1.17 Anatolia

0 Content 1 Foundation

India Horror 1.19

1.18 633 BC Muslim Conquest Of Persia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents
 
 
Faravahar background
History of Greater Iran
Until the rise of modern nation-states
Pre-modern

 

Muslim conquest of Persia
Part of the Muslim conquests
Knight-Iran.JPG
Mounted Persian knight, Taq-e Bostan, Iran.
Date 633-644
Location Mesopotamia, Caucasus, Persia, and Bactria
Result Decisive Arab victory
Territorial
changes
Belligerents
Sassanid Empire
Arab Christians
Rashidun Caliphate
Commanders and leaders

Introduction

The Arab conquest of Persia, led to the end of the Sassanid Empire in 644, the fall of the Sassanid dynasty in 651 and the eventual decline of the Zoroastrian religion in Iran. Arabs first entered Sassanid territory in 633, when general Khalid ibn Walid invaded what is now Iraq. Following the transfer of Khalid to the Roman front in the Levant, the Muslims eventually lost their holdings to Iranian counterattacks. The second invasion began in 636 under Saad ibn Abi Waqqas, when a key victory at the Battle of Qadisiyyah led to the permanent end of Sassanid control west of Iran. The Zagros mountains then became a natural barrier and border between the Rashidun Caliphate and the Sassanid Empire. Owing to continuous raids by Persians into the area, Caliph Umar ordered a full invasion of the Sassanid Iranian empire in 642, which was completed with the complete conquest of the Sassanids by mid 644. The quick conquest of Iran in a series of well coordinated multi-pronged attacks, directed by Caliph Umar from Medina several thousand miles from the battlefields in Iran, became his greatest triumph, contributing to his reputation as a great military and political strategist.[1]

Iranian historians have sought to defend their forebears by using Arab sources to illustrate that "contrary to the claims of some historians, Iranians, in fact, fought long and hard against the invading Arabs."[2] By 651, most of the urban centers in Iranian lands, with the notable exception of the Caspian provinces and Transoxiana, had come under the domination of the Arab armies. Many localities in Iran staged a defense against the invaders, but in the end none was able to repulse the invasion. Even after the Arabs had subdued the country, many cities rose in rebellion, killing the Arab governor or attacking their garrisons, but reinforcements from the caliphs succeeded in putting down all these rebellions and imposing the rule of Islam. The violent subjugation of Bukhara (q.v.) after many uprisings is a case in point. Conversion to Islam (q.v.) was, however, only gradual. In the process, many acts of violence took place, Zoroastrian scriptures were burnt and many mobads executed (for examples, see Balāḏori, Fotuḥ, p. 421; Biruni, Āṯār, p. 35).Once conquered politically, the Persians began to reassert themselves by maintaining Persian language and culture. Regardless, Islam was adopted by many, for political, socio-cultural or spiritual reasons, or simply by persuasion, and became the dominant religion.[3][4]

Historiography and recent scholarship

When Western academics first investigated the Muslim conquest of Persia, they only had to rely on the accounts of the Armenian Christian bishop Sebeos, and accounts in Arabic that were written some time after the events they describe. The most significant work was probably that of Arthur Christensen, and his L’Iran sous les Sassanides, published in Copenhagen and Paris in 1944.[5]

However recent scholarship, both Iranian and Western,[citation needed] has begun to question the traditional narrative. Parvaneh Pourshariati, in her Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran, published in 2008, provides both a detailed overview of the problematic nature of trying to establish exactly what happened, and a great deal of original research that questions fundamental facts of the traditional narrative, including the timeline and specific dates.

Pourshariati's central thesis is that contrary to what was commonly assumed, the Sassanian Empire was highly decentralized, and was in fact a "confederation" with the Parthians, who themselves retained a high level of independence.[6] Despite their recent victories over the Byzantine Empire, making the Byzantines a client-state of the Sassanians, the Parthians unexpectedly withdrew from the confederation, and the Sassanians were thus ill-prepared and ill-equipped to mount an effective and cohesive defense against the Muslim armies.[7] Moreover, the powerful northern and eastern Parthian families, the kust-i khwarasan and kust-i adurbadagan, withdrew to their respective strongholds and made peace with the Arabs, refusing to fight alongside the Sassanians.

