In this essay, I am going to assess and analyze between 3 dynasties, namely, Umayyad, Fatimid and Idrisid. By these meant, to make a comparison between these 3 dynasties in term of political, social and economic and the tension arise between Umayyad and Fatimid and what contributed to their decline – however, this will be focusing more on Fatimid and Idrisid while Umayyad as a background.
The emergence of Umayyad was when Uthman was killed by mutinous Egyptian troops, therefore his second cousin Mu’awiya was inevitably implicated in the crisis. Mu’awiya made claim and demanded justice for his murdered kinsman and demand to manoeuvre ‘Ali bin Abi Talib out of the caliphate in spite of initial support from the Kufan and Egyptian garrisons and many madinan companions. By 660, Mu’awiya was in position to advance his own claim to the caliphate. His adherents swore the oath of obedience to him in Jerusalem – that meant to reassure his Christian subjects that he was not head of the Muslim community, but their emperor and protector as well (Stephen Humphreys: 516). His grip on the office assured the following years when ‘Ali was assassinated by the Kharijites, …show more content…
The Shiites had articulated the doctrine that only a descendent of the Prophet’s cousin and son-in-law, Ali ibn Abi Talib, could be imam or leader of the Muslim community. This Shiite group split into activist and quietist wings – the quietist was called Imami or “Twelver” Shiites, they believed the line of visible imams had ended in 874 when the twelfth imam, still only an infant, believed to gone into hiding in Samarra, from which he will return as Mahdi. The activist, the Ismaili view, argued the imamate had not ended as the Twelvers claim but rather it’s was continued in a different line of Ali’s descendants (John L. Esposito:
The emergence of Umayyad was when Uthman was killed by mutinous Egyptian troops, therefore his second cousin Mu’awiya was inevitably implicated in the crisis. Mu’awiya made claim and demanded justice for his murdered kinsman and demand to manoeuvre ‘Ali bin Abi Talib out of the caliphate in spite of initial support from the Kufan and Egyptian garrisons and many madinan companions. By 660, Mu’awiya was in position to advance his own claim to the caliphate. His adherents swore the oath of obedience to him in Jerusalem – that meant to reassure his Christian subjects that he was not head of the Muslim community, but their emperor and protector as well (Stephen Humphreys: 516). His grip on the office assured the following years when ‘Ali was assassinated by the Kharijites, …show more content…
The Shiites had articulated the doctrine that only a descendent of the Prophet’s cousin and son-in-law, Ali ibn Abi Talib, could be imam or leader of the Muslim community. This Shiite group split into activist and quietist wings – the quietist was called Imami or “Twelver” Shiites, they believed the line of visible imams had ended in 874 when the twelfth imam, still only an infant, believed to gone into hiding in Samarra, from which he will return as Mahdi. The activist, the Ismaili view, argued the imamate had not ended as the Twelvers claim but rather it’s was continued in a different line of Ali’s descendants (John L. Esposito: