Pact of Umar

Not to be confused with Umar's Assurance of safety to the people of Aelia, known as al-Uhda al-ʿUmariyya.

The Pact of Umar (also known as the Covenant of Umar, Treaty of Umar or Laws of Umar; Arabic: شروط عمر or عهد عمر or عقد عمر) is a treaty between the Muslims and non-Muslims who were conquered by Umar during his conquest of the Levant (Syria and Lebanon) in the year 637 CE that later gained a canonical status in Islamic jurisprudence.[1] It specifies rights and restrictions for dhimmis, or "protected persons," a type of protected class of non-Muslim peoples recognised by Islam which includes Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, and several other recognized faiths[2] living under Islamic rule.

Although the text is presented as a treaty, the first sentence points to a petition-like text written by the defeated to the conquerors, while the next sentence points to the rationale for its preparation. According to some historians, the text's content is also incompatible with the period of Umar, and it is highly likely that it was written later or developed over a specific period. It begins as follows:

"In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. This is a document to the servant of Allah `Umar, the Leader of the faithful, from the Christians of such and such city. When you came to us you requested safety for ourselves, children, property and followers of our religion. You made conditions on ourselves that:...... These are the conditions that we set against ourselves and followers of our religion in return for safety and protection. If we break any of these promises that we set for your benefit against ourselves, then our Dhimmah (promise of protection) is broken and you are allowed to do with us what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion."

There are several versions of the pact, differing both in structure and stipulations.[3] While the pact is traditionally attributed to the second Rashidun Caliph Umar ibn Khattab,[4] other jurists and orientalists have questioned this attribution[3] with the treaty being instead attributed to 9th century Mujtahids (Islamic scholars) or the Umayyad Caliph Umar II. In general, the pact contains a list of restrictions on non-Muslims (dhimmis).[5]

Origin and authenticity

Caliph Umar's (581?-644) entry into Jerusalem, 19th century depiction.

Western scholars' opinions vary concerning the Pact's authenticity. According to Anver M. Emon, "There is intense discussion in the secondary literature" about the Pact's authenticity, with scholars disagreeing whether it originated during the reign of Umar b. al-Khattab ['Umar I] or was "a later invention retroactively associated with Umar -- the caliph who famously led the initial imperial expansion -- to endow the contract of dhimma with greater normative weight".[6] Several historians suggest that the Pact was written not all at one time, but over the course of several centuries. Bernard Lewis, after stating that "Muslim historiographical tradition attributes these regulations to the caliph Umar I (634-644),[7] adds that the document is "almost impossible to be authentic"[7]

The structure of the Pact of 'Umar is unusual, given the purpose of the document was to restrict the rights of the dhimmi. The Pact of 'Umar has several different translations and versions, but each follow the same general format described above: a peace treaty written from the dhimmi to the conquering Muslim forces. A. S. Tritton includes several of these translations/versions in "Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects: A Critical Study of the Covenant of 'Umar." Each of these versions begin with some variation of "When you came to us we asked of you safety for our lives… on these conditions..." and conclude with some form of "We impose these terms on ourselves and our co-religionists; he who rejects them has no protection."[8] Mark R. Cohen explains the unusual format of the Pact of 'Umar by comparing it to other conquest treaties from throughout the Middle Ages, writing "The literary form of the Pact… becomes less mysterious if we view the document as a kind of petition from the losers promising submission in return for a decree of protection."[9]

Another important point to consider when studying the origins of this document is the inconsistency as to whom the document addressed. The document was typically addressed to the Caliph 'Umar, but not always directly. In some translations the Pact addresses a conquering general of the Muslim forces, such as Abu 'Ubaida, "the chief commander in Syria and apparently from Damascus."[10] There is a lack of any physical documentation of the Pact of 'Umar from the time of Caliph 'Umar I. Cohen addresses this, writing that although the Pact is "attributed to the second caliph (‘Umar I)… no text of the document can be dated earlier than the tenth or eleventh century" – well after the death of 'Umar I.[11] Bernard Lewis supports this: "it is not unlikely that in this as in many other aspects of early Muslim administrative history, some measures that were really introduced or enforced by the Umayyad caliph 'Umar II (717–720) are ascribed by pious tradition to the less controversial and more venerable 'Umar I."[7]

