NAME: DEBOTREE LAHIRI

MA HISTORY (SOUTH CAMPUS)

ROLL NO: 22/648

Write a critical note on the ideological role

played by Khariji’tes in the Islamisization
as well as the establishment of indigenous
Berber polity in Maghrib.
The arrival of the Arabs in Maghrib during the 8th century marked the establishment of one of the most
dynamic social, political, cultural and religious rules in history of mankind. With North Africa’s
geography largely catering to a diverse indigenous population with a variety of cultures and ideologies,
the abrupt emergence of the Arabs resulted in a historic disruption and discontinuity which brought forth
centuries of resistance and chaos from both parties. While on the one hand was the turbulent successions
of the Caliphate with new dynasties rising and falling, there also came hostility from the people of the
land who felt threatened towards the new rule. The shunned, sedentary living of the old civilizations of
North Africa newly got introduced to Islam which created a situation so unique that made its way even to
Spain. Initially referred as the “Berbers” by the ever so sophisticated prior Western invaders like the
Greeks and the Romans, the indigenous groups were later called “Barberia” by the Arabs with the
connotation being primitive or foreign. However, the local people called themselves “Imazighen”,
meaning “free-born” who had a distaste towards a centralized state system and believed to live outside
any control. These two conflicting mindsets of Tribalism and Centralizing tendencies are what we will
further be focusing on.

The Islamisization of the Maghribi society takes the shape of a complex process involving numerous
socio-political factors which historians still fail to explore completely. Historians such as Lewicki and a
few other presents one of the reasons to be trade. But the major factor has to be the teachings of Khariji’te
and Sha’ite1 spread by the fugitives of East Arab and da’is during the eighth and ninth centuries which led
to Islam taking its roots in the Berber society. Still, with all its justice and religious equality, the Arab
rulers failed to apply the political hegemony in the treatment of the Berbers. As the Ummayads Caliphate
took the centre stage for the Arab expansion, there also came indigenous Berbers who, despite converting
to Islam, were dissatisfied with their rule. The reason behind was the obvious discrimination which
contradicted the tenet of brotherhood according to Sharia. A great instance would be Uqba bin Nafi’s case
as he embodied the Arabs and Muslims conquest but sidelined the Berbers. Philip C. Nayor provides a

1
Refers to party/partisans of Ali
more detailed picture of Uqba’s devout but prejudiced personality especially towards the Mawalis2, who
believed in the principles of Muslim equality and expected it. This only became the prime reason of
resentment towards the Arab commander who was later opposed by a prominent Berber leader,
Kusalaya3. With the support of the Byzantines came Uqba’s end and the Berbers subsequent advance to
Qayrawan where they briefly asserted regional authority. Here, it is important to understand that the
constant conflict is more of a result of how the idea of True Islam 4is followed and how the newly
converted Berbers are truly treated under it (i.e., as equals to their Arabian Muslims brothers).

Sadly, the discrimination often surfaced where the Berbers became an extension of their own region’s
history. The development of this unfavorable religio-ideological conception of the Berbers in the Mashriq
was a result of the difficulties encountered in the establishment of Arab-caliphial hegemony in the
Maghrib which was later became a justification of the repressive and exploitative practices employed
against them. Even after adopting Islam, they were treated as second-class citizens with high taxation,
heinous tributes and no prime positions given in administration.

To give a history of the initial rising tension between the two sides, the foundation of the Ummayads was
established in 660 with historians suggesting the appearance of the Khariji’tes sect in 657 was a result of
this conflict. Mu’awiya's victory over the Fourth Caiph Ali and his proclamation as caliph during the
battle of Siffin gave the caliphate a new character which was disliked by many. Mu’awiya’s cheap trick
of using the torn Quran pages as attribution and Ali’s acceptance infuriated many of his followers. They
wished to see the chosen victor by God himself and viewed the Caliph as an apostate. These seceders
became known as the Khariji’tes (kharaja means to leave or secede) who later assassinated the Caliph and
would play a bigger role in the political development of North Africa.

Along with the Shi’as, Mu’awiya’s rule was a hereditary monarchy which was also rejected by the
Khariji’tes. Believing in the idea of elective emirate, they strongly supported the idea of any righteous
Muslim becoming the leader with no connection to hereditary kingship. While such an ideology led to
their were persecution, the Berbers of Maghrib felt seen in those times as they always considered
themselves independent. As Naylor points, the stark contrast between the Khariji’s egalitarianism and the
Umayyad Arab Superiority offered the Berber’s an appealing alternative which would later provide them
the base to take control over their own land without rejecting Islam.

In his work, Jamil M. Abun Nasr talks about the three doctrinal principals which sharply differentiated
from the Umayyad dynasty principles5: (i) ‘If a sinful Muslim still withheld their faith’ While the

2
Refers to converted Muslims
3
Another leader being Al-Kahina who managed to mobilize the Berbers
4
With the coming of 8th century came contention within Islam for religious and theological superiority paralleling with the rise of different dynasties and their need
for political legitimization.
5
Abun-Nasr, Jamil M., ed. A History of the Maghrib in the Islamic Period. Cambridge University Press, 1987. pp 37.
Umayyad’s accepted them, gaining the trust of the Sunnite Muslims, Khari’jite’s were strict and labeled
them apostates, (ii) ‘Rejecting hereditary succession to the caliphate and the practice of restricting it
to the Arabs’ as the Khari’jites upheld the principle of the election of the head of the Muslim
community, with the immas elected by religious scholars on the basis of their religious piety and learning,
despite their race or caste, and (iii) ‘The legitimacy of political authority dependent on upholding the
religious principles of Islam and affirmed the right of the Muslims to depose an imam who violated
these principles’ thus arbitrating for a system of check and balance based on an idea of Asabiyyah.

While the Khariji’te’s had their discontentment towards the Umayyad, there also were the Berber’s who
now faced the unjustifiable rule which came through conquest. These Muslim leaders felt entitled to levy
Islamic legal principles with the imposition of jizya (poll tax) and the kharaj (land tax). However, the
demands went beyond any legal principles. Talbi observes that such a treatment towards the Berbers was
the result of a loose assumption made by the Muslims as they were considered perfidious people who
rejected the divine command. Overexaggerated accounts of the riches of the Maghrib only gave them
more the reason to exploit the people. But it was the heinous reasoning related to the difficulties faced
during the conquest of Maghrib that agitated the Berbers further. The human tribute system levied upon
the Berbers was the “justified” action taken by the Umayyads to extort more. The conquerors obtained
slaves, especially slave girls, to cater for the pleasures of the Arab ruling class. This practice seems to
have been initiated at the beginning of the conquest with the slaves being a part of the jizya payment.
Settlements were looted and captives were treated as war booty and then thrown into slavery.

However, one major cause of discontentment with Arab rule was also the treatment received by the
Berber warriors who served in the Arab army. While the conditions under which the Berber’s entered are
unclear, their large number is evident in the Arab army since 690s. Even though the recruitment was a
factor of Islamisization, the inferior status and unfair treatment – whether through low stipends or as war
booty- only deepened their resentment towards the Umayyads.

The ultimate result of such mistreatment by the Arab rulers led to the Berber rebellion of 739-740. Slave
raiding expeditions and oppressive policies were adopted in order to resist the Arab’s rule. The rebellion
had both political and religious dimensions, with inspiration drawing from not just the Khariji’tes, but
also the wider currents of religious thought that brought the legitimacy of Umayyad political authority
into question. Scholars speculate that the rebellion was influenced by several factors, including the
Ibadait and Sufrite missionaries who were engaged in propagating the religion among Berbers since 720s,
showcasing a link between the rebellion and the spread of Islam.

