| By the late Professor Abdul Latif TIBAWI
The conquest of Egypt was entrusted to 'Amr b. Al-'AS, who
as a merchant in pre-Islamic days knew the country, its wealth,
and the routes leading to it."1"
Moreover, his army which had occupied Palestine west of the
river Jordan was seasoned and ready when, according to tradition,
Amr sought and received the approval of Umar when he was at
Al-Jabiyah or in Jerusalem to receive its surrender. After an
easy march, 'Amr laid siege to Babalyan, near the site of modern
Cairo, with the Patriarch of Alexandria, Cyrus (Al-Muqauqas'
"2" of the Arabic sources),
holding the fortress as the representative of Heraclius the
Emperor. The fortress fell in A.H. 20/A.D. 641. Later in the
year the capital Alexandria itself surrendered. The usual guarantees
of life, property, and freedom to profess the Christian faith
were given here as elsewhere. But the terms"3"
included also the payment of a tribute of two dinars by every
male adult, "4" and of and-tax
in kind, and a guarantee not to help the Byzantines to land
forces to recover the country once those who elect to leave
have left under The terms of the agreement.
Ibn Abd 'il-Hakam, the earliest Arab authority on the conquest,
states that the Copts, the native Christian population, were
instructed by Their ecclesiastical authorities to refrain from
obstructing the Arabs. A modern scholar "5"
explains the reason in these words: 'the rapid success of The
Arab invaders was largely due to the welcome they received from
the native Christians, who hated the Byzantine rule not only
for its oppressive administration, but also, and chiefly, on
account of the bitterness of the Theological rancour. . . .'
This, of course, refers to the persecution of the native Monophysites
by the ecclesiastical authorities of the official church, The
Much the same pattern of administration was maintained in Egypt
as had already become the established practice in Syria and
Al-Iraq. Much the same system of taxation. Women, "6"
children, aged men, and, according to some authorities, also
monks were exempted. The civil service was almost entirely manned
by native Copts. The Arabs lived in :Military camps, such as
Al-Fustăt (from the Byzantine fossatum camp). I may be inferred
from a correspondence between Amr and the Caliph on delays in
tax payment that the people of Egypt may have been overtaxed."7"
But this was not so. There is no doubt that the burden and incidence
of taxation was lighter than under the Byzantines "8"
There was one innovation, however, the privileged classes who
were exempt under Tae former rulers were now liable to tax."9"
The wealth that had poured into Medina not only from Egypt,
but also from Syria and Al-Iraq, was so fabulous that a lesser
man than 'Umar might have failed to administer it properly.
This is not the place to go into details about his institution
of what amounted to a national pension scheme. Soon after Al-Yarmuk
and Al-Qadisiyyah, a system was devised for the distribution
of the income, after defraying the costs of state administration.
This is called Ad-Diwăn by later writer like Ibn al-Tiqtaqa
in Al-Fakhri. The allowances were graduated according to relationship
to the Prophet, priority of conversion to Islam, and participation
in the early wars of Islam from Badr to the battles in Syria,
Al-Iraq, and Egypt. Nor were the ordinary citizens, the widows,
orphans, and slaves forgotten."10"
The covenant made by the Prophet with Najrăn
has been mentioned above. It will be remembered that the covenant
contains in its concluding phrases the equivocal words hattaya't
ya Allahu bi amrihi. This may mean 'until Day Of Judgement,
or 'until circumstances change by God's command'. Now according
to tradition circumstances did change, and the Prophet ordered
during his last illness that within the Arabian Peninsula
'there shall be no faith other than Islam'. "11"
That is the authority for the removal of the people of Najrăn
during the caliphate of 'Umar. The question, however, has
been asked, 'If this was the command of the Prophet, why did
Abu Bakr ne