Another important theme of Pourshariati's study is a re-evaluation of the traditional timeline. Pourshariati argues that the Arab conquest of Mesopotamia "took place, not, as has been conventionally believed, in the years 632-634, after the accession of the last Sasanian king Yazdgird III (632-651) to power, but in the period from 628 to 632."[8] An important consequence of this change in timeline means that the Arab conquest started precisely when the Sassanians and Parthians were engaged in internecine warfare over who was to succeed the Sassanian throne.[8]

Sassanid Empire Before the Conquest

Since the 1st century BC, the border between the Roman (later Byzantine) and Parthian (later Sassanid) empires had been the Euphrates river. The border was constantly contested. Most battles, and thus most fortifications, were concentrated in the hilly regions of the north, as the vast Arabian or Syrian Desert (Roman Arabia) separated the rival empires in the south. The only dangers expected from the south were occasional raids by nomadic Arab tribesmen. Both empires therefore allied themselves with small, semi-independent Arab principalities, which served as buffer states and protected Byzantium and Persia from Bedouin attacks. The Byzantine clients were the Ghassanids; the Persian clients were the Lakhmids. The Ghassanids and Lakhmids feuded constantly—which kept them occupied, but that did not greatly affect the Byzantines or the Persians. In the 6th and 7th centuries, various factors destroyed the balance of power that had held for so many centuries.

Revolt of the Arab Client States (602)

Ancient Iranians attached great importance to music and poetry, as they still do today. This 7th century plate depicts Sassanid era musicians.

The Byzantine clients, the Arab Ghassanids, converted to the Monophysite form of Christianity, which was regarded as heretical by the established Byzantine Orthodox Church. The Byzantines attempted to suppress the heresy, alienating the Ghassanids and sparking rebellions on their desert frontiers. The Lakhmids also revolted against the Persian king Khusrau II. Nu'man III (son of Al-Monder IV), the first Christian Lakhmid king, was deposed and killed by Khusrau II in 602, because of his attempt to throw off the Persian tutelage. After Khusrau's assassination, the Persian Empire fractured and the Lakhmids were effectively semi-independent. It is now widely believed that the annexation of the Lakhmid kingdom was one of the main factors behind the Fall of Sassanid dynasty, to the Muslim Arabs and the Islamic conquest of Persia, as the Lakhmids agreed to act as spies for the Muslims after being defeated in the Battle of Hira by Khalid ibn al-Walid.[9]

Byzantine-Sassanid War (612-629)

The Persian ruler Khosrau II (Parviz) defeated a dangerous rebellion within his own empire, the Bahram Chobin's rebellion. He afterward turned his energies towards his traditional Byzantine enemies, leading to the Byzantine-Sassanid War of 602-628. For a few years, he succeeded gloriously. From 612 to 622, he extended the Persian borders almost to the same extent that they were under the Achaemenid dynasty (550-330 BC), capturing Western states as far as Egypt, the Holy Land, and more.

The Byzantines regrouped and pushed back in 622 under Heraclius. Khosrau was defeated at the Battle of Nineveh in 627, and the Byzantines recaptured all of Syria and penetrated far into the Persian provinces of Mesopotamia. In 629, Khosrau's general Shahrbaraz agreed to peace, and the border between the two empires was once again the same as it was in 602.

Assassination of Khosrau II

Sassanid King Khosrau II submitting to the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius, from a plaque on a 12th-century French cross.

Khosrau II was assassinated in 628 and as a result, there were numerous claimants to the throne; from 628 to 632 there were ten kings and queens of Persia. The last, Yazdegerd III, was a grandson of Khosrau II and was said to be a mere child. However, no date of birth is known.

During Muhammad's life

After the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah in 628, Islamic tradition holds that Muhammad sent many letters to the princes, kings, and chiefs of the various tribes and kingdoms of the time, inviting them to convert to Islam. These letters were carried by ambassadors to Persia, Byzantium, Ethiopia, Egypt, Yemen, and Hira (Iraq) on the same day.[10] This assertion has been cast into scrutiny by some modern historians of Islam—notably Grimme and Caetani.[11] Particularly in dispute is the assertion that Khosrau II received a letter from Muhammad, as the Sassanid court ceremony was notoriously intricate, and it is unlikely that a letter from what at the time was a minor regional power would have reached the hands of the Shahanshah.[12]

