Echoes of the First Encounters - Syriac Testimonies on Islam’s Emergence (EFE) - V - The Chronicle of 705: The Earliest Syriac Caliph-List
The Chronicle of 705: The Earliest Syriac Caliph-List
In the decades following the Arab-Muslim conquests, Syriac-speaking Christians struggled to understand and narrate the sweeping changes reshaping their world. One remarkable witness to this transition is the Chronicle of 705—the earliest known Syriac document to compile a formal list of Arab rulers, treating them with the same political seriousness traditionally reserved for Roman and Persian monarchs.
As Sebastian Brock notes, this chronicle marks a crucial turning point: after Jacob of Edessa, Syriac writers began recording the reigns of the Arab caliphs just as Greek historians had done for emperors and kings for centuries. Lists of rulers, tied to the lengths of their reigns and the scope of their conquests, were indispensable tools for preserving history, structuring debates, and orienting communal memory. The Chronicle of 705 reflects this practice. Though fragmentary today, it originally included not only a list of caliphs but also a now-lost record of territorial conquests—a clear sign that Syriac Christians were preparing for the long-term reality of Muslim rule.
As Michael Philip Penn highlights, the Chronicle of 705 opens in 620/621 CE with the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and traces leadership up to the accession of Caliph Walīd I. Yet, it displays numerous chronological inaccuracies: Muhammad’s flight to Medina is dated incorrectly; the reigns of Muhammad and ʿUmar are mistimed; and critical figures such as ʿAlī, Muʿāwiya II, and Marwān I are omitted entirely. Instead, the author refers to a five-and-a-half-year period without leadership among the Arabs, skipping the early Islamic civil wars and presenting a streamlined, somewhat unstable portrait of the early Islamic polity.
Importantly, the Chronicle's choice of terminology is revealing. Its author calls the Arab rulers simply malkē ("kings")—the same term Syriac chroniclers used for secular, non-Islamic rulers. Nowhere is there any attempt to translate Islamic political titles like "Commander of the Faithful" (Amīr al-Muʾminīn) into Syriac. Moreover, the civil war is reduced to the “War of Siffīn,” without any theological framing. This purely secular and pragmatic treatment shows that Syriac Christians had begun, cautiously but unmistakably, to view the Arabs as a permanent political reality.
The Chronicle also reveals a profound shift in historical consciousness. Earlier apocalyptic works, such as the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius, had predicted that the Arab conquerors would soon vanish, unable to form a true kingdom. In stark contrast, the Chronicle of 705 straightforwardly speaks of "the kingdom of the Arabs"—acknowledging that the new rulers had established a legitimate, durable empire comparable to Rome or Persia.
The manuscript of this text survives uniquely in British Library Add. 17,193, copied by a Miaphysite monk named Abraham in 874 CE. This fascinating codex preserves over 125 religious, historical, and philosophical works. The Chronicle of 705 stands as a rare and valuable glimpse into how early non-Muslims perceived the transformation of the Near East—not through the lens of apocalypse or denial, but through pragmatic historical record-keeping.
Although the Chronicle’s authorship remains anonymous, scholars suggest it was likely composed between 705 and 715, possibly within the heartlands of Syria or Mesopotamia. It's dating places it squarely within the Umayyad period, when the Muslim empire was consolidating and expanding, and when Christian communities were adjusting to a new political order.
As Penn and Brock both observe, the Chronicle’s chronological mistakes—especially the attribution of Muhammad's reign as seven years long—may stem from reliance on earlier sources like the lost Chronicle of Jacob of Edessa. Yet despite its inaccuracies, the Chronicle of 705 remains a critical window into early Christian reactions to Islamic rule: pragmatic, incomplete, but increasingly grounded in acceptance of a new imperial reality.
In this post, we will explore the structure, significance, and historical context of the Chronicle of 705—a document that quietly signals the end of an old world and the beginnings of a new one.
The Chronicle Begins: The Kingdom of the Arabs
Text
"Next, a tract reporting the kingdom of the Arabs, how many kings there were among them, and how much land after his predecessor each held before his death."
Commentary
The choice of words is critical:
-
The Arabs are spoken of as having a "kingdom" (malkutha in Syriac), not just an ephemeral occupation.
-
Their leaders are termed "kings" (malkē), not prophets, imams, or commanders — purely secular titles, stripping away any overt religious framing.
-
The chronicler is concerned with land control, highlighting the growing awareness that Muslim rule was not just military but administrative and territorial.
Muhammad and the Year 932 of Alexander
Text
"[In] the year 932 of Alexander [620/21 CE], the son of Philip the Macedonian, Muhammad entered the land. He reigned seven years."
Commentary
This brief but dense line raises several important points:
-
Dating:
-
The Chronicle dates Muhammad’s entry to AG 932, corresponding to 620/621 CE.
-
This is before the Prophet’s Hijrah to Medina (622 CE), and long before the actual Muslim conquest of Palestine (634–638 CE).
-
Thus, this date is factually impossible and reflects the same schematic telescoping we have seen in other Christian chronicles (as noted by Mehdy Shaddel).
-
The chronicler, like others of his time, confuses the founding of the Muslim community with the start of empire-building.
-
-
Geography:
-
The phrase "entered the land" (‘al ar‘a, “the land”) clearly refers to Palestine — a shorthand common in Christian Syriac literature for the Holy Land.
-
-
Title and Reign:
-
Muhammad is portrayed as a king (malkā), reigning for seven years.
-
This “seven-year reign” contradicts all Islamic sources, which date the Prophet’s leadership in Medina to approximately ten years (622–632 CE).
-
The seven-year figure appears to derive from Jacob of Edessa’s erroneous caliph list, which had already compressed Muhammad’s rule, probably for schematic, not historical, reasons.
-
-
Political Framing:
-
Muhammad is placed in a dynastic succession, not as a prophet or religious reformer but as a king founding a new empire.
-
The association with "Philip the Macedonian" (Alexander the Great’s father) is not meant literally; it's simply a way of indicating the Seleucid Era ("Year of Alexander") — not claiming Muhammad descended from Greeks.
-
In short:
Abū Bakr’s Brief Reign
Text
"After him, Abū Bakr reigned: two years."
Commentary
Several important observations emerge from this succinct statement:
-
Chronological Accuracy (Partial):
-
Islamic tradition records that Abū Bakr ruled for about two years (632–634 CE).
-
Here, the Chronicle of 705 correctly reflects the short duration of Abū Bakr’s reign — a rare moment of alignment between Syriac and Islamic sources.
-
-
Sequential Logic:
-
The Chronicle places Abū Bakr immediately after Muhammad, preserving the basic historical order.
-
This demonstrates that even though Christian chroniclers telescoped dates, they did possess a rough framework of succession.
-
-
Title Again Matters:
-
As with Muhammad, Abū Bakr is simply called a king (malkā) — not Khalīfa (Caliph) or Commander of the Faithful (Amīr al-Mu’minīn).
-
The term "king" reflects Christian historiographical conventions, treating Muslim leaders like secular monarchs rather than religious heads.
-
-
The Broader Pattern:
-
Despite occasional accurate details (like Abū Bakr’s short rule), the Chronicle remains chronologically unstable, because its foundation — Muhammad's "entry" into Palestine — was misdated by over a decade.
-
Therefore, even accurate fragments exist within a distorted chronological frame.
-
In short:
ʿUmar’s Twelve-Year Reign
Text
"After him, ʻUmar reigned: twelve years."
Commentary
This line, though simple, is packed with important signals about how the Chronicle of 705 remembered early Islamic leadership:
-
Approximate Accuracy:
-
In Islamic tradition, ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb ruled from 634 to 644 CE — about ten years, not twelve.
-
The Chronicle overstates ʿUmar’s reign by about two years, showing once again a tendency to round or inflate reign lengths in Christian memory.
