The Roots of Independence in the West
Harthama ibn A’yan was welcomed back to Ruma al-Gharbiya by the Roman [Byzantine] bureaucrats of Rabina. Even though Abd al-Malik ibn Salih al-Abbasi had not acted egregiously during his time as governor, he had focused on enriching himself at the expense of the wilaya, and sent the accumulated wealth to the rest of the Banu Salih in al-Sham rather than to the central government in Baghdad. Harthama ibn A’yan re-hired some of his old employees and fired the idlers and sycophants who entered the bureaucracy during Abd al-Malik’s tenure. The returning governor commissioned a reassessment of the revenues due from tax-paying properties; his son Hatim ibn Harthama was appointed as his deputy and instructed to accompany the tax assessors. The nobility were unsurprisingly nervous over the coming tax reassessment, and this worsened the already unsteady relations between them and the government in Rabina. The Arab and Berber governors originated from al-Andalus and so looked there for their political identity, instead of far-off Iraq. Meanwhile the native converts among the nobility were entirely comprised of Lombard aristocrats who opposed Harthama ibn A’yan’s seeming imposition of Roman rule. On the other hand the mercantile elite (both Muslim and dhimmi) of the coastal cities appreciated the wali’s intent to integrate Ruma al-Gharbiya further into the Dar al-Islam. Hatim ibn Harthama however was the one on the ground and thus receiving the brunt of the nobility’s hostility and complaints. Fearful of a rebellion, the governor’s son convinced his bureaucratic companions to under-report the available revenues. Even though the policy was a failure, the revenues Rabina received were still relatively high and a large portion of that was forwarded to Baghdad.
The city of Venetia was officially ruled by the Roman Empire. However the receding Roman influence in Italia, exemplified by the final Lombard conquest of the Exarchate of Ravenna, resulted in the local government of the city fracturing along factional lines. One such faction remained pro-Roman, despite the near absence of their power in the Adriatic. The other two factions either supported the Lombards, who were clearly the dominant power in Italia, or charting a completely independent course. Al-Qasim ibn Yusuf al-Fihri’s conquest of the northern Lombard kingdom had drastically affected the power balance in Venetia however; those erstwhile supporters of the Lombard kings suddenly found themselves without patrons and thus were severely weakened. Though initially wary of the newly-arriving Muslims, the remaining Venetian magnates recognised an opportunity. The region that was once known as Friuli, al-Thughur al-Sharqiya, became the principal staging point for the regular Islamic raiding eastwards. While the Muslims had their own slave-trading cities and ports, they were subject to the regulations of the government in Rabina. Furthermore Venetia was much closer to the raiding frontier than many of the Islamic slave-trading centres. The Venetians therefore seized the opportunity and encouraged returning ghuzat to offload their human bounty at their city. Venetia was able to successfully ride the coattails of the burgeoning slave trade of the western Mediterranean cities.
Yet there was an obstacle to Venetia’s fortunes. The Slavic tribes who had earlier migrated into the Balkans were inclined to engage in piracy when they inhabited the coast. Even after Roman Emperor Nikephoros’ western expedition, the Slavs to the north of Roman territory continued their seaborne depredations unabated. The most notorious piratical tribe of the Adriatic was known to the Venetians as the Narentani. The influx of wealth from the slave trade had allowed the Venetian government to outfit a navy to protect their merchant fleets, but the expenses were prohibitively high. So the Venetians looked to the Muslims for assistance; an embassy was dispatched to Rabina in 789 CE but wali Abd al-Malik ibn Salih al-Abbasi was dismissive and derided the Venetians for their inability to protect their own trade. After the Fourth Fitna, in 801 CE, Venetia tried again. Harthama ibn A’yan, keen to transform Ruma al-Gharbiya into a model province, was receptive to the new Venetian embassy. The Venetians proposed a joint naval expedition against the Narentani. The Muslim governor supported the idea but, noticing that he was in a position of strength, demanded that Venetia was subordinated to the authority of Ruma al-Gharbiya; they would however be exempt from tax and retain their autonomous rule. The embassy took the proposal back to Venetia where it was debated vigorously. After two assassinations and a number of exiles, the Venetians agreed to Harthama ibn A’yan’s terms.