With regards to Persia, Muslim histories further recount that at the beginning of the seventh year of migration, Muhammad appointed one of his officers, Abdullah Huzafah Sahmi Qarashi, to carry his letter to Khosrau II inviting him to convert:

"In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. From Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, to the great Kisra of Iran. Peace be upon him, who seeks truth and expresses belief in Allah and in His Prophet and testifies that there is no god but Allah and that He has no partner, and who believes that Muhammad is His servant and Prophet. Under the Command of Allah, I invite you to Him. He has sent me for the guidance of all people so that I may warn them all of His wrath and may present the unbelievers with an ultimatum. Embrace Islam so that you may remain safe. And if you refuse to accept Islam, you will be responsible for the sins of the Magi."[13]

There are differing accounts of the reaction of Khosrau II. Nearly all assert that he destroyed the letter in anger; the variations concentrate on the extent and detail of his response[citation needed].

Rise of the Caliphate

Muhammad died in June 632, and Abu Bakr was appointed Caliph and political successor at Medina. Soon after Abu Bakr's succession, several Arab tribes revolted, in the Ridda Wars (Arabic for the Wars of Apostasy). The Ridda Wars preoccupied the Caliphate until March 633, and ended with the entirety of the Arab Peninsula under the authority of the Caliph at Medina.

Whether Abu Bakr intended a full-out imperial conquest or not is hard to say. He did, however, set in motion a historical trajectory (continued later on by Umar and Uthman) that in just a few short decades would lead to one of the largest empires in history,[14] beginning with a confrontation with the Sassanid Empire under the general Khalid ibn al-Walid.

First conquest of Mesopotamia (633)

Map detailing the route of Khalid ibn Walid's conquest of Mesopotamia.

After the Ridda Wars, a tribal chief of north eastern Arabia, Muthana ibn Harith, raided the Persian towns in Mesopotamia (what is now Iraq). Abu Bakr was strong enough to attack the Persian Empire in the north-east and the Byzantine Empire in the north-west. There were three purposes for this conquest: 1. Along the borders between Arabia and these two great empires were numerous Arab tribes leading a nomadic life and forming a buffer-like state between the Persians and Romans. Abu Bakr hoped that these tribes might accept Islam and help their brethren in spreading it. 2. The Persian and Roman taxation laws were arbitrary and oppressive; Abu Bakr believed that they might be persuaded to help the Muslims, who sought to release them from injustice. 3. Two gigantic empires surrounded Arabia, and it was unsafe to remain passive with these two powers on its borders. Abu Bakr hoped that by attacking Iraq and Syria he might remove the danger from the borders of the Islamic State.[15] With the success of the raids, a considerable amount of booty was collected. Muthana ibn Harith went to Medina to inform Caliph Abu Bakr about his success and was appointed commander of his people, after which he began to raid deeper into Mesopotamia. Using the mobility of his light cavalry he could easily raid any town near the desert and disappear again into the desert, into which the Sassanid army was unable to chase them. Misnah’s acts made Abu Bakr think about the expansion of the Rashidun Empire.[16]

To be certain of victory, Abu Bakr made two decisions concerning the attack on Persia: first, the invading army would consist entirely of volunteers; and second, to put in command of the army his best general: Khalid ibn al-Walid. After defeating the self-proclaimed prophet Musaylimah in the Battle of Yamama, Khalid was still at Al-Yamama when Abu Bakr sent him orders to invade the Sassanid Empire. Making Al-Hirah the objective of Khalid, Abu Bakr sent reinforcements and ordered the tribal chiefs of north eastern Arabia, Misnah ibn Haris, Mazhur bin Adi, Harmala and Sulma to operate under the command of Khalid along with their men. Around the third week of March 633 (first week of Muharram 12th Hijrah) Khalid set out from Al-Yamama with an army of 10,000.[16] The tribal chiefs, with 2,000 warriors each, joined Khalid; so Khalid entered the Persian Empire with 18,000 troops.

After entering Mesopotamia with his army of 18,000, Khalid won decisive victories in four consecutive battles: the Battle of Chains, fought in April 633; the Battle of River, fought in the 3rd week of April 633 AD; the Battle of Walaja, fought in May 633 (where he successfully used a double envelopment manoeuvre), and the Battle of Ullais, fought in the mid of May, 633 AD. The Persian court, already disturbed by internal problems, was thrown into chaos. In the last week of May 633, the important city of Hira fell to the Muslims after their victory in the Siege of Hira. After resting his armies, in June 633 Khalid laid siege to the city of Al Anbar, which resisted and eventually surrendered after a siege of a few weeks in July 633 after the Siege of Al-Anbar. Khalid then moved towards the south, and conquered the city of Ein ul Tamr after the Battle of Ein ut Tamr in the last week of July, 633. At this point, most of what is now Iraq was under Islamic control.

Khalid got a call of help from northern Arabia at Daumat-ul-Jandal, where another Muslim Arab general, Ayaz bin Ghanam, was trapped among the rebel tribes. Khalid went to Daumat-ul-jandal and defeated the rebels in the Battle of Daumat-ul-jandal in the last week of August, 633. Returning from Arabia, he got news of the assembling of a large Persian army. He decided to defeat them all separately to avoid the risk of being defeated by a large unified Persian army. Four divisions of Persian and Christian Arab auxiliaries were present at Hanafiz, Zumiel, Sanni and Muzieh. Khalid devised a brilliant plan to destroy the Persian forces. He divided his army in three units, and attacked the Persian forces in well coordinated attacks from three different sides at night, starting from the Battle of Muzieh, then the Battle of Sanni, and finally the Battle of Zumail during November 633. These devastating defeats ended Persian control over Mesopotamia, and left the Persian capital Ctesiphon unguarded and vulnerable to Muslim attack. Before attacking the Persian capital, Khalid decided to eliminate all Persian forces in the south and west. He accordingly marched against the border city of Firaz, where he defeated the combined forces of the Sassanid Persians, the Byzantine Romans and Christian Arabs in the Battle of Firaz in December 633. This was the last battle in his conquest of Mesopotamia. While Khalid was on his way to attack Qadissiyah (a key fort in the way to the Persian capital Ctesiphon), he received a letter from Caliph Abu Bakr and was sent to the Roman front in Syria to assume the command of the Muslim armies to conquer Roman Syria.[17]

Second invasion of Mesopotamia (636)

According to the will of Abu Bakr, Umar was to continue the conquest of Syria and Mesopotamia. On the northeastern borders of the Empire, in Mesopotamia, the situation was deteriorating day by day. During Abu Bakr’s era, Khalid ibn al-Walid had been sent to the Syrian front to command the Islamic armies there. As soon as Khalid had left Mesopotamia with half his army of 9000 soldiers, the Persians decided to take back their lost territory. The Muslim army was forced to leave the conquered areas and concentrate on the border areas. Umar immediately sent reinforcements to aid Misna ibn Haris in Mesopotamia under the command of Abu Ubaid al Saqafi.[1] The Persian forces defeated Abu Ubaid in the Battle of Bridge. However, later Persian forces were defeated by Misnah bin harisah in the Battle of Baiyoub. In 635 Yazdgerd III sought alliance with Emperor Heraclius of the Eastern Roman Empire. Heraclius married his daughter (according to traditions, his grand daughter) to Yazdegerd III, an old Roman tradition to show alliance. While Heraclius prepared for a major offense in the Levant, Yazdegerd, meanwhile, ordered the concentration of massive armies to pull back the Muslims from Mesopotamia for good. The goal was well coordinated attacks by both emperors, Heraclius in the Levant and Yazdegerd in Mesopotamia, to annihilate the power of their common enemy Caliph Umar.[18]

Battle of Qadisiyyah

According to Bernard Lewis:

"Arab Muslims conquests have been variously seen in Iran: by some as a blessing, the advent of the true faith, the end of the age of ignorance and heathenism; by others as a humiliating national defeat, the conquest and subjugation of the country by foreign invaders. Both perceptions are of course valid, depending on one's angle of vision… Iran was indeed Islamized, but it was not Arabized. Persians remained Persians. And after an interval of silence, Iran reemerged as a separate, different and distinctive element within Islam, eventually adding a new element even to Islam itself. Culturally, politically, and most remarkable of all even religiously, the Iranian contribution to this new Islamic civilization is of immense importance. The work of Iranians can be seen in every field of cultural endeavor, including Arabic poetry, to which poets of Iranian origin composing their poems in Arabic made a very significant contribution. In a sense, Iranian Islam is a second advent of Islam itself, a new Islam sometimes referred to as Islam-i Ajam. It was this Persian Islam, rather than the original Arab Islam, that was brought to new areas and new peoples: to the Turks, first in Central Asia and then in the Middle East in the country which came to be called Turkey, and of course to India. The Ottoman Turks brought a form of Iranian civilization to the walls of Vienna."[44]

Administration

Under Umar and his immediate successors, the Arab conquerors attempted to maintain their political and cultural cohesion despite the attractions of the civilizations they had conquered. The Arabs initially settled in the garrison towns rather than on scattered estates.[18] The new non-Muslim subjects were protected by the state and known as dhimmi (meaning protected), and were to pay a special tax, the jizya (tribute), which was calculated per individual at varying rates, usually two dirhams for able bodied men of military age, in return for their exemption from military services. Women and Children were exempted from the Jizya.[45] Mass conversions were neither desired nor allowed, at least in the first few centuries of Arab rule[46][47][48] Caliph Umar had liberal policies towards dhimmis. These policies were adopted to make the conquered less prone to rise up against their new masters and thus making them more receptive to Arab colonization, as it for the time being gave them release from the intolerable social inferiority system of the old Sassanid regime.[49] Umar is reported to have issued the following instructions about the protected people:

Make it easy for him, who can not pay tribute; help him who is weak, let them keep their titles, but do not give them our kuniyat (Arabic traditional nicknames or titles).[50]

Umar's liberal policies were continued by at least his immediate successors. In his dying charge to his successor he is reported to have said:

I charge the caliph after me to be kind to the dhimmis, to keep their covenant, to protect them and not to burden them over their strength.[50]

Practically the Jizya replaced poll taxes imposed by the Sassanids, which tended to be much higher than the Jizya. In addition to the Jizya the old Sassanid land tax (Known in Arabic as Kharaj) was also adopted. Caliph Umar is said to have occasionally setup a commission to survey the taxes in order to check that they wouldn't be more than the land could bear.[51] It is narrated that Zoroastrians were subjected to humiliation and ridicule when paying the Jizya in order to make them feel inferior,.[52]

For at least under Rashiduns and early Ummayads, the administrative system of the late Sassanid period was largely retained. This was a pyramidal system where each quarter of the state was divided into provinces, the provinces into districts, and the districts into sub-districts. Provinces were called ustan (Middle Persian ostan), the districts shahrs, centered upon a district capital known as shahristan. The subdistricts were called tasok in Middle Persian, which was adopted as tassuj (plural tasasij) into Arabic.

Religion

Having effectively been recognized as dhimmis under the Rashidun Caliphs, on the terms of annual payment of the Jizya, Zoroastrians were sometimes left largely to themselves, but this practice varied from area to area. Due to their financial interests, the Ummayads generally discouraged the conversion of non-Arabs, as the dhimmis provided them with valuable revenues (Jizya).

Before the conquest, the Persians had been mainly Zoroastrian. The historian Al-Masudi, a Baghdad-born Arab, who wrote a comprehensive treatise on history and geography in about 956, records that after the conquest:

Zorastrianism, for the time being, continued to exist in many parts of Iran. Not only in countries which came relatively late under Muslim sway (e.g Tabaristan) but also in those regions which early had become provinces of the Muslim empire. In almost all the Iranian provinces, according to Al Masudi, fire temples were to be found - the Madjus he says, venerate many fire temples in Iraq, Fars, Kirman, Sistan, Khurasan, Tabaristan, al Djibal, Azerbaijan and Arran.

He also added Sindh and Sin of the Indian subcontinent (Al-Hind) to the list. This general statement of al Masudi is fully supported by the medieval geographers who make mention of fire temples in most of the Iranian towns.[53]

Muslim leaders in their effort to win converts encouraged attendance at Muslim prayer with promises of money and allowed the Quran to be recited in Persian instead of Arabic so that it would be intelligible to all.[54] Islam was readily accepted by Zoroastrians who were employed in industrial and artisan positions because, according to Zoroastrian dogma, such occupations that involved defiling fire made them impure .[54] Moreover, Muslim missionaries did not encounter difficulty in explaining Islamic tenets to Zoroastrians, as there were many similarities between the faiths. According to Thomas Walker Arnold, for the Persian, he would meet Ahura Mazda and Ahriman under the names of Allah and Iblis.[54] In Afghanistan, Islam was spread due to Umayyad missionary efforts particularly under the reign of Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik and Umar ibn AbdulAziz.[54]

However, some modern Zoroastrian communities do not view the early Islamic period as benevolently and document various persecutions, including forced conversions, destruction of fire temples, and loss of dhimmi status during the Abbasids[citation needed].