In case of the genesis of this resistance, it was the circle of the pious and learned Muslims who
condemned the Umayyads for transforming the Arab caliphate into hereditary monarchy while deviating
from the early ascetic life of the caliphs and adopting a more exuberant luxurious lifestyle. Their violation
of Islam taboos were looked down on. Despite the military and political achievements, the learned
Muslims refused to compromise with their religion in this extended empire. This further led to the spread
of the Khariji’tes ideology later made its way to Qayrawan during the late eighth century as a significant
centre for Islamic learning in Maghrib. Also being the administrative centre, the Caliphate then, Umar b
Abdul-Aziz tried not only to put an end to the oppressive policy in Maghrib by its governors, but also
sought to have Islam propagated systematically amongst the Berbers. Ismac il b. Ubayd Allah, whom he
appointed in 718 as amir of Ifriqiya was a learned traditionist and he sent with him ten tabis charged with
teaching Islam to the Berbers. But rather than spreading the Islamic teachings among the Berber tribes,
these scholars settled down in Qayrawan for the development of religious teachings. Abu Arab in his
bigraphical work of 10th century talks about renowned scholars studying under the tabi’s. Such teaching
strengthened the conviction of Maghribi Muslims and Mashriq (the eastern Islamic world) who learned
about the true Islamic system of government and how it differed from the Umayyads rule, forming
somewhat of a pan-Islamic movement.

The political success of the Khariji’te sect was a result of the tabi’s and the Sunnis presence in Maghrib
since the early eight century who managed to propagate knowledge and promote their own ideas among
the masses. While the Sunnis criticized but tolerated the Umayyads’ rule, the Kahri’jite’s emerged as an
organized group of propagandists preaching a coherent religio-political doctrine that opposed the
Umayyads and advocated for the Muslims' right in order to overthrow unjust rulers through force, thus
providing the impetus and the ideological backing for the rebellions that were to follow. Even as a large
sect, Khariji’tes was not monoliths but had three major groups - the Ibadait, the Sufraite and the Azraqaits
- in an order from the most moderate to the most orthodox. They believed in preservation of their religion
and the idea of Imam or leader rather than an all powerful Caliph.

Kharijite authors trace the appearance and success of their sect in the Maghrib to the activities of two
Da’is (Missionaries) representing two of its main branches, the Ibadites and the Sufrites, who are said to
have arrived in Qayrawan at the end of the first century A.H. (A.D. 719) or shortly afterwards. Though, it
is unlikely that the Khari’jites doctrine had not gained followers before early eighth century as these
regions were always connected via trade and pilgrimage while providing avenues for dissemination of
knowledge and ideas. However, there is little information about the first two da’is, while it’s doubtful
whether the third, namely Sufirite Ikrima, ever entered Quyrawan. Hence, it is important to understand the
arrival of the two da’is led to the beginning of a new era when the Kharijite doctrine was being
systematically propagated in the Maghrib, rather than being restricted to the regions of two
representatives.

It was in the 660s when the Kahrijites began the rebellion largely in Iraq against the usurers, the
Umayyads, while drawing support from Non-Arab Muslims (especially Persians). Al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf, the
governor of Iraq between 695 and 714, brought about the final military defeat of the Azraqite extremist
branch of the Khari’jites in 699. Although, the Ibadites, who constituted the most moderate branch of the
Kharijite sect, survived as an organized community after the defeat of the Azraqites.6 Under the leadership
6
Abun-Nasr, Jamil M., ed. A History of the Maghrib in the Islamic Period. Cambridge University Press, 1987. pp 38.
of an eminent traditionalist, Jabir b. Zayd al-Azdi, and later his disciple, Abu Ubayda Muslim b. Karima
al-Tamimi, the Ibadite jama gained prominence in Basra and became a centre of Ibadite propagandists
known as Hamalat al-Hilm (transmitters of learning).