Following the negotiations, the government of Ruma al-Gharbiya invested into its ship construction industry on the Adriatic coast; the bulk of the wilaya’s naval power and facilities were previously focused on the west. While Harthama ibn A’yan recognised the importance of the venture, he refused to endanger the fleet he already controlled by sailing it too close to the territory of the Romans and Slavic pirates. By 803 CE the Muslim fleet on the Adriatic was ready for the anti-piracy expedition. The fleets of the Muslims and the Venetians met just outside of Venetia and from there sailed southeast. The Narentani primarily inhabited the three coastal islands of Brach, Hvar, and Korchula, along with the neighbouring mainland. As the expedition neared Narentani territory they were engaged by a small fleet of pirates; against unprotected trade ships, the pirates were a menace. When confronted with a large fleet of warships however the Slavic pirates stood no chance and were easily defeated. The fleet divided into two in order to simultaneously attack the islands of Hvar and Korchula. The devastation was near-absolute: towns were sacked, their populations enslaved or slaughtered, while crops and livestock were ravaged. Part of the fleet returned to Rabina with the captives while the rest of the expedition landed near Mokro [Makarska]. The town received the same treatment as the islands, after which the remainder of the fleet travelled back to Rabina. The spoils of the expedition were portioned equitably between the Muslims and the Venetians. Slavic piracy in the Adriatic had been dealt a blow from which it would take a long time to recover.
In 799 CE Muhammad ibn Yusuf ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Fihri, wali of al-Andalus, passed away. His eldest son Ilyas served as the governor of Tulaytula and the fame (and wealth) he gained from the regular cross-border warfare with the Kingdom of Asturias ensured his succession as governor of the whole province. Once again most of the Banu Fihr cooperated out of apprehension towards the Abbasid government ending Andalusian autonomy. While Ilyas ibn Muhammad al-Fihri was stationed in Tulaytula he took a particular interest in the career of Archbishop Elipandus of Toledo (the city’s old name still being used by the Christians). Elipandus had argued that Christ’s human nature was adoptive rather than inherent; Beatus of Liebana, an influential monk from the Kingdom of Asturias, argued that Elipandus was exaggerating the humanity of Christ at the expense of his divinity. Bishop Felix of Orgellia [Urgell] supported the position of Archbishop Elipandus. Soon enough Patriarch Adrian of Rome involved himself in the debate and repudiated the Adoptionist position of Elipandus and Felix. Bishops from the Germanic kingdoms to the north and from the Roman Empire followed suit. Ilyas ibn Muhammad al-Fihri didn’t understand the theology behind the arguments, but he did understand that there was a rift between the Christians of al-Andalus and those outside of the province. Furthermore, the Twelfth Council of Toledo in 681 CE granted the archbishopric of Toledo primacy over all of the dioceses of Hispania. Therefore while Ilyas governed Tulaytula he financially supported Elipandus and protected him from harassment. When Ilyas became the wali of all al-Andalus he extended his support to Felix of Orgellia and other prominent members of the clergy who supported Adoptionist theology.