-
-
Sequential Integrity:
-
Despite the slight miscalculation, the Chronicle correctly places ʿUmar as Abū Bakr’s successor, keeping the proper succession order intact.
-
-
Title and Image:
-
Like Muhammad and Abū Bakr, ʿUmar is simply called a king (malkā), with no hint of religious or spiritual authority.
-
This secularization continues: Syriac writers consistently reframe the Islamic polity in familiar political terms, avoiding Islamic titles that might acknowledge a new divine order.
-
-
Why Twelve Years?
-
As scholars like Sebastian Brock note, late antique chronography often preferred neat numbers (5, 7, 10, 12, etc.) for mnemonic reasons.
-
Twelve, in particular, had Biblical resonance (e.g., 12 tribes of Israel, 12 apostles), making it a theologically tidy number even if it wasn’t exact.
-
-
Layered Memory:
-
These minor distortions suggest that the Chronicle drew not from direct documents, but from oral summaries, popular tradition, or abbreviated records, where symbolic numbers often replaced precise dates.
-
ʿUthmān’s Twelve-Year Reign
Text
"After him, ʻUthmān reigned: twelve years."
Commentary
This time, the Chronicle of 705 aligns precisely with Islamic historical tradition:
-
Accurate Duration:
-
According to Muslim sources, ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān ruled for twelve years (644–656 CE).
-
The Chronicle correctly records both the order of succession and the length of his reign.
-
-
Consistency with the Caliphal Sequence:
-
ʿUthmān’s placement after ʿUmar matches the canonical Muslim memory preserved in early sīrah and ṭabaqāt literature.
-
This shows that, despite other errors, the basic political skeleton of early Islam was known to non-Muslim Syriac writers.
-
-
Framing ʿUthmān as King:
-
Once again, there’s no reference to religious authority like “Caliph” or “Commander of the Faithful.”
-
ʿUthmān is portrayed simply as a secular monarch, continuing the “king-list” approach that fits Arab leadership into familiar late antique categories.
-
-
A Window into Early Cross-Cultural Memory:
-
The correct duration here indicates that Syriac Christians could accurately preserve some details even as they misunderstood others.
-
It highlights how historical memory often selects and filters — keeping easy-to-remember facts (like the reigns of kings), while confusing larger theological or political shifts.
-
In short:
The Interregnum: The War of Ṣiffīn and the Leaderless Years
Text
"They were without a leader in the war of Siffīn: five and a half years."
Commentary
This is a major divergence from the Islamic historical tradition:
-
Erasure of ʿAlī’s Caliphate:
-
In Muslim sources, ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (r. 656–661 CE) is the fourth Rightly Guided Caliph.
-
He reigned for approximately five years before his assassination.
-
The Chronicle completely omits ʿAlī, treating the period of his rule as leaderless chaos tied to the Battle of Ṣiffīn (657 CE).
-
-
Ṣiffīn as the Defining Event:
-
The Chronicle names the whole era “the war of Ṣiffīn” — reducing the complexities of the first civil war (fitna) to one major battle.
-
This shows that Syriac Christian memory of this turbulent period was flattened into a symbol of anarchy, without acknowledging that a legitimate leader existed (ʿAlī).
-
-
Political Memory vs. Sectarian Reality:
-
For these non-Muslim chroniclers, political stability defined legitimate kingship.
-
Since ʿAlī's reign was marked by intense civil war, they did not recognize him as a king like his predecessors.
-
This reflects how early non-Muslim observers judged Islamic leadership through the lens of order and chaos, not theological legitimacy.
-
-
Five and a Half Years:
-
The Chronicle says the "leaderless" period lasted five and a half years, roughly matching the real span of ʿAlī’s reign (656–661 CE).
-
Thus, the time frame is roughly correct, but the interpretation (no leader) shows a different cultural perception.
-
In short:
The Reign of Muʿāwiya: Founder of the Umayyad Dynasty
Text
"After this, Muʻāwiya reigned: twenty years."
