ABSTRACT
The nature of the ‘sulhan’–‘anwatan traditions concerning Iraq is completely different from that of the Egyptian traditions; in fact it is possible to say–cum grano salis–that they amount to the exact opposite. The aim of the traditions is to present the arrangement with the original land owners, which did not involve a treaty, as equivalent to an actual treaty. Some instances use the word ‘sulh’ to refer to asking the inhabitants. The legal claims of the Caliph’s central power as laid down in the qismat al-aradin traditions are rendered invalid by the Iraqi ‘sulhan’–‘anwatan’ traditions in two ways. Those are by proclaiming a near-contractual agreement with the non-Muslim Sawadians and thus denying the anwatan position of the Sawad. Second is by claiming that the question of whether the lands should be distributed or not only referred to the Sassanid crown land, and land whose owners had fled, but not to the entire country of the Sawad.
