Following the death of the Prophet Muhammad in 632, the Muslim community found itself without political leadership. The office of caliph was created, beginning with Abu Bakr and the rightly guided caliphs, passing on to the Umayyads and Abbasids, who controlled an expanding territory during the Arabs’ conquest. The scholar Ibn Khaldun explains in the Muqaddimah that royal authority “is more than leadership. Leadership means being a chieftain, and the leader obeyed, but he has no power to force others to accept his rulings. Royal authority means superiority and the power to rule by force.”[1] The caliph possesses leadership, but not the royal authority Ibn Khaldun describes, because the caliph is not a religious leader and cannot supersede the Quran, hadith and consensus that developed in the Sunni tradition by the Muslim community .
The caliph’s distinct manner of nomination or designation reflects the specific qualifications for the office. The caliph in Sunni ideology is chosen by consensus because there were no clear guidelines in the Quran or from the Prophet on succession. This arose from a unique situation where the Prophet was a political leader as well as a religious figure. With the expanding Muslim conquests, the office of caliph was created to fill the need for a leader to coordinate military campaigns and manage the administrative side of the Muslims’ growing territory. Ibn Khaldun wrote, “At the death of the Prophet the men around him proceeded to render the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr and to entrust him with the supervision of their affairs.”[2] The elections of Abu Bakr and Umar set precedents on how a caliph is chosen, he must be respected in the community and possess leadership skills. On the other hand, in Shiite ideology, the imam is descended through the line of Fatima, so this fixed hereditary succession is decided similarly to royal families. The House of the Prophet acts as a royal family, and the imam must appoint the next imam, much like an heir apparent. Additionally, the incumbent caliph cannot simply elect his own heir apparent, as there is a process of consultation and approval of the nominated successor. Mawardi wrote in the Ordinances of Government, “(The caliph) may not nominate a son or father until he consults the electors and they judge his nominee suitable for the office. His nomination in that case amounts to supporting recommendation or testimony.”[3] The concept of consensus acts as a check on the caliph’s ability to change his mind or choose his heir. This shows the limit [PH2] on the caliph’s ability to designate a successor.
Ibn Khaldun theorizes that royal authority comes about through group feeling. The tribe elects a leader because of his superiority in the natural hierarchy of society: “that person must have superiority over others in the matter of group feeling. If not, his power cannot be effective. Such superiority is royal authority.”[4] However, the caliphs of the Umayyad dynasty onwards were not elected through group feeling. The Umayyads came to power controversially, because many factions including the supporters of Ali and also within the Sunni community resented them. An example of one source of discontent: “The Umayyads were resented by non-Arab converts to Islam precisely because of their reliance on Arab tribes and customs.”[5]. The Umayyad caliphate therefore did not arise out of group feeling, since the Umayyad clan was in conflict with Shi’at Ali and the Kharijites. Even after the First Fitna, which cemented the Umayyads as caliphs, there were dissidents within the empire. The caliph did not have the traditional royal authority because dissidents within the caliphate did not recognize his authority.
The caliph is not like a traditional king because he cannot claim to be appointed by God. This limits the caliph’s ability to be an absolute ruler, as his primary responsibility is to manage the affairs of the ummah and he can be overthrown if the ummah believes he is not upholding Islamic values. This is because the Prophet is considered the last messenger of God in the Islamic tradition. The companions who succeeded the prophet as political leaders could not claim to hold a sacred office. Abu Bakr, the first caliph, understood the title of caliph to mean successor to the prophet’s leadership of the ummah. “When Abu Bakr the Upright heard himself addressed as God’s Caliph’s, he responded ‘I am not God’s Caliph, but the Caliph of God’s Messenger, may God bless him and grant him salvation.’”[6] This limits the caliph to an exclusively political figure; there is no special connection or communication with God. There is a clear separation between the sacred nature of the Prophet, who is the last in the line of prophets such as Moses and Jesus, and the caliph, who holds no religious title. Caliphs are not like kings who claim to be appointed by God, and there is no sacred nature to the caliph’s office.
However, the caliph is the leader of a religious community, the ummah, and the caliph therefore does have a role in religious affairs of the state. Mawardi wrote that the caliph’s first public duty is to “guard the faith”[7]. The caliph protects the territory under Muslim control against internal and external enemies. The caliph is given this responsibility, not because he is a religious leader, but because Muslim armies expanded their territory fairly quickly and leadership was needed to ensure they were able to control their conquests. This is evidenced by the military campaigns against Arabian tribes who backed out of their treaties led by Abu Bakr and Umar. In doing so they “established a new principle: there was no going back on acceptance of Islam.”[8] The caliph acts as a patron to religious institutions; the Umayyad caliphs built mosques in the new urban centers of the caliphate such as Damascus and Fustat. The Umayyad caliphs also had the authority to collect taxes, including the Jizya tax, which they used to build infrastructure such as mosques and administrative palaces.
