Echoes of the First Encounters - Syriac Testimonies on Islam’s Emergence (EFE) - VII - The Chronicle of 775: From Adam to Empire — A Syriac Vision of History in a Changing World

The Chronicle of 775: From Adam to Empire — A Syriac Vision of History in a Changing World

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ 

"In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful."

In the quiet margins of a tenth-century Syriac manuscript (British Library Add. 14,683) lies a brief but extraordinary historical record—an anonymous Chronicle of 775, known to scholars by the Latin incipit Expositio quomodo se habeant generationes et familiae et anni ab Adamo usque ad hunc diem ("An Exposition on How the Generations, Families, and Years Proceed from Adam to This Day"). Preserved in a codex once gifted by the Coptic Patriarch Abraham (or Ephraim) of Alexandria to the Monastery of Scetis, the chronicle offers a sweeping historical survey from the creation of the world all the way to the late Umayyad period.

Its pages are deceptively simple: catalogues of patriarchs, judges, kings, emperors, and caliphs dominate the early sections. Only after 724 CE does it include short historical notices, probably penned by a near-contemporary author. For the earlier eras, it draws heavily on the Book of Generations and a Persian chronographer writing around 505 CE.

Yet beneath its catalogic surface, the Chronicle of 775 contains startling implications about how Syriac Christians of the early Islamic centuries perceived history and imperial power.

The chronicle is full of oddities:

• Chronological Errors: Among the Roman emperors, only Phocas’ reign length matches historical reality; among the Arab caliphs, Abū Bakr’s reign is shortened while ʿUmar I’s is extended.

• Regnal Summation Issues: The sum of regnal years and months points to AG 1037 (April 726 CE)—two years after the death of Caliph Yazīd II. The use of Seleucid dates muddles the matter further, suggesting that the scribe may have been using lunar reckoning at times.

• Historical Collapsing: Strikingly, the chronicler treats the Arab caliphs as successors to the Roman emperors, glossing over the fact that Muhammad and Heraclius were contemporaries. It is almost as if a translatio imperii—a symbolic transfer of imperial legitimacy from Rome to the Arabs—was quietly assumed.

This is not simply bad chronology. It reflects a deeper transformation in Syriac Christian historical consciousness: the Arabs were no longer seen as mere invaders but as inheritors of the old imperial mandate.

Where earlier apocalyptic writers (like the author of the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius) had insisted the Muslim rule was temporary and would soon collapse, the Chronicle of 775 hints—subtly but decisively—that the new rulers were here to stay.

---

 Entry 1 — The Arabs Enter the Land (AG 930 / 620–621 CE)

 Latin Text

Et anno 930º Alexandri Heraclius et Romani Constantinopolim ingressi sunt: et Muhammat et Arabes e meridie exierunt et terram ingressi eam subiugaverunt.

 English Translation

And in the year 930 of Alexander [620/621 CE], Heraclius and the Romans entered Constantinople; and Muhammad and the Arabs went forth from the south and entered the land and subdued it.

---

 Commentary and Analysis

This is the first reference to Islam in the Chronicle of 775, and it immediately presents some fascinating—and highly telling—features:

1. Dating: AG 930 / 620–621 CE

• The Chronicle assigns the beginning of the Muslim movement to AG 930, equivalent to 620/621 CE in the Alexandrian calendar.

• This is before the Hijrah (622 CE), when the Prophet ﷺ migrated to Medina and founded the first Muslim polity.

Important: As Mehdy Shaddel carefully explains, this is not a literal conquest date!

Rather, the chronicle equates:

• The epoch of the Hijri calendar (1 AH)

• With the foundation of the Muslim community (Ummah)

• And therefore symbolically with the subjugation of the land.

➔ It is an act of historical compression, not a faithful record of military events.

---

2. The Translatio Imperii (Transfer of Empire)

Sebastian Brock and Mehdy Shaddel both point out a remarkable detail:

• The chronicler treats the Arab Muslims as natural successors to the Roman emperors.

• Muhammad is treated as the first king (malkā) of the Arabs, just as Heraclius was the Roman emperor.

• No separation is made between Muhammad’s spiritual leadership and imperial kingship: they are fused.

This matches broader Late Antique habits of thinking:

Empires were expected to hand over rulership to the next dominant force—thus the Arabs (Islam) replace Rome.

---

3. Not a Mistake—but a Worldview

Shoemaker argued that this represents evidence that Muhammad led the conquests.

