville between 851 and 862,
prohibited to the Christian to search for the martyrdom and ordered to arrest
the priests who didn’t obey his order. For this reason, when Abd er-Rahman
appointed him as a Metropolitan of Andalusia, Recafred ordered the arrest
of Eulogius129 .
Meanwhile the Muslim population increased. Immediately after the
conquest of part of the peninsula by Abd ar-Rahman, the first to convert to
Islam were the slaves who, under their previous master, lead a miserable
existence without any hope to improve their situation, until they saw in the
Muslim feeling of the brotherhood the possibility of changing their destiny .
36
However also some members of nobility and middle class converted to
Islam. The process of conversion has been gradual and without
compulsion. In fact the construction of
37
new mosque, due to the increase of Muslim population in Andalusia,
happened one century after the conquest of these territories by the
Muslims130 . New mosques were build by Abd ar-Rahman II in Seville and
Elivia between 822 and 852 A.D.
Successively these converted, usually called Muwallad, constitute an
important component of the population and in the centuries they became
the majority. In 1311 among the 200.000 Muslims, who lived in Granada,
only 500 were Arabs. But, soon after the Reconquista, the monarchs of
Spain instigated by Cardinal Ximenez131 issued an edict according to which
the Muslims, as happened centuries before to the Jews, were compelled to
convert to Christia- nity or to leave the country. All the mosques of
Andalusia were forcefully closed and the libraries rich of manuscripts from
every part of the Muslim world were burnt .
The Muslims were compelled not only to receive the Baptism but also to
abandon their language, their traditional garments and hygienic habits, inter-
preted by Christian of that age as a kind of vice. Muslims of Spain were
forced not only to be Christians but also to be Spaniard and to assume all the
habits of Christians of Spain.
An historian wrote: “The mosques were closed, the countless manuscripts
that contained the results of ages of Moorish learning were burnt by the ru-
thless Cardinal and the unhappy “infidels” were threatened and beaten into
the Gospel of peace and goodwill after the manner already approved by their
Catholic majesties in respect of the no less miserable Jews132.”
Also the Jewish population received the same treatment: they were not
allowed to interact with Christians, to trade and to engage in professions
where they could demonstrate all their skills. They were also forced to live
in some special districts of the town and to wear some special garments in
order to be recognizable.
A Jewish scholar described the situation of the Jewish community
respectively under Muslim rule and under the Catholic one, as follows:
“On that day Christianity ceased to rule within the land of Spain, and as its
power sank, there dawned one more the sun of prosperity unto Israel. The
Moors did not forget the valuable services of the Jews. (.) political and
religious freedom and social recognition was granted to the Jew throughout
the Caliphate, and from that day unto this the two oriental people have lived
in peace side by side upon the occidental soil, viewing with each other in
their noble efforts to restore unto Spain her original beauty and prosperity
38
and to make her in culture and
39
art and intelligence the mistress of Europe” 133; “The hour in which the Chri-
stian cross replaced the Muslim crescent on the turret of the Alhambra that
hour when Christianity ruled again and alone, in the peninsula, marked a cli-
max in the history of cruelties and human sufferings. That hour, though the
brightest in the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, was most fatal for Spain,
most pitiful to Europe, most unfortunate for civilization, and most
calamitous of the Jews”134.
The Ottoman Empire : Muslims Amongst the Orthodox Christians and

Others
Let us finally discuss the Ottoman Empire, as the last example of Muslim
rule. Also in this case the territories conquered by the Ottoman Turks were
suffering from social and political decadence 135. Severe poverty and lack of
security were the main features of the heart of the Byzantine Empire at the
time of Turkish invasion of Constantinople.
Under the rule of Justinian the Eastern Roman Empire was characterized
by increased economical and cultural decadence . The towns, which before
employed an amount of the taxes paid by the citizen to build road and
repair brid- ges and fortifications, were left to decadence and without
any defence, becoming an easy prey for barbarian tribes living at the border
of the Empire. The inhabitants of the remote districts of the Empire,
continuously subject to the invasions of Bulgars, Slavs and Hunni, who
brought with them death and destruction, started to develop a deep hatred
towards the Roman power. The situation in the remote districts was so
desperate that some regions, once densely populated and rich, were
completely left by their inhabitants after the raids of the barbarians. Besides,
also a violent earthquake destroyed some of the most important and
populated cities of the East. For example, Antioch was almost entirely
destroyed and under the ruins died almost 50000 people. Around 15
years after Justinian became the Emperor, a pestilence, started in Egypt,
rapidly spread all over the Empire both in the East and in the West for
almost 50 years. Half of the population of Constantinople died and several
towns lost the majority of their inhabitants, thus becoming desolate
villages136 Under Justinian the social asset of the empire also changed: the
middle class completely disappeared and the number of slaves and servants
increased, who were mainly employed in the vast estates under the control
40
of few families.137 During the 150 years before the reign of Leo III the
situation got worse eco-
41
nomically and socially138.
The majority of the provinces in the north of the Empire, due to the conti-
nuous raids, were almost deserted; the bridge and the street, almost
completely ruined, made the transit of man and goods extremely difficult.
Even the cultural and social life in the cities felt the effects of the general
decadence. An historian, speaking about the cultural decadence of the
Byzantine Empire, observes: “In this moral despotism of the hierarchy of
the Church appears the great and fatal secret of the decline and final
destruction of the intellectual life of the empire. This deplorable
enslavement of the human mind was already complete before the time of
Justinian, and its fatal effects became more and more apparent until the final
extinction of the empire by the Turks139.”
In 1025, at the death of Basilio II, the destiny of the Empire was reaching
its pick: the government was totally unable to administrate the territories of
the provinces, the population became very poor under the excessive fiscal
pressure and the general corruption infected all the tissues of the society,
now reduced in poverty due to the lack of trade and other economical
activities. This was the general condition of the empire at the time of the
invasion of the crusaders. An historian, about the invasion of Constantinople
by the Crusaders, wrote: “The Latins then took Constantinople by storm
under the Marchis of Monferrat. The city was sacked. Many of the priceless
treasures were carried to Europe; more were destroyed. The patriarch fled
on an ass without a single attendant. The sacred vessels in the church were
turned into drinking cups. Icons, even portraits of Christ, were used as
gambling tables. At St. Sophia the splendid altar was broken in pieces, and a
harlot, whom Nicetas calls “a minion of the furies”, seated herself on the
Patriarch’s throne, and sang and danced in the church, ridiculing the Greek
hymns and processions”140 ; “The thing was unpardonable. That an army,
gathered together to defend the Chri- stian against the Muslims, should
instead of doing so, destroyed the very state that for centuries had been the
one bulwark of Christendom141”.
After days of plunders and violence against the population, the 9 May
1204 Baldwin, count of Flanders, was elected Emperor of Constantinople 142.
But the city was in the peak of its decadence: the fiscal pressure was
unbearable, the population was reduced in poverty, and the trade and the
agriculture were completely neglected. The barons were forced to melt the
copper of the churches’s bells in order to coin the money143.
42
An historian describes the condition of the Byzantine Empire under
Michael VII, after the end of the brief kingdom of the Crusaders: “Literary
taste, poli-
43
tical honesty, patriotic feeling, military honour, civil liberty and judicial
purity, seem all to have abandoned the Greek race. Government and people
were alike corrupt, and the slaves of a grovelling superstition. There was
abundance of heresy and schism, but the very subjects of these barren
controversies reveal the degraded condition of the church144 ”.
A Turkish historian, who related the fall of Constantinople, wrote:
“Without the fear of the law an empire is like a steed without reins.
Constantine and his ancestors allowed their grandees to oppress the people.
There was no more justice in their law court; no more courage in their
hearts. The judges amassed treasures from the tears and blood of the
innocent. The Greek soldiers were proud only of the magnificence of their
dress. The citizens did not blush at being traitors. The soldiers were not
ashamed to fly. At length the Lord poured out his thunder on this unworthy
rulers, and raised up Muhammad, whose warriors delight in battle, and
whose judges do not betray their trust145 ”.
Before the Ottoman domination the situation of the Greek population was
somewhat miserable. The decadence of the Byzantine Empire destroyed the
social tissue of the country: the middle class disappeared and entire
territories, once densely populated and highly productive, now were
deserted and ruined. With the disappearance of the middle class and the
increase of the slaves and servants, the empire lost also the support of that
part of the society that, in case of attack or invasion, would be ready to
defend their goods and land. The enormous number of servants and slaves,
who were the majority of the population of the Empire, didn’t have any
reason to remain faithful to the Byzantine government. For example, at the
time of the siege of Constantinople by the Turks, the population amounted
to 100000 people, but only 600 take an active part in the defence of the
capital of the empire146 . It must also be remembered that the ancient
architectural splendour of the capital, at the time of the Turkish invasion,
almost totally disappeared due to three fires that destroyed entire districts
of the capital. Other parts of the city, where the buildings were still ha-
bitable, were entirely deserted due to the demographic decrease147.
An historian, speaking about the condition of the population of the Empire
before the Ottoman conquest, observes: “A corrupt aristocracy, a tyrannical
and innumerable clergy, the oppression of perverted law, the exactions of a
despicable government, and still more, its monopolies, its fiscality, its
armies of tax and custom collectors, left the degraded people neither rights
44
nor insti- tutions, neither change of amelioration nor hope of redress148 ”.
After the Turkish conquest the condition of the Greek population improved
45
considerably. Several Greeks, who, before, were employed as servants in the
craft and agriculture, became free and paid workers. Thanks to a stable
government, an impartial justice, a just taxation, the inhabitants of the
territories in the Ottoman Empire- Christians, Muslims and Jews- enjoyed
also a civil and religious freedom, which they did not have in its fullness for
a long time. The inhabitants of the towns, due to the improvement of trade,
accumulated huge fortunes149.
At the end of the 17 century, the condition of the Christians in the
Ottoman Empire improved considerably. Slaves almost completely
disappeared from the provinces at the south of Danube and consequently the
work of the agri- cultural labourers gained a new meaning and some of them
became also owners of the land they worked on for several years and
started to enjoy an economic independence.
The Ottoman government divided the conquered territories into several na-
tions or millet on the base of religious belonging150. Soon after the fall of
Con- stantinople, the territories of the empire were divided as follow:
-Rum Millet, i.e. the Orthodox Church under the Patriarch of Constantinople.
-Ermeni Millet, i.e. the Monophysite Church of Armenia under their patriarch.
-Ermeni Katulik Millet, i.e. the Armenian Unitarian church.
-Yahudi Millet: i.e. the Jewish community, to which belonged the Jews who
left Spain after the Reconquista.
-Latin Millet, i.e. the Catholic church.
Every Patriarch in the sphere of his own Millet enjoyed the follow rights:
-Full authority on all the places of worship.
-The authority to remove from his office every priest and bishop, who proved
to be unworthy of his office.
-The authority to submit to the Ottoman government the priests who commit-
ted crimes.
-The authority to judge in matter concerning marriage and other issues related
to their faith and religion.
-The authority to impose taxes in order to collect funds for activities related
their religious community.
Besides every Millet enjoyed the follow rights:
-The right to choose their Patriarch, even when the election was subject to the
approval of the Sultan.
-Autonomy in questions related not only to religious matter but also to admi-
nistrative and judicial matters.
46
The Greek-Orthodox church under the Ottoman Empire enjoyed a very ad-
vantageous position both in economical and political terms, since they could
benefit both from the spiritual autonomy and the economic improvement.
An historian, commenting on the book entitled Travels of Macarius, wrote:
“There is no undercurrent, no indication of a hidden feeling of disaffection,
of the conscious suffering of oppression and wrong towards the government
of the Sultan. He follows the imperial highway from Aleppo to
Constantinople; notes the populous villages and plentiful comfort which he
finds on the road: visits Busa and Constantinople and he is filled with
admiration at their magnificent churches, large congregations, and imposing
churches services. Speaks with affectionate loyalty of Muhammad IV, the
reigning Sultan, pray for his long life and prosperity, and relates with
grateful interest that the year before he had pitched his tent that he may
observe the Easter festivities of his Greek subjects151”.
Following the travel of the Greek Patriarch from Aleppo to
Constantinople, it is possible to see images showing the prosperity of the
church of that time and the Christian community in general. On the way the
author of the book describes the populated and prosperous villages, until the
Patriarch reaches the capital of the Ottoman Empire where he attended the
rites of the Eastern Churches in the magnificent churches of Constantinople.
But, even when under the Ottoman rule, the Greek Church enjoyed a
period of prosperity, some historians argued that its cultural decadence
carried on inexorably152. The scholarship was almost completely neglected,
even when the majority of the monasteries had got huge libraries and the
priests, neglec- ting his own duties toward the community, was eager to
protect their own interests at the court of the Sultan.
Religion, almost completely disassociated from morality, became the ex-
pression of an obsessive ritual, deprived of its original meaning. The
religion of the common people was based on the cult of the saints, the
Virgin, the icons and the relicts and assumed the features of the superstition.
The secular clergy was completely unprepared to face the spiritual needs of
the people, with whom often shared the ignorance and superstition. Very
soon the Orthodox Church was divided between the ignorant and illiterate
clergy, who was in charge of the education of the members of the
community, and the high prelates, who were totally involved with the
political power and for this reason spent most of their time in the intrigues
of the Ottoman court, of which they were acting sometimes as spies.
47
A scholar writes about the condition of the Orthodox clergy: “The Greek
