Everything about Battle Of Heliopolis totally explained
The
Battle of Heliopolis, or "Ayn Shams," was a decisive battle between
Arab Muslim armies and
Byzantine forces for the control of
Egypt. Though there were several major skirmishes after this battle, it effectively decided the fate of the Byzantine rule in Egypt, and opened the door for the Muslim conquest of the Byzantine
Exarchate of Africa.
Background to the Islamic Expansion Era
At the time of the death of Prophet Muhammad on
6 July 632, Islam had effectively unified the entire
Arabian peninsula. Within the next twelve years, under the rule of the first two “rightly guided Caliphs” an Islamic empire arose that expanded into all of what used to be the
Sassanid Persian Empire, and almost all of the eastern provinces of what was the East Roman (Byzantine) Empire. The Muslim Caliphate continued to expand in a near-unstoppable onslaught until, by the turn of the
8th century, it stretched from the
Atlantic Ocean and the
Iberian peninsula in the west to
Central Asia in the east.
Under the first
Caliph, Abu Bakr, force was used to prevent unrest and rebellion from causing the collapse of the new Islamic “state”, and the first raids were carried out into the territory of the Sassanid Empire. But the all out attack on the Empire came with the ascension of the second Caliph, the man
John Bagnell Bury called “the great and austere
Omar.” Omar’s ascension as Caliph left the rule of the Islamic world in the hands of a man determined to not just prevent the collapse of what Muhammad had built, but to expand it to the ends of the civilized world. When Omar began his rule in 634, the international situation in the
Middle East could hardly have been more propitious for a new and ambitious power: the region's two traditional superpowers, the East Roman and the Sassanid Empires, had exhausted each other in a
conflict that raged for over 20 years. By the 630s, Persia had descended into a state of civil war, while Byzantium, under the aging emperor
Heraclius, its manpower and resources depleted in the life-and-death struggle with its old adversary, was struggling to re-establish its authority in its newly re-conquered eastern provinces. The two states were thus in considerable internal turmoil, and unable to either stop the Muslim expansion or to recover from its first blows. It is unknown whether Umar intended from the outset to conquer both the Sassinid and the Byzantine Empire, or simply allowed raids, and then, perceiving their weakness, followed up with full-scale invasion.
The loss of Byzantine Syria
Sir Walter Scott in 1915 in the
Gentleman’s Quarterly, wrote of the Byzantine loss of Egypt:
» :“The most noteworthy event of the interval between the conquest of Egypt in 616-618 by the Persians under the last great Sassanid rulers, Khosrau, and the Arab invasion of 639 was the reoccupation of the land of the Pharaohs by the Romans. To the modern historian, this period of warfare between the Persians and the Romans was the “first crusade,” in which Heraclius inspired a moribund Roman state to somehow rise up and vigorously route the forces of the Great Sassanid in a succession of brilliant campaigns. Heraclius not only reconquered all of his lost provinces, but also actually increased the size of the Empire! But then, out of the desert, rode a horde of fierce boudins practicing a new religion of which the west knew nothing. Of that faith, it's said that Heraclius' father knew it not, but his sons would know it all too well, as only the walls of the Mother of Cities saved it from the fate of Damascus and all the cities of the fallen empire. Nor was Rome alone in her losses – the Mohammedans made no distinction between Roman and Persia. Only the mighty walls of Constantinople saved her from the fate of fallen Persia…”
Heraclius fell ill soon after his triumph over the Persians and never took the field again. When the Muslim Arabs attacked Syria and Palestine
634, he was unable to oppose them personally, and his generals failed him. The
Battle of Yarmuk in
636 resulted in a crushing defeat for the larger Roman army and within three years, Syria and
Palestine were lost again. By the time of Heraclius' death, most of Egypt had fallen as well.
Though historians such as Butler blame the treachery of the Coptic Christians as well as the failure of the Byzantine generals for the swift fall of the Exarchate of Egypt, Gibbon doesn't blame anyone as much as he praises the character and genius of Amr for the victory at Heliopolis. Gibbon says "the conquest of Egypt may be explained by the character of the victorious Saracen, one of the first of his nation."
