Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Patricia Crone (Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton) It is well known that Umayyad soldiers were paid an annual sum in cash, known as eata (stipends), and a monthly allocation in kind, known as rizq (rations), which enabled them to serve on a full-time basis. One is thus surprised by the commonly encountered claim that non-Arab Muslims (mawali, "clients") who served in the army rarely or never received regular pay.1 The non-Arabs in question were not peasant soldiers or feudal grandees rendering military service by way of fulfillment of duties attached to land. How did they combine soldiering with making a living, then? Since there is no record of them being conscripted, one may also ask why they should have seen fit to join up. The answer, of course, is that the commonly encountered claim is wrong: though clients were not paid as much as Arabs, paid they certainly were. The idea that the Umayyads recruited non-Arab soldiers without paying them is a modern elaboration on the old theme of Umayyad iniquity: c Umar treated Arab and non-Arab Muslims equally when he instituted the military roll (dlwan), we are told, but the secular-minded ) See for example G. VAN
Der Islam – de Gruyter
Published: Jan 1, 2003
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.