al-Ashʿath ibn Qais

Abū Muhammad al-Ashʿath ibn Qais al-Kindī ( Arabic أبو محمد الأشعث بن قيس الكندي, DMG Abū Muḥammad al-Ašʿaṯ ibn Qais al-Kindī ; * approx. 599 ; † March 5, 661 in Kufa ) was the last king from the Arab tribe of the Kinda in the Hadramaut and played an important role in the early history of Islam . After joining the Prophet Muhammad in 631 , he led the Kinda resistance against the Muslim troops of Medina during the Ridda Wars , but was defeated and captured by them. Pardoned by Abū Bakr , he took part in the most important Arab battles of conquest under ʿUmar ibn al-Chattāb and settled with his tribe in the newly founded camp city of Kufa. During the caliphate of ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān , with whom he was friendly, he served as governor of Azerbaijan . After the Battle of Siffin , he urged ʿAlī ibn Abī Tālib to accept the arbitration proposed by Muʿāwiya I , which led to the secession of the Kharijites . Shiite sources suspect him to have been involved in the plot to assassinate ʿAlī. Al-Ashath and his family were generally said to have a tendency to betrayal.

Al-Ashath's real name ( ism ) was Maʿdīkarib. He is said to have received the Laqab nickname al-Ashʿath ("the shaggy, disheveled one") because he was always unkempt. Because of his contact with the Prophet Mohammed, al-Ashʿath is assigned to the Sahāba .

Origin and position within the Kinda tribe

Al-Aschʿath belonged to the branch of the Banū Muʿāwiya ibn Kinda, who was one of the two branches of the Kinda alongside the Banū Ashras. The Banū Muʿāwiya ibn Kinda were the branch of the tribe from which the crowned kings ( al-mulūk al-mutauwaǧūn ) of the Kinda descended. According to al-Hamdānī , the Banū Muʿāwiya produced a total of seventy crowned kings, of which al-Ashʿath was the last.

The Banū Muʿāwiya were divided into two major subgroups at the time of Ashʿath, the Banū l-Hārith ibn Muʿāwiya and the Banū ʿAmr ibn Muʿāwiya. The former were led by the Banū Jabala clan, the latter by the four brothers of the Banū Walīʿa, who owned various valley floors in the Hadramaut and were referred to as "the four kings" ( al-mulūk al-arbaʿa ). Al-Aschʿath belonged in the paternal line to the Banū Jabala. While most Arabic sources only report that the Banū Jabala held the leadership ( riʾāsa ) over the Banū l-Hārith ibn Muʿāwiya, others state that they had also held the title of king since the time of al-Ashʿath's grandfather Maʿdīkarib. According to Ibn Abī Usaibiʿa , al-Ashath's father Qais ibn Maʿdīkarib was even king over the entire tribe of Kinda. However, this information must be questioned because there were at least four other kings among the Kinda in his time with the Banū Walīʿa.

Both al-Ashʿath's father and his sister Warda were Jews. The Judaism was generally prevalent at that time under the Kinda and Yemen. Michael Lecker therefore suspects that al-Ash -ath himself was originally Jewish. This is also supported by the fact that ʿAlī ibn Abī Tālib is said to have once referred to al-Ashʿath in anger as "Jews".

Al-Ashath's mother Kabscha bint Yazīd belonged to the Banū ʿAmr ibn Muʿāwiya and was a descendant of the Kindite king Hudschr Ākil al-Murār. Al-Ashʿath himself later married into the Banū ʿAmr ibn Muʿāwiya by marrying the daughter of one of the Banū-Walīʿa kings. His wife was the daughter of Jamd ibn Maʿdīkarib ibn Walīʿa.

The Arabic sources give the Nasab for al-Aschʿath: al-Ashʿath ibn Qais ibn Maʿdīkarib ibn Muʿāwiya ibn Jabala ibn ʿAdī ibn Rabīʿa ibn Muʿāwiya al-Akramūn ibn al-Hārith ibn Muʿāwiya ibn Thāwiya ibn Muʿa Murta.

Life

The ransom from the Bal-Harith

Al-Ashʿath began his military career with a campaign of revenge against the Banū Murād of the Madhhij tribe, who had killed his father, but on the way clashed with the Bal-Hārith (Banū l-Hārith ibn Kaʿb), another branch of the Madhhij , was captured by them and had to buy his way out with a large number of camels. Most sources speak of 3,000 camels and emphasize that it was the largest number of camels ever used to ransom an Arab, three times the number otherwise used for a tribal king. This high amount paid for al-Ashʿath became proverbial.

Delegation trip to Medina

In the year 10 of the Hijra (= 631 AD) al-Ash Aath came to Mohammed in Medina with a delegation from the Kinda and accepted Islam. While most sources state that al-Ashath headed the delegation, a report dating back to al-Ashʿath himself states that he was not considered the most senior person in the group. This is likely due to the fact that, as other sources suggest, the delegation also included the Banū Walīʿa, the four royal brothers who led the Banū ʿAmr ibn Muʿāwiya, alongside him. They were on an even higher level than him, even if he was already crowned ( mutauwaǧ ) at that time , as reported in the Mufaddalīyāt compiled in the 8th century .

There is different information about the size of the delegation. While Muhammad ibn Saʿd , citing Ibn Shihāb al-Zuhrī (d. 742) states that there were only a few more than ten, the delegation according to Ibn Ishāq comprised 80 mounted people. The men paid their respects to the prophet in pompous dress in the mosque of Medina : they had done their hair and coated their eyelids with antimony ( kuḥl ) and wore long robes made of gold brocade with palm leaf patterns and hoods lined with silk. It is reported that Mohammed took the opportunity to remind the delegation of the Islamic ban on wearing silk. The men are said to have removed the hoods from their robes.

Ibn Hishām reports that al-Ashʿath at this meeting also attributed a descent from his maternal ancestor to Ākil al-Murār. Mohammed is said to have rejected these attempts to establish a genealogical commonality between him and the Kinda, but with a smile he replied that his uncle al-ʿAbbās ibn ʿAbd al-Muttalib and his cousin Rabīʿa ibn al-Harith were on their trade trips through Arabia boasted of belonging to the Kinda, but he did not deny his true origin. Mohammed is quoted in this connection as saying: “No, we are the descendants of an-Nadr ibn Kināna (= Quraish ). We do not pursue the parentage of our mother, but we do not fall away from our father either. "

Marriage alliances were also forged during the visit: Al-Ashath offered Mohammed his sister Qutaila for marriage, and Mohammed accepted the offer. Conversely, Abū Quhāfa, the father of Abu Bakr, al-Ashʿath gave his daughter Umm Farwa, who was blind, to wife. However, he did not allow al-Ashʿath to take them to Yemen. According to Ibn Saʿd's report, Mohammed also made gifts to the members of the delegation when they left for their return journey: al-Ashath received twelve ounces of gold, the other members of the delegation ten each.

