alternatehistory.com

Sorry for the mistaken title. I decided to write about the state structure roughly. Deu tot he massive lengths to which I was writing expanding more and more on the decline and fall. So, forgive me for that.

As was discussed earlier, in another thread that I created which focused on the military matters of the height of the Abbasid period, here I wish to discuss more abstract questions on the Abbasid period. Namely, here I wish to discuss the size and nature of the Abbasid state apparatus.

To begin, I will discuss the basis for Abbasid rule in its ideal and its realities.


Like the Umayyad before it, the Abbasid period was characterized by the rule of the Sharia law system or that which is the law of Allah and the traditions past down from Muhammad who relayed this information unto the Arab peoples. Shar'i codes are varied, but in the Abbasid period it referred to the general state of organizing the Islamic society at all levels. It was the unspoken law, no edict carried the Sharia or enforced it overtly, it was a socially enforced code to a great extent. This fits with almost all thinkers of Islam who say clearly, Sharia is not necessarily enforced by the state but enforced person to person, community to community and state to state (invasion..). However, the hadood, or the penal codes of Shar'i (sharia does not necessarily have penal codes, it is simply the laws, whereas hadood is the penal codes and penalties associated with breaking the sharia or individual shar'i codes [Sharia is made up of shar'i codes, so you can break one code whilst still upholding the whole sharia]) are enforced by the caliph of Islam.

In Abbasid society, it was to set to function (ideally) as the Islamic society or ummah operating independently their religious and secular roles without the tyranny of direct rule of the state. Thus, it was to be a situation whereby the state was limited in its functions by the 'law of Allah' which mandated that man operate his loyalty to Allah above all. This has its origins within two subjects of Islamic theology and jurisprudence (fiqh). The first of which, is Tawheed ar-Raboobiyyah which mandates that Allah is the lord of the entire earth and all things within. Thus, Allah is the one who is truly the master of the people and the subjects of the Caliphate follow him before a secular state. Instead, the Caliph is the one entrusted as leader of the Ummah in the sense of a commander, but not truly a king. Which is why, the lord of the Abbasid hegemony was never called emperor, king, etc... Always either prince or caliph which is a special way or shorthand for commander of the faithful (Amr al-Mu'minin). The second is, Tawheed al-Hakimiyyah, which means that Allah alone is the legislator of the affairs of man. His laws thus, have already been decreed and edicts given unto man and are then interpreted by his Ulema. What this entails is, that the Caliph becomes chained to what new laws can be enforced (in theory)as such would make him a legislator, which is not according to Fiqh. So in theory, the Caliph is limited in his actions and in practical terms he was limited in what he could do.

Some practical examples:

1. Taxation: While there were some land taxes that were not enumerated by the Sharia, the extent to which subjects (1) were taxed, was extremely limited when compared to later European states or in the Tang dynasty. A concept such as a tax that is generally imposed on all would be seen as insanity and as a perversion of the law of Allah. In fact, it is said that the state enforcing taxes is a sin greater than adultery. Taxes in Islam is very complex, but to put it very clearly, it is permissible to take taxes or levies for extreme circumstances. Some circumstances, include war, massive land ownership disparity (Umayyad caliphate imposed a land tax for this reason), empty treasury, etc... If the needs are met by the state in question, the parameters are strict. Namely, the tax can only be a flat rate never gaining more based upon class or standing and not overbearing. See Fatwa 138115 for more information (it is only in Arabic I believe, but if you want me to help with understanding it, just message me). After reading this, you can imagine how fiscally the Caliph was limited. It should also be noted that tax evasion of any kind was rampant even if there was a tax imposed and the zakaah could be avoided by hiding your actual wealth(2).