However, Shaddel's careful reading proves otherwise:

• This superimposes later events (like the conquest of Palestine c. 636 CE) back onto Muhammad’s lifetime.

• Why? In Late Antique historiography, the beginning of a new political-religious community (the Ummah) was equivalent to the beginning of its conquests.

• Result: Muhammad is credited not because of eyewitness testimony, but because of the logic of kingship narratives.

Thus, this passage is not a record of an actual military invasion led by Muhammad ﷺ in 620/621, but a reflection of how 8th-century Syrians understood historical transformation.

---

Final Insight

This passage perfectly encapsulates how memory and myth intertwined in early Christian and Syriac reactions to Islam:

• Muhammad’s leadership

• The launch of a new calendar (Hijrah)

• The birth of an unstoppable new empire
  = A compressed symbolic timeline, seen from the perspective of Late Antique imperial historiography.

No real battle, no historical conquest of Palestine by Muhammad—only a reimagining of historical phases through the prism of political theology.

---

 Entry 2 — The Hagarene Era and the Succession of Kings (Starting AG 933 / 621–622 CE)

 Latin Text

Rursus anni Hagarenorum. Et tempus quo Syriam ingressi potestatem acceperunt ab anno 933º Alexandri incipit. Unusquisque eorum nomine suo ita se habet:

 English Translation

Again, [now begin] the years of the Hagarenes. And the time in which they entered Syria and received authority begins from the year 933 of Alexander. Each one of them is listed by name as follows:

---

 Commentary and Analysis

This brief but loaded statement sets up the succession list of Arab rulers (caliphs) that follows.

1. The "Years of the Hagarenes"

• The term "Hagarenes" (Hagarenorum) is a common Syriac Christian term for Muslims, deriving from Hagar, the mother of Ishmael.

• It marks a formal change of era:
  ➔ The Roman world is no longer central.
  ➔ Arab Muslim rule now defines historical time.

Symbolically significant:

This acknowledges that the Arabs have become the new dominant power, and time itself must now be measured from their ascent.

---

2. The Starting Point: AG 933 / 621–622 CE

• The Chronicle states that Muslim rule over Syria begins in AG 933, corresponding roughly to 621–622 CE.

• Again, this date is far too early for any real conquest of Syria (which only happened 634–640 CE).

• Thus, this is not historical narration:
  It equates the Hijrah (the Prophet’s migration to Medina) with the beginning of Muslim political power.

In the Late Antique imagination, the founding of a community = the founding of an empire.

---

3. Literary and Theological Worldview

This framing reflects a Late Antique "translatio imperii" model:

• Political authority naturally passes from one empire (the Romans) to another (the Arabs).

• The Chronicle compresses events to reflect this larger theological movement of history.

• Muhammad’s role is thus expanded retroactively:
  ➔ He is not just a Prophet, but the first king, founding an empire by divine design.

Mehdy Shaddel insightfully shows that this superimposition is found consistently across Christian and Syriac sources from this period.

---

 Final Insight

By beginning the "Hagarene Era" at AG 933, the Chronicle maps theology onto history:

• Muhammad = founder

• Hijrah = start of empire

• Islam = the new ruler of history

There is no concern here for exact historical events or battles.

Only the symbolic shift matters: the Arabs have replaced Rome, and history has entered a new divine phase.

---

 Entry 3 — The First Five Muslim Rulers According to the Chronicle

 Latin Text

Muhammat, annos 10. — Abū Bakr, annum unum. — Umar, annos 12. — 'Uthman, annos 12. — Et sine rege, annos quinque.

 English Translation

Muhammad: 10 years. — Abū Bakr: 1 year. — ʿUmar: 12 years. — ʿUthmān: 12 years. — And without a king: 5 years.

---

 Commentary and Analysis

This early part of the caliph list summarizes the formative first decades of Islam, but again through a symbolic and compressed Christian/Syriac lens.

1. Muhammad’s Ten-Year Rule

• 10 years corresponds to Muhammad’s Medinan period (622–632 CE) — correctly matching the Islamic tradition.

• It shows the chronicler recognized Muhammad not merely as a prophet but also as a sovereign (king, malkā) ruling a community.

• Important:
  ➔ This listing reinforces the portrayal of Muhammad as the founder of an earthly kingdom, not merely a spiritual leader.

---

2. Abū Bakr's One Year

• The Chronicle gives only one year to Abū Bakr.

• Problem:

  • Islamic tradition gives Abū Bakr about two years (632–634 CE).

