Oriental Orthodox History #2 The Islamic Invasion

At the beginning of the 7th century Heraklios (610-641 A.D.) ascended the throne of the East-Roman Empire. After he defeated the Persians and conquered Mesopotamia, he forced his way into Syria in 612 A.D. In 629 A.D. he occupied Damascus. Following that he tried earnestly to restore the religious unity in his empire to unite the Syrians, Copts and Armenians with the Byzantines. This happened on the one hand through promises and on the other hand through threats. Very often he used ruthless oppression through which many Syrians, Copts, and Armenians became martyrs. The persecution of the Syrian Church by the Byzantine Empire did not end until the appearance of Islam.

Only through the campaigns of Islam in the first half of the 7th century was it possible to free the East from the Byzantines and the Persians. This happened with the help of the members of the Syrian Church; the original inhabitants of Syria of whom one part was of Aramaic origin who inhabited these areas for generations and another part was of Arabic origin. When the Arab Muslims marched into Syria they were welcomed by the Syrians who saw the new rulers as saviors who freed them from the yoke of the Byzantines because the Byzantines tried by force to assimilate them into the Byzantine Church. This was the church of the empire and membership in it would have meant compulsorily acceptance of the resolutions of Chalcedon: that Christ had two natures, the human eating, drinking and feeling pain and the divine making miracles. This would have been a denial of the dogma of their church fathers. The Syrians were also able through the cooperation with the Arab Muslims to retain their ecclesiastical dogma, the Antiochian See, their churches, monasteries, ecclesiastical inheritance and their liturgy.

The Position of the Syrians Toward the Islamic Conquest

From the above it becomes clear that the religious conflicts in the Christian church, the attempts of the Byzantine powers to force the issues of the council of Chalcedon upon the other churches by force, to throw its members in prison, to kill them, to ban them and to drive them out alienated the Syrian Christians. All these unchristian deeds only sowed hate and aversion in the hearts of the Syrians against the Byzantine powers. The Persian powers in their empire oppressed both West and East Syrians in general to force them under tyrannical policies and Zoroastrian beliefs. Therefore the Syrians under the Byzantine and Persian powers saw the Islamic conquerors as liberators and not as occupiers. The Syrians put great hope in them, not only because the Muslims liberated them from their religious trouble but also because they relieved the Syrians of the burdensome taxes that were placed on their backs. They said, "Praise be to God, who delivered us from the unjust Byzantines and who put us under the rule of the just Muslim Arabs."

...

There were many psychological, social and religious reasons for the Syrians, the indigenous inhabitants in the Byzantine Syria, to welcome the Muslim Arab conquerors coming out of the Arab peninsula. Because the Syrians, as we have mentioned above, suffered a lot under the Byzantine yoke in Syria. They were also oppressed by the Persians because the Persians tried to force the Syrians to pay high taxes and through barbaric treatment and bloodshed to force them to switch from their faith to their Zoroastrian religion. The apparent reason for the oppression of the Syrians by the Byzantines was the rejection of the resolutions of Chalcedon (451 A.D.). The true reason, however, was the fact that from the Syrian's national consciousness thoughts of freedom movements flamed up anew. They wanted to free their country from the colonizing Byzantine control. In addition the Byzantines robbed Syria of its wealth - especially it's wheat. It is not surprising that an inner resistance spread in the hearts of the Syrians because of the Byzantine oppression so that the Syrians welcomed the Muslim Arabs as liberators of their country. This happened especially because many Arab tribes in Iraq and Syria were members of the Syrian Orthodox faith. These tribes felt obliged to support the Arabic Muslims despite the difference of their faith for they were related by blood, language, and culture.

Thus most of them, like the tribes Taghleb, Uqail, Tennuch and Rabia in the north and west of Iraq, joined the Muslim fighters under the leadership of Al-Muthanna Ibn Haritha and fought with them. In the year 651 A.D. the Persians were defeated and their last king Yezed Jared fled the country. History tells us that a Syrian Christian boy from the Taghlebites killed the Persian leader Marzaban Mihran took his horse and shouted with a loud voice: "I have killed Marzaban." The conquering army marched towards Byzantine Syria, they entered Damascus in 634 A.D. and Jerusalem 637 A.D. They came to Alexandria in the year 638 where they were welcomed by the Copts in the same way as they had been welcomed by the Syrians in Syria before.

The Syrians Under the Islamic Rule Keeping their faith, the Syrians fought together with the Muslim Arabs against the colonists and freed their land and afterwards they supported them in the building of a new empire. History tells of their creative power in all areas of science and culture.

Despite our lack of time we want to dwell on a few points of the common history between Syrians and Muslims and acknowledge the positive events from the reports of trustworthy chroniclers, avoiding the negative events because they do not build up. At the same time we assure you that the unjust deeds on the side of the Arab-Muslim army during and after the conquest happened relatively seldom in comparison to similar conquests of other armies. We are going to mention the names of a group of Syrian characters who found favor with the Islamic Arab rulers and served them faithfully, which at the same time held fast onto the Christian faith and their Syrian Church. This leads us also to the strong relationship between Islamic Arabs and sons of the Syrian Church and the fact that holding fast to Christianity does not oppose pride in one's nation or faithful service to it.

etc.