During this time (739-740) began a Berber rebellion under the leadership of Sufirite Kharijites in Tangier.
The Ibadites however had gained control over the tribal population of Tripolitania, including the the
Hawwara, Nafusa, and Zanata tribes. Meanwhile, the Sufrite Khariji’tes had a limited presence in
Qayrawan, and their propagation of the Sufrite doctrine in the Maghrib is poorly documented. It is
believed that the rebellion, led by Maysara of the Matghara tribe, was influenced by Ikrima who had spent
a few years in Qayrawan. The rebellion faced setbacks but caught momentum under the leadership of
Khalid b. Hamid who later defeated the Arabs in 741. 7Though, in the upcoming year, the Kharijites were
defeated by the governor of Egypt, Hanzala b. Safwan.

These two battles hold a symbolic significance, showing how Qayrawan did not fall under the Sufirite
Khariji’tes rule. However, the persistent Kharijite Berbers did not give and in 756, the Sufrite Khariji’tes,
known as the Warfajuma tribe, seized control of Qayrawan with the support of certain members of the
Fihrid family opposed to Habib b. Abdul-Rahman. The Ibadites, threatened by the ascendancy of the
Sufrites, proclaimed an Ibadite imamate in Tripolitania in 757 or 758 and later ousted the Sufrites from
Qayrawan in 858. It is evident here how the Khariji’tes even later continued to rebel against the
Caliphates while joining hands with other Berber tribes who wished to hold power within the folds of
Islam.

While on one hand the Khiriji’tes and Berbers struggled against the Caliphate, the fall of Umayyads in
750 brought in new dynasties to the centre stage. The Abbassides, being the first of the successors, took
control of North Africa, following the Rustamids in Tahart and the Banu Midrar in Sijilmasa, both
belonging to Khariji’te branches. The Idriside dynasty in Fez and the Jund8 frequently rebelled against
Abbassid representatives, making it difficult for them to extend their control. The Fihrid in Tunisia found
it difficult to rule due to internal conflicts while the Aghlabid dynasty became independent rulers after
taking control of Ifriquia in 800. Sufirite and Ibadite Khariji’tes though continued to oppose the
Abbassides with the former ever the profiting from the conflicts between members of the Fihrid.

The coming of the Abbasids to power in 750 marked the transformation of the caliphate in a way which
enabled non-Arab Muslims to play a much greater part in public life than under the Umayyads. A
glorious Islamic civilization developed which took inspiration from Greeks, Romans and Non-Arab
cultures. While they faced oppression, the Abbassid Caliphate managed to gain control over North Africa
by 771, leading to the elimination of the Khariji’tes residing in the east of Aures mountains. The town
named Tahart found by a Ibadi representative in 761 became a political centre during the Rustamids’ rule.
7
This battle came to be known as the Battle of the Nobles.
8
Refers to the Arab military caste long established in Ifriqiya.
Supplanting the Khariji’te teachings, the Abbassids shaped a new political structure in this region. But
with the coming of the Rustamids, new changes were witnessed.

The importance of Rustamids traces way back to the battle of Siffin where the Caliph’s decision alienated
the Khariji’tes who later were accepted by the Berbers of the Maghrib. Robert Hillenbrand observed a
historic continuity in that Kharijism “with its ethical intransigence, its concern with authority and
legitimacy, and its care to define the respective value of faith and works, has distinct affinities with the
Donatist heresy.”9 In Algeria, Abd al-Rustam, of Persian ancestry, established an independent Ibadi (a
sect of Kharijism) imamate in Tahart while a small tribe called Banu Irfan joined the Berbers in Awras
region. The Rustamids were thus able to establish their dynasty with the alliance of the Berber tribes till
the tenth century, with Tahart becoming one of the first confederacies of different Berber tribes coming
together under the banner of Islam based on the doctrine of the Kharijaits. Thriving as a trans-Saharan
trade route, wealth and influence expanded among the Berbers. The Rustamids won the tribes’ trust with
Tahart becoming a prosperous centre and home for Muslims, non-Muslims, Christians and other groups.
They also maintained important and intellectual connections with Ibrid of Basra, leading to Ibridism’s
widespread dissemination around North Africa and Sahara via trade, strong tribal affiliations and political
influence of the imamate itself.