Mohammed provided al-Ashʿath and the Banū Walīʿa with Ziyād ibn Labīd al-Baiyādī, who belonged to the Ansār , their own governor at their side, who accompanied them to the Hadramaut. After his return to the Hadramaut, al-Ashʿath prepared his sister to marry Mohammed and went to Medina to bring her to him. Even before he had left Yemen, however, the news of the Prophet's death reached him and he brought it back.

Various sources say that Mohammed also decided a legal dispute in which al-Ash alath was involved. This involved owning a valley in the Hadramaut. Al-Aschʿath's opponent was Wā'il ibn Hudschr, another South Arabian tribal king. Mohammed is said to have decided this dispute in favor of Wā'il after hearing various eyewitnesses. Al-Ashʿath is quoted as saying that this legal dispute was the occasion for the revelation of the Qur'anic word in sura 3 : 77: "See, those who sell God's covenant and their oaths at a low price have no part in the hereafter."

Fall of the Banū Walīʿa and (second) coronation of al-Ashath

Even before the Prophet's death in 632, there was a serious conflict between the Banū Walīʿa and Ziyād ibn Labīd, the governor appointed by Mohammed. The reason for this was that Muhammad had awarded the Banū Walīʿa part of the Sadaqa income from the Hadramaut during their visit to Medina , but the mode of payment of their share was not clarified. While Ziyād ibn Labīd said that the Banū Walīʿa had to collect the money from him themselves, they were of the opinion that he and his own people should bring it to them. Both sides then complained in writing to Mohammed in Medina. Mohammed threatened the Banū Walīʿa in his reply that they would wage war. When Mohammed died a short time later and the news of it reached the Banū Walīʿa, they loudly expressed their glee. More than twenty women, referred to in the sources as "whores" ( baġāyā ), made music and dyed their hands with henna on the occasion .

Ziyād ibn Labīd, who was confirmed in his office by Abū Bakr after the death of Muhammad, asked the Banū Walīʿa to take the oath of allegiance to the caliph and to make sadaqa payments, but they refused. A small cause was enough to escalate the situation. When Ziyād, a young man's camel who was especially noble, moved in when Sadaqa, he and other men defended themselves. A serious conflict arose in which al-Ashʿath tried to mediate, but the governor refused. When Ziyād refused to surrender the animal, which had already been branded as Sadaqa, and took the man prisoner, the Banū ʿAmr ibn Muʿāwiya gathered their people together to fight him. However, Ziyād and men from other branches of the Kinda who had remained loyal to him made a surprise night attack on them and killed a large number of them, including the four kings of the Banū Walīʿa. Numerous women and children were taken into captivity and the houses looted.

The Banū ʿAmr bin Muʿāwiya who had escaped from the fight then sought refuge in al-Ashʿath. The female prisoners of the Banū ʿAmr ibn Muʿāwiya also asked him for help, emphasizing his family ties to them. Al-Ashʿath promised help to his relatives, but tied it to the fact that they made him their king. The leaderless Banū Walīʿa family then actually crowned him their king ( mallakū-hu ʿalai-him wa-tauwaǧū-hu ). If the statement in the Mufaddalīyāt that he was already crowned on his delegation visit to Medina is correct, it was his second coronation. It was done in the manner that was customary for the kings of Qahtan. As king of all Banū Muʿāwiya, al-Ashʿath was now the most powerful man of the Kinda tribe.

Obviously, as king, al-Ashath had a penchant for luxury. The Muslim sources of the Middle Ages emphasize that he was the first Arab to be escorted by footmen when riding out.

Confrontation with the state of Medina

Al-Ashʿath apparently found himself in a position of strength vis-à-vis the Muslims, for it is said that at this time he proclaimed: “The Arabs have returned to what their fathers worshiped, and we are the Arabs, those of Abu Bakr live furthest away. Should he send troops against us? ”He now led the Kinda into the fight against Ziyād, caused him and the Muslims a serious defeat at Tarīm and locked them up in the city. Ziyād ibn Labīd therefore requested reinforcements, whereupon the Meccan al-Muhādschir ibn Abī Umaiya came to his aid.

With regard to the subsequent events, the reports differ widely. During At-Tabarī reports that Ziyād and al-Muhādschir now advanced against al-Ashʿath and the Kinda and defeated them at Mahjar al-Zurqān. succeeded according to another report al-Ashʿath by a ruse to also include al-Muhādschir in the city. This second account, which comes from Ibn Aamtham al-Kūfī (8th / 9th centuries), is very detailed. Accordingly, Ziyād wrote a letter to Abū Bakr from the besieged city, in which he described the situation, whereupon Abū Bakr in turn wrote a letter to al-Ashʿath, in which he admonished him with reference to Sura 3: 102 not to apostate from Islam , and at the same time offered the removal of his governor Ziyād. The well-known poet Hassan ibn Thabit also put a few words under the letter. The letter was delivered to al-Ashʿath by a messenger named Muslim ibn ʿAbdallāh. Al-Aschʿath reacted to the letter with great anger because Abū Bakr had blamed him for the confrontation with Ziyād. A young man from his relatives rushed at the messenger and split his head, which al-Ashʿath subsequently approved. However, the killing of the messenger and al-Ashath's reaction to it aroused great indignation in his camp and led several sub-groups of the Kinda to turn away from al-Ash Aath.

Although al-Ashʿath remained only 2,000 fighters and al-Muhādschir and Ziyād received reinforcements from the Banū Ashras, the other subgroup of the Kinda, he managed to defeat the two military leaders and lock them up in the city. Ziyād then sent a second request for help to Abū Bakr, which prompted him to call the Muslims in Medina for a consultation . Abū Bakr did not accept the advice of Abū Aiyūb al-Ansārī to accommodate the insurgents by exempting them from the payments due for the current year. On the advice of ʿUmar ibn al-Chattāb , however, he ordered the Meccan ʿIkrima ibn Abī Jahl to go into the Hadramaut and fight al-Ashʿath and his people. Only after the fighters of ʿIkrimas had arrived in the Hadraumaut could the Muslims join forces to defeat al-Ashath and his people. Al-Ashʿath, who had put on his crown before the battle, was put to flight.

