| Summary: | Rules of engagement, ethics of war, and codes of chivalry are all phrases which remind one of human attempts to rein in and regulate what is perhaps the most anarchic and illogical of all human activities: organized war. The role of the great religions of the world both in propagating war through crusades and jihads as well as their attempts at transcending its savagery through images of miles Christianus or the pious ghazi has also been much discussed. The aim of this thesis is to study the ethics of war in the context of Islamic societies in the Early Middle Ages from several complementary perspectives. Our sources for the period vary greatly from decade to decade and from region to region. This has often led historians of ideas and mentalities to concentrate on one aspect to the exclusion of others. This is particularly so in the case of ethics of war where most of the argument seems to concentrate on a few passages from the Qur'an, supplemented by some quotations from manuals of ḥadith and commentaries on them in the legal textbooks of the different religious schools. That all these are crucial for an understanding of Muslim attitudes and reactions to war throughout centuries is beyond dispute. But it remains, nevertheless, a lop-sided view: neglecting large areas of debate and speculation in literature, philosophy, and mystical meditations, presented as fully-fledged arguments or as occasional remarks and observations embedded in the extant texts from the period. By evaluating these scattered sources and listening to the different voices heard through them, I hope to show some of the different attitudes and responses to the ethics of war and avoid the monolithic and doggedly timeless approach which, at its worst and most extreme, envisages a non-existing consensus among the Muslims from the rise of Islam to the beginning of this new century and neglects the evidence of regional traditions and innovative thinkers by relying solely on a handful of quotes.
|
|---|