There were also large and thriving Christian and Jewish communities, along with smaller numbers of Buddhists and other groups. However, there was a slow but steady movement of the population towards Islam. The nobility and city-dwellers were the first to convert. Islam spread more slowly among the peasantry and the dihqans, or landed gentry. By the late 10th century, the majority of the Persians had become Muslim. Until the 15th century, most Persian Muslims were Sunni Muslims[citation needed], though today Iran is known as a stronghold of the Shi'a Muslim faith. Recognizing Islam as their religion and the prophet's son in law, Ali as an enduring symbol of justice.[citation needed]

According to Amoretti in Cambridge History of Islam, the conquestors brought with them a new religion and a new language, but they did not use force to spread it. While giving freedom of choice, however, the conquestors designated privileges for those who converted.[55]

Ancient Zorastrian Fire Temples

Place Description Other Information
Isthakar Recorded in the Bam nama -a history of Kirman [56]

Language

During the Rashidun Caliphate, the official language of Persia remained Persian, just as the official languages of Syria and Egypt remained Greek and Coptic. However, during the Ummayad Caliphate, the Ummayads imposed Arabic as the primary language of their subjected people throughout their empire, displacing their indigenous languages. Although an area from Iraq to Morocco speaks Arabic to this day, Middle Persian proved to be much more enduring. Most of its structure and vocabulary survived, evolving into the modern Persian language. However, Persian did incorporate a certain amount of Arabic vocabulary, especially words pertaining to religion, and it switched from the Pahlavi Aramaic alphabet to a modified version of the Arabic alphabet.[57]

