THE TRIBAL KINGS IN PRE-ISLAMIC ARABIA

This article deals with the issue of tribal kings in pre-Islamic Arabia. These kings, mulvk in Arabic, were no more than tribal leaders who bore the title, malik, and placed crowns on their heads. Some of them had derived power from the Sassanid emperor who used to grant them crowns. Their scope of autority was mainly local, limited to the specific territory of their own tribes, or in some cases, was extended to include other territories by means of a federation of tribes. Supported by a garrison of horsemen from the Persian army they could impose their power over the population and territory as well. Their dominion took the form of an annual tribute extracted from the inhabitants under their control. They also acquired control over the seasonal markets held in their area, and the trade routes as well. In return, the tribal king was responsible for his tribesmen's lives and the security of their property.


Birzeit University
Researchers of Arabic and early Islam often encounter the term malik or dhü al-tàj as an epithet referring to some of the tribal leaders who lived in northern or southern part of the Arabian peninsula during the pre-Islamic period just before the appearance of Muhammad.A thorough investigation of these titles, or of the persons who bore them, reveals that these were no more than local leaders whose authority did not exceed the bounds of their tribe, or of adjacent tribes.Furthermore, there is no justification for comparing them to the kings and emperors of the neighboring kingdoms, such as Persia, Ethiopia, and the Byzantine Empire.The scope of authority and command enjoyed by these local leaders cannot even be described in the same terms as that of the rulers of the southern kingdoms in %men, who belonged to the dynasties of Saba^ and Himyar.At the very most, they may not be compared with the rulers of the buffer emirates, the Lakhmids or the Ghassanids.
Why, then, were these rulers given the epithet malik, «king», and why were their heads adorned with fijan, «crowns»?This article will attempt to address these questions and to deal with the phenomenon of the muluk, «kings», their authority, and the scope of their command, as well as with the sources from which they drew their authority and how it was imposed.
Islamic historical tradition refers to the existence of some tribal leaders known as muluk aU^^arab, «the kings of the Arabs».The earhest reference to these kings is contained in the issue of the letters which were sent by the Prophet to the kings of the neighboring countries, in which he proposed that they embrace Islam.Included in the Hst of kings are the names of five Arab fa-anta awlà bi-tàji l-mulki talbasuhü i 4 min Hawdhata b. 'Aliyyin wa-bni dhl Yazanl «you are more worthy of placing the royal crown on your head/than were Hawdhata b. *^AE and (Sayf) b.Dhl Yazan» (the king from the Himyar dynasty in "fèmen who converted to Judaism and died as a martyr in the Ethiopian invasion of his country).Hawdha's crown is also mentioned on other occasions, by another poet.^ In both cases, Hawdha's crown is etched in the collective memory of the early generations of Islam as an element symbolizing the concept of royalty and sovereign power.
Hawdha b. *^AIi was not the only one to acquire this title; other tribal leaders also bore it, such as the leader of the Tanum tribe, Hajib b.Zuràra, who wore the taj al-mulk, the royal crown, as described by al-Farazdaq.^ Epithets associated with royalty were sometimes combined in poetic terminology with the parallel term mu^assab bi-al-tàj, as reflected in the following verse, which praises a leader from the Kinda tribe by the name of al-Ash*^ath b.Qays: wa-mu 'assabun bit-tàji mafriqu rasiHi mulkun la-'amruka ràsikhu 'l-awtadi.^ -«the man whose head is adorned with a crown / is, by your life, the deeply rooted royalty».
^ The link between the taj and the royal title is clearly shown in the verse of al-Farazdaq, where he refers to taj al-mulk; Diwàn al-Farazdaq (ed. Beirut, 1966), vol. I, p. 100;Abu al-Baqâ^, al-Manüqib al-Mazyadiyya, (ed. S. Dararka and M. Khresat, *^Amman, 1984), p. 62;Abu *^Ubayda, al-NaqàHd, (ed. A. Bevan, Leiden, 1905) -«if you win her (the woman) and afterwards win the caliphate / then you shall be worthy of the two most prestigious things: the caliphate and the kingdom».In this verse, the minbar (the preacher's pulpit) represents the element of the caliphate in its Islamic sense, while the safir (the throne of royalty) symbolizes the element of royalty in its secular, pre-Islamic sense.