The main concern of Ilyas ibn Muhammad al-Fihri’s reign was the ongoing contentious status of al-Faranj. Unbeknownst to the Banu Fihr was Abd al-Malik ibn Salih al-Abbasi’s promise to separate al-Faranj from Andalusian authority following Muhammad Qarulamun ibn Baban al-Qarula’s assistance during the Fourth Fitna. In the event, the circumstances of the Fourth Fitna moved too quickly for either the Banu Fihr or the Banu Qarula to intervene in the hostilities. Despite his old age Qarulamun ibn Baban still aimed to escape subordination to the Banu Fihr and bequeath to his son al-Qasim a near-autonomous state. The former Frankish prince’s plan was to force the Abbasids to intervene between al-Andalus and al-Faranj, and leverage the central government’s desire to weaken Fihrid authority. To that end Qarulamun ibn Baban stopped forwarding his tax revenues to Qurtuba in 805 CE and expelled administrators he knew were loyal to the Fihrids. Simultaneously a small army loyal to the Banu Qarula was sent to garrison Irunya [Pamplona] to guard the pass over the western Pyrenees. In response Ilyas ibn Muhammad personally led an army to Irunya to confront the rebellious garrison; the pro-Qarulid garrison commander delivered, as ordered, the proclamation that as Irunya was previously confirmed by the Banu Fihr to be part of the Kingdom of Aquitaine, Muhammad Qarulamun ibn Baban al-Qarula in his position as wali of al-Faranj was the legal successor to the king of Aquitaine and therefore legal holder of all the territories of the former kingdom. When Qarulamun ibn Baban received news of the Fihrid arrival at Irunya, he dispatched a delegation to Ruma al-Gharbiya that would seek the governor’s aid in adjudicating the matter.
Harthama ibn A’yan was eager to reduce the power of the Banu Fihr, yet his son warned him of the potential disloyalty of the Arab and Berber nobility of Ruma al-Gharbiya. With this in mind, Harthama ibn A’yan raised an army of Lombards and marched west to Irunya. Ilyas ibn Muhammad and his army were encamped on the fortress-town’s southern side and had so far not initiated hostilities. Irunya’s garrison commander repeated his proclamation for the new arrivals. When Harthama pointed out that the claim appeared to be valid, Ilyas replied that King Hunald of Aquitaine had broken the agreement concerning both Irunya and non-aggression, thus any future extrapolation from the agreement was invalid. Harthama’s suggestion that the negotiations be postponed until the arrival of Qarulamun ibn Baban angered Ilyas, as he considered the Frank to be his subordinate. Ilyas further stated that since he and Harthama were equals, he would submit only to the authority of the khalifah and not a fellow wali. Harthama seized on this and demanded that the case be referred to Baghdad; Ilyas had been trapped by his own logic, and to refuse would be to deny the authority of the Abbasid Caliphate. The governor of al-Andalus reluctantly agreed to Harthama’s demand and the parties adjourned while a delegation comprising bureaucrats from both sides embarked upon the long journey to Iraq.
The western delegation arrived in al-Sham during the Arab revolt and so were delayed on their journey to Baghdad. When they eventually arrived at the capital, khalifah al-Amin and the long-serving wazir Yahya ibn Khalid al-Baramika heard their case and assigned it to Tahir ibn al-Husayn, a rising star in the bureaucracy. Tahir ibn al-Husayn descended from a certain Khurasani dihqan (the class of Iranian landowners) named Ruzayq, who converted to Islam and became a mawla to Talha ibn Abdallah al-Khuza’i long before the Abbasid Revolution. The family took part in the Abbasid Revolution and had served the dynasty ever since. Tahir ibn al-Husayn gathered his family and household and returned to Ruma al-Gharbiya with the western delegation. Once there Tahir left his family at Rabina and travelled with Harthama ibn A’yan to Arbuna to meet with Ilyas ibn Muhammad al-Fihri. Tahir listened to the arguments of both parties but, due to the intransigence of Ilyas ibn Muhammad, had to travel to Rabat al-Faranj to hear Muhammad Qarulamun ibn Baban al-Qarula’s claim. Tahir ibn al-Husayn’s judgement was swift and not at all surprising given his closeness to the abna al-dawla. The wilaya of al-Faranj was promoted so that it was immediately subservient to the Caliph, while Qarulamun ibn Baban retained his post as governor. On the other hand, al-Faranj had to pay a one-time indemnity to al-Andalus as compensation for their future loss of revenue, while Irunya was transferred to Andalusian jurisdiction. It was a defeat for Ilyas ibn Muhammad, though not as dire as he was expecting.