Commentary
-
Muʿāwiya’s Restoration of Order:
-
In Islamic tradition, Muʿāwiya ibn Abī Sufyān (r. 661–680 CE) is recognized as the first Umayyad caliph.
-
His reign is remembered for restoring unity after years of civil war following ʿUthmān's assassination and the conflicts during ʿAlī's caliphate.
-
-
Twenty Years of Rule:
-
Muslim sources record Muʿāwiya’s reign as approximately nineteen years and a few months.
-
The Chronicle rounds it off to twenty years — a common simplification in ancient and medieval sources when recounting reign lengths.
-
-
Reassertion of Kingship:
-
After the chaos of Ṣiffīn and the "leaderless" years, Muʿāwiya’s rise restores the caliphal list in the Chronicle.
-
He is seen as a true king (malkā), consolidating Arab authority and establishing dynastic succession — a critical marker of legitimacy for Syriac chroniclers.
-
-
Importance for Syriac Writers:
-
By Muʿāwiya's time, the Arabs (ṭayyāyē) were increasingly viewed as a real and enduring political force, rather than a transient scourge.
-
His long reign signaled stability, which Syriac Christians, weary of war, would have recognized and recorded.
-
Summary:
The Reign of Yazīd ibn Muʿāwiya: A Short and Troubled Succession
Text
"After him, Yazīd the son of Muʻāwiya reigned: three and a half years."
Commentary
-
Yazīd's Controversial Reign:
-
Yazīd I (r. 680–683 CE) is one of the most controversial figures in early Islamic history.
-
His reign is primarily remembered for two traumatic events:
-
The martyrdom of al-Ḥusayn at Karbalāʾ (680 CE), which ignited profound grief and division, especially among Shiʿa Muslims.
-
The siege of Mecca and damage to the Kaʿba during Ibn al-Zubayr's rebellion.
-
-
-
Chronicle's Dating:
-
Yazīd ruled for about three years according to Islamic sources; the Chronicle records it slightly differently as three and a half years — a minor inflation typical of ancient historical writing.
-
Given the turmoil of his reign, the Chronicle’s acknowledgment of his rule suggests that even troubled reigns were still cataloged as legitimate within the framework of “Arab kingship” (malkē).
-
-
Dynastic Fragility:
-
Yazīd’s reign exposed the vulnerability of hereditary succession among the early caliphs.
-
His sudden death at a young age (around 37–38) and the subsequent collapse of Umayyad authority for a brief period hint at cracks in the new dynasty that Syriac chroniclers may have observed with a wary eye.
-
Summary:
Interregnum After Yazīd: A Year Without a Leader
Text
"[In the margin: 'After Yazīd, they were without a leader: one year.']"
Commentary
-
Margin Note:
-
This detail appears not in the main body, but as a later marginal addition, showing that scribes or later readers were trying to clarify gaps or repair inconsistencies in the chronology.
-
-
Historical Context:
-
After Yazīd I’s death in 683 CE, his son Muʿāwiya II briefly assumed power, but his reign was extremely short (barely a few months) and is often overlooked or omitted by non-Muslim chroniclers.
-
Muʿāwiya II died young and childless, leaving the Umayyad Caliphate in chaos, leading to a brief period when the Arabs were effectively without a universally recognized leader.
-
-
Why Call It a “Leaderless Year”?
-
Instead of mentioning Muʿāwiya II directly, the Chronicle simply calls it a year without a king — emphasizing political instability.
-
This omission fits a pattern among Syriac chroniclers: reigns that were too short, fragile, or contested were either ignored or described as power vacuums.
-
-
Editorial Correction:
-
That this information is marginal shows that later copyists or readers were aware of a missing piece and tried to fill the gap, preserving the memory of an unstable moment even if the figure of Muʿāwiya II remained obscure.
-
Summary:
ʻAbd al-Malik: Twenty-One Years of Rule
Text
"After him, ʻAbd al-Malik reigned: twenty-one years."
Commentary
-
Omission of Marwān I:
-
The Chronicle of 705 skips Marwān I, the father of ʻAbd al-Malik, who reigned briefly (684–685 CE).