"Everything that is taken unlawfully is like a tax, and is haraam. It is not permissible for anyone to take his brother’s wealth unlawfully, as the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If you sell fruit to your brother then the crop (on the tree) fails, it is not permissible for you to take anything of it (his brother’s money). On what basis would you consume your brother’s wealth unlawfully?” But the Muslim is required to hear and obey; he should listen to those in authority and obey those in authority. If they ask him for money for such matters, he should give it to them. Then if he has a right to it, he will find it restored (i.e., on the Day of Resurrection), and if it he does not have any right to it, in that it was taken from him in a justifiable manner, then there will be nothing to be settled. What matters is that what we are obliged to do is to hear and obey with regard to those in authority. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Hear and obey, even if your back is beaten and your wealth is taken.” It is not permissible to take these matters as an excuse to criticize those in authority and to slander them in gatherings and the like. We should be patient and whatever we do not get in this world we will get in the Hereafter."

-Shaykh Uthaymeen on taxation, such an opinion is almost libertarian in its implications.

(1) The extent to which one was a subject is disputed. They were not subjects of the Caliph in theory, but subjects of the Islamic community as a whole and the caliph was the commander of that community or deputy of the faith.

(2) The zakaah refers to the tithe incumbent upon Muslim. The jizya or the tax of protection of non Muslim, was also avoidable through loopholes such as working for little pay in certain courts or simple avoidance of tax collection and hiding of wealth (the jizya is only enforced at a certain wealth, decided by the ulema). It was common for Syriac Christian scribes to not pay taxes by working for the Abbasid courts or such. Since, Jizya is payed not to the community or Ummah, but is payed directly to the commander of the Islamic community (state). This comes from the understanding that jizya is a peace treaty or protection money (a racket), so it is given to the holder of the military or armed forces.


2. Military: The Caliph was not allowed to levy troops by coercion as it was in most parts of the world. Instead, the Abbasid army relied upon slaves and professional soldiers who made a life of looting or jihad. This is the reason that Mamluks became so common in the Abbasid period and similar slave castes in Islamic society, since it was taboo and considered tyranny for the ruler to force the people into an army for war. The ruler, was to have power without having to call upon the collective of the ummah. Limits on this, created the situation whereby, Arab tribalism developed so independently from the state structures, whose own military while Arab speaking, where generally non Arabs. The standing army composed primarily of non Arabs and then on campaigns were bolstered by Arabs seeking loot or jihad. Such is a limitation not seen in most areas of the world then or later.


3. Transportation: Unlike in Byzantium, where the state achieved such a massive size, that the movement of people was restricted completely and controlled; the Abbasid caliphate was restricted by the Shariah in that, subjects had the right to travel across the lands within the rule of Islam. The only restriction was the question of whether it was permissible for one to leave the lands of Islam to the lands of the kafr unless it was for war.


After all this, the Abbasid where hampered in their position as absolute rulers. However, the Caliph held certain privileges and powers that made the position worthwhile and increased the willingness for a family to keep closer to the ideals. Namely, as lords of Islam and the titular commander of the three faiths, the caliph required all Muslims both foreign and domestic to pledge allegiance to him (bayait). Thus, the caliph in terms of titles, was both commander of those Muslim within the Abbasid hegemony as well as those Muslims outside the protection of the Abbasid lands. As well, all Muslim groups, peoples or states, were demanded by Abbasid tradition to give them bayait. In most ways, this meant, surrendering your nation to rule by the Abbasid. However, once joint, you had extreme autonomy. ^

^Do note, this is the reason for me referring to the Abbasid as a hegemony or dominion, as it held lands by complex protection pacts and its position as the Ideal Masters of Islam. It directly did not rule much of its lands and allocated most of it to autonomous vassals or governors/emirs. This is partly why order ruptured so rapidly and the Abbasid seemingly lost its entire lands within less than a decade.

Though the Caliph was restricted, so was the subject/Muslim. It was considered a transgression (tagha) fro a leader to break the shariah and go beyond his limitations, he became a taghoot (transgressor). However on the same token, the subjects were disallowed from rebellion without clear signs of kufr from the Caliph. Such a rebellion, was the mantra of the Khawarij, Shi'i, etc.. Such crimes of rebellion was called fitnah (mischief) and carried a gruesome death of the highest degree, namely a public execution, often times, crucified then beheaded.