From the above instances, it is pretty clear that while the Khariji’tes movement may have been a reason
for the widespread revolt, scholars have proposed two more important causes for it. The first points at the
Khariji’te missionaries coming from Basra in Iran who played a significant role in spreading the
interpretations of Islam among the Berber tribes of northwest Africa. The geographical disassociation
along with the unjust Umayyad regime only poured fuel in the Berber’s blazing hearts. Kharijism, in such
a moment, appeared more as a religious expression, an ideological framework that provided the Berbers a
vessel to channel their resentment towards the Umayyads and the Abbasids in the form of inexorable
revolts. The other has to be the historical context of autochthonous Berber tribes in North Africa who
had a longstanding inclination toward autonomy and resistance against central authorities, dating back to
the Roman-Byzantine period. They had a history of strongly resisting the Byzantines and after the
Vandals invasion during the fifth and sixth centuries, the Berber or “Moorish” principalities emerged in
this region, weakening the Romans. Moreover, there was the resistance against the Arabs during the
seventh century.

All these factors, linking the incidents in a chronological order, represent the rise of Kharijism ideology
more as a logical progression which provided them the base to oppose the Umayyads. It became a glue of
sort, binding together the non-Arab Muslims and other groups with the Berbers while simultaneously
providing them a means to complement their political aspirations. When discriminated under the guise of
brotherhood, they fought for their dignity and equality that Islam promised. As observed in the several
rebellions against the Ummayads throughout the years, the Berbers remained committed to their cause
Furthermore, the transfer of power to Abbasids post 743 A.D. enabled the Berbers to play a greater role in
9
Naylor, Phillip C. North Africa, Revised Edition: A History from Antiquity to the Present. University of Texas Press, 2014. pp 68-69
the administration and public spheres. Provision of local, independent rule to the Berbers and nominal
authority of the Caliphate opened a new gate for Berber rebellions and Khariji’te ideology. Association of
Islam with the Berber culture and vice-versa not only led to Islamisization of the Berbers but also
“Berberization” of Islam. An example would be of the Barghawata chiefs, who first declared themselves
Prophet and translated Quran in the Berber language. Thus, one can see the assimilation of Ibn Khaldun’s
idea of Asabbiyah here with the replacement of kinship ties with religious ones which made possible a
united resistance against discrimination, with the Khariji’te ideology providing the idea of legitimacy and
leadership to the Berbers as it further led to the establishment of new monarchies. The Al-Moravids and
the Al-Mohads coming up from the local dynasties in the 11th century serve as great examples of cohesive
Berber-Islamic rule with the later unifying the rest of Maghrib through slow yet steady Islamic practices.
The use of Mehdi – similar to Shi’a – can be interpreted as a continuum of Khariji’te ideology to facilitate
autonomy and claim power. Hence, the importance the Berbers hold in the Islamisization of Maghrib
presents a fascinating picture of transculturalism, and their rise to power itself links back to the Khariji’te
ideology, providing access to a larger Asabiyyah which enabled their claim to power in the Pan-Islamic
world.

References:

 Abun-Nasr, Jamil M., ed. A History of the Maghrib in the Islamic Period. Cambridge University Press, 1987.
 Naylor, Phillip C. North Africa, Revised Edition: A History from Antiquity to the Present. University of Texas Press,
2014.
 Ṭāha, Abdulwāḥid Dhanūn. The Muslim conquest and settlement of North Africa and Spain. Routledge, 2016.
 Ballandalus. Kharijism in Islamic North Africa (700-900 : A Summary Overview, August 2014)
 Class Notes