Negotiations with an-Nujair and pardon by Abū Bakr

The sources unanimously report that al-Ashʿath fled with the rest of the rebels to the fortress an-Nujair east of the city of Tarīm, where they were subsequently besieged by the Muslims. When the siege of the fortress continued, al-Ashʿath started negotiations with the Muslims. Ibn ʿAsākir reports that under the cover of the night he went to al-Muhādschir and Ziyād and asked them for a security guarantee ( amān ) for his life and property, so that they could bring him to Abū Bakr and he might pass judgment on him. In return he wanted to hand over the fortress to them. The two Muslim commanders agreed to this plan. According to Ibn Aʿtham’s report, Abū Bakr found out about al-Ash’ath’s request for peace and sent a letter to Ziyād, in which he asked him to bring al-Ash’ath to him with the appropriate honors and not to kill any of the noble people of the Kinda.

However, the messenger who was supposed to deliver Abu Bakr's letter, al-Mughīra ibn Shuʿba, arrived too late. When he arrived at an-Nujair, the Muslims had already stormed the fortress, beheaded the men and taken the women prisoner. Various sources report that a total of 700 to 800 men were killed in the storming of An-Nujair. Women who expressed their glee at the death of Muhammad had their hands cut off. As Ibn Aʿtham reports, Ziyād regretted his actions against the Kindites after reading the letter from Abū Bakr. Nevertheless, he had al-Ashʿath laid in iron chains together with 80 other members of the Kinditic royal family and brought to Abū Bakr in Medina.

The information on the security guarantee that al-Ashʿath negotiated with the Muslim commanders at an-Nujair is confused. While some reports say that it was allowed to leave the fortress because of its seventy people in total, according to other reports it only included ten people. There is agreement, however, that the final version of the document did not contain al-Ashʿath's name. The fact that he had concluded a protection agreement that did not include the entire crew of the fortress was viewed by the tribesmen as an outright treason. Even on the train to Medina, the female inmates of his tribe are said to have cursed him for this reason and reviled him with the Yemeni name ʿUrf an-nār ("mane of hell"). It is not clear whether al-Ashʿath expected the killing of his tribesmen. Obviously, her fate did not leave him unmoved. Al-Balādhurī reports a funeral ode that he is said to have written for the fallen of an-Nujair.

It is unanimously reported that after al-Ashʿath's arrival in Medina there was a discussion with Abū Bakr. Aslam, the slave of Umar ibn al-Chattābs, is said to have been there when al-Ashʿath was still in chains and Abu Bakr reproached him. He claims to have heard how al-Ashʿath asked Abū Bakr in the conversation to spare him so that he could help him in the war, and also asked him to give him his sister Umm Farwa as a wife. According to Ibn Aʿtham's report, Abū Bakr asked forgiveness for his misstep, but justified his resistance to the Muslim troops with the fact that Ziyād had killed his people "unjustly and in a hostile manner" ( ẓulman wa-ʿudwānan ). The conversation ended with Abu Bakr al-Ash Aath freeing him and bringing Umm Farwa, whom al-Ashath had officially married on his first visit to Medina, to him. After the marriage, al-Ashʿath is said to have given a huge banquet in Medina, for which he had numerous camels slaughtered. It is unclear what happened to the imprisoned tribesmen of al-Ashath who were with him in Medina. While according to the report of at-Tabarīs Abū Bakr released them together with al-Aschʿath, another report cited by al-Balādhurī states that he had to buy them for a price of 400 dirhams per person. He borrowed the money from the traders in Medina.

As a tribal leader in the Futūh and as a settler in Kufa

His behavior in connection with the uprising against the state of Medina is said to have al-Aschʿath himself later referred to as apostasy ( irtidād ). After his return to Islam, he lost the kingship, but retained the position of chief ( saiyid ) within his tribe. Shurahbīl ibn Simt , a member of the tribe who had distinguished himself in the Ridda Wars, had greater influence with the Kinda than he did during this time.

In the following years al-Ashʿath participated intensively in the Arab conquests ( Futūh ). So he fought in 636 in the battle of Yarmūk and lost an eye. A year later ʿUmar sent him together with Sad ibn Abī Waqqās and several hundred southern Arabs to Iraq, where he distinguished himself in the battle of al-Qādisīya and in a few other skirmishes. According to the report of Saif ibn ʿUmar , al-Ashʿath visited Chālid ibn al-Walīd in Qinnasrīn in the year 17 of the Hijra (= 638 AD) , which he had just conquered, and received a gift of 10,000 dirhams from him . This is said to have been the reason for the deposition of Chalid from the supreme command of the city. The Arab historian Ibn al-ʿAdīm (d. 1262) cites a tradition in his history of the city of Aleppo , according to which al-Aschʿath was also the first Muslim who crossed the Cilician Gate after the conquest of Antioch . On behalf of Abū ʿUbaida ibn al-Jarrāh , he is said to have crossed the Lukkām Mountains , conquered several fortresses behind them and then returned to him.

After al-Ashʿath had settled in the newly established military camp of Kufa , he regained his leading position among the Kinda. Shurahbīl ibn Simt is also said to have intended to settle in Kufa, but was withdrawn from ʿUmar to Syria. Al-Ashʿath had a house built in Kufa and soon had his own mosque there . In the time after that, al-Ash Aath still took part in campaigns. So he fought in 642 at the battle of Nihāwand and took part in the conquest of Azerbaijan in 646/47 .

In addition to Mālik al-Ashtar ibn Harith an-Nachaʿī, al-Aschath was one of the most important leaders of the Yemeni Arabs, who made up the majority of the population of Kufa. During the time of the caliphate of Umar, an incident occurs that is reported in various hadiths : a fatherly aunt of al-Ash Aath, who still adhered to the Jewish faith and lived in Yemen, died, and al-Ashath claimed her inheritance a. However, ʿUmar refused him and awarded the inheritance to the Jews on the grounds that members of different religions could not inherit one another.

As governor in Azerbaijan

During the caliphate of ʿUthmān, al-Walīd ibn ʿUqba, the governor in Kufa, appointed al-Ashʿath as deputy governor of Azerbaijan. A large part of his time in this office was occupied with securing Muslim rule over the region. This also included the establishment of a permanent Muslim garrison in Ardabil . Al-Balādhurī reports on a village in Armenia in which there were still descendants of the Kindites who had come to the country with al-Ashʿath in his day.

During his time as governor, al-Ashʿath received an annual income of 100,000 dirhams as tribute from Azerbaijan, which he used to support his followers in Kufa. An eyewitness quoted by Abū l-Qāsim at-Tabarānī reports how he prayed one morning in the mosque of al-Ashʿath and after the prayer he found a purse with 500 dirhams and a pair of shoes in his place. When he asked what it was, he was told that al-Ashʿath had arrived the night before and that he had provided all the men who had participated in the prayer with money and shoes. Although he was not a member of the mosque, he was allowed to keep the presents.

Al-Ashʿath also had very friendly relations with ʿUthmān and gave two of his daughters sons of the caliph for marriage: his daughter Habbāna he married to ʿUthmān's son ʿAmr, his daughter Qarība with his son Chālid. Saif ibn ʿUmar reports that al-Ashʿath at ʿUthmān was able to exchange his land in the Hadramaut for an estate in Iraq. This estate, called Tīzanābād, was originally Sassanid crown domain land .

Under the caliphate of ʿAlī ibn Abī Tālib

When ʿAlī ibn Abī Tālib (656) came to power, he demanded from al-Ashʿath that he hand over the income of the province of Azerbaijan to him. Thereupon al-Ash Aath toyed with the idea of ​​transferring to the camp of Muʿāwiya , but was stopped by his tribesmen. They made it clear to him that he would thereby give up his community and his camp ( Misr ), while for the people in Syria he would only be an appendage ( ḏanab ). Al-Aschʿath then went to ʿAlī, who gave him command of the tribal division of the Kinda and Rabīʿa in Kufa. A family relationship with ʿAlī was established through the fact that al-Ash seineath gave his daughter al-Jaʿda ʿAlī's son al-Hasan in marriage .

Tensions arose when ʿAlī wanted to replace al-Ashʿath in his position as commander of the tribal division of the Kinda and Rabīʿa with Hassān ibn Machdūdsch adh-Dhuhlī for an unknown reason. Many Yemenis took offense at this measure because they believed that Hassan was not on the same level as al-Ash'ath in the tribal hierarchy. Muʿāwiya tried to take advantage of the situation by commissioning a poem to incite al-Ashath against ʿAlī. The poem sent to al-Ash -ath by his tribal mate Mālik ibn Hubaira (st. 685), which aroused fear of a split among the Yemenis in Iraq, led ʿAlī to reverse his injunctions.

Role in Siffīn

At the Battle of Siffin (657) al-Ashʿath carried the war banner of the Kinda of Kufa and was in command of the right wing of ʿAlī's army. After adh-Dhahabī he was the most important military leader bedeutendAlīs at the battle ( akbar al-umarāʾ ʿAlī yauma Ṣiffīn ). After Muʿāwiya had blocked the troops of TrAlīs access to the waters of the Euphrates , al-Ashʿath was sent by ʿAlī with 2,000 fighters to clear the way to the water. They were involved in fierce fighting with Muʿāwiya's troops, but in the end they were able to secure access to the water.

After the fighting stopped, al-Ash Aath offered ʿAlī to go to Muʿāwiya and start negotiations with him. According to a tradition that cites adh-Dhahabī, he rode alone into the Syrian camp and called for a peaceful solution to the conflict, taking into account the unpleasant consequences of an intra-Muslim struggle and the Qur'anic 49: 9: “And if two groups of If the believers are in dispute with one another, arbitrate between the two! "

Muʿāwiya suggested to al-Ashʿath that each of the two warring parties should elect a representative and that these representatives should then decide, according to the Koran, to whom the rule was due. Al-Ashʿath adopted this proposal and brought it to the people in ʿAlī's camp, who largely agreed to it. However, there were also some in the Iraqi army who were not satisfied with it. For example, Mālik al-Ashtar, ʿAlī's commander, who had recently undertaken the successful advance against Muʿāwiya, rejected the establishment of a court of arbitration and reprimanded al-Ashath. After al-Yaʿqūbī there was a violent exchange between them ( kalām ʿaẓīm ), which threatened to degenerate into a violent conflict.

ʿAlī, who had initially also rejected the arbitration tribunal proposed by Muʿāwiya's delegate, finally gave his approval. His preferred candidate for the arbitration tribunal was ʿAbdallāh ibn ʿAbbās , but at the urging of al-Aschʿath he sent the Yemeni Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī as his representative, although he knew that he was hostile to him. Thereupon a contract was drawn up between īAlī and ʿAmr, in which both sides undertook to obey the judgment of the arbitral tribunal. Al-Aschʿath urged ʿAlī to renounce his caliphate "Commander of the Believers" ( amīr al-muʾminīn ) when signing the treaty in order to make the document acceptable to the other side. Al-Ashath then went around the camp himself and read the treaty to the tribes.

When he came to the Banū Tamīm, a certain ʿUrwa Ibn Udaiya there was indignant that the decision about rule should be placed in the hands of two people. He shouted indignantly: "Only God has the decision ( lā ḥukma illā li-Llāh )!" And struck the rear of al-Ashath's mount with his sword so that it jumped away. Al-Ashath's members of the tribe then became angry with the Tamīm. The conflict could only be stifled by the fact that the heads of the Tamīm sought mediation and appeased al-Ashʿath. On the way back to Kufa, however, more and more people joined Ibn Udaiya. From this group later formed the community of the Kharijites . The arbitration tribunal, which met in Dūmat al-Jandal and at which al-Ashʿath himself was present, ended in a defeat of ʿAlīs.

Split with ʿAlī

Al-Ash Aath is said to have participated in the fighting against the Kharijites near Nahrawān in July 658, but after Siffīn the relationship between him and ʿAlī seems to have deteriorated considerably. It is reported that ʿAlī reviled the minbar at a public sermon in Kufa al-Ashʿath . His words, which he said on the occasion, are so well known that they have found their way into the proverbs Nahj al-Balāgha (No. 19). The starting point for the incident was that ʿAlī had spoken about the arbitration tribunal in his sermon and a man asked why ʿAlī had first forbidden them to consent to the arbitration tribunal, but then ordered them. ʿAlī then clapped his hands and exclaimed, “That is the punishment of one who has failed to reason ” ( hāḏā ǧāzāʾ man taraka l-ʿuqda ). When al-Ashʿath noticed that this spoke against him but not for him, ʿAlī cursed him, insulted him as Munāfiq and recalled his “betrayal” to an-Nujair.

Various traditions report that al-Ashʿath once asked for admission to ʿAlī and, when he was rejected by his servant Qanbar, he blew his nose. Reports from Shiite sources also state that al-Ashʿath once threatened ʿAlī with death during a conversation.

Al-Ashath was suspected of being responsible for the murder of īAlī while he was still alive. This was based on the fact that he had spent the night before the crime together with its murderer Ibn Muljam in the Great Mosque of Kufa. On the morning in question he could be heard saying loudly to Ibn Muldscham: "Salvation, salvation, tomorrow has come for you". This was interpreted as an indication that he was privy to the murder plot. In particular, the ʿAlī follower Hudschr ibn ʿAdī , who had observed al-Ashʿath during his talks with Ibn Muljam, saw in him the person actually responsible for the murder of ʿAlī.