To sum all this quickly, the Abbasid structure was one of a highly limited state, decentralized and based upon more local laws (Sharia). The Abbasid, however, benefitted from the position as masters of Islam, through this, receiving large sums of tribute, prestige, power and the loyalty of the ummah.

===============================================================

A rough breakdown of the state structure and power:

1. The Caliph and his court. This was centered in the city of Baghdad and for a time at Samarra, it was the titular ruler of Islam. His duties included:

-Maintaining a coherent foreign policy for the Muslims. He also was responsible for Emirs who broke his foreign policy goals. Say, an emir in Anatolian emir attacks and raids a local prince in Armenia who has signed a pact with the Caliph? The Caliph would then be sent an emissary to arbitrate between the two parties and the emir would be told to hold back and likely, both parties would be compensated, the Emir for his inability to loot and the prince for his lost goods.

-Arbitrate between factions. While disputed by the Khawarij, the Caliph had a duty to arbitrate between the factions of his realm. Especially, when it came to governors waging war against one another. It was his position to correct the issue and create a semblance of peace between opposing parties or at least keep armed conflict form occurring.

-Provide for the people mosques and other Islamic functions. Including the payment of Islamic scholars, collecting of zakaah, repairs to mosques, etc... This did not include schooling.

-Creation of fortifications for large populations.

-Arbitration in terms of contracts and land ownership/disputes. The Abbasid though, were secondary in this role, which was usually local.

-Jihad, the Caliph was required to wage war upon exterior enemies or exact a tribute from them to ensure peace. This was one that was truly taken seriously and it was not uncommon for the Abbasid throne to be fighting wars and skirmishes on all of its borders at once or in times p]of treaty, engaging an enemy elsewhere. Usually though, this was state sanctioned looting and banditry as opposed to campaigns seeking to conquer completely. Despite this role, the Abbasids were not obliged to capture slaves for the Ummah, this was a decision for the actual soldiers to capture on their own or acquire when the loot was divided between warriors. Often military pay, was this loot the Abbasid gained, thus campaigns were typically were targeted at rich foes or with the intent to acquire slaves.

2. The emirs, or those who were either governors or warlords and under the Caliphal authority. Duties included:

-Maintaining a rough military of some sort. These were especially needed for the defense of frontiers and the acquiring of loot.

-The distributors of Abbasid policy, in terms of power.

- Agreeing to Abbasid tributes and calls to join in wars. If one was to reject this, they were made anathema to Islam and engaged by the Abbasid in a war. This is what befell the Tulunids for rejecting tribute.

These were often placed by the Abbasid throne and then kept within a family. However, the Abbasid attempted to curb this tendency by subversion and causing wars between various families; giving the Abbasid the opportunity to replace positions with new and loyal subjects. Abbasid powers especially favored Turkic governors for these posts, who in technical terms, were still slaves and thus legally increasing their power over the emirs. One example was the Abbasid enticing of various Iranian nobility into inner conflict then accusation of various crimes, followed by an execution. Much of the Iranian nobility was replaced by Turkic Mamluks or Abbasid yes-men after the Khurramiyyah rebellion.


3. Wazirs and diwans. The wazir or the viceroy (?I am actually not sure how to fully translate this in English) was the titular second in command of the Caliphate and in control of the day to day events in the court. He also, was empowered to control the bureaucracies. Though, typically, was not in control of military matters in the actual Abbasid court, but this was not uniform in situations of more local establishments. A diwan is a bureau however, and is the general bureaucracies of the Abbasid throne.

There were three main Abbasid bureaus:

-Diwan al-Kharaj, which was the bureaucracy that operated on tax collection, fiscal policy and investigating sources of income.

-Diwan al-Jaysh, the bureaucracy responsible for funding the military. Though, this bureaucracy was quite limited, as soldiers often paid themselves through divided loot (loot is mandated by sharia to be divided after a campaign or battle). Further, the Mamluks were not paid in any sense as well as any other slave warriors. Yet, their armor, weapons, mounts, were paid for. This includes any funding for logistics, such as camel trains, wagons, servants, night stays, etc...