monastic life, as we have already seen, has been from the beginning
indolent, stationary, fruitless. The Greek monks, for many centuries, have
lived in stupid ignorance, leaving the treasures of ancient learning stored up
in their libraries unstudied and neglected; have put forth no evangelistic
effort for the instruc- tion of the people and the advancement of their faith;
have had no thought or aspiration for the public good. The only virtue to
which they aspired was the rigid observance of the ritual of the Church, and
the fasts, austerities and pe- nances prescribed by their monastic rule. Their
only passion was the accumu- lation of money and the pushing of their own
personal interests. The high offices of the church were prizes eagerly
coveted by the wealthy Greeks and many of these, often among the most
worthless of men, were continually en- tering the monasteries for the most
selfish ends153”.
The condition of the Orthodox Church was characterized by a cultural and
intellectual lethargy and by a deep ignorance. The remaining intellectual
energy was mostly spent in continuous disputes against the Latin Catholic
Church, which the common people were unable to understand. On the other
side, most of the Christians were scandalized by the Simony widely spread
in all the Greek-Orthodox Church.
A long testimony, dated on 1700, describes the situation as follows: “We
need not at all doubt but the new Patriarch makes the best of his time.
Tyranny suc- ceeds to Simony. The first thing he does is it to signify the
Sultan’s order to all the archbishops and bishops of his clergy. His greatest
study is to know exactly the revenues of each prelate; he imposes a tax upon
them, and enjoins them very strictly by a second letter to send the sum
demanded, otherwise their dioceses are adjudge to the highest bidder. The
prelates being used to this trade, never spare their suffragans, these latter
torment the papas. The papas flea the parishioners and hardly sprinkle the
least drop of holy water, but what they are paid for before hand. If
afterwards the patriarch has occasion for money, he farms out the gathering
of it to the highest bidder among the Turks. He that gives most for it, goes
into Greece to cite the prelates. Usually for twenty thousand crown that the
clergy is taxed at, the Turk extorts two and twenty; so that he has the two
thousand crowns for his pains, besides having its charge borne in every
diocese. In virtue of the agreement he has made with the patriarch, he
deprives and interdicts from all ecclesiastical functions, those prelates who
refuse to pay their taxes154”.
48
There are several documents, which attested the conversion to Islam by
com-
49
mon people and also high prelates of the Orthodox Church, as for example
the conversion of the Metropolitan of Rodi. In 1676, almost every day, there
were in Corinth people who expressed the intention to convert to Islam. And
in 1673 three priests convert to Islam. The news of the death of a monk, who
converted to Islam, dated on 1679. On the occasion of the circumcision of
Mustafa, son of Muhammad IV, in one week around 200 people convert to
Islam. At the of the 17 century the Christians converted to Islam were one
mil- lion, from all the social classes155.
The following remark, made by a writer of the 17 century, explains very
well the mental attitude of the people who reverted to Islam in the territories
of the Ottoman Empire: “When you mix with the Turks, in the ordinary
intercourse of life and see that they pray and sing even the Psalms of David;
that they give alms and do other good works; that they think highly of
Christ, hold the Bible in great honour, and the like, that, besides, any ass
may become parish priest who plies the bassa with presents, and he will not
urge Christianity on you very much. So you will come to think that they are
good people and will very probably be saved; and so you will come to
believe that you too may be saved, if you like wise become Turk. Here with
the crucified son of God, with many other mysteries of the faith, which seem
quite absurd to the unenlightened reason, easily pass out of your thoughts
and imperceptibly Christianity will quite die out in you, and you will think
that it is all the same whether you be Chri- stian or Turk156”.
In the case of Albania, for example, the passage from Christianity to
Islam seems to have been slow and gradual. In 1610 the Christian
population was ten time more numerous than the Muslim one. Christians
lived mainly in the districts of the country side, while the Muslim population
dwelt in the towns. When several Christian families, after the Turkish
conquest, decided to move in the neighbour countries, the remained ones,
belonging to different social class, gradually converted to Islam. In 1610
several churches were transformed into mosques. This act was against the
terms of the agreements at the time of the Turkish conquest, but Arnold
remarks that there was a justification based on the progressive decrease of
Christians and an increase of the Muslim population. Mons. Marino Bizzi,
Pontifical envoy, describes the situation of the Christian population in
Antivari:“There are about 600 houses inhabited indi- scriminately by
Muslims and Christians-both Latin and schismatic (i.e. the Orthodox Greek
Church). The number of the Muslims is a little in excess of the Christians
50
and that of the Latins in excess of the schismatics157 ”.
51
The condition of the clergy of the Albanian Church was similar to that one
of other parts of Christianity. The majority of the clergy was ignorant. Some
priests, being totally illiterate, didn’t even know the meaning of the Latin
words pronounced during the Eucharistic celebration. In all Albania there
wa- sn’t any Christian school and Bizzi, deploring this condition of
ignorance, considered it responsible for the decadence of the Christian faith
in the country158. In 1624 in the diocese of Antivari there were only 2000
Catholics and in the middle of the century the Christian population consisted
mainly of women. At the end of the century the situation got even worse: in
the city remained in fact only two Catholic families159.
Conclusion
The above brief historical survey, backed up by historically irrefutable