What speaks against al-Ash standath's involvement in the murder of ʿAlī, however, is that he continued to have a good relationship with his son al-Hasan. When al-Hasan was made caliph, al-Ash -ath immediately swore allegiance to him, and al-Ash Aath's son Muhammad conducted the abdication negotiations with Muʿāwiya on behalf of al-Hasan.

The End

Al-Aschʿath died a little later, however, on the 27th Schauwāl of the year 40 dH (= March 5, 661), when the abdication negotiations were not yet concluded.

The great esteem al-Hasan held for al-Ash Aath can be seen in the fact that he said the funeral prayer for him and embalmed his body. Al-Ashʿath was buried in his house and is said to have been 63 lunar years old when he died.

progeny

From his first marriage to the daughter of Jamd ibn Maʿdīkarib ibn Walīʿa, al-Ashʿath had a son named an-Nuʿmān, who, however, died early. He received the news of the birth of this son during his delegation trip to see the Prophet in Medina. The boy was also the subject of conversations with Mohammed. When al-Ashʿath said that he would have liked to give a feast for the Banū Jabala on the occasion of the birth, Mohammed is said to have warned him that children, as much as people grow dear to them, are also reasons for cowardice, sadness and avarice ( inna l-aulād mabḫalatun wa-maǧbanatun wa-maḥzanatun ).

Umm Farwa, al-Ashʿath's main wife, bore him at least five children, namely the sons Muhammad and Ishāq and the daughters Quraiba, Hubāba and Jaʿda. Abū Hilāl also names a son named Ismāʿīl. Muhammad, who was born in 633/634, continued to lead the Kinda after the death of his father and remained enormously influential in the politics of Kufa. During the caliphate of ʿAbdallāh ibn az-Zubair , he served as governor of Mosul . After al-Muchtār ibn Abī ʿUbaid came to power in Kufa, he fled to Musʿab ibn az-Zubair and then fell in the fight against al-Muchtār.

Muhammad's son ʿAbd ar-Rahmān Ibn al-Ashʿath undertook a large-scale uprising during the caliphate of ʿAbd al-Malik , which almost brought the Umayyad Empire to a collapse and was only put down after three years by al-Hajjāj ibn Yūsuf . After that, the Aschāʿitha, the name for the family of al-Aschath, no longer played a major role in politics. However, a direct descendant of al-Ash ,ath, Yaūqūb ibn Ishāq al-Kindī , became famous as "the philosopher of the Arabs".

The image of al-Ashʿath as an "arch traitor"

Al-Ashʿath had been associated with the reputation of a traitor at the fortress of an-Nujair since the Ridda Wars. Shiite circles later viewed al-Ashʿath's behavior with Siffīn as treason and attributed all the mishaps that later hit the ʿAlīds to him . The Shiite historian al-Yaʿqūbī attributed a plot to him with ʿAlī's opponent Muʿāwiya. The latter wrote to him even before the battle of Siffīn al-Ashʿath and pulled him to his side. Al-Aschʿath then ensured that ʿAlī called back his troops when they were making a successful advance against Muʿāwiya's troops, and thus helped the Syrians to victory. In the early account of Siffīn by Abu Michnaf , however, there is no mention of this plot. In Shiite circles, Abū Bakr was also said to have deeply regretted his pardon for al-Ashʿath, "because he does not see any wickedness without running after her and lending his support to her." Ashʿath also heard that they accused his daughter Jaʿda of poisoning her husband al-Hasan, the third imam according to Shiite teachings .

Umaiyad propaganda also contributed to the deterioration of al-Ashʿath's image. During the uprising of ʿAbd al-Rahmān Ibn al-Ashʿath, they tried to publicly denigrate his family in order to deprive him of his political legitimacy. They spread that his grandfather al-Ashʿath did not come from the Kinda royal family, but rather was the descendant of a Jewish shoemaker named Sībucht from Fars . He crossed the sea from at-Tauwaj and immigrated to Hadramaut.

Umaiyad propaganda against the Ashāʿitha has also found its expression in the learned literature. The Baghdad scholar Muhammad Ibn Habīb (d. 860) claimed that the Ashāʿitha were "those Arabs with the greatest innate tendency to be unfaithful " ( aʿraq al-ʿArab fī l-ġadr ). He substantiated this claim by depicting a long chain of betrayals and breaches of oath, in which various generations of the al-Ashʿath family were allegedly involved. Al-Ashath he held against his behavior in the pre-Islamic times towards the tribe of Bal-Harith. In reality he did not pay this tribe 3,000 camels as a ransom, but only a hundred. Muhammad ibn Habīb states that al-Ashʿath originally promised 200 camels for his release, but then used his covenant with Islam to declare all obligations under the Jāhilīya null and void. Later he committed a betrayal of Islam with his participation in the Ridda.

The early orientalists such as Gustav Weil , Reinhart Dozy , Rudolf Ernst Brünnow and August Müller adopted the image of al-Aschʿath as a "common traitor" from Muslim sources. On the basis of the Arabic sources available to them (including the chronicle of Ibn al-Athir ), they said that al-Ash habeath had arranged the spectacle with the Koran copies on the lances at Siffīn with ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀs, and gave him the Mainly responsible for the breakup of ʿAlī's camp after the battle. In Müller's view, al-Ashʿath was even “one of the meanest traitors that the sun has ever shone”. He concluded the section on al-Ashʿath's “betrayal” against an-Nujair with a brief reflection on world history: “One is led to melancholy contemplations of the course of the world when one thinks of the unheard-of luck that helped this fellow out of the trap that he himself even laid, one would like to believe that, as we shall see later, he could practice his traitor trade again on the prophet's own son-in-law at a fateful hour. "