• Explanation:

  • Likely rounding down or condensation for simplicity.

  • Schematic thinking dominates — exact regnal length is less important than overall succession structure.

---

3. ʿUmar’s Twelve Years (Overstated)

• The Chronicle gives ʿUmar a reign of twelve years,
  but Islamic tradition records it as roughly ten and a half years (634–644 CE).

• Explanation:

  • The chronicler exaggerates ʿUmar’s reign length by about one and a half years.

  • This mistake fits a common pattern in early Syriac sources: simplifying reigns into rounded, symbolic numbers rather than preserving exact historical durations.

• Insight:

  • While the chronicler had a general awareness of the major sequence of Muslim rulers,
    He did not preserve precise chronological accuracy.

  • This supports the idea that Syriac chroniclers remembered broad succession patterns but filtered them through their own historiographical habits.

---

4. ʿUthmān’s Twelve Years

• Uthmān’s reign is given as twelve years, which aligns with Islamic tradition (644–656 CE).

• This reinforces that the early Rashidun caliphate was broadly recognized by outsiders.

---

5. "Without a King": Five Years

• Here, the Chronicle notes a five-year interregnum ("sine rege") following ʿUthmān.

• Interpretation:

  • This period corresponds to the First Fitna — the civil war after ʿUthmān's assassination.

  • Notably, the Chronicle refuses to acknowledge ʿAlī’s caliphate during this time!

• Political theology:

  • From the chronicler’s perspective, ʿAlī’s rule was illegitimate or too chaotic to count as kingship.

  • Reflects a broader trend among early Syriac Christian writers who saw the Fitna as a breakdown of Arab authority, not proper succession.

Very Important Insight:
Ali’s reign (656–661) is completely erased, just as we saw in earlier Syriac chronicles like the Chronicle of 724.

---

 Broader Meaning

➔ The Chronicle presents early Islamic history not as a fluid struggle but as a clear "king list" interrupted only by a civil war.

➔ The emphasis is on political stability and legitimacy, NOT on the internal religious or political complexities Muslims recorded.

---

4. The Sufyānid Caliphs: Muʿāwiya and Yazīd

Latin Text:

Muawiya, annos 20. Yazīd, filius eius, annos 3. Et sine rege, menses 9.

English Translation:

Muʿāwiya reigned for 20 years. Yazīd, his son, reigned for 3 years. And without a king, 9 months.

• Muʿāwiya I:
  The Chronicle correctly assigns 20 years to Muʿāwiya's reign, aligning well with Islamic tradition (661–680 CE).

• Yazīd I:
  Yazīd’s reign is recorded as 3 years, slightly rounded. Historically, Yazīd ruled for about 3 years and 8 months (680–683 CE).

• Interregnum of 9 Months:
  

  After Yazīd’s death, the Chronicle notes a 9-month gap "without a king" (sine rege).
  This reflects the chaotic collapse of the Umayyad central authority during the Second Fitna, especially after the death of Yazīd’s son, Muʿāwiya II, whose reign was short and unstable (often omitted in these chronicles).

Insight:

• The chronicler is aware of the dynastic connection (father → son) between Muʿāwiya and Yazīd, reflecting real succession.

• The nine-month gap shows that non-Muslim chroniclers recognized the political vacuum after Yazīd’s death but glossed over minor or short-lived rulers like Muʿāwiya II, typical of these abbreviated regnal lists.

Conclusion:

• Again, broad succession memory survives, but detailed precision is lacking.

• This confirms that these Syriac chroniclers used compressed historical memory rather than rigorous year-by-year recordkeeping.

---

5. The Marwānid Caliphs up to Hishām

Latin Text:

Marwān, menses 9. Abd al-Malik, annos 21. Walīd, filius eius, annos 9. Sulaiman, annos 2 et menses 7. Umar, annos duo et menses 7. Yazīd, annos 4 et menses decem et dies 10.

English Translation:

Marwān [I] ruled for 9 months. ʿAbd al-Malik [his son] ruled for 21 years. Walīd [son of ʿAbd al-Malik] ruled for 9 years. Sulaymān [his brother] ruled for 2 years and 7 months. ʿUmar [ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz] ruled for 2 years and 7 months. Yazīd [II, son of ʿAbd al-Malik] ruled for 4 years, 10 months, and 10 days.

---

Commentary:

• Marwān I:
  His rule lasted 9 months (684–685 CE), as correctly noted. Marwān reestablished Umayyad authority after the Second Fitna.