Whether through the foolishness of the Byzantine generals, including Theodore, contributed to what then occurred, certainly Amr fought a brilliant battle at Heliopolis. When the Byzantine army began approaching, Amr divided his army into three separate units, with one detachment under the command of a trusted commander, Kharija. This unit marched abruptly east to near-by hills, where they effectively hid. This unit was to remain there until the Romans had begun the battle, at which point they were to fall on the Roman flank or rear, whichever was more vulnerable.
[ The second detachment Amr ordered to the south, which would be the direction the Romans would flee if the battle went badly. Once the Byzantine forces initiated contact with Amr's forces and commenced an attack, the detachment of Kharija attacked the Byzantine rear, which was completely unexpected by the Romans][ Theodore hadn't kept scouts out, or, if he had, he ignored their warning of the approaching Arab horsemen. This attack from the rear created utter chaos among the Byzantine ranks. As Theodore's troops attempted to flee to the south, they were attacked by the third detachment, which had been placed there for just such a purpose. This completed the final break-down and defeat of the Byzantine army, which fled in all directions.][
Theodore survived, but with only a tiny fragment of his army, while the remainder was killed or captured. In the battle's aftermath, most of southern and central Egypt fell to Amr's forces. The defeat at Heliopolis was crucial, as it removed the last Roman force standing between the Islamic invaders and the heart of Egypt. However, not only did the Battle of Heliopolis leave Egypt practically defenceless, it also encouraged the disaffected natives, most of whom were Monophysite Christians and had suffered on-and-off persecution at the hands of Constantinople, to rise up against their Roman oppressors. Although the Byzantine Empire was certainly by lineage the Roman Empire, it’s traditions, language, and ruling elite, by this time, were Greek. The Greeks of Egypt, whose numbers could scarcely equal a tenth of the native population, were overwhelmed by the universal defection of those same natives from obedience to the Roman Empire. As Bury wrote in the History of the Later Roman Empire from Arcadius to Irene:]
» :”The Greeks had ever been hated, they were no longer feared: the magistrate fled from his tribunal, the bishop from his altar; and the distant garrisons were surprised or starved by the surrounding multitudes.”
The native population had heard that taxation and rule under the Caliphate was far better than that of the Romans, and once the Battle of Heliopolis left the Romans without an army to force their obedience, that obedience was gone, and a large portion of the Coptic Christians sided with the invading Muslims over the Byzantines. Ironically, some Copts believed they'd find the Muslims more tolerant than the Byzantines, and of these some turned to Islam. In return for a tribute of money and food for the troops of occupation, the Christian inhabitants of Egypt were excused military service and left free in the observance of their religion and the administration of their affairs, while Amr was Emir of Egypt. A smaller number sided with the Byzantines, hoping that they'd provide a defense against the Arab invaders.(External Link
)
It is notable that after the end of Amr's rule in Egypt, the population found their taxes ever increasing. Indeed, under the Umayyad Caliphate the Coptic Christians of Egypt found their taxes higher than the Byzantine Greeks had ever made them.[ As to religious freedom, the issues there are more fully discussed in the history of Egypt.
]Aftermath
The next year and a half were spent on more maneuvers, skirmishes, and sieges before the formal surrender of the capital, Alexandria, took place on 4 November 641, but Sir Walter Scott was correct when he said “the fate of Byzantine Africa was decided at the Battle of Heliopolis.” The permanent loss of the Egypt left the Byzantine Empire without an irreplaceable source of food and money. The loss of Egypt and Syria, followed later by the conquest of the Exarchate of Africa also meant that the Mediterranean, long a "Roman lake", was now contested between two powers: the Muslim Caliphate and the Byzantines. In the event, the Byzantine Empire, although sorely tested, would be able to hold on to Anatolia, while the mighty walls of Constantinople would save it, during two great Arab sieges, from the fate of the Persian Empire.
Footnotes
Further Information
Get more info on 'Battle Of Heliopolis'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://battle_of_heliopolis.totallyexplained.com">Battle of Heliopolis Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |
