Q. & A. 711 to 1707 with solved Papers css 1971 to date

Marwan II
447
was proclaimed Caliph in November 744, because it was believed that he would save the Urn .yyad dynasty from its bitter enemies who were raising their heads all over the empire. Marwan justified this trust to a great extent.
In dealing with these insurrections, Marwan displayed admirable generalship and soldierly promptitude. He swooped down in succession upon Hems and Palestine, scattered the rebels and impaled their leaders. He then marched back upon Iraq, and after some hard fights drove the Zealots across the Tigris. In Hijaz, Medina was captured’by the Kharijis under Abu Hamza, after a fight in which the citizens were worsted, and was treated by them with a consideration which it did not receive from the Umayyads. Suppression of the Khawarij Revolt
Marwan had not been long on the throne before violent insurrections broke out against him at Hems and in Palestine. The Kharijis emerged once again from their desert refuge and denounced the Umayyad rule and called the people to revolt. Though few in number, they overran and captured Yaman, Hijaz, the whole of Iraq, and later spread to Persia. In dealing with these insurrections, Marwan displayed admirable generalship and soldierly promptitude. He quickly fell upon the rebels in Syria and Palestine and scattered them. He then marched upon Iraq and after some hard fights drove the Kharijis across the Tigris. In Yaman and Hijaz, the Caliph’s commanders crushed the Khariji rebels. In this way he pacified his empire, and restored peace in Iraq. He made Yazid bin Umar bin Hubeira the governor of Iraq. He then returned to his favourite headquarters in Harran, believing that all troubles were finally crushed. CHARACTER
Up to this time, Marwan had amply proved his ability as a general and as a Caliph. But soon occurred an event in distant Khurasan which exposed certain short-comings in his character as a military leader and certain defects in his policy as a Caliph. This was the revolt of the Abbassids in Khurasan under Abu Muslim. Before describing the revolt, we should analyse his character and conduct of policy to bring out his faults and weaknesses. Marwan as a Soldier and Caliph
As a soldier and as a Caliph, Marwan had shown remarkable qualities. Though he was more than sixty years old, when he

448 Political and Cultural History of Islam

ascended the throne, he still possessed the soldierly qualities of prompt action, vigour, great powers of endurance and physical strength and bravery. For his quality of endurance and physical strength he was nicknamed the ”ass of Mesopotamia,” not derisively but appreciating. Besides these soldierly qualities, Marwan was far better a man and Caliph than his immediate predecessors. He was simple, austere, avoided pleasures and luxuries which corrupted the life and court of those Umayyad Caliphs whom he succeeded. ’’In camp or on the march,”’ says Ameer AH, ”he lived like his soldiers and shared their simple fare as well as their hardship; nor would he in his palace indulge in those luxuries which had become habitual among the sovereigns of his house. He was devoted to the study of ancient history.” These qualities justify the statement that he was one of the bravest and best of his House, ”and deserved a better fate.” But a few defects destroyed him and his dynasty.
Like some of his predecessors, Marwan II did not possess wide sympathies. He was narrow-minded, hot-tempered, obstinate and hard. These short-comings were reflected in his conduct of state when he became the Caliph, because he became an unyielding partisan of the Modharite faction of the Arabs. At the critical time, when his dynasty was surrounded by strong and resolute foes, it was necessary to rise above party and faction, to reconcile the warring tribes and to restore harmony among them. Instead of pacifying the unending feuds of Arab tribes, Marwan flung himself into the tribal dissensions with the blind zeal of a partisan. He treated the Yamanites with such harshness and even cruelty that they became the mortal enemies of his and his dynasty. Thus they not only caused still greater quarrels among Arab tribes and thereby gave an opportunity to the Abbasid rebels to fish in the troubled waters of the tribal feuds in Khurasan but also to recruit their forces from among the discontented Arabs. So Marwan ultimately failed as a statesman. He failed to rise above the tribal spirit and enmity. This became the cause of his undoing in spite of his ability and bravery.
While Marwan was engaged in suppressing the Kharijis in Iraq, Abu Muslim had unfolded his black banner of revolt in Khurasan on 15th June, 747 A.D.’ He drove out the Umayyad governor, Nasr bin Sayyar, from Khurasan, and his lieutenant later defeated and killed him. Before his defeat and death Nasr appealed to the Caliph to take strong measures against the Abbasid insurgents. But Marwan, strange to say, paid no heed to his appeal. For once in
Marwan II
449
his life he became lazy and negligent of his enemies and, thus, enabled Abu Muslim’s forces to conquer Khurasan, Persia and Iraq and proclaim as-Saffa as their Caliph in Kufa in November, 749 A.D. That was practically the end of the Umayyad power. At last Marwan shook off his inactivity and gave battle to the Abbasid forces under Abdullah and Abu Ayun on the bank of the greater Zab on 25th January, 750. He was defeated and fled for his dear life to Damascus and from there to Egypt, for the Abbasid forces were hard on his heels. At last he was overtaken by them near Fustat and was put to death in August, 750 A.D. Thus ended the reign of Marwan II. who was both able and brave and would have deserved a better fate but for the few defects in his character and policy.
Marwan II was one of the bravest and best of his house. He was a man of vigour and ability, ”His remarkable powers of endurance had obtained for him the surname of al-Himar,” says Ameer Ali. He was simple in life and habits. He had a life like his soldiers in the camp, ”but,” says Ibn al-Athir, ”as destiny had put a term on his reign both his valour and wisdom came to naught”. It was not only destiny but he himself was responsible for the downfall of his empire. There was wanting in him the sovereign ability whichwas essentially needed at the critical moment of the Umayyad dynasty. Moreover, he was not above the tribal bias. The remarks of Ameer Ali in this connection can be quoted here, ”Instead of endeavouring to pacify the feuds which rent the Arab nation, he flung himself into the trivial dissensions with the blind zeal of a partisan and the harshness, not to say cruelty with which he treated the Yamanites gave rise to implacable hatred on their side’’. During the first part of his reign Marwan showed extraordinary courage and capacity and thereby proved himself a worthy and capable monarch of the great Umayyad dynasty. But later in life he was quite indifferent and careless towards the administration of the empire. Consequently, different discontented parties began to grow up in the heart of the empire causing his own downfall and the downfall of the dynasty he belonged to.5
1 For detail see, Hawtmg, The First Dynasty of Islam, London 1990.

CHAPTER