It is apparently the verse of Khalid b.Yazid which created the impression that there is no difference between the expressions dhü al-^amàma («owner of the turban») and dhü al-tàj («owner of the crown»), so that Abu Uhayha bore both epithets simultaneously.This synonymous interpretation of the two terms was attached by the author of al-Manàqib al-Mazyadiyya, who opposed the inclusion of Abu Uhayha among the crowned kings despite the fact that he was indeed called dhü al-tàj, an epithet which stemmed from the ^ See, for example, the verse of al-Akhtal, in which he refers to the Sassanian king using the title dhü al-tàj, Abu al-Baqâ^, p. 400.The same title is given to the vassal king of Hira in a verse attributed to Hâni^ b.Qablsa al-Shaybàm.See: ibid, p. 401.
There is another case in which Abu al-Baqa' attempts to dissociate a tribal leader from the group of crowned rulers, ashàb al-fijàn.The person in question was Malik b. *^Awf al-Nasrï, who, according to the tribal conception, belonged to this group.^^ He was head of the tribal federation of Hawizin in the battle against the Muslims at Hunayn, but he converted to Islam after his tribe was defeated.^^ As a sign of esteem, and in the interest of gaining his favor for his new religion, the Prophet awarded him with one hundred camels.^^ Abu al-Baqa^ asserts that the act of giving Malik command in this battle did not stem from the fact that he was leader of the tribe, but rather was intended to gain his favor, as an act of good tidings.^^ But Abu al-Baqa^'s facts are not accurate: in fact, Malik was given command because he was the sayyid as well as the fàris -the fighter-^^ Abûal-Baqa\p.71.^ '^ Lisàn al-*^Arab, s.v. (*^.m.m.).^^ Thimàr al-qulÜb, p. 159.It is noteworthy that the phrase ta'assaba bi'l-'isàbati, «to don the turban or bandage on one's head» has no other meaning than to be crowned as king, since the term Hsaba in its wider sense means "crown".The significance is clearly understood from the words of the tradition concerning the coronation of *^Abdullah b.Ubayy by his fellow tribesmen.The tradition begins as follows: wa~laqad istalaha ahlu hàdhiKi al-bahratV 'ala an yutawwijühu, fa-ya 'sibühu bi-'isàbati. Ibn Shabba, Akhbàr al-madina (ed. Fahlm M. Shaltût, Beirut, 1990), vol. 1, p. 357;Lisàn al-^arab, s.v. C.s.b);al-Bukhan, Sahlh (ed. Cairo, 1378 a.h.), vol.VI, p. 50.The coronation act itself is referred to by the term 'asaba in a verse attributed to *^Amr b.KalthOm, al-Anban, Shark al-qasà 'id al-sab ' al-tiwàl (ed. Abd al-Salam Hárün, 2nd edition, Cairo, 1969), p. 389.It seems that Balidhun had misunderstood the meaning of the phrase reported in al-Ya*^qûbl wa-^asabathu bi-'isàba, since he comes to the conclusion that Sa*^d b. *^Ubâda was suffering from a fever when the Ansar convened the meeting of the Saqifa of Banü Si*^ida to choose their candidate for the position of caliph after the death of Muhammad. Ansàb al-ashràf (ed. M. HamiduUâh, Cairo, 1959), vol. 1, p. 581.Al-Halabl also makes the same mistake when he states that Sa*^d was ill in that meeting.See: al-Sira alhalabiyya, vol.Ill, p. 479.The phrase used in al-Ya*^qùbl denotes, in fact, the method of coronation according to the tribal tradition.In this context, the word 'isàba has nothing to do with fever or any kind of illness.See: Tafikh al-Ya^qüJñ, vol.H, p. 123.It it surprising to note that D. Ayalon does not refer to the pre-Islamic concept of monarchy in his treatment of the term malik in Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed.