• ʿAbd al-Malik:
  Reign of 21 years (685–705 CE) — very accurate. He rebuilt and expanded the Umayyad state, introducing major reforms.

• Walīd I:
  Given 9 years here. In reality, he ruled for about 9 years and 8 months (705–715 CE) — very close to the Chronicle's accounting.

• Sulaymān:
  2 years and 7 months (715–717 CE) — quite accurate; Islamic tradition records about 2 years and 8 months.

• ʿUmar II (ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz):
  2 years and 7 months (717–720 CE) — again, extremely close to Islamic sources.

• Yazīd II:
  4 years, 10 months, and 10 days (720–724 CE) — very detailed here, and matches extremely well with Islamic records.

---

Analysis:

Remarkable Accuracy:

The Chronicle shows high familiarity with the major Umayyad rulers’ reigns during the late 7th and early 8th centuries.

Compression and Selectivity:

Short-lived rulers like Muʿāwiya II are omitted, but all strong caliphs (ʿAbd al-Malik’s line) are recorded.

Reflects Islamic Regnal Counting:

The Syriac chronicler or his Arabic source must have had direct access to Islamic regnal traditions — lunar year counting explains minor deviations.

Shift to Umayyad Stability:

From Marwān I onward, the Chronicle treats the Umayyad dynasty as a legitimate succession, with no chaotic gaps like earlier.

---

6. The Reign of Hishām and the Third Fitna

Latin Text:

Et anno 1035°, qui est annus 105us Arabum, regnavit Hišām, filius Abd al-Malik, mense kānun posteriore.

Et anno 1054° mortuus est Hišām; et regnavit Walīd, filius Yazīd, qui occisus est; et post eum stetit Yazīd; et post eum stetit Marwān, filius Muhammat.

Et anno 128º Arabum Emesam eruit.

Et anno 129º contra Dhahhāk Harūritam descendit.

English Translation:

In the year 1035 of Alexander (which is the 105th year of the Arabs), Hishām, son of ʿAbd al-Malik, began to reign, in the month of Kānūn the Later (January).

And in the year 1054 of Alexander, Hishām died; and Walīd, son of Yazīd, reigned, but he was killed; and after him Yazīd [III] stood; and after him Marwān, son of Muḥammad [i.e., Marwān II].

And in the year 128 of the Arabs he dug up Emesa [Ḥimṣ].

And in the year 129 of the Arabs, he marched against Dhahhāk the Ḥarūrī.

---

Commentary:

Hishām ibn ʿAbd al-Malik:

• Began reign in AG 1035 = around 724 CE.

• The note that this is 105 AH matches Islamic records well: 105 AH = 723/724 CE.

• "Kānūn the Later" = January, so the dating is remarkably precise.

Death of Hishām:

• AG 1054 = around 742–743 CE.

• Islamic sources say Hishām died in February 743 CE, at the end of 105 AH, so the dating here is very close.

Walīd II (son of Yazīd II):

• Reigned briefly (743–744 CE) before being killed during civil unrest.

Yazīd III:

• Came after Walīd II, but only ruled for a few months in 744 CE.

Marwān II:

• Final Umayyad caliph (r. 744–750 CE), referred to here as "Marwān, son of Muḥammad" — correctly, since his father was indeed Muḥammad ibn Marwān, the brother of Caliph ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Marwān.
  He was a fierce and skilled general, the last defender of the Umayyad state against the Abbasid revolution, before being defeated and killed at Busir in Egypt in 750 CE.

---

Special Notes:

Emesa Dug Up (128 AH):

• 128 AH = 745–746 CE.

• "Dug up" refers to the destruction or severe fighting at the siege of Ḥimṣ (Emesa) during Marwān II’s campaigns to suppress revolts in Syria.

Campaign Against Dhahhāk (129 AH):

• 129 AH = 746–747 CE.

• Dhahhāk al-Khuraytī (the Harūrī) was a major Kharijite rebel whom Marwān fought during the chaotic collapse of Umayyad authority.

Notice:

🔹 After Hishām’s death, the Chronicle shows a shift to more chaotic and fragmented rule — civil wars, rapid changes of rulers, and rebellion.

🔹 The Chronicle moves from neat regnal listings to short crisis notes, reflecting the turbulence of the Third Fitna.

---

Calendar Cross-Checking:

Calendar	Year Event	Event
Seleucid (AG)	1035	Hishām’s accession
Hijrī (AH)	105	Hishām’s reign begins
Seleucid (AG)	1054	Hishām’s death
Hijrī (AH)	128	Fighting at Ḥimṣ
Hijrī (AH)	129	Battle against Dhahhāk

Clear use of both the Seleucid (solar) and Islamic (lunar) systems.