-
Marwān I’s reign, though short (about 9 months to 1 year), was crucial in stabilizing the Umayyad dynasty after the collapse following Yazīd I's death.
-
However, because his reign was brief, crisis-driven, and lacked wide recognition across the caliphate, Syriac chroniclers often omitted him entirely — treating the Umayyad recovery as starting properly with ʻAbd al-Malik.
-
-
ʻAbd al-Malik's Importance:
-
ʻAbd al-Malik (r. 685–705 CE) was a major figure who restored and reorganized Umayyad power after years of civil war.
-
His rule included critical developments: the Arabization of administration, the minting of Islamic coinage, and the construction of monumental architecture like the Dome of the Rock.
-
-
Why Twenty-One Years?
-
The 21-year reign stated here matches closely with Muslim historical sources, suggesting that for well-established rulers, Syriac chroniclers had relatively accurate information.
-
This consistency contrasts with the earlier errors about Muhammad ﷺ, Abū Bakr, and ʻUmar.
-
-
Pattern of Recording:
-
Like Muʿāwiya I, ʻAbd al-Malik is treated with full recognition as a king (malkā) — showing that long, stable reigns were easier for non-Muslim historians to integrate into their frameworks.
-
Summary:
Walīd ibn ʻAbd al-Malik: The Succession Begins
Text
"After him, Walīd his son began to reign in the beginning of October 1017 [705 C.E.]."
Commentary
-
Accurate Transition:
-
The Chronicle of 705 correctly records that Walīd I succeeded his father ʻAbd al-Malik in October 705 CE, corresponding to the beginning of year 1017 of the Seleucid (Alexander) Era.
-
This remarkably matches Muslim internal sources, notably the early historian Khalīfa ibn Khayyāṭ, who reports:
“‘Abd al-Malik died in Damascus, in the middle of Shawwāl 86 AH / October 705 CE. Al-Walīd b. ʻAbd al-Malik recited the prayers for him.”
-
-
Importance of This Agreement:
-
Unlike earlier confused reign lengths (e.g., Muhammad’s 7 years, ʻUmar’s 12), the transition from ʻAbd al-Malik to Walīd is accurately recorded.
-
This suggests that by the end of the 7th century, key facts about major Umayyad succession events had become widely and consistently known, even among non-Muslim chroniclers.
-
-
No Mention of ʻAlī, Muʿāwiya II, or Marwān I:
-
The Chronicle continues its pattern of ignoring disputed or short-lived rulers, focusing instead on figures associated with long, stable, and empire-defining reigns.
-
-
Walīd’s Role:
-
Walīd I (r. 705–715 CE) would preside over one of the greatest periods of Umayyad expansion, including campaigns into Spain, Transoxiana, and Sindh.
-
Summary:
Conclusion — The Chronicle of 705 and Its Significance
Summary of the Chronicle
The Chronicle of 705 offers a rare and valuable glimpse into how non-Muslim contemporaries of the early Umayyad Caliphate perceived Islamic political history:
-
It presents an organized list of Arab kings (malkē) starting from Muḥammad and extending to Walīd I.
-
It records reign lengths, transitions, and even moments of political instability, such as the fitna (civil war) after ʿUthmān’s death.
-
Despite its brevity and occasional chronological mistakes, the chronicle demonstrates a basic historical consciousness regarding the caliphs among Syriac-speaking Christians.
-
Critically, the chronicle omits certain sensitive figures like ʿAlī, Muʿāwiya II, and Marwān I, suggesting a selective remembrance focused on the stability and legitimacy of rule rather than civil wars or dynastic disputes.
📚 Key Observations
-
The “Kingdom of the Arabs” Is Recognized:
-
Earlier apocalyptic Syriac writers (like Pseudo-Methodius) hoped Arab rule was temporary.
-
By 705 CE, Syriac Christians were acknowledging the Arabs as long-term sovereigns worthy of being listed like Roman and Persian kings.
-
The Chronicle uses neutral, secular language (e.g., “kings,” not “caliphs” or “commanders of the faithful”) — indicating an early pragmatic adaptation to Umayyad rule rather than full religious endorsement.
-
-
Shift from Apocalyptic to Historical Thinking:
-
Gone is the frantic expectation of imminent divine intervention to end Arab rule.
-
In its place emerges a more empirical recording of history, modeled on older Christian chronicles.
-
-
Selective Memory and Historical Simplification:
-
The omission of ʿAlī and others shows that non-Muslim memory of early Islamic leadership favored strong, centralized power and ignored internal Muslim conflicts that didn’t produce lasting rulers.
-
🧠 Broader Implications
-
Early Non-Muslim Views Were Shaped by Political Realities, Not Theology:
-
Syriac Christians living under Islamic rule adjusted their historiography to accommodate new realities — recognizing Islamic governance without fully assimilating Islamic religious concepts.
-
-
The Chronicle as an Early Cross-Cultural Witness:
-
Even with its flaws, the Chronicle of 705 stands among the earliest external attempts to document the Muslim world systematically, outside of Islamic tradition.
-
It shows how deeply the rise of Islam affected neighboring cultures, compelling them to update their ways of recording history itself.
-
-
Understanding the Context of Misdating:
-
Errors like the seven-year reign for Muḥammad do not reflect deliberate falsehoods, but rather the schematic, compressed views of external observers who were working with limited, fragmentary information.
-
These minor errors should not be exaggerated to overturn the clear consensus of Islamic historical memory.
-
Final Thought
THE END
Works Cited
-
Primary Sources
al-Balādhurī, Aḥmad ibn Yaḥyā. Futūḥ al-Buldān [The Conquest of the Lands: A New Translation of al-Balādhurī’s Futūḥ al-Buldān]. Translated and annotated by Hugh Kennedy, I.B. Tauris, 2022.
al-Dīnawarī, Aḥmad ibn Dāwūd. al-Akhbār al-Ṭiwāl [The Lengthy Reports]. Edited by ʿAbd al-Munʿim ʿĀmir, reviewed by Jamāl al-Dīn al-Shayyāl, Egyptian Ministry of Culture, 1960. Originally published by Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Kutub al-ʿArabiyya.
al-Dhahabī, Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad. Tārīkh al-Islām wa-Wafayāt al-Mashāhīr wa-al-Aʿlām [The History of Islam and the Deaths of the Famous and the Great]. Edited by ʿUmar ʿAbd al-Salām al-Tadmurī, 2nd ed., Dār al-Kitāb al-ʿArabī, 1993. 52 vols.
al-Khallāl, Khalīfah ibn Khayyāṭ. Tārīkh Khalīfah ibn Khayyāṭ [The History of Khalīfah ibn Khayyāṭ]. Edited by Akram Ḍiyāʾ al-ʿUmarī, 2nd ed., Dār al-Qalam & Muʾassasat al-Risālah, 1977.
Brooks, E. W., editor. Chronica Minora Pars Secunda. Translated by I.-B. Chabot, Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, vol. 4, series tertia tomus IV, Typographeo Reipublicae / Otto Harrassowitz, 1904.
Harrak, Amir, translator. The Chronicle of Zuqnīn, Parts III and IV: A.D. 488–775. Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1999. Mediaeval Sources in Translation, vol. 36.
Hoyland, Robert G., translator. Theophilus of Edessa’s Chronicle and the Circulation of Historical Knowledge in Late Antiquity and Early Islam. Liverpool University Press, 2011. Translated Texts for Historians, vol. 57.
Ibn al-Athīr, ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad. al-Kāmil fī al-Tārīkh [The Complete History]. Dār al-Kitāb al-ʿArabī, 1997. 10 vols.
Ibn Aʿtham al-Kūfī, Aḥmad. Kitāb al-Futūḥ [Book of Conquests]. Edited by ʿAlī Shīrī, Dār al-Aḍwāʾ, 1991.