^"^ Ibn Hazm, op. cit., p. 269;al-^^^qidi, al-Maghàzi, ed. M. Jones, Oxford, 1966, p. 886. 1^ Ibn Durayd, al-Ishtiqàq (ed. Abd al-Salam HarOn, 2nd ed., Baghdad, 1979) Two things can be learned from the coronation of Haritha al-Shaybáni: first, that his coronation was the initiative of the local inhabitants and not of a third party (as would generally have been the case at that time, when it was the kings of Persia or their local representatives who has the final say regarding local events), and second, that the coronation was an act designed to strengthen a political position whose purpose was to break the yoke imposed by the hegemony of the ruler of Hira.For these tribesmen -as for others-ridding themselves of this yoke meant ridding themselves of the annual tributes levied from them by the king of al-Hira and of the need to place several youths in his custody as hostages to ensure their loyalty and subservience.^^ The case of Hâritha al-Shaybàrii's coronation was not unusual for the pre-Islamic period or for the transitional period between the Jâhiliyya and Islam following the death of the Prophet, when tribal insurrections broke out at the beginning of the reign of Abu Bakr, which Islamic historiography refers to as al-ridda, the apostasy wars.One reported insurrection involved a southern tribe by the name of Banû WaE'a in the area of Hadramawt.The representative of the al-Madina government who was in charge of this region came out to suppress the insurrection and defeated the tribesmen.They sought refuge in the fortress of a ruler form the Kinda tribe called al-Ash'ath, and requested his aid in the fight against the Muslim warriors.But al-Ash'ath made his assistance contingent upon their crowning him as their king, which they did not hesitate to do.They appointed him king and crowned him in accordance with the same formula by which kings from the descendents of Qahtan were crowned.^^ In this case, too, one notes the same two elements: that of personal initiative and that of an underlying political need which motivated the coronation.
The political element is clearly reflected in cases of coronation which served as an act of insurrection against the imposition of an external poUtical power.Various tribal leaders and false prophets who led the rebellions against the regime of the first Caliph, Abu Bakr, wore crowns which symbolized the act of breaking the yoke of government imposed by the regime in al-Madina.^^ But sometimes the poMtical element is conspicuously absent from the circumstances which brought about the coronation of the tribal leader, as was the case in the decision by the Sulaym tribe to crown ^Abbas b.Anas al-Ri'li.This decision was not carried to fruition, since the candidate for coronation abandoned the tribe and sought refuge with another tribe which had awarded him their patronage.This occured after *^Abbas al-Ri'li had been insulted by the behavior of one of his relatives.^^ As is well known, the candidate for coronation was one of the outstanding noble figures within his tribe and among other tribes.^^ In the case of *^Abbas al-Ri'E, the only factors which came into play were internal ones, expressed by a series of hindrances and acts of opposition on the part of various clans within the Sulaym tribe who were opposed to the coronation.^° The external political element is missing from the story of the proposal to crown *^Abdu'llâh b.Ubaj^^, the leader from al-Madina.This coronation plan, according to reports, came at the initiative of the Arab residents of al-Madina (Yathrib), whether from the al-Khazraj tribe (the dominant tribe in that town) or as a coordinated effort from both the al-Khazraj tribe and the Aws tribe.^^ Of all the reports regarding the coronation of Ibn Ubayy, only the tradition cited by al-Mas'üdi contradicts this.According to al-Mas'üdi, the Khazraj tribe forced the coronation upon the Aws tribe.^^ But it is difficult to accept this version, since the circumstances and the general climate in Yathrib on the eve of the coronation would not have enabled a unilateral initiative by the Khazraj, even though they were the stronger side.As for the candidate for coronation, Ibn Ubayy had to his credit the neutral stance he maintained with regard to the mutual acts of violence between the two factions of the city's inhabitants, in which considerable blood was spilt -^particularly in the bloody battle of Bu'ath.^^ In addition, Ibn Ubayy was no normal tribal leader; rather, he was a dominant figure of unique military importance, since one third of the fighting force of Madina was under his command.^"^ If needed, he could mobilize two thousand warriors from his tribe, from his «clients», mawaTihiy and from his aUies outside Madina.^ His social stand, military power, and degree of influence are reflected in historical reports.^^ In the opinion of this writer, it was all of these facts, along with the atmosphere of reconciliation which characterized Madina on the eve of the hijra, ^^ which underlay the idea of crowning *^Abdu'llâh b.Ubayy.