Julius Wellhausen , on the other hand, rejected the thesis of al-Aschʿath's “betrayal”. Trying to relativize his role in Siffīn as a whole, he asked: “Where is the betrayal in this act of Ash Aath? He didn't direct the current, he just let it lift him up. He pushed forward, he made himself important and thereby promoted disaster. But that is not yet a betrayal. "

literature

Arabic sources

• Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī: al-Awāʾil. Ed. Muḥammad al-Maṣrī, Walīd Qaṣṣāb. Dār al-Bašīr, Tantā, 1408h. Online version
• Al-Balādhurī : Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. Ed. Michael Jan de Goeje . Brill, Leiden, 1866. pp. 100-104. Digitized - German translation Oskar Rescher . Pp. 100-105. Digitized
• Shams ad-Dīn aḏ-Ḏahabī : Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Ed. Shuʿaib al-Arnāʾūṭ. 11th edition. Muʾassasat ar-Risāla, Beirut, 1996. Vol. II, pp. 37-41. Digitized
• Ibn Abī l-Hadīd : Sharḥ Nahǧ al-Balāġa . 20 vols. Ed. Muhammad Abū l-Faḍl Ibrāhīm. Beirut 2001. Vol. I, pp. 184-187. Digitized
• Ibn al-ʿAdīm: Buġyat aṭ-ṭalab fī taʾrīḫ Ḥalab. Ed. Suhail Zakkār. 12 Vol. Dār al-Fikr, Beirut, 1988. Vol. IV, pp. 1889–1895. Digitized
• Ibn ʿAsākir : Taʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq . Ed. ʿUmar ibn Ġarāma al-ʿUmarī. Vol. 9. Dār al-Fikr, Beirut, 1995. pp. 116-145 digitized
• Ibn Aam al-Kūfī: Kitāb al-futūḥ. Ed. ʿAlī Šīrī. 8 Vol. Dār al-Aḍwāʾ li-ṭ-Ṭibāʿa wa-n-Našr wa-t-Tauzīʿ, Beirut, 1991. Vol. I, pp. 54-68. Digitized
• Ibn al-Aṯīr : Usd al-ġāba fī maʿrifat aṣ-ṣaḥāba. Dār Ibn Ḥazm, Beirut, 2012. Vol. I, pp. 52b – 53b. Digitized
• Ibn Hišām : Kitāb Sīrat Rasūl Allāh From d. Hs. On Berlin, Leipzig, Gotha a. Leyden ed. by Ferdinand Wüstenfeld. 2 vol. Göttingen 1858–59. P. 953f. Digitized
• Ibn Qutaiba : Kitāb al-Maʿārif. Ed. Ṯarwat ʿUkkāša. Dār al-Maʿārif, Cairo, 1969. pp. 333f. Digitized
• Naṣr ibn Muzāḥim: Waqʿat Ṣiffīn. Ed. ʿAbd al-Salām Muḥammad Hārūn. Dār al-Ǧīl, Beirut, 1990. pp. 20-24. Digitized
• Muhammad ibn Saʿd : Kitāb aṭ-Ṭabaqāt al-kabīr . Ed. E. Sachau. 9 vols. Leiden 1904–1940. Vol. I / 2, p. 44. Digitized
• Abū l-Qāsim at-Tabarānī : al-Muʿǧam al-kabīr. Ed. ʿAbd al-Maǧīd as-Salafī. Maktabat Ibn Taimīya, Kairo o. D. Vol. I, pp. 232-238. Digitized
• at-Tabarī : Taʾrīḫ al-rusul wa-l-mulūk. Ed. MJ de Goeje. Leiden, 1879-1901. Vol. I, pp. 2004-6, 2009-12. Digitized
• Al-Yaʿqūbī : Taʾrīḫ. Al-Aʿlamī, Beirut, 2010. Vol. II, pp. 88f. Digitized

Secondary literature

• Khalid Yahya Blankinship: “al-Ashʿath, Abū Muḥammad Maʿdīkarib b. Qays b. Maʿdīkarib ”in Encyclopaedia of Islam, THREE. Edited by: Kate Fleet, Gudrun Krämer, Denis Matringe, John Nawas, Everett Rowson. Brill Online, 2014.
• Rudolf-Ernst Brünnow : The Kharijites among the first Omayyads. A contribution to the history of the first Islamic century . Leiden 1884. pp. 14-17. Digitized
• Werner Caskel: Ǧamharat an-nasab: the genealogical work of Hišām Ibn Muḥammad al-Kalbī . 2 Vols. Brill, Leiden, 1966. Vol. II, p. 381.
• Patricia Crone: Slaves on Horses: The Evolution of the Islamic Polity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1980. pp. 110f.
• Michael Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam and during the ridda” in Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Third Series 4 (1994) 333–56, especially pp. 346–351.
• Michael Lecker: “Judaism among Kinda and the Ridda of Kinda” in Journal of the American Oriental Society 115 (1995) 635-50, especially pp. 639-642.
• ʿAbd al-Muhsin Madʿaj M. al-Madʿaj: The Yemen in early Islam, 9-233 / 630-847. Ithaca Press, London 1988. pp. 12, 48-51.
• August Müller : Islam in the Orient and Occident. Grote'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Berlin, 1885. Vol. I, p. 182f. Digitized
• H. Reckendorf: Art. "Al-A sh ʿa th " in The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition Vol. I, pp. 696b-697a.
• Redwan Sayed: The revolt of Ibn al-Ašʿaṯ and the Koran readers. A contribution to the religious and social history of the early Umayyad period . Freiburg / Br. 1977. pp. 76-81, 106-112. Digitized
• Julius Wellhausen : The religious-political opposition parties in ancient Islam. Berlin 1901. pp. 1-7. Digitized

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 38.
2. ↑ Cf. Ibn Saʿīd al-Maġribī: Našwat aṭ-ṭarab fī ǧāhilīyat al-ʿArab . Ed. Nuṣrat ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān. Maktabat al-Aqṣā, Amman, 1992. p. 264. Digitized
3. ↑ Cf. al-Hamdānī : Kitāb Ṣifat ǧazīrat al-ʿarab . Ed. DH from Müller. Brill, Leiden, 1884. pp. 88f. Digitized
4. ↑ Cf. al-Balādhurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 101. Dt. Translated from O. Rescher p. 101.
5. ↑ Cf. Caskel: Ǧamharat an-nasab. 1966, Vol. II, p. 381a.
6. ↑ For example, Ibn Saʿīd al-Maġribī: Našwat al-ṭarab fī ǧāhilīyat al-ʿArab. Ed. Nuṣrat ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān. Maktabat al-Aqṣā, Amman, 1992. p. 264. Digitized
7. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 346f.
8. ↑ See Lecker: “Judaism among Kinda”. 1995, p. 642.
9. ↑ Cf. Sayed: The revolt of Ibn al-Ašʿaṯ. 1977, p. 113.
10. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 348.
11. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 350.
12. ↑ Cf. Caskel: Ǧamharat an-nasab. 1966, vol. I, plate 236 and aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 37.
13. ↑ Cf. Caskel: Ǧamharat an-nasab. 1966, Vol. II, p. 381a.
14. ↑ Cf. Ibn al-Kalbī : Nasab Maʿadd wa-l-Yaman al-Kabīr . Ed. Nāǧī Ḥasan. ʿĀlam al-kutub, Beirut, 1988. Vol. I, p. 146.
15. ↑ Cf. Ibn Qutaiba : Kitāb al-Maʿārif . Ed. Ṯarwat ʿUkkāša. Dār al-Maʿārif, Cairo, 1969. pp. 555f.
16. ↑ See Lecker: “Judaism among Kinda”. 1995, p. 640.
17. ↑ Cf. at-Tabarānī: al-Muʿǧam al-kabīr . Vol. I, p. 235.
18. ↑ See e.g. B. Muhammad ibn Saʿd : Kitāb aṭ-Ṭabaqāt al-kabīr . Ed. E. Sachau. 9 vols. Leiden 1904–1940. Vol. V, SS 7, lines 3-4 digitized .
19. ↑ See The Mufaḍḍalīyāt, an anthology of ancient Arabian odes, compiled by al-Mufaḍḍal, son of Muḥammad . Ed. J. Ch. Lyall. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1921. Vol. I, p. 441, line 4 digitized .
20. ↑ Cf. Muhammad ibn Saʿd : Kitāb aṭ-Ṭabaqāt al-kabīr . 1904-1940. Vol. I / 2, p. 44.
21. ↑ Cf. Ibn Hišām: Kitāb Sīrat Rasūl Allāh . 1858-59, p. 953.
22. ↑ Cf. Muhammad ibn Saʿd : Kitāb aṭ-Ṭabaqāt al-kabīr . 1904-1940. Vol. I / 2, p. 44.
23. ↑ Cf. Ibn Hišām: Kitāb Sīrat Rasūl Allāh . 1858-59, p. 953.
24. ↑ Cf. Ibn Hišām: Kitāb Sīrat Rasūl Allāh . 1858-59, p. 953.
25. ↑ On the name cf. Maʿmar ibn Muṯannā Abū ʿUbaida: Tasmiyat azwāg an-nabī wa-aulādi-hī . Ed. in Maǧallat Maʿhad al-maḫṭūṭāt 13 (1967) 272. Digitized
26. ↑ Cf. Muḥammad ibn Ḥabīb: al-Muḥabbar. Ed. Ilse Lichtenstädter. Dār al-Āfāq al-Ǧadīda, Beirut, approx. 1985. pp. 94f.
27. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 353.
28. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, p. 135.
29. ↑ Cf. Muhammad ibn Saʿd : Kitāb aṭ-Ṭabaqāt al-kabīr . 1904-1940. Vol. I / 2, p. 44.
30. ↑ Cf. Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī: al-Awāʾil . 1408h, p. 309 and Ibn Abī l-Ḥadīd: Šarḥ Nahǧ al-balāġa . 2001, Vol. I, p. 185.
31. ↑ Cf. Muḥammad ibn Ḥabīb: al-Muḥabbar. Ed. Ilse Lichtenstädter. Dār al-Āfāq al-Ǧadīda, Beirut, approx. 1985. p. 95.
32. ↑ Cf. al-Madʿaj: The Yemen in early Islam. 1988, p. 12.
33. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 38.
34. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 339.
35. ↑ Cf. Ibn Abī l-Ḥadīd: Šarḥ Nahǧ al-balāġa . 2001, Vol. I, p. 185.
36. ↑ See also AFL Beeston: “The So-called Harlots of Ḥaḍramaut” in Oriens (1952) 16–22.
37. ↑ Cf. Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī: al-Awāʾil. 1408h, p. 309.
38. ↑ Cf. Ibn Abī l-Ḥadīd: Šarḥ Nahǧ al-balāġa. 2001, Vol. I, p. 186.
39. ↑ Cf. Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī: al-Awāʾil. 1408h, p. 310.
40. ↑ Cf. Al-Balādhurī : Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. pp. 100f. German Translated from O. Rescher p. 100.
41. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 346.
42. ↑ Cf. al-Madʿaj: The Yemen in early Islam. 1988, p. 50.
43. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 348.
44. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 346.
45. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 42.
46. ↑ Quoted from Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, p. 128. See also al-Madʿaj: The Yemen in early Islam. 1988, p. 51.
47. ↑ See al-Madʿaj: The Yemen in early Islam. 1988, p. 51.
48. ↑ Cf. al-Balādhurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 101. Dt. Over. O. Rescher p. 101.
49. ↑ Cf. aṭ-Ṭabarī: Taʾrīḫ al-rusul wa-l-mulūk. Vol. I, p. 2005.
50. ↑ Cf. Ibn Aʿṯam al-Kūfī: Kitāb al-futūḥ . Vol. I, pp. 53-55.
51. ↑ Cf. Ibn Aʿṯam al-Kūfī: Kitāb al-Futūḥ. Vol. I, pp. 55-58.
52. ↑ Cf. Ibn Aʿṯam al-Kūfī: Kitāb al-Futūḥ. Vol. I, pp. 58-61.
53. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq . Vol. IX, p. 126.
54. ↑ Cf. Ibn Aʿṯam al-Kūfī: Kitāb al-Futūḥ. Vol. I, p. 67.
55. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, pp. 131f.
56. ↑ Cf. Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī: al-Awāʾil. 1408h, p. 310f.
57. ↑ Cf. Ibn Aʿṯam al-Kūfī: Kitāb al-Futūḥ. Vol. I, p. 67.
58. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, pp. 130f.
59. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, p. 130.
60. ↑ Cf. aṭ-Ṭabarī: Taʾrīḫ al-rusul wa-l-mulūk. Vol. I, p. 2010.
61. ↑ Cf. al-Balāḏurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 104. Dt. Over. O. Rescher p. 104f.