See also

Notes and references

  1. ^ a b The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch: 1 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4, 9780195977134
  2. ^ Milani A. Lost Wisdom. 2004 ISBN 978-0-934211-90-1 p.15
  3. ^ Mohammad Mohammadi Malayeri, Tarikh-i Farhang-i Iran (Iran's Cultural History). 4 volumes. Tehran. 1982.
  4. ^ ʻAbd al-Ḥusayn Zarrīnʹkūb (1379 (2000)). Dū qarn-i sukūt : sarguz̲asht-i ḥavādis̲ va awz̤āʻ-i tārīkhī dar dū qarn-i avval-i Islām (Two Centuries of Silence). Tihrān: Sukhan. OCLC 46632917, ISBN 964-5983-33-6.
  5. ^ Arthur Christensen, L’Iran sous les Sassanides, Copenhagen, 1944 (Christensen 1944).
  6. ^ Parvaneh Pourshariati, Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire, (I.B.Tauris, 2009), 3.
  7. ^ Parvaneh Pourshariati, Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran, I.B. Tauris, 2008.
  8. ^ a b Parvaneh Pourshariati, Decline and Fall of the Sasanian Empire: The Sasanian-Parthian Confederacy and the Arab Conquest of Iran, I.B. Tauris, 2008. (p. 4)
  9. ^ Iraq After the Muslim Conquest By Michael G. Morony, pg. 233
  10. ^ "The Events of the Seventh Year of Migration". Ahlul Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project. http://www.al-islam.org/message/43.htm. Retrieved 2007-04-03.
  11. ^ Leone Caetani, Annali dell' Islam, vol. 4, p. 74
  12. ^ Leone Caetani, Annali dell' Islam, vol. 2, chapter 1, paragraph 45-46
  13. ^ Tabaqat-i Kubra, vol. I, page 360; Tarikh-i Tabari, vol. II, pp. 295, 296; Tarikh-i Kamil, vol. II, page 81 and Biharul Anwar, vol. XX, page 389
  14. ^ Fred M. Donner, "Muhammad and the Believers: At the Origins of Islam", Harvard University Press, 2010, ISBN 978-0-674-05097-6 [1]
  15. ^ Akbar Shah Najeebabadi, The history of Islam. B0006RTNB4.
  16. ^ a b Tabari: Vol. 2, p. 554.
  17. ^ Akram, chapters 19-26.
  18. ^ a b c d e f g h Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War, By Kaveh Farrokh, Published by Osprey Publishing, 2007 ISBN 978-1-84603-108-3
  19. ^ Serat-i-Hazrat Umar-i-Farooq, by Mohammad Allias Aadil, page no:67
  20. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch: 5 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4, 9780195977134
  21. ^ Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War By Kaveh Farrokh Edition: illustrated Published by Osprey Publishing, 2007 Page 270 ISBN 978-1-84603-108-3, 9781846031083
  22. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch: 6 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4, 9780195977134
  23. ^ Al Farooq, Umar By Muhammad Husayn Haykal. chapter no:5 page no:130
  24. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch: 7 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4, 9780195977134
  25. ^ a b The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch: 8 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  26. ^ Dictionary of Islamic Architecture By Anderew Petersen pg.120
  27. ^ Rome's Enemies 3: Parthians and Sassanids By Peter Wilcox, pg 4
  28. ^ Al Farooq, Umar By Muhammad Husayn Haykal. chapter 18 page 130
  29. ^ a b c d e The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:10 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4
  30. ^ Iranian History and Politics: The Dialectic of State and Society By Homa Katouzian, pg. 25
  31. ^ The History of Al-Tabari: The Challenge to the Empires, Translated by Khalid Yahya Blankinship, Published by SUNY Press, 1993, ISBN 978-0-7914-0852-0,
  32. ^ a b c d e Al Farooq, Umar By Muhammad Husayn Haykal. chapter 19 page no:130
  33. ^ a b The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:11 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  34. ^ a b c d The History of Al-Tabari: The Challenge to the Empires, Translated by Khalid Yahya Blankinship, Published by SUNY Press, 1993, ISBN 978-0-7914-0852-0
  35. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:12 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  36. ^ Rahim Yar Khan Culture | Rahim Yar Khan History
  37. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:13 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  38. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:14 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  39. ^ a b The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:15 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  40. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:16 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  41. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:17 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  42. ^ The Muslim Conquest of Persia By A.I. Akram. Ch:19 ISBN 978-0-19-597713-4,
  43. ^ "Iran". Encyclopædia Britannica. http://p2.www.britannica.com/oscar/print?articleId=106324&fullArticle=true&tocId=9106324.
  44. ^ Lewis, Bernard. "Iran in history". Tel Aviv University. http://www.tau.ac.il/dayancenter/mel/lewis.html. Retrieved 2007-04-03.
  45. ^ Kennedy, Hugh (2004). The Prophet and the Age of the Caliphates. Longman. p. 68.
  46. ^ Frye, R.N (1975). The Golden Age of Persia. p. 62. ISBN 978-1-84212-011-8.
  47. ^ Tabari. Series I. pp. 2778-9.
  48. ^ Boyce, Mary (1979), Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices, London: Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-23903-5 pg.150
  49. ^ Landlord and peasant in Persia: a study of land tenure and land revenue. By Ann K. S. Lambton, pg.17.
  50. ^ a b The Caliphs and Their Non-Muslim Subjects.By A. S. Tritton, pg.138.
  51. ^ The Caliphs and Their Non-Muslim Subjects.By A. S. Tritton, pg.139.
  52. ^ Boyce, Mary. Zoroastrians: their religious beliefs and practices. Routledge, 2001. p. 146. ISBN 0415239028, 9780415239028. http://books.google.com/books?id=a6gbxVfjtUEC&lpg=PP1&dq=Zoroastrians,%20their%20religious%20beliefs%20and%20practices&pg=PP1#v=snippet&q=inferior&f=false.
  53. ^ E.J. Brill's first encyclopaedia of Islam 1913-1936 By M. Th. Houtsma Page 100
  54. ^ a b c d The preaching of Islam: a history of the propagation of the Muslim faith By Sir Thomas Walker Arnold, pg.170-180
  55. ^ The Cambridge History of Iran Volume4 The Period from the Arab Invasion to the Saljuqs, p. 483
  56. ^ Acta Iranica Encyclopedie Permente Des Etudes Iraniennes .Papers in honour of Professor Mary Boyce,Mehrdad Shokoohy, Volume 1 By Mary Boyce Page 545
  57. ^ "What is Persian?". The center for Persian studies. http://www.languages.umd.edu/persian/persianlanguage1.php.[dead link]

References

External links


Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muslim_conquest_of_Persia&oldid=538835303"

Navigation menu

 

Hit Counter

Counter