II
Abu al-Baqa^, referring to the crown of Hawdha b. ^^Ali al-Hanafí, says that Hawdha was indeed a noble figure within his tribe, but that he did not attain a rank which entitled him to place a crown upon his head.^^ Abu al-Baqa^'s words contain not the slightest hint of denial that Hawdha had a tqjy but in the same breath, Abu al-Baqa^ attempts to belittle the value of this tàj and to show that it is not in the same league as those of kings belonging to the well-known kingdoms of that historic period.This tàj was, in Abu al-Baqa^'s opinion, a simple crown suited to the proportions of a sayyid, a tribal leader, which consisted of a small number of beads with which he adorned his turban.But apparently, it was the poets who created the impression that this tàj was a real royal crown.^^ Abu al-Baqa^ apparently failed to notice the tradition regarding Hawdha's crown, according to which Hawdha was summoned to the palace of Kisra, the Persian king, and crowned there by the king himself, who placed a string of pearls upon his head, from which point onward Hawdha bore the title of dhü al-tàj."^^ In this context, Abu al-Baqá^ relied upon the version of Abu *^Ubayda, which does not mention the King of Persia, and which describes Hawdha's crown in an abstract fashion as nothing more than a few primitive beads.In that tradition, Abu *^Ubayda establishes categorically that crowns were associated with the southern kings of the Himyar dynasty, and that the northern rulers who were descendants of Ma'add had no part in this royal heritage."^^ In all actuality, Abu *^Ubayda's version is not immune to criticism.First of all, it was the poets of the period who spoke of the tàj of Hawdha, and they did not refer to this tàj as a simple string of beads devoid of any allusion to royalty, as the poet al-A^sha puts it.Furthermore, another poet, Labld, emphasizes with regard to another leader that these beads indeed comprised the tàj."^^ These beads were not simple, ordinary beads; rather, they were the pearls with which the royal crown was adorned."^^ Such pearls were not easily accessible because of their price and special worth.The difficulty involved in obtaining them and the effort involved in purchasing them may well have been what forestalled the initiative to crown *^Abdu'llâh b.Ubayy, as one may understand from the tradition of al-Waqidf."^"^ In this context, it is worth mentioning that Abu *^Ubayda was a disciple of the shu^übiyya, which undermined Arab cultural superiority and that he even dedicated some writings to citing the shortcomings, mathàlib, of the Arab tribes."^^ This is yet another factor which weakens the credibility of his version with regard to Hawdha's tàj.The value of the crown -indeed, of any crown-was assessed in accordance with the value of the pearls that comprised the tàj.Hawdha's crown was worth three times the value of those which the Persians gave their agents from the Banû Nasr dynasty of Hira: it is reported that the value of the crown given to Banû Nasr was no more than ten thousand dirhams, "^^ while Hawdha's crown was valued at thirty thousand dirhams."^^ In any case, however, the difference between these crowns and the royal crown of the Persian kings was a vast one: because of the extreme size and weight of the royal crown, it could not actually be worn on the king's head; instead, it was suspended from the ceiling above the royal throne, and when the king sat upon the throne, his head was positioned within the aperture of the crown, making it appear as if he were wearing it.^^ In addition to crowns, descriptions of other symbols and trappings of majesty and royal tradition have come down to us.Mentioned among these articles are the namàriq, which were a type of small cushion which also served as pillows and which were placed upon the king's throne or on the floor of his chambre."^^ The poet Janr, in one of his odes, praises Warqá^ b. *^ Attâb, one of his senior figures in his clan, who used to drink in the company of the king and sit upon the namàriq.^^ Another type of colored carpet, called namat (plural: anmàt), which was placed on the side of the pillows and became part of the accessories of the royal Persian throne, ^^ found its way onto the seat of the tribal king.Al-A*^shâ, in one of his verses, describes as «radiant as a shiny sword» the face of the tribal king who sat down on his throne in the morning, which was covered with royal pillows and colorful carpets.^^ The wisàda (pillow) became a symbol of royalty and government in the Islamic tradition.When the ansàr (the men of Madïna who were companions of the Prophet) proposed their leader, Sa*^d b. *^Ubâda, as a candidate for the position of Caliph after the Prophet's death, they sat him down and gave him pillows to lean on.^^ The wisàda became an Islamic symbol of legitimate rule.In the context of the struggle of the Abbasid Dynasty against the Alid dynasty, the wisàda appears as a tool in this struggle: in the Abbasids^ attempt to strengthen the legitimacy of their claim to power, they cite a tradition attributed to *^AE, according to which he sat in the company of the Prophet, who was leaning upon a pillow of hairy leather.According to the tradition, al-*^Abbas (forefather of the Abbasid ^^ But the crown of Yazdajard which the Arabs plundered from the royal palace in Madâ^in (Ctseiphon) was much simpler.See: al-Suhayfi, op.cit., vol.I, p. 301.See Shaked, Sh., «From Iran to Islam: On Some Symbols of Royalty,» JSAINU (1986), 75-91.