Ibn Kathīr, Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUmar. al-Bidāyah wa-al-Nihāyah [The Beginning and the End]. Dār ʿĀlam al-Kutub, 2003. 20 vols.
Kaʿbī, Nasir Al, editor and translator. A Short Chronicle on the End of the Sasanian Empire and Early Islam: 590–660 A.D. Gorgias Press, 2016.
Levy-Rubin, Milka, editor. The Continuatio of the Samaritan Chronicle of Abū l-Fatḥ al-Sāmirī al-Danafī: Annotated Translation. Gerlach Press, 2021.
Palmer, Andrew, translator. The Seventh Century in the West-Syrian Chronicles. With translations and annotations by Sebastian Brock and historical commentary by Robert Hoyland, Liverpool University Press, 1993. Translated Texts for Historians, vol. 15.
Penn, Michael Philip. Envisioning Islam: Syriac Christians and the Early Muslim World. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2015.
———. When Christians First Met Muslims: A Sourcebook of the Earliest Syriac Writings on Islam. University of California Press, 2015.
Thomson, R.W., translator. The Armenian History Attributed to Sebeos. Translated, with notes, by R.W. Thomson, historical commentary by James Howard-Johnston, and assistance from Tim Greenwood, Liverpool University Press, 1999.
Wolf, Kenneth Baxter, translator. Conquerors and Chroniclers of Early Medieval Spain. 2nd ed., Liverpool University Press, 2011.
Secondary Sources
-
Anthony, Sean William. Muhammad and the Empires of Faith: The Making of the Prophet of Islam. University of California Press, 2020.
Beihammer, Alexander Daniel, Stavroula Constantinou, and Maria G. Parani, editors. Court Ceremonies and Rituals of Power in Byzantium and the Medieval Mediterranean: Comparative Perspectives. Brill, 2013.
Briquel-Chatonnet, Françoise, and Muriel Debié. The Syriac World: In Search of a Forgotten Christianity. Translated by Jeffrey Haines, Yale University Press, 2023.
Crawford, Peter. Emperor Leo III the Isaurian: Imperial Saviour, Christian Icon Breaker? Pen & Sword History, 2024.
---. The War of the Three Gods: Romans, Persians and the Rise of Islam. Pen and Sword Military, 2013.
Donner, Fred McGraw. The Early Islamic Conquests. Princeton University Press, 1981.
Görke, Andreas, and Gregor Schoeler. The Earliest Writings on the Life of Muḥammad: The ʿUrwa Corpus and the Non-Muslim Sources. Gerlach Press, 2024.
Harper, Kyle. The Fate of Rome: Climate, Disease, and the End of an Empire. Princeton University Press, 2017.
Howard-Johnston, James. Witnesses to a World Crisis: Historians and Histories of the Middle East in the Seventh Century. Oxford University Press, 2010.
Hoyland, Robert G. In God’s Path: The Arab Conquests and the Creation of an Islamic Empire. Oxford University Press, 2015.
———. Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish, and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam. Darwin Press, 1997.
Kaegi, Walter E. Byzantium and the Early Islamic Conquests. Cambridge University Press, 1992.
King, Daniel, editor. The Syriac World. Routledge, 2019.
Marsham, Andrew. Rituals of Islamic Monarchy: Accession and Succession in the First Muslim Empire. Edinburgh University Press, 2009.
———. The Umayyad Empire. Edinburgh University Press, 2024.
O'Sullivan, Shaun (2004) Sebeos' account of an Arab attack on Constantinople in 654, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, 28:1, 67-88
Petersen, Leif Inge Ree. Siege Warfare and Military Organization in the Successor States (400–800 AD): Byzantium, the West and Islam. Brill, 2013.
Shaddel, Mehdy. “Periodisation and the Futūḥ: Making Sense of Muḥammad’s Leadership of the Conquests in Non-Muslim Sources.” Arabica, vol. 69, 2022, pp. 96–145. Brill.
Comments
Post a Comment