The content of the Pact seems to have developed in response to social and political issues cropping up between the dhimmi and their Muslim rulers over the course of the early and high Middle Ages. Certain portions of the Pact deal with social issues that did not arise until the 10th or 11th centuries, well after the time of Caliph 'Umar I. An important part of the evolution of the Muslim people during the Middle Ages was their transition from a conquering people to a ruling people. During the time of 'Umar I, Islam was in its early years and largely a society of conquering peoples. This meant that the majority of their legal focus was centered around defining their status as a small conquering minority over a larger conquered majority and ensuring that the conquered majority would not be able to interfere with their rule. Legal measures concerning the everyday rule and maintenance of their society only came later in the Middle Ages. Norman Stillman addresses this in an analysis of the content of the Pact of 'Umar, writing "many of the provisions and restrictions of the pact were only elaborated with the passage of time," and that "certain provisions of the pact only applied to the early years of the Arab military occupation… other provisions were added to the pact when the Arabs became permanent settlers."[12]

A. S. Tritton suggested that the Pact is a fabrication, because later Muslim conquerors did not apply its terms to their agreements with their non-Muslim subjects, which they would have if the pact had existed earlier. Daniel C. Dennet, believes that the Pact was "no different from any other treaty negotiated in that period and that it is well within reason that the Pact we have today, as preserved in al-Tabari's chronicle is an authentic version of that early treaty."[6] Historian Abraham P. Bloch writes that "Omar was a tolerant ruler, unlikely to impose humiliating conditions upon non-Muslims or to infringe upon their religious and social freedoms. His name has been erroneously associated…with the restrictive Covenant of Omar."[13]

According to Thomas Walker Arnold, the pact "is in harmony [with Umar's] kindly consideration for his subjects of another faith,[14][15] "A later generation attributed to 'Umar a number of restrictive regulations which hampered the Christians in the free exercise of their religion, but De Goeje and Caetani have proved without doubt that they are the invention of a later age; as, however, Muslim theologians of less tolerant periods accepted these ordinances as genuine."

Content

There are several different versions of the pact that differ both in their language and stipulations.[16]

The pact:[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. This is a document to the servant of Allah `Umar, the Leader of the faithful, from the Christians of such and such city. When you (Muslims) came to us you requested safety for ourselves, children, property and followers of our religion. You made conditions on ourselves that:

  • We will neither erect in our areas a monastery, church, or a sanctuary for a monk,
  • Nor restore any place of worship that needs restoration,
  • Nor use any of them for the purpose of enmity against Muslims.
  • We will not prevent any Muslim from resting in our churches whether they come by day or night,
  • And we will open the doors [of our houses of worship] for the wayfarer and passerby.
  • Those Muslims who come as guests will enjoy boarding and food for three days.
  • We will not allow a spy against Muslims into our churches and homes or hide deceit [or betrayal] against Muslims.
  • We will not teach our children the Qur'an,
  • Publicize practices of Shirk (polytheism),
  • Invite anyone to Shirk,
  • Or prevent any of our fellows from embracing Islam, if they choose to do so.
  • We will respect Muslims, (and)
  • Move from the places in which we sit if they choose to sit in them.
  • We will not imitate their clothing, caps, turbans, sandals, hairstyles, speech, nicknames and title names,
  • Or ride on saddles,
  • Or hang swords on the shoulders, collect weapons of any kind, or carry these weapons.
  • We will not encrypt our stamps in Arabic,
  • Or sell liquor.
  • We will have the front of our hair cut,
  • Wear our customary clothes wherever we are,
  • Wear belts around our waist,
  • Refrain from erecting crosses on the outside of our churches,
  • Or demonstrating them and our books in public in Muslim fairways and markets.
  • We will not sound the bells in our churches, except discretely,
  • Or raise our voices while reciting our holy books inside our churches in the presence of Muslims,
  • Nor raise our voices [with prayer] at our funerals,
  • Or light torches in funeral processions in the fairways of Muslims, or in their markets.
  • We will not bury our dead next to Muslim dead,
  • Or buy servants who were captured by Muslims.
  • We will be guides for Muslims and refrain from breaching their privacy in their homes.
  • We will not beat any Muslim.