Many scholars in the Abbasid caliphate, partly due to Iranian monarchial influence, thought the caliph should have great authority over religious matters, especially in the development of Islamic jurisprudence. One of these scholars was Ibn Muqaffa, who said that the caliph should make laws if there is not any precedent by using reason. “We would be able to hope that the unification of judicial practices would be a means of harmonizing justice according to the opinion, and through the mouth, of the Commander of the Faithful.”[9] Although this would help assert the caliph’s political authority, legislating was outside of the caliph’s authority because of the rising class of religious scholars.
The Caliph is limited in his authority over religious jurisprudence, fiqh, because of the rise of legal schools and development of madhabs in the Islamic political ideology independent of the Abbasid regime. According to Shafi’I, the Quran, hadith and consensus are the most important sources for legal knowledge[10]. There is no mention of the caliphs as a source of authority in Sharia. The canonization of Sunni-based laws during the Abbasid caliphate led to the foundation of legal schools by scholars such as Shafi’i and Hanbal, who were entrusted with finding solutions to practical problems by analyzing and debating sources from the Quran and hadith. The religious scholars met local needs for guidance in diverse matters during the Abbasid caliphate. Therefore, the caliph did not have sole control over Sharia, although he did enforce the laws. According to Mawardi, the caliph also has the role to enforce the law, but this is different than making laws. For example, the caliph must “collect the legal taxes and alms imposed by jurisprudence.” [11] The caliph was invested in the power to collect taxes and manage the growing state treasury because the economy needed to be managed according to Islamic principles. Because the religious scholars were respected in urban societies, this established the inability of the caliphate to have autonomous control over decisions in the Sharia.
The title of Caliph is not specifically tied to one individual, limiting a caliph’s ability to build a cult of personality or claim glory for himself. “One does not have to recognize him personally or by name… in the same way, judges who pass sentences, and jurisconsults who dispense expert opinion in matters of right and wrong must be known in a general rather than specific manner to the public at large” [12] This can be interpreted to mean the individual who becomes caliph is not as important as how he performs his public duties. The image of the caliph is different from kingship, because the public expected the caliph to carry out his duties. The public should not admire him because he is in a position of power, but should expect him to maintain order in society, hence the comparison to judges who act as public servants. This differentiates the caliphs from the Byzantines, whose empire they inherited. While Byzantine emperors are portrayed in gold or wearing crowns, the caliphs are not portrayed in imperial coins or religious buildings after Caliph Abd-el-Malik’s reign[13]. This transition could be a reflection of the rising importance of building monumental structures, such as mosques and schools, and growing the caliphate’s prosperity through trade and efficient tax collecting, as symbols of power rather than glorifying the caliph himself.
According to Ibn Khaldun, a consequence of achieving royalty is luxury. “(Members of the tribe) are merely concerned with prosperity, gain, and a life of abundance…to adopt royal habits in building and dress”[14]. Those with royal authority, as portrayed by Ibn Khaldun, separate themselves from the rest of society in their castles and distract themselves with wealth and material objects. However, the caliph is expected not to accumulate wealth or live a luxurious life. For example, among the caliph’s public duties are to “estimate payments and allocations that must be made by the treasury without extravagance” and to “personally oversee matters and study the conditions of the people in order to manage public policy and guard the faith instead of relying on delegation of authority while he is preoccupied…”[15] The caliph’s duties would make him deeply involved in the affairs of society. Ultimately the caliph’s duty is to enact social justice and order throughout the caliphate, rather than accumulating wealth for himself.
The caliph is a more ambiguous role than traditional kingship because there was no precedent or rules set out before the Prophet’s death. Consequently, there was no universal agreement within the Muslim community on the office of the caliph and the limits of his power. However, in practice, the caliph’s power became limited by the secular nature of the office and the canonization of Sharia independent of the caliphate. The caliph was a traditional leader since the caliphs from Abu Bakr to the Abbasids had great authority to enforce the law, build a state bureaucracy, defend the status of Islam and Muslims against enemies through the army, and maintain social order guided by Islamic principles.
Footnotes:
[1] Ibn Khaldun, “Muqaddimah”, 108.
[2] F.E. Peters, “A Reader on Classical Islam”, 120.
[3] Ali ibn Muhammad Al Mawardi, “The Ordinances of Government”, 10.
[4] Ibn Khaldun, “Muqaddimah”, 107.
[5] Antony Black, “The History of Islamic Political Thought: From the Prophet to the Present”, 19.
[6] Mawardi, 16.
[7] Mawardi, 16.
[8] Hugh Kennedy, “Three Questions”, 9.
[9] Black, 23.
[10] Peters, 232.
[11] Mawardi, 16.
[12] Mawardi, 15.
[13] Class PowerPoint on “Building the Umayyad caliphate”
[14]Ibn Khaldun, 109.
[15] Mawardi, 16.