Final Section of the Chronicle of 775

Latin Text

Et anno 130° Arabum contra Maurophoros descendit; et ab eis [victus] fugit et in Aegypto, ab Abū 'Aun duce, occisus est.

Et co [anno] regnavit Abū 'l-ʿAbbās, filius Muḥammad, Hāšimita.

Et anno 1065° regnavit ʿAbd Allāh, filius Muḥammad, frater eius.

Et anno 133° Circesium urbs ab Abū Naṣr erutum est. Et eo anno erutae sunt universae urbes Gězīrthae.

Et anno 1087°, mense tešrīn posteriore, die nono, regnavit Muḥammad al-Mahdī, filius eius.

English Translation

And in the year 130 of the Arabs, [Marwān] marched against the Black-Clad (Maurophoros, i.e., the Abbasids); but, being defeated by them, he fled and was killed in Egypt by the commander Abū ʿAun.

And in that same year, Abū al-ʿAbbās, the son of Muḥammad, the Hāshimite, began to reign.

And in the year 1065 of the Seleucid era, ʿAbd Allāh, the son of Muḥammad, his brother, began to reign.

And in the year 133 [AH], the city of Circesium (Qarqīsiyā) was captured by Abū Naṣr. And in that same year, all the cities of the Jazīra (Upper Mesopotamia) were captured.

And in the year 1087 of the Seleucid era, on the ninth day of the month of Second Tishrin (November), Muḥammad al-Mahdī, his son, began to reign.

---

Detailed Commentary

1. The Year 130 of the Arabs (AH) — The Black-Clad Abbasids and the Fall of Marwān II

Latin Text

Et anno 130° Arabum contra Maurophoros descendit; et ab eis [victus] fugit et in Aegypto, ab Abū 'Aun duce, occisus est.

Footnote on Maurophoros by E.-W. BROOKS

Hoc est, Abbasidarum asseclas, qui nigras vestes induebant.

(That is, the followers of the Abbasids, who wore black garments.)

---

Detailed Commentary

Year 130 AH = approximately August 747 – July 748 CE.

Maurophoros (Greek: Μαυρόφορος, "Black-Clad") is explicitly explained by E.W. Brook's footnote as referring to the Abbasid revolutionaries — the partisans of the black banners (Abbasidarum asseclas, qui nigras vestes induebant).

Therefore, the Latin phrase "contra Maurophoros descendit" is correctly read as:

• Marwān II descended (marched) against the Black-Clad (i.e., the Abbasid revolutionaries),

• But was defeated by them,

• fled to Egypt,

• and was killed by Abū ʿAun (ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Yazīd), a key Abbasid military leader.

---

 Breaking Down Maurophoros

• Not Marwān II himself: Earlier confusion in modern interpretations sometimes suggested Maurophoros referred to Marwān himself. This is incorrect — the chronicle very clearly says Maurophoros refers to the Abbasids.

• "Black-clad" symbolism:
  The Abbasids famously raised black banners when they rebelled against the Umayyads, as a sign of mourning and revolutionary renewal.
  (Black became their dynastic color in Islamic history.)

• Thus, when the chronicle says Marwān descended against the "black-clad," it is recording Marwān II’s attempt to suppress the Abbasid revolt — and his eventual failure.

---

 What Happened?

• Marwān II, the last Umayyad caliph, tried to resist the Abbasid uprising in Syria.

• Defeated, he fled to Egypt (via Palestine).

• In 750 CE (AH 132), he was cornered and killed at Busir, Egypt, by Abbasid forces under Abū ʿAun.

Thus, the Chronicle of 775 condenses the dramatic collapse of the Umayyads and the dawn of Abbasid rule into just a few lines!

---

 Why This Matters

• The Chronicle correctly identifies the Abbasids as the "black-clad" (Maurophoros) rebels, not Marwān.

• It matches Islamic sources: the Abbasids’ adoption of black banners, Marwān’s defeat and death, and the role of Abū ʿAun are all attested in Muslim histories like al-Ṭabarī and Khalīfa ibn Khayyāṭ.

• It reflects a Christian Miaphysite perspective: concise, factual recording of major Islamic political shifts without heavy polemic.

---

2. The Rise of Abū l-ʿAbbās al-Saffāḥ: The First Abbasid Caliph

Latin Text:

Et co [anno] regnavit Abū 'l-ʿAbbās, filius Muḥammaț, Hāšimita.