^^ Namàriq, as a kind of small carpets laid down on the floor of the king's chamber, were described by Rabí b. *^Amir, the Arab delegate who was sent to meet the Persian general Rustam before the battle of Qadisiyya (al-Taban, vol.HI, p. 519).Namàriq as carpets on which one are mentioned in the rajaz of Hind (the mother of Mu*^âwiya) before the battle of Uhud, in which the MusHms were defeated by Quraysh.See: al-W^qi(fi, p. 225; Ibn Hisham,588;s.v. (n.m.r.q.)  dynasty) walked in, and the Prophet handed him the wisada and told him to sit on it.^^ In this context, it is mentioned that Caliph ^Umar I had a pillow which he would take with him wherever he went.^^ The king's throne must have been a central item, but there was always room for comparison between one throne and another, the clear preference being for the higher seat.This becomes apparent from the comparison between the throne of the king of Hira and that of the king of Ghassan in Syria.^^ All of these items continued to exist in the palaces of the caliphs of the Umayyad and the Abbasid dynasties, but they ceased to comprise symbols of dominion or rule, because of their Jahilite nature and because the caUphs did not wish to be like the infidel kings.^^ Rather, they were careful to give themselves titles and symbols of an Islamic-religious nature, which raised them to the dogmatic position of the ideal Islamic leader.^^ An apparent result of the establishment of the phenomenon of tribal kings was the formation of a characteristic image of these kings within the consciousness of pre-Islamic Arab society.There were even mutual behavioral norms which formed and which governed relationships between the king and the community and between the king and the masses.Arab tradition particularly emphasized the reverential fear with which the average man viewed the king.In this context, Ibn Sa*^d tells of a particular man who came to meet the Prophet.When he met him, the man was stricken by fright and began to tremble.The Prophet tried to calm him, saying: I am not a king, but the son of an ordinary woman from the Quraysh tribe.^^ The prestige of kings found concrete expression in the feeling of security enjoyed by those who had the kings^ protection.Some of the merchants of Quraysh who arrived in Ifemen presented themselves as descendants of the ^^ The significance of the wisada as a symbol of power and rule is attested by a pro-Abbasid tradition which came to support their claim for rule and their legitimate right to the caliphate.According to this tradition, *^AIi b.Abl Talib and his uncle al-*^Abbas visited the Prophet in his home and found him leaning on a wisada.The Prophet Hfted it and gave it to al-•^Abbas and said to him: Sit down on it.Anonymous author, Akhbàr al-' Abbàs (éd. al-Duñ, ^Abd al-^Azlz and A. al Muttalibl, Beirut, 1971) Zaydan, Tafikh al-tamaddun al-Islami (ed. Beirut, 1967), vol. I, p. 133. ^^ Crone, P. andHinds, M., God's Caliph, Religious Authority in the First Centuries of Islam, Cambridge, 1986, p. 33. ^^ Ibn Sa*^d, vol. 1(1), p. 4;Ibn Ishaq, al-Siyar wa-al-maghàfi (ed. Suhayl Zakkar, Damascus, 1976), p. 169.dynasty of the kings of Kinda, so that they would not be harmed and could move freely.^° Hawdha b. *^AH referred to this hayba in a letter of response which he sent to the Prophet.^^ The greeting with which kings were saluted was accompanied by the sujüdy the act of bowing down and lowering one's head, as attested by the verses of al-A^shi.^^ The hadith of the Prophet refers to the sujud which was customary and speaks of a short scepter which the king would carry; waving the scepter signified the beginning of the sujud ceremony.^^ Kings got special treatment when they were taken as prisoners of war: while ordinary prisoners had their sideburns shaven as a sign of shame and humiliation, kings were spared this.^"^ In addition, the ransom paid in order to free a king from captivity was one thousand camels, ten times the ransom for an ordinary prisoner.^^ in The Sassanians, through their Lakhmid vassal kings, attempted to establish a network of alliances with the tribes in much of northern and northeastern Arabia as a mean of keeping these tribes under control and, in particular, to keep them from plundering or taxing settled districts in the Iraqi alluvium, or from plundering or disrupting the caravan trade.^^ Abu al-Baqa^ draws a general picture of the Sassanians^ influence in the region and of the mutual relationship between them and the various tribal groups.^^ As for the region of Bahrayn, this area was controlled by rulers from the tribe of Tarriim like al-Mundhir b.Sâwâ, who were appointed as kings of the region on behalf of the Sassanians.^^ Bahrayn was actually a Persian territory, most of whose inhabitants were from the tribes of *^Abd al-Qays and Bakr b.Wa^il; these coexisted with Banü Tamlm who were concentrated in the desert areas, bàdiyatuhà.^^ To the south, in *^Umân, lived the Azd tribe, which comprised the dominant majority and which was controlled by two brothers: *^lJbâd and Jay far.These two had inherited the monarchy from their father, al-Julanda b. al-Mustakbir, and had been crowned as kings of this region on behalf of the Sassanid kings.