Abstract:

Early Islamic historical sources included exaggerated numbers, figures and statistics on city populations, soldier counts in armies, statistics on casualties or prisoners in wars, and the amount of booty. In addition to exaggerations of tax and jizya from some geographical regions, there were also high figures on material losses caused by natural disasters such as plague, flood, earthquake, drought and famine not compatible with the demographic and socio-economic structure of the period. Similar exaggerated figures also exist about slave counts and concubines owned by some caliphs, sultans, or the rich. In this article, the figures, numbers and statistics given about the Muslim, Byzantine and Sassanid armies in the Syrian and Iranian-Iraqi conquests taking place during Hulefâ-yi Râşidîn period were examined and criticized. Classical Islamic historical sources show the number of soldiers, especially in the Byzantine and Sassanid armies, to be much larger. Similarly, the statistics on soldiers killed or captured by the enemy in wars are too high to correspond to the facts. This study mainly aims to reveal that the enemy armies, outnumbering the Muslim Arab armies, were not tens of times more numerous; secondly, to reveal that the number of soldiers allegedly killed by the enemy is greatly exaggerated in Islamic historical sources; also, to discuss that Islamic conquests were not “bloody” and “cruel,” as some circles claim. Considering soldier count in enemy armies and casualties are much less than in the sources, it will be understood that the Islamic conquests took place on a more peaceful ground. For a healthy opinion, firstly, the figures of classical Islamic historical sources about Syrian wars and the Iranian-Iraqi conquests were quoted as they were. In addition, Christian and Magi sources describing the same conquests were consulted–within the limits of the possibilities–to allow for comparisons. Likewise, studies of modern historians specializing in Byzantine and Sassanid history were also used. The figures provided by classical sources on these conquests were examined using analysis, criticism and comparison methods. Based on the information in Islamic historical sources, it can be seen that the number of soldiers in the Byzantine army, consisting of 100-200 thousand people on average in each war during the Syrian-Palestinian conquests, reached 500-600 thousand people in total. Likewise, the number of Iranian army recruits, allegedly participating important battles with 150-200 thousand people, exceeds 500-600 thousand during the conquests. In the same sources, the Muslims participated in the conquests with a military force of about 50-80 thousand people, 25-40 thousand people in each of the Syrian and Iraqi-Iranian fronts. Again, according to sources, the number of soldiers killed on both fronts exceeds one million. However, sources overestimating the crowds of enemy armies have greatly exaggerated the number of people allegedly killed by them. However, when all sources describing the relevant period are subjected to a sound reading, it will be seen that both the number of soldiers in the enemy army and the number of people claimed to have been killed by the enemy are greatly exaggerated. Likewise, it will be understood that Muslims actually attempted conquest movements in large numbers with a considerable military force.

Keywords: