ABSTRACT
Once the Berber revolt was over in Spain, a new struggle started there. The Syrians, who were attracted by the prosperity of the country and the wealth of the early settlers, preferred to stay rather than to depart to North Africa or Syria. The early settlers, on the other hand, were not prepared to give up any of their possessions, and conflict was therefore inevitable. There has been much discussion among modern scholars about the struggle between the Arab tribesmen in Spain. The affair was erroneously explained as a mere tribal strife between the Qaysites and the Yamanites. Mu’nis, in his book Fajr al-Andalus, makes a good start in his criticism of Dozy’s persistent concentration on the tribalism and the fanaticism of the Arabs, together with his continuous efforts to prove that they were merely hostile parties with no bonds whatsoever to connect them.1 These were the tribesmen of the tribal groups of ‘Adnān and of Qahtān, or the northern Qaysites, and the southern Yamanites.2 However, when Mu’nis elaborates on the struggle between the Arabs in Spain, he himself falls into the same mistake and adopts Dozy’s outdated conclusions.3 Moreover, he confuses this issue in such a way that it becomes virtually impossible for anyone to understand his point of view concerning the identity of both Qays and Yaman in Spain and North Africa. He refers to the Qaysites as Yamanites, and vice versa, whenever it suits the context, or whenever it supports a certain argument. His views are very contradictory about both the Qaysite and Yamanite elements and their behaviour. On one occasion, for example, he describes the Yamanites as a chaotic people who lacked all knowledge of administration,4 215while in another place he mentions that they were a stable people inclined to an ordered and tranquil way of life.5 Among other examples illustrating this point, Mu’nis calls ‘Abdulmalik b. Qatan al-Fihrī a Yamanī and a shaykh of the Yamanītes, while it is well-known that he was from Quraysh. Even Mu’nis himself mentions in another place that he was from Muḍar.6 Similarly, he describes ‘Umar b. ‘Abdillāh al-Murādī, Ḥanẓala b. Ṣafwān al-Kalbī and Tha’laba b. Salāma al-’Āmilī as Qaysites.7 On the other hand, he considers al-Ḥabḥāb b. Rawāha al-Zuhrī, ‘Āmir b. ‘Amr al-’Abdarī and ‘Udhra b. ‘Abdillāh al-Fihrī to be Yamanites.8 Moreover, Mu’nis does not seem to identify Abū ‘Aṭā’ al-Murrī. On one occasion, this leader is referred to as a Qaysite and shaykh of Ghaṭafān, and elsewhere as a Yamanīte and shaykh of Judhām.9 Last but not least, in an attempt to support his argument about Yamanīte fanaticism, he even describes al-Ḥajjāj b. Yūsuf al-Thaqafi, and his kātib Yazīd b. Abī Muslim in particular, as Kalbites of Yaman.10