-Diwan al-rasa'il, the bureaucracy that was centered upon record keeping. This is where much of our knowledge of the Abbasid period come from.

The bureaucracy in any state, is known as the deep state or the state that controls the general movement of affairs and in a sense is the state that exists without sight. In any bureaucracy, their occupants do not ever work as a whole without a particular view of the state or ideology. Generally, the bureaucracy was one of the most diverse areas of occupation in the Islamic world, however, it was not proportionate. While the society as a whole eschewed primarily Sunni Islam, the bureaucracy, was made heavily of Christians, Jews and Mu'Tazilah. This was a stratagem by the Abbasid throne (my opinion, never stated) to make a loyal bureaucracy as well as one that would be unlikely to side with a widespread revolt. Mu'Tazilah, especially, dominated the bureaucracies leadership and highest posts in Baghdad/Samarra, especially in the area of record keepings and historical works.

The bureaucracy though, differed between the outer edges of the realm and that of the actual city of Baghdad. Within the capital, the bureaucrats doubled as courtesans and intellectuals within the court of the Abbasid throne. They became famous for their schemes and grabs for power between one another.

While these were state institutions, they held not absolute power. At local levels there were hierarchies and powers not tied to the state apparatus.

-Tribal Chiefs: These operated much as they do today, as powerful non state actors in local areas. These Arab chiefdoms could be of any creed, but usually, they opposed the heavy handed diwans and the Turkic Mamluks. However, the Arab tribes nearly always served loyally to the Caliph in times of wars, especially during the Khawarij revolt of 866, where the tribes actively waged a vicious war against the Khawarij in a manner similar to the recent wars in Iraq. This also includes non Arab chiefs. In much of Syria, Egypt and Lebanon, Christian Syriacs had tribes and such, but operated almost wholly loyal to the Abbasid throne (exceptions of course abound).

-Ulema: This was another type of bureaucracy, but not controlled by the state to any extent (except the Mihna). Ulema were those who have great knowledge of the Islamic fiqh or religion and are a separate class from the Ummah, like the Caliph, in that they perform the duty of interpreting the words of Allah or the prophet. The ulema was present everywhere in society, often deciding disputes, holding Islamic courts for a community, giving financial advice to merchants, etc... The Ulema primarily opposed the increasing power of the Abbasid.

This is not mentioning actual groups of people and communities that in most ways, ruled themselves without state compulsion or general people in society.

===========================================================

So, with all the overlaying levels of states, it was not a burden for the average person as the state often was faraway or distant to their actual life, focused on income, spirituality and familial relations.

==========================================================
Caliphal provinces are as follows/ name and capital(s)

1. Ifriqiya-- Kairouan
2. Barka-- Barneeq
3. Egypt/Misr-- Fustat/Alexandria
4 al-Awasim-- Malatya
5. al-Jazira-- Aleppo
6. Syria-- Damascus
7. Hijaz-- Makkah
8. Nejd/Arabia-- N/A
9. Bahrain-- al-Ahsa
10. Yemen-- Sana'a
11. Oman-- Masqat
12. Iraq-- Baghdad/Samarra/Basra (depended)
13. Ninewah-- Mosul
14. Armenia--Bagaran
15.Ahvaz-Karun-- Suq al-Ahvaz
16. Arran-- Ganja
17. Azerbayjan-- Qarom
18. Tabarestan--Lafur
19. Gilan-- Rasht
20. Moh-- Hamadan
21. Isfahan--Isfahan
22. Rayy--Rayy or Rhagei
23. Jujan--Nisa
24. Fars-- Shiraz
25. Kirman--Kirman
26. Sistan and Zabul-- Zabul/Zwambinar
27.Makran-- N/A
28. Khursan-- Qabul and Herat
29. Marwannahr-- Samarqand
30 Kwarezm-- Gurganj and Konjikala
31. Wazirastan-- Peshawar
32. Hindustan-- None, was a province by name but not conquered.
======================================================
Hope this was informative to someone.
Top