---

Detailed Commentary

Translation:

“And in that same year, Abū l-ʿAbbās, son of Muḥammad the Hāshimite, began to reign.”

Historical Context:

• This refers unmistakably to Abū l-ʿAbbās ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad, better known by his regnal title al-Saffāḥ (“the Blood-Shedder”).

• He was the first Abbasid caliph, proclaimed in 750 CE after the overthrow of the Umayyad dynasty.

Title “Hāshimite” (Hāšimita):

• A direct descendant of Hāshim, the great-grandfather of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.

• The Abbasids proudly emphasized their Hāshimite lineage as a key source of religious legitimacy against the Umayyads.

• Thus, the Chronicle’s description is perfectly in line with Islamic political vocabulary.

---

Matching to Islamic History

Islamic records state:

• Abū l-ʿAbbās was proclaimed caliph in Rabīʿ al-Awwal 132 AH, corresponding to late 749 CE to early 750 CE.

• His formal assumption of full caliphal power occurred after the Battle of the Zab (January 750 CE), where the Abbasids decisively defeated Marwān II.

Chronicle dating:

• The Chronicle places his accession in the same general year as the fall of Marwān II — fully consistent with the historical timeline.

Thus:

The Chronicle accurately registers the Abbasid takeover, without any detectable chronological error once one adjusts for lunar and solar calendar differences.

---

Broader Implications

Miaphysite Record-Keeping:

• Even though written by a Syriac Miaphysite Christian under Muslim rule, the Chronicle accurately reflects Abbasid dynastic ideology.

• This shows that even non-Muslim chroniclers at Qarṭmin were well-informed about intra-Muslim political shifts.

Neutral Presentation:

• There is no polemical tone here — Abū l-ʿAbbās is simply noted by his genealogy, not by judgment or criticism.

• This neutrality is important: it shows that early Abbasid transitions were recorded among Christians with interest but without immediate apocalyptic framing.

Symbolic Turning Point:

• For the Syriac Christians of the Jazīrah, the accession of Abū l-ʿAbbās marked the end of an age:

  • The Umayyad military aristocracy that had ruled for a century collapsed.

  • A new dynasty arose claiming legitimacy not through conquest, but through family ties to the Prophet.

---

3. The Rise of Al-Manṣūr: The Second Abbasid Caliph

Latin Text:

Et anno 1065° regnavit Abd Allah, filius Muḥammaț, frater eius.

---

Detailed Commentary

Year 1065 AG (Seleucid Era) = approximately October 753 CE to September 754 CE.

"Abd Allah, son of Muhammad, his brother" = refers to Abū Jaʿfar ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad al-Manṣūr — better known simply as al-Manṣūr.

 The chronicle notes that in this year, ʿAbd Allāh, brother of the previous caliph Abū l-ʿAbbās al-Saffāḥ, ascended the throne.

Islamic tradition confirms:

• Abū l-ʿAbbās al-Saffāḥ, the founder of the Abbasid dynasty, died in June 754 CE (136 AH).

• His brother al-Manṣūr succeeded him almost immediately and ruled from 754 to 775 CE.

Thus, the Chronicle’s dating is precisely in line with Islamic sources — despite being a Syriac Christian document written from an entirely different cultural and religious world.

---

Broader Implications

Miaphysite Precision:

The fact that the chronicler got the transition of Abbasid rulers correctly — and even recognized ʿAbd Allāh al-Manṣūr as "the brother" of the previous caliph — shows the sharp and attentive observation of Islamic political changes by Syriac Christians.

Cross-Calendar Synchronization:

• Islamic calendar: 136 AH for al-Saffāḥ’s death and al-Manṣūr’s accession.

• Seleucid calendar (AG): 1065 for the same transition.

• The Chronicle smoothly matches both — a feat requiring considerable chronological skill.

Historical Context:

• Al-Manṣūr's reign (754–775 CE) would be crucial for consolidating Abbasid power, building Baghdad, and transforming the caliphate into a more Persianized, cosmopolitan empire.

• For Christians of Upper Mesopotamia, al-Manṣūr’s rule meant greater integration into the Abbasid system — along with new pressures and negotiations over religious identity, tax status, and political loyalty.

---

4. The Year 133 of the Arabs (AH) — The Fall of Circesium and the Collapse of Umayyad Resistance

Latin Text:

Et anno 133° Circesium urbs ab Abū Naṣr erutum est. Et eo anno erutae sunt universae urbes Gězīrthae.

---

Detailed Commentary

Year 133 AH = approximately August 750 – August 751 CE.

Circesium (Greek: Kirkēsion, Syriac: Qerqīsion), today known as al-Busayra in modern Syria, was a critical frontier city at the confluence of the Euphrates and Khabur rivers.

• It had long served as a military and administrative stronghold under the Umayyad caliphate, guarding the approaches to Mesopotamia and Syria.

Abū Naṣr is mentioned here as the general who captured Circesium.

---

Who Was Abū Naṣr?

The real figure in this Chronicle is Abū Naṣr Mālik ibn al-Haytham al-Khuzāʿī

• An early Khurasani Arab from the tribe of Banū Khuzāʿah.

• One of the twelve secret captains (al-nuqabāʾ al-ithnā ʿashar) of the Abbasid underground movement in Khurāsān.

• He served under Abū Muslim al-Khurāsānī, the revolutionary general who led the Abbasid cause in the East.

When the Abbasid Revolution broke out in 747 CE, Abū Naṣr was appointed as:

• Commander of the camp (ʿamīd al-ʿaskar),

• Chief of security (ṣāḥib al-shurṭa) under Abū Muslim.

After the Abbasids seized power, Abū Naṣr Mālik ibn al-Haytham remained loyal to the caliphal regime, especially after the turbulent fallout from the death of Abū Muslim.

Capture of Circesium:

• In the early consolidation campaigns after the Abbasid takeover, Abū Naṣr led forces westward and captured Circesium, uprooting one of the last Umayyad loyalist outposts in the Jazīrah.

• His conquest paved the way for the full Abbasid control of Upper Mesopotamia (Gězīrtha).

---

 Full Historical Picture:

In 750 CE, the Abbasids overthrew the Umayyads at the Battle of the Zab.

After the fall of Damascus, remaining Umayyad forces regrouped in the north (Jazīrah).

Abū Naṣr Mālik ibn al-Haytham led a key offensive that:

• Took Circesium,

• Crushed resistance in the whole Jazirah,

• And secured Mesopotamia for the Abbasids.

 The Chronicle adds:

Et eo anno erutae sunt universae urbes Gězīrthae.

“And in that same year, all the cities of the Jazīrah were conquered.”

Thus, not just Circesium, but the entire frontier zone passed into Abbasid hands.

---

 Why This Entry Is Important:

The Chronicle of 775 gives us a rare Christian Syriac perspective on the final collapse of Umayyad power.

Abū Naṣr Mālik ibn al-Haytham’s campaign is a vivid example of how the Khurasani army, initially built under Abū Muslim, continued to play a decisive role in expanding and stabilizing Abbasid rule.

The fall of Circesium symbolized:

• The final extinction of Umayyad influence outside Egypt,

• The consolidation of Abbasid authority from Iraq to the Euphrates frontier.

It also highlights how Miaphysite chroniclers were keenly attuned to Muslim internal power struggles — recording events with precision even if viewing them from a distance.

---

5. The Accession of Al-Mahdī in the Chronicle of 775

Latin Text:

Et anno 1087°, mense tešrīn posteriore, die nono, regnavit Muḥammad al-Mahdī, filius eius.

---

Detailed Commentary 

Year 1087 AG (Seleucid Era) = approximately October 775 CE – September 776 CE.

Tishrīn the latter = the Syriac term for November.

Die nono = the 9th day of November.

Thus, the chronicle records:

"On the 9th of November 775 CE, Muḥammad al-Mahdī, the son of al-Manṣūr, began his reign."

This matches Islamic history with remarkable accuracy:

• Al-Mahdī (full name: Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Manṣūr) became the third Abbasid caliph after his father al-Manṣūr's death in October 775 CE.

• Islamic sources place his accession within Dhu al-Ḥijjah 158 AH, which corresponds to October–November 775 CE in the Julian calendar.

• The 9th of November falls perfectly into this window, adjusted for the solar-lunar gap.

Thus:

The Chronicle’s dating, when read carefully through the lens of Syriac (solar) and Islamic (lunar) calendars, aligns beautifully with known Islamic chronology.

---

Broader Significance

Christian Awareness:

The Syriac chronicler was carefully following political events within the Islamic caliphate — indicating an ongoing Christian concern with tracking Abbasid legitimacy and succession.

Synchronic Precision:

Even though written from a non-Muslim perspective, the Chronicle demonstrates an admirable synchronization between Christian and Muslim historical consciousness.

A New Era in the Abbasid Dynasty:

Al-Mahdī’s reign (775–785) would usher in a period of cultural flourishing, administrative reforms, and further integration of non-Arab populations into the Islamic empire — trends which Christian communities like those at Qarṭmin would have experienced firsthand.

Miaphysite Survival:

The very survival of this Chronicle and its precision shows that even under Abbasid rule, Miaphysite Christianity in Upper Mesopotamia remained intellectually active, chronologically sophisticated, and deeply embedded in the historical currents of the Islamic world.

---

Conclusion — The Chronicle of 775: A Syriac Window onto a Shifting World

The Chronicle of 775 is no ordinary list of names and reigns.

Behind its terse, matter-of-fact entries, it opens a rare window into how Syriac Christians living under the early Abbasid Caliphate understood the world around them.

The Chronicle speaks volumes by what it records — and by what it omits.

It treats the Muslim rulers not with polemical hatred, nor with apocalyptic dread, but as an established fact of life.

Muhammad is presented as the first king in a list of sovereigns, and the founding of the Islamic polity is synchronized with classical Near Eastern methods of dating — Seleucid years, reign-based eras, and calibrated timelines.

No sense of imminent collapse is present.

Earlier Christian apocalyptic writers like Pseudo-Methodius had predicted the Arabs would soon vanish.

Here, a century later, the chronicler shows no such illusions.

The Arabs had conquered, and now ruled.

Equally striking is the way the chronicler understands political change.

The fall of the Umayyads and the rise of the Abbasids are treated not as cosmic upheavals, but simply as succession events — new kings replacing old kings, as had always happened.

Even great events like the Abbasid Revolution are compressed into the simple notices of battles, flights, and deaths.

---

Major Implications

Historical Realism:

The Chronicle reflects a mature, pragmatic Christian view of the Islamic world: Islam was not a passing storm, but now a permanent imperial reality.

Calendar Synchronization:

The use of Seleucid years alongside Hijri (Islamic) years shows an attempt to bridge Christian and Muslim timelines.

This bilingual chronological consciousness points to the deep integration of Christian communities into the administrative and cultural systems of the Abbasid empire.

 Non-Muslim Use of Muslim Sources:

The chronicler relies, directly or indirectly, on Arabic Muslim source material (especially in the caliph lists).

This demonstrates that early Islamic historiography existed in Arabic before Ibn Ishāq and the "official" Muslim historians — refuting modern revisionist claims that Muslim historical writing only began very late.

 Persistence of Syriac Christian Identity:

Despite adapting to new political realities, the chronicler retains his religious and cultural identity, writing in Syriac, preserving Christian dating systems, and maintaining a Christian memory of the ancient empires.

 The Early Abbasid Context:

Composed within decades of the Abbasid rise, the Chronicle gives us an almost contemporaneous Christian reflection on one of the most important dynastic transitions in Islamic history.

---

In the End

The Chronicle of 775 is a profound testimony:

Not of political triumph, nor of desperate resistance, but of adaptation, realism, and survival.

The Christian communities of the Near East, once subjects of Rome, now made their peace with a new world, and set their histories alongside the rulers who now commanded their fates.

It is not just a list of kings.

It is a eulogy for the old world, and a blueprint for living in the new.

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, Shams al-Dīn Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn ʿUthmān. Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ [The Biographies of the Noble Luminaries]. Muʾassasat al-Risālah, 2001. 24 vols.

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.

al-Ṭabarī. The History of Al-Tabari, Volume XXVII: The `Abbasid Revolution. Translated by John Alden Williams. SUNY Series in Near Eastern Studies. State University of New York Press, 1999.

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.

Kennedy, Hugh. Caliphate: The History of an Idea. First ed., Basic Books, 2016.

———. The Great Arab Conquests: How the Spread of Islam Changed the World We Live In. Da Capo Press, 2007.

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.

Shoemaker, Stephen J. A Prophet Has Appeared: The Rise of Islam Through Christian and Jewish Eyes – A Sourcebook. University of California Press, 2021.

———. The Death of a Prophet: The End of Muhammad’s Life and the Beginnings of Islam. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2012.

Tsafrir, Yoram. “The Transfer of the Negev, Sinai and Southern Transjordan from ‘Arabia’ to ‘Palaestina.’” Israel Exploration Journal, vol. 36, no. 1/2, 1986, pp. 77–86. Israel Exploration Society. JSTOR.