These are the conditions that we set against ourselves and followers of our religion in return for safety and protection. If we break any of these promises that we set for your benefit against ourselves, then our Dhimmah (promise of protection) is broken and you are allowed to do with us what you are allowed of people of defiance and rebellion.

See also

Notes

  1. ^ "Islam and the Jews: The Pact of Umar, 9th Century CE". www.bu.edu. Retrieved 7 April 2024.
  2. ^ Cohen, Mark (1994). Under Crescent and Cross: the Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 52.
  3. ^ a b Abu-Munshar 2007, p. 63.
  4. ^ Thomas & Roggema 2009, p. 360.
  5. ^ Ipgrave, Michael (2009). Justice and Rights: Christian and Muslim Perspectives. Georgetown University Press. p. 58. ISBN 978-1589017221.
  6. ^ a b Emon, Anver M. (2012). Religious Pluralism and Islamic Law: Dhimmis and Others in the Empire of Law. Oxford University Press. p. 71. ISBN 9780191637742. Retrieved 19 June 2015.
  7. ^ a b c Lewis, Bernard (1984). The Jews of Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 24.
  8. ^ Tritton, A.S. (2008). Caliphs and Their Non-Muslim Subjects: A Critical Study of the Covenant of 'Umar. London: Routledge. pp. 5, 6.
  9. ^ Cohen, Mark R. (1994). Under Crescent and Cross: the Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 57.
  10. ^ Tritton, A.S. (2008). Caliphs and Their Non-Muslim Subjects. London: Routledge. p. 6.
  11. ^ Cohen, Mark R. (1994). Under Crescent and Cross. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 55.
  12. ^ Stillman, Norman (1979). The Jews of Arab Lands: A History and Source Book. Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society of America. p. 25.
  13. ^ Abraham P. Bloch, One a Day: An Anthology of Jewish Historical Anniversaries for Every Day of the Year, p. 314. ISBN 0881251089.
  14. ^ Walker Arnold, Thomas (1913). Preaching of Islam: A History of the Propagation of the Muslim Faith (PDF). Constable & Robinson Ltd. p. 73. It is in harmony with the same spirit of kindly consideration for his subjects of another faith, that 'Umar is recorded to have allowed an allowance of money and food to be made to some Christian lepers, apparently out of the public funds.; (https://dl.wdl.org/17553/service/17553.pdf])
  15. ^ Walker Arnold, Thomas (1913). Preaching of Islam: A History of the Propagation of the Muslim Faith. Constable & Robinson Ltd. p. 57. A later generation attributed to 'Umar a number of restrictive regulations which hampered the Christians in the free exercise of their religion, but De Goeje and Caetani have proved without doubt that they are the invention of a later age; (online)
  16. ^ Abu-Munshar 2007, p. 63-4: "There are several versions of the Pact of ‘Umar, with similarities as well as differences in vocabulary or sentence order; some differ in detail, both in their stipulations and literary structure."
  17. ^ Ibn Kathir. Tafsir ibn Kathir (Abridged) - Paying Jizyah is a Sign of Kufr and Disgrace.
  18. ^ Roggema 2009, p. 361.
  19. ^ Meri 2005, p. 205.
  20. ^ al Turtushi, Siraj al Muluk, Cairo 1872, pp 229-230.
  21. ^ The Caliphs And Their Non Muslim Subjects, A. S. TRITTON MUSLIM UNIVERSITY, ALIGARH, HUMPHREY MILFORD, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1930, p.5
  22. ^ Medieval Sourcebook: Pact of Umar, 7th Century? The Status of Non-Muslims Under Muslim Rule Archived 16 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine Paul Halsall Jan 1996
  23. ^ The Jews of Iran in the nineteenth century [electronic resource]: aspects of history, community, and culture / by David Yeroushalmi. Leiden; Boston : Brill, 2009.
  24. ^ Marcus, Jacob (1999). The Jew in the Medieval World: A Sourcebook, 315-1791. p. 13-15. ISBN 978-0878202096.

References

English Wikisource has original text related to this article:
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.