62. ↑ Cf. Ibn al-ʿAdīm: Buġyat aṭ-ṭalab fī taʾrīḫ Ḥalab. Vol. IV, p. 1894.
63. ↑ Cf. Ibn Aʿṯam al-Kūfī: Kitāb al-Futūḥ. Vol. I, p. 67.
64. ↑ Cf. aṭ-Ṭabarī: Taʾrīḫ al-rusul wa-l-mulūk. Vol. I, p. 2011 and al-Balāḏurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 104. Dt. Over. O. Rescher p. 104.
65. ↑ Cf. al-Balāḏurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. pp. 101f. German Over. O. Rescher p. 101 and Ibn al-Athīr : Usd al-ġāba. Vol. I, p. 53.
66. ↑ Cf. al-Balāḏurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 104. Dt. Over. O. Rescher p. 104.
67. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 40.
68. ↑ See Naṣr ibn Muzāḥim: Waqʿat Ṣiffīn . 1990, p. 138.
69. ↑ Cf. aṭ-Ṭabarī: Taʾrīḫ al-rusul wa-l-mulūk. Vol. I, p. 2225.
70. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, pp. 116, 119 and Ibn al-Aṯīr: Usd al-ġāba . Vol. I, p. 53b.
71. ↑ See Klaus Klier: Ḫālid and ʿUmar: Source-critical examination of the historiography of the early Islamic period . Schwarz, Berlin 1998. pp. 178f. Digitized
72. ↑ Cf. Ibn al-ʿAdīm: Buġyat aṭ-ṭalab fī taʾrīḫ Ḥalab . Vol. IV, p. 1890.
73. ↑ Cf. al-Balāḏurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 138. Dt. Translated from Rescher p. 141.
74. ↑ See Ibn al-Athīr: Usd al-ġāba. Vol. I, p. 53b.
75. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 41.
76. ↑ See Lecker: “Judaism among Kinda”. 1995, p. 642.
77. ↑ Cf. al-Balāḏurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 331.
78. ↑ Cf. aṭ-Ṭabarānī: al-Muʿǧam al-kabīr . Vol. I, p. 237 and aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, pp. 41f.
79. ↑ See Crone: Slaves on Horses. 1980, p. 110.
80. ↑ See Wilferd Madelung: The succession to Muḥammad. A study of the early caliphate. Cambridge 1997. pp. 83-84.
81. ↑ See Naṣr ibn Muzāḥim: Waqʿat Ṣiffīn. 1990, pp. 20f.
82. ↑ See Naṣr ibn Muzāḥim: Waqʿat Ṣiffīn. 1990, pp. 137-140.
83. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 344.
84. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 40.
85. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 38.
86. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 40.
87. ^ Cf. Wellhausen: The religious-political opposition parties. 1901, p. 3.
88. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 41.
89. ^ Cf. Wellhausen: The religious-political opposition parties. 1901, p. 3.
90. ↑ Cf. al-Yaʿqūbī: Taʾrīḫ. Vol. II, p. 88.
91. ↑ Cf. al-Yaʿqūbī: Taʾrīḫ. Vol. II, p. 89.
92. ↑ Cf. Brünnow: The Kharijites. 1884, p. 14.
93. ^ Cf. Wellhausen: The religious-political opposition parties. 1901, p. 4.
94. ↑ See Ibn al-Athīr: Usd al-ġāba. Vol. I, p. 53b.
95. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, p. 120.
96. ↑ Cf. Ibn Abī l-Ḥadīd: Šarḥ Nahǧ al-balāġa . 2001, Vol. I, pp. 184, 187.
97. ↑ Cf. at-Tabarānī: al-Muʿǧam al-kabīr . Vol. I, pp. 237f.
98. ↑ See Abū l- Faraj al-Isfahānī : Maqātil aṭ-ṭālibīyīn. Intišārāt aš-Šarīf ar-Raḍī, Qum, 1416/1995. P. 47f. Digitized
99. ↑ See Laura Veccia Vaglieri : Art. "Ibn Mul dj am" in The Encyclopaedia of Islam. New Edition Vol. III, 888b.
100. ↑ Cf. Sayed: The revolt of Ibn al-Ašʿaṯ. 1977, p. 112.
101. ↑ Cf. Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, p. 120.
102. ↑ Cf. Muhammad ibn Saʿd : Kitāb aṭ-Ṭabaqāt al-kabīr . Ed. E. Sachau. 9 vols. Leiden 1904–1940. Vol. VI, p. 14.
103. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 42.
104. ↑ See Lecker: “Kinda on the eve of Islam”. 1994, p. 350.
105. ↑ Cf. at-Tabarānī: al-Muʿǧam al-kabīr . Vol. I, p. 235f and Ibn ʿAsākīr: Tāʾrīḫ madīnat Dimašq. Vol. IX, pp. 123f.
106. ↑ Cf. al-Balāḏurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. pp. 101f. German Translated from O. Rescher p. 101.
107. ↑ Cf. Abū Hilāl al-ʿAskarī: al-Awāʾil. 1408h, p. 311.
108. ↑ Cf. aḏ-Ḏahabī: Siyar aʿlām an-nubalāʾ. Vol. II, p. 42.
109. ↑ See Crone: Slaves on Horses. 1980, p. 110.
110. ↑ See Sayed: The revolt of Ibn al-Ašʿaṯ. 1977.
111. ↑ Cf. Ibn Rusta: al-Aʿlāq an-nafīsa. Ed. M. de Goeje. P. 205.
112. ↑ See Peter Adamson: Al-Kindī. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007. p. 4.
113. ↑ Cf. Sayed: The revolt of Ibn al-Ašʿaṯ. 1977. p. 80.
114. ^ Cf. Wellhausen: The religious-political opposition parties. 1901, p. 6.
115. ↑ Cf. Sayed: The revolt of Ibn al-Ašʿaṯ. 1977, p. 77.
116. ↑ Cf. al-Balādhurī: Kitāb Futūḥ al-Buldān. 1866. p. 104. Dt. Translated from O. Rescher p. 104.
117. ↑ Cf. Ibn al-Aṯīr: Usd al-ġāba. Vol. I, p. 53b.
118. ↑ See Lecker: “Judaism among Kinda”. 1995, pp. 640f.
119. ↑ Cf. Ibn Rusta: al-Aʿlāq an-nafīsa. Ed. M. de Goeje. Brill, Leiden, 1892, p. 205. Digitized
120. ↑ Cf. Muḥammad ibn Ḥabīb: al-Muḥabbar. Ed. Ilse Lichtenstädter. Dār al-Āfāq al-Ǧadīda, Beirut, approx. 1985. p. 244.
121. ↑ Cf. Sayed: The revolt of Ibn al-Ašʿaṯ. 1977. p. 78.
122. ↑ Cf. Muḥammad ibn Ḥabīb: al-Muḥabbar. Ed. I. Lichtenstädter. Dār al-Āfāq al-Ǧadīda, Beirut, approx. 1985. p. 244.
123. ↑ So Gustav Weil in his story of the Chalifes . Friedrich Bassermann, Mannheim, 1846. Vol. I, p. 227, digitalised note
124. ↑ See Brünnow: The Kharijites. 1884, p. 16f.
125. ^ Cf. Wellhausen: The religious-political opposition parties. 1901, p. 5
126. ↑ Müller: Islam in the Orient and Occident. 1885. Vol. I, p. 182.
127. ↑ Müller: Islam in the Orient and Occident. 1885. Vol. I, p. 182.
128. ^ Wellhausen: The religious-political opposition parties. 1901, p. 6.