^° Yamâma was controlled by king Hawdha b. ^^Ali, who had been crowned by the Sassanians.Its Banü Hariifa inhabitants, who were under the authority of Persia, did not participate in the battle of dhü Qâr (611) alongside the Persians and the other tribes which were allied with Persia.^^ The rule and power of the tribal kings stemmed from the support and protection they received from the Sassanid kings.This may be gathered from the writings of Hamza al-Isfahanl.^^ Most of this support was in the form of a garrison of horsemen from the army of the king of Persia, which served as reinforcement to the local warriors of the vassal king.^ Every year, these units were reheved by fresh units called wadà'f.'^^ These kings were respected by the tribesmen not only because of their noble origin, but also because of the totahty of services they received from them, as is evident from Hawdha's case.The king was viewed as being able to satisfy all the aspirations and desires of his tribe.^^ The most important of the services which the king could provide was that of providing the tribesmen's lives with the sense that their lives were secure and that their tribe would not be taken into captivity.^^ Hawdha b. *^An' s domain of influencie was vast, extending from the territory controlled directly by the kings of Hira at the north and east and down to the border with Ifemen, which was controlled by the Persian governor, the marzubàn of lièmen.^^ From the moment the tribe of Banü Hariifa arrived in Yamâma and settle in Hajr, they began to extend their control over the adjacent territory.^^ In fact, Hawdha b. *^AIi inherited control over this extensive territory from his predecessors, and it was this fact which caused the Sassanid king to invite Hawdha to the capital of the Sassanians to be crowned there.'^^ Banü Hanlfa's control over a long segment of the trade caravan route from Persia to Yemen, is what forced the Persian king to take the course of action that he did.In addition to the leadership, Hawdha b. *^An acquired estates, agricultural farms, grazing land, and fortresses which came into his possession either by inheritance, or by force, or as a feudal estate (iqtà*^) provided by the Sassanid king -as, for example, the estates at Hajar.^° Hajar, which was the central city in Bahrayn, had formerly been under the control of al-Mundhir b.Sâwâ, as mentioned above.^^ When Hawdha acquired control of Hajar, he abandoned his dwelling at Yamâma and went to live in Hajar.^^ The granting of estates to tribal leaders on behalf of the Sassanid kings was one of the means by which these kings bought the leaders^ loyalty.^^ Actually, these leaders enjoyed the fruits of tributes collected from these estates, as well as reaping the resources of the estates themselves.^"^ Leaders who received these expanses of land as estates were called dhawü al-àkàl.^^ When the Prophet called upon Hawdha b. *^AE to convert to Islam, he promised to leave Hawdha's estates in his hands if Hawdha agreed to his request.^^ Another tribal leader, Wa^il b.Hujr, from the area of Hadramawt, had estates and fortresses which the Prophet listed in an epistle to him containing a similar offer.^^ From all of the above, one may gather that the acquisition of land and the actual realization of control over territory were the basic criteria for the dominion of a tribal king.The tradition cited by Ibn Sa^d leaves little room for doubt as to the strong, direct connection between the role of malik and the dominion over the land within a particular territory.The tradition says, in this context: «And they were called kings, since each of them had a wàdi in his possession and was in dominion of all which lay therein».^^ These wàdis (valleys, plains) were actually the green areas on which an agricultural or semi-agricultural society could be founded, or, at the very least, a shepherding society.Since desert regions like Arabia do not enable agriculture or grazing except in such areas, ^^ the control over them was always a focal point for controversy and strife among the various kings, as one may gather from another tradition cited by Ibn Sa*^d.^° A territory governed by a tribal king was called mahjar, according to the Southern Arabic terminology.Each king in the southern Kinda dynasty had a mahjar which he would enter when necessary.^^ The mahjar served as a himà, a private retreat to which entrance by strangers was forbidden.^^ The tribal kings had complete dominion over their territory and over all the people who lived there.This dominion took the form of an annual tribute which was imposed upon all inhabitants of the region.This was the practice among the Arab tribes which lived in the areas that were controlled by the kings of Hira.^^ The memoirs of one of the dynasty's princesses, Hurqa bint al-Nu*^màn, mention the tax which was imposed upon inhabitants living in the region of Kûfa prior to the Muslim invasion.^"^ Even tribes which were dominated by the king of Hira and which were further inside Arabia like that of Tamim tribe were obliged to pay this annual tribute.^^ King Hujr b. al-Hârith of the Kinda dynasty, who dominated the Asad and Ghatafân tribes, imposed an annual tribute upon them; it was this tax which led the Asad tribe to rebel against the king's authority and to assassinate him.