Nicolle, David

2013-06-26T14:04:48Z

2013-06-26T14:04:48Z

1982

Any study of arms and armour relies an three source, of evidence: archaeological, pictorial and written. The farmer naturally take precedence as such studies are essentially concerned with material culture. For similar reasons this thesis gives greater priority to pictorial sources rather than to the written, descriptive, record. This is despite the limitations of artistic conventions such no archaism. Written evidence seems to suffer from comparable limitations while at the same time often having an obscure vocabulary and a strongly poetic style. In fact, the terminology of Islamic military equipment remains far from clears and seems likely to remain so until archaeology uncovers a greater number of surviving artifacts. Nor can the study of terminology answer all questions relating to the structure, development or appearance of items of arms and armour. Nevertheless, a study of the known vocabulary does suggest certain features, most'of which are backed up by both the archaeological and pictorial evidence. Iranian influences were probably much stronger in pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arabia than were those from Byzantium. Iranian and Central Asian technological advances subsequently had an increasing impact on Muslim military technology, until Central Asian influences came to predominate in all regions outside North Africa and the Iberian peninsula. This eastern influence did not reflect a backward nomadic culture, but rather one that boasted advanced metallurgical techniques as well as sophisticated tactical concepts. In the west, European influences dominated all other external factors. At the some time it would be wrong to see the Maghhrib and Andalus solely as the adopters of other peoples' technical developments. (Wring the early Middle Ages there was probably a two-way flow of ideas and techniques across the Mediterranean: just as there was across the frontier between Islam and Byzantium. In these central regions, however, the Byzantine and Muslim worlds were both rapidly absorbing Central Asian military fashions. One of the most characteristic features of Classical Islamic civilization was, in fact, its eclecticism. This was particularly true in military matters. As the armies of the Prophet advanced gnat and west they had mot the warriors of rival cultures whose military traditions Islam then gradually absorbed. Thus the military technologies and tactics of the late.. Romano-t3yz¬tntine world, the Barbers., the Iberian peninsula, Armenia, the Saassaaninn Empire, Buddhist Afghnnistän and Turkish Transoxaania, were all added to those of ancient Arabia. The process by which they blended to produce something nov was slow and far from regular, Influences from Perain and Turkistän were clearly more important than those from Egypt end North Africa$ while the impact of Visigothic Spain was limited almost cntiroly to the Muslin culture of al Andnlus that succeeded it. At first infantry dominated the armies of Islamas but during the Umayyad period cavalry become ever more important. This was particularly true of an Irenian.. style heavy cavalry which made urea of the neul. y adopted stirrup. Such changes were soon reflected in the organization of both Umayyad and cAbbäsid forces. Nevertheless# skilled professionalp and often mercennrya, infantry continued to play a vital role as the borders of Islam became relatively fixed and campaigns were generally limited to siege-warfare. In the 11th century the arrival of the Saljügs;, ldd' to a sudden, but not sustained, rise in the importance of Central Asian) nomad-style, horse-archery. This was later reinforced by the longol conquests and uns felt in all regions of the ruslim world. Such an impact was, however) minimal in the My rib and virtually non-2xiotant in al ttndalus, whore a local version of early medieval western European military traditions continued to predominate.

Any study of arms and armour relies an three source, of evidence: archaeological, pictorial and written. The farmer naturally take precedence as such studies are essentially concerned with material culture. For similar reasons this thesis gives greater priority to pictorial sources rather than to the written, descriptive, record. This is despite the limitations of artistic conventions such no archaism. Written evidence seems to suffer from comparable limitations while at the same time often having an obscure vocabulary and a strongly poetic style. In fact, the terminology of Islamic military equipment remains far from clears and seems likely to remain so until archaeology uncovers a greater number of surviving artifacts. Nor can the study of terminology answer all questions relating to the structure, development or appearance of items of arms and armour. Nevertheless, a study of the known vocabulary does suggest certain features, most'of which are backed up by both the archaeological and pictorial evidence. Iranian influences were probably much stronger in pre-Islamic and early Islamic Arabia than were those from Byzantium. Iranian and Central Asian technological advances subsequently had an increasing impact on Muslim military technology, until Central Asian influences came to predominate in all regions outside North Africa and the Iberian peninsula. This eastern influence did not reflect a backward nomadic culture, but rather one that boasted advanced metallurgical techniques as well as sophisticated tactical concepts. In the west, European influences dominated all other external factors. At the some time it would be wrong to see the Maghhrib and Andalus solely as the adopters of other peoples' technical developments. (Wring the early Middle Ages there was probably a two-way flow of ideas and techniques across the Mediterranean: just as there was across the frontier between Islam and Byzantium. In these central regions, however, the Byzantine and Muslim worlds were both rapidly absorbing Central Asian military fashions. One of the most characteristic features of Classical Islamic civilization was, in fact, its eclecticism. This was particularly true in military matters. As the armies of the Prophet advanced gnat and west they had mot the warriors of rival cultures whose military traditions Islam then gradually absorbed. Thus the military technologies and tactics of the late.. Romano-Byzantine world, the Barbers., the Iberian peninsula, Armenia, the Saassaanian Empire, Buddhist Afghanistän and Turkish Transoxaania, were all added to those of ancient Arabia. The process by which they blended to produce something nov was slow and far from regular, Influences from Perain and Turkistän were clearly more important than those from Egypt end North Africa, while the impact of Visigothic Spain was limited almost entirely to the Muslin culture of al Andalus that succeeded it. At first infantry dominated the armies of Islam, but during the Umayyad period cavalry become ever more important. This was particularly true of an Iranian-style heavy cavalry which made urea of the newly adopted stirrup. Such changes were soon reflected in the organization of both Umayyad and 'Abbäsid forces. Nevertheless, skilled professional, and often mercenary, infantry continued to play a vital role as the borders of Islam became relatively fixed and campaigns were generally limited to siege-warfare. In the 11th century the arrival of the Saljüqs led to a sudden, but not sustained, rise in the importance of Central Asian) nomad-style, horse-archery. This was later reinforced by the Mongol conquests and was felt in all regions of the Muslim world. Such an impact was, however) minimal in the My rib and virtually non-existent in al Andalus, whore a local version of early medieval western European military traditions continued to predominate.

331246

http://hdl.handle.net/1842/7432

eng

University of Edinburgh

History

Military technology of classical Islam

The military technology of classical Islam

PhD Doctor of Philosophy