sources, of Muslims’ relationship and their interactions with some of the
powerful Christian sects like the Latin Catholics, Greek Orthodox, the
Coptic and even minor Churches, along with Jews in countries such as
Egypt, Syria, Palestine, Spain and finally the Ottoman Empire, has shown
that throughout the history they were rooted in tolerance, religious freedom,
cultural harmony, and even to certain extent political autonomy.
At the heart of this refined Muslim attitude is Islam’s unique approach to
Christians and Jews as the People of the Scriptures. This special concept,
ba- sing its legitimacy in the Quran and the life examples of the Prophet
( peace be upon him), automatically guaranteed religious autonomy to non-
Muslim Christian and Jewish citizens of the Islamic Empire. Precisely
because this concept is backed up by the divine sanction, no Muslim
governments were able to breach it.
Second, even when, in some cases, certain Christian sects or their leaders
faced persecutions, they had more to do with the political tensions between
them and the Muslim rulers, and they were never religious in nature. Third,
more than anything else, it was the comparative peace that the Muslim
armies brought to the conquered lands that attracted non-Muslims to
embrace Islam in the long run.
Some other factors that helped the process of gradual conversions of non-
Muslims in the conquered lands to Islam were the egalitarian teachings of
Islam, lack of priestly and other ecclesiastical oppression, Muslims’
52
educatio-
53
nal and cultural refinements, etc.
Many Christian sects that had problem within them, apart from facing per-
secution at the hands of their fellow Christians, welcomed the Muslims as
just arbitrators in their disputes, and in many cases, Muslims acted truly as
those guaranteed protection to such Christians their life, faith and property.
Finally, forceful conversions to Islam never happened anywhere in the
Muslim lands, however, sadly, as Muslims lost Spain, oppression and
forceful conversions of both Muslims and Jews happened there in an
unprecedented way.
Arnold discusses all these and many other points, as hinted before, very
ob- jectively in the book, and indirectly reminding us all of the importance
of the religious tolerance and freedom.
Sabrina Lei
Notes on Introduction:
1- Daniel (N.), Islam and the West, 131.

2- Krey (A.C.), The First Crusade, 26-27.
3-Idem, 28-29.
4-Shahan (T.J.), Middle Ages Sketch, 127.
5-De Lacy (O.), How Greek Science passed to the Arabs, 47-
64. 6-Idem, 73-90.
7-Milman (H.H.), History of Latin Christianity, 59.
8-Afsaruddin (A.), The First Muslims, 39.
9- Butler A.J., The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 152.
10- Ibidem.
11- Arnold (T.W.), The Preaching of Islam,
27. 12-Ibidem.
13- Idem, 40.
40. 15-Idem, 38-39.
54
16- Krey (A.C.), The First Crusade, 29.
55
17- Idem, 31.
18- Idem, 32.
19- Arnold (T. W.), The Preaching of Islam,
42. 20-Idem, 43-44.
21- Adeney (W.F.), History of Greek Eastern Church, 170.
22- In 1010 the Church of Resurrection got destroyed by the fury of Hakim,
but in 1048 was completely rebuid by the emperor Constantin Monomachus
under the superintendence of the Patriarch Nicephorus.
23- La Strange (G.), Palestine under the Moors, 202.
24- Adeney (W. F.), History of Greek Eastern Church, 165.
25- Arnold (T. W.), The Preaching of Islam,
46-48. 26-Idem, 48.
27- Ibidem.
28- Idem, 48-49.
29- Idem, 50.
30- Ibidem.
31-Ibidem.
32-Ibidem.
33-Idem, 51.
34-Ibidem.
35-Ibidem.
36-Ibidem.
37-Ibidem.
38-Ibidem.
39-Ibidem.
40-Ibidem.
41-Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 42.
42-Idem, 46
43-Idem, 73-74.
44-Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 84.
45- Amélieau, Monuments pour server à l’histoire de l’Egypte chrétienne
(Paris, 1888); Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 88.
46-Idem,176-177.
47-Ibidem.
48-Ibidem.
49- Quoted in Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 184.
50- Adeney (W.F.), History of Greek Eastern Church, 575-576.
56
51- Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 251-252.
52-Idem, 274.
53- Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 320.
54- Ibn ‘Abd Al Hakam by Abu Salih, 97-100; Butler (A.J.), The Arab Con-
quest of Egypt, 436.
55- Abu Salih, 231, Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 440.
56- Severus, p. 110, l. 5, p. 108, l. 18. Butler (A.J.), The Arab Conquest of
Egypt, 445.
57- Ibidem.
58- Severus III, 15-20, Butler (A. J.), The Arab Conquest of Egypt, 445.
59- Neale (J.M.), A history of the Holy Eastern Church,
78 60-Idem, 82.
61- Idem, 83.
62- Idem, 90.
63- Ibidem, 90.
64- Idem, 109.
65- Ibidem, 109.
66- Idem, 111.
67- Idem, 115-118.
68- Idem, 118.
69- Idem, 129.
70- Idem, 137.
71- Idem, 147.
72- Idem, 149.
73- Idem, 150-151.
74- Idem, 157.
75- Idem, 162.
76- Idem, 169.
77- Idem, 189-190.
78- Idem, 204.
79- Idem, 200-201
80- Idem, 206.
81- Idem, 220.
82- Idem, 225.
83- Idem, 227.
84- Idem, 251-262.
85- Idem, 261-266.
57
86- Idem, 299.
87- Idem, 305.
88- Idem, 306.
89- Idem, 327-329
90- Idem, 329.
91- Idem, 73.
92- Idem, 75.
93- Idem, 85.
94- Ibidem.
95- Idem, 108-109.
96- Idem, 273-278.
97- Lane-Poole (S.), The Moors in Spain, 7.
98- Prescott , Ferdinand and Isabella, I, 192.
99- Krauskopft (J.), Jewis and Moors in Spain, 94.
100-Ibidem.
101- Idem, 96.
102- Idem, 94.
103- Ibidem.
104- Idem, 95-96.
105- Lane Poole (S.), The Moors in Spain, 44.