^^ King Zuhayr b.J.udhayma al-*^Absl, who was known by the nickname malik al-*^arab, imposed an annual tax upon the tribes of the Hawazin federation.Every year, he would come to the marketplace of *^Ukâz with his men to collect the tax, and it was there that he was assassinated by Khàlid b.Ja^^far after he chastised a woman who had failed to pay the tax.^^ Sometimes the responsability for collecting the tax from tribes which were under the king's authority was placed in the hands of a local representative from one of the tribes, who was known as a ridf (plural: ardàf).This position was a prestigious and respected one.^^ The authority of the king did not exclude tribes which were permanent residents, such as the tribes of Aws and Khazraj in Madina, which was ruled by marzubàn al-bàdiya, a sort of military governor who empowered the ruler of Banü Qurayza and, later, the leader of BanO al-Nadir, the two Jewish tribes in the area, to collect the tribute that had been imposed upon the two Arab tribes.^^ In this context it is reasonable to assume that the initiative to crown *^Abdu'llàh b.Ubayy as king of al-Madina on the eve of the Prophet's hijra, was designed to eliminate the burden of Jewish control over the Arab residents of this town.
The connection between the role of ruler and the collection of taxes from the tribesmen under that ruler's authority, is also emphasized in traditions dealing with the attempted crowning of *^Uthmin b. al-Huwayrith as ruler of Mecca on behalf of the Byzantine ruler.In this context, Ibn Ishiq reports that this man offered the Byzantines to collect a tax on their behalf from the inhabitants of Mecca in exchange for giving them permission to sell their wares in the markets of Syria.^°° More detailed versions report that Ibn al-Huwayrith visited the palace of the Byzantine emperor and proposed that the latter annex Mecca under his control as the Sassanians had annexed Ifemen.He also proposed himself as a candidate for the position of king of Quraysh, his tribe.The emperor accepted the proposal and issued an order whereby he appointed Ibn al-Huwayrith king of Quraysh.Ibn al-Huwayrith returned to Mecca with the appointment and attempted to convince his fellow tribesmen that the change would not cost them dearly and that they would have to part with only a minuscule sum of money to be transfered to the treasury of the Byzantine emperor.^^^ The payment of a tribute to the tribal king was a sine qua non for all such kings throughout all historical periods, attested in every case that has come down to us.This was the practice amongst the ancient kings of "temen, the tabàbi^a, who maintained dominion over the northern Arab tribes and collected a tribute from the tribes they controlled.^°^ This was also the case when the Sasanians appointed the vassal king, Ma*^di-Karib b.Sayf b. dhl Yazan, as king of Yemen after they had vanquished the Ethiopian invaders.^^^ The tribal tradition emphasized the feeling of pride and glory felt by tribes which succeded in evading the payment of tribute out of an unwillingness to be subjugated by kings.The term laqàh, which expresses political independence and a refusal to yield to the humiliating rule of kings, was frequently used by the few tribes who enjoyed this position of independence.^^"^ The element of not paying the tribute was the chief factor which characterized the tribes that enjoyed the status of laqah.^°^ The sphere of authority of the tribal king also included the marketplaces which were held consecutively throughout all seasons of the year.The king in whose dominion the marketplace was held would collect customs on merchandise entering the marketplace.In addition, he enjoyed another privilege: the king's own merchandise was given priority over that of ordinary merchants in the marketplace, and the sale of ordinary merchandise was suspended until all of the king's own merchandise had been sold.^°^ The king's control of the marketplace was a constant source of rage for the tribesmen, who complained in particular of the customs which the king imposed upon the sale of their wares.^^^ Against this background of the ruler and the ruled, and in light of the conflict of interests between the king and the tribes under his authority, a hostile inclination toward the monarchy developed within Jahiliyya Arab society.So it was that disobedience toward the king and the desire to break the yoke of imperial rule became the makruma, an ideal norm which the tribesmen passed down from generation to generation.The act of taking kings prisoner became an act of heroism which was glorified, as evidenced by tribal poetry.^°^ Regecide, the assassination of kings, v^as considered the height of glory by tribal values, an ideal which fathers dihgently passed on to their sons, as reflected by the odes written by the foremost poets of the JahiUyya and of early Islam.^^ ABSTRACT This article deals with the issue of tribal kings in pre-Islamic Arabia.These kings, mulvk in Arabic, were no more than tribal leaders who bore the title, malik, and placed crowns on their heads.Some of them had derived power from the Sassanid emperor who used to grant them crowns.Their scope of autority was mainly local, limited to the specific territory of their own tribes, or in some cases, was extended to include other territories by means of a federation of tribes.
Supported by a garrison of horsemen from the Persian army they could impose their power over the population and territory as well.Their dominion took the form of an annual tribute extracted from the inhabitants under their control.They also acquired control over the seasonal markets held in their area, and the trade routes as well.In return, the tribal king was responsible for his tribesmen's lives and the security of their property.
Apoyados por guarniciones de la caballería persa, los reyes podían ejercer su poder sobre el territorio y la población, lo que se traducía en un tributo anual pagado por los habitantes de las áreas bajo control.Asimismo, los reyes controlaban los mercados estacionales que se celebraran en su territorio y las rutas comerciales que lo atravesaban.A cambio, eran responsables de las vidas de sus contríbulos y de la seguridad de sus propiedades.
, p. 292.19 Abu al-Baqâ\ p. 72.horseman-of the Hawazin federation.^° The man chosen by Hawazin to be blessed by his participation was none other than Durayd b. al-Simma, who was already about sixty years of age and had lost his eyesight.^^ While the grounds for including Malik b. *^Awf within the category of those who bore the title of dhu al-tàj are not acceptable to Abu al-Baqa^, the situation is different with regard to another tribal leader, by the name of Hâritha b. *^Amr al-Shaybanl, who bore the title dhü al-tàj.^^ Hâritha's coronation was associated with the complex inter-tribal relationships that characterized that period: when the people of the Bakr b.WSLÛ tribe rebelled against the king of al-Hira, they came under the dominion of the opposing king from the Kinda dynasty in order to receive his assistance and support against the ruler of al-Hira.But matters did not work out the way the Bakr b.Wâ'il tribesmen had hoped.The two kings made peace, celebrated by the marriage of al-Mundhir, king of al-Hira and the daughtter of the king of the Kinda dynasty.^^ In light of the situation which arose, the Bakr b.Wa'il tribesmen crowned Hâritha b. *^Amr al-Shaybarii as their ruler and treated him as their king.^"^

( c )
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas Licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0) http://al-qantara.revistas.csic.es term maliK as attested by examples in Classical Arabic poetry.^ But there were rulers who used to adorn their heads with crowns, and even bore the title dhü aUtàj, but were not elevated to the ranks of royalty, as in the case of the Meccan ruler Sa*id b. al-*^Às, Abu Uhayha ^^ about whom it was said that no man in Mecca dared to wear a turban the same color as his, because of the reverence with which they regarded him.^^ But the fact that Abu Uhayha was not given the title malik did not nullify the officialpolitical significance of the term dhü al-tàj, which apparently always reflected the status of royalty.In a verse attributed to Khalid b.Yazid b.
the Mu'awiya, the poet refers to a woman named Umama, who was the granddaughter of Abu Uhayha on her father's side and the granddaughter of the Caliph *^Uthmân on her mother's side.He mentions two elements of (secular) royalty and of the (religious) caliphate which were embodied by this woman, which she inherited from her ancestors Abu Uhayha and ^Uthman.The poet writes: fa-in huztahà thamma al-khilàfatu ba 'dahà tahuz khayra 'ilqay minbarin wa-sarlfi.^^ , pp. 186-187.^^ Shaked, op.cit.5^ AmàU al-QàU, vol.I, pp.257-258; note 12 above.^^ Abu al-Baqà^, pp.83-84; al-Aghàm, vol.IV, p. 158.The pre-Islamic symbols of royalty were changed into Islamic symbols during the Islamic rule.On the new symbols see G.