Comparing Benjamin Tudela and Habib Ibn Muslama

Daniel Costello
Dr. Hofmann
Hist 101
Using the following primary source documents by Benjamin of Tudela and Habib ibn Muslama, I found that they share similar themes pertaining to rulers' relations with their subjects and the influences religions and cultures have on each other in a society. More specifically each primary source explores the rulers and their positive or negative relationships with their subjects.
In Benjamin of Tudela's Book of Travels the quality of life for Jews under Islamic rule in Baghdad is examined. The Islamic rule and culture in Baghdad had a profound impact on Jewish individuals' faith. In this primary source we see that Judaism is allowed but in order to participate in everyday affairs one must participate in traditions of the Islamic culture. The Jews faith in Judaism was not shattered but rather strengthened. In turn, Jews were forced to put their beliefs second after Islamic orders. For example, Emir al-Mumin, the lord of Islam, granted Daniel, also known by Muslims as Saldna ben Daoud, "authority over all the congregations of Israel. For thus Muhammad commanded…grant a seal of office over all the congregations that dwell under his rule, and ordered that everyone, Muslims or Jews… should rise up before him and salute him, and any one who should refuse to rise up should receive one hundred stripes." This states that David, "head of captivity" over all communities including Persia, Armenia and ever over some African Christian civilizations including Nubia and Ethiopia. It is unclear whether these areas were required to participate as heavily in the Islamic traditions. What is known is that David, the head of the captivity, bestowed communities with the power to appoint Rabbis and Ministers as long as these appointed individuals go to him and allow themselves to be consecrated. Only then will David grant them the "authority to own hospices, gardens and plantations in Babylon…no one can take his possessions from him by force. He has fixed weekly revenue arising from the hospices of the Jews, the markets and the merchants…very rich, and wise in the scriptures as well as in the Talmud."
The desire for David to meet and bestow authority on any appointed ministers from the Christian communities and rabbis from Jewish communities shows the relations between ruler and subjects. Another example of Rulers relations with those they rule and Benjamin Tudela's book of travels, is his description of al-Abbasi "he is kind unto his real and many belonging to the people of Israel are his attendance; he knows all languages and is well versed in the law of Israel. He reads and writes the Holy Language [Hebrew]"2. Al-Abbasi, the Caliph, is a Muslim ruler in Baghdad who recognizes the Jewish community living under his Islamic rule. He educated himself and in Israeli law and Hebrew. Although he kept Islam superior to Judaism and Christianity, he paid his Jewish and Christian subjects the ultimate respect by educating himself on their religious culture and by allowing them to worship freely alongside Muslim traditions. In Benjamin's accounts what we must understand is that the Jewish community is in exile and is being subjected to Muslim Diaspora because they have entered a culture that is different from their own. Benjamin sought to describe the influence of Muslim rule over the Jewish culture. According to Benjamin, though the Islamic rule forced Jews to participate in Muslim traditions, Jews rather than be influenced by the rituals remained faithfully to the covenant.
Ibn Muslama's account is a little different in that it seems more like an official document that was commissioned to be written by the state and seems like he built himself up as well as his fellow Muslim leaders. He could be loosely considered a leader because he was a military commander. He definitely made himself look strong (even if he really was strong) and made no effort to practice modesty. In The Pact of Ibn Muslama he made clear that the Christians of Tiflis are second to Muslims in that area. They had to do a lot of things such as pay taxes and support the Muslim army if it goes to war. It is a sort of "might makes right" arrangement. There was also an effort to encourage conversion to Islam with the incentive being that a convert no longer has to pay a poll-tax. However, Muslama clearly was not too worried about the Christians of Tiflis given that if they were conquered by another group and the Muslims were too busy to help, it's too bad. It was kind of a low blow to an already humbled group seeing as they didn't have the strength to repel the Muslims and were forced to accept a treaty. The proverbial rubbing of salt in the wound. This showed a basic lack of respect and a derisive attitude towards the Christians. However, Muslama did make one notable concession: the Muslims would not divide households to get more tax money. Perhaps this was a pity compromise because in the grand scheme of things, the Muslims came out on top in this deal.
In The Pact of Umar it seems to be the same thing only from the point of view of the Christians. The Christians of that area had a great deal of respect (or perhaps more appropriately, fear) for the Muslims and basically conceded nearly all of the things that I imagine would be held dear by Christians at that time. The Christians were not even allowed to attempt to convert non-believers. Perhaps what is most interesting about this document is that the Christians agreed to house Muslims for up to three days including food. There must have been enough fear that it could be tasted. These Christians took second-class status to Muslims. They even had to give up seats to Muslims in their assemblies. To return to the original thesis, this showed exactly what the ruling Muslims thought about their subjects, and more specifically the Christians.
These were both very interesting documents. Both Benjamin of Tudela and Habib ibn Muslama showed not only the relationship of Islam with other religions, but also depicted how the ruling Muslims viewed and treated their subjects.