106- Whishaw (B. e E.), Arabic Spain:sidelight on her history and art, 17.
107-Ibidem.
108- Idem, 18.
109- Ibidem.
110- Ibidem.
111- Ibidem, Idrisi, 17.
112- Whishaw (B. and E.), Arabic Spain: sidelight on her history and art,
113- Cronica General VIII, 257. Whishaw (B. and E.), Arabic Spain: side-
light on her history and art, 27.
114-Ibidem.
115-Ibidem.
116-Idem, 171.
117-Lane Poole (S.), The Moors in Spain, 129.
118-Lane Poole (S.), The Moors in Spain, 129-
130. 119-Idem, 18.
120- St. Bonifaciae, A.D. 745, Epistola LXII, Migne, Patr. Lat.
Tom. LXXXIX, 761.
58
121- Alvar, Indiculus Luminosus 18, 531-532.
122- Whishaw (B. and E.), Arabic Spain: sidelight on her history and art,26.
123-Menocal (M.R.), The Ornament of the world, 66.
124- Migne, Patr. Lat. Tome XCVIII, 385.
125- Alvar, Indiculus Luminous, Migne Patr. Lat. Tom., CXXI,
29. 126-Lane Poole (S.), The Moors in Spain, 84.
127- Idem, 87.
128- Idem, 93.
129- Idem, 95.
130- Whishaw (B. e E.), Arabic Spain: sidelight on her history and art, 22.
131-Idem, 25.
132-Arnold (T.W.), The Preaching of Islam, 105.
133-Krauskopf Jos., Jews and Moors in Spain, 99
134-Idem, 173
135-Clark (E. L.), Races of European Turkey, 17-
18. 136-Idem, 18.
137- Idem, 22.
138- Idem, 31
139- Idem, 48.
140- Adeney W.F., History of Greek Eastern Church, 253, Fortescue A.,
The Orthodox Eastern Church, 222, 227.
141- Fortescue A., The Orthodox Eastern Church, 227.
142- Clark E. L., Races of European Turkey, 64.
143- Adeney W.F., History of Greek Eastern Church, 259.
144- Clark E. L., Races of European Turkey, 67.
145- Clark E.L. Races of European Turkey,
146- Creasy (E. S.), History of the Ottoman Turks,
78. 147-Idem, 86.
148- Clark E. L., Races of European Turkey,
82. 149-Idem, 93.
150-Fortescue A., The Orthodox Eastern Church,
242. 151-Clark E. L., Races of European Turkey, 98-
99.
152- Ibidem.
153- Idem, 141.
154- Turnefort (J. P.) A voyage into Levant, I,
107. 155-Arnold (T.W.), The Preaching of Islam,
59
142.
156- Ibidem, Scheffler (J.), Turcken-shrifft: von der ursachen der turckishen
60
ueberziehung unde der zertretung des volkes gottes (1664), 55.
157- Bizzi (M.), Relazione della visita fatta da me, Marino Bizzi,
Arcivescovo d’Antivari, Albania e Servia, alla Santità di Nostro Signore
Papa Paolo Quinto 1610 (Biblioteca Barberina, Rome, NLXIII, 13) fol.7
(B), fol. 38 (B).
132. 159-Idem.
61

Introduction To Thomas Arnolds Preaching

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To Thomas Arnolds Preaching

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction To Thomas Arnolds Preaching

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction

Dr. Sabrina Lei

An Objective Look at the Distortions of the History of Islam and the

T.W. Arnold and the Refined Scholarship on Islam

However, in spite of the overwhelming Orientalist discourse of power that

The Ottoman Empire : Muslims Amongst the Orthodox Christians and

The above brief historical survey, backed up by historically irrefutable

1- Daniel (N.), Islam and the West, 131.

You might also like