What's interesting about this is that you could make the case that it was that very power play by the Abbasids (ie Mutazilism) that actually ended up destroying the actual authority of the Caliph in the Muslim world, leading to the fracturing of authority in the realm (only further exacerbated by the Sunni-Shia split) that ended the Islamic Golden Age. If you happen to take that perspective, it's not too hard to see how the Alids could botch things up similar to how the Abbasids eventually did OTL, and notably earlier; though I suppose it may also be possible for them to avoid such a blunder.
Part 1:
The Decline of the Abbasid Caliphate
TL;DR:
The main reason for the fall of the Caliphate and end of the Golden Age was the financial collapse of its bankroller: the agriculture of Iraq.
Brought about by violent civil wars caused by succession disputes as well as the Turks becoming kingmakers - due to Mamun alienating every former support base of the Caliphate (Mutazila was only a small part of this), resorting to Turkish slaves.
Detailed explanation:
Early Abbasids:
Early Abbasid government was a broadly based coalition of various groups with different interests, brought together by Mansur in the service of the dynasty, integrated into the regime, so that it was in their interests for the caliphate to succeed and thrive.
Even the Syrians, arch enemies of the Abbasids, launching a whole revolution against them were integrated into and had a palace in the Abbasid system.
It was an era of peace and prosperity. With the only significant rebellions being from the sidelined Alids.
Unlike the Umayyad who relied solely on the Syrians, to the exclusion of all others. Or the middle Abbasids who relied on an even smaller group of Turks to the exclusion of all others. Causing resentment and civil war.
A few decades later Harun arRashid, tried to give the landowning class (Dehqans) greater influence, specifically the Barmakid family, sidelining the traditional Abbasid support base, the Abna (descendants of the Khurasanis who spearheaded the revolution).
The Barmakids/Dehqans were excellent bureaucrats, greatly improving the administration and centralisation. But they had very little military support, especially compared to the Abna.
Their centralising policies also caused discontent and rebellious against their rule, which due to their lack of military strength they couldn't contain properly. Eventually, Harun had to backtrack on his decision and rely once more upon the Abna.
Then the worst decision Harun ever made was his
succession plans.
Amin was the Caliph and given Iraq and the west and was supported by the Abna, while Mamun received the east, supported by the Dehqans and was basically entirely independent, with many restrictions put on Amin in his conduct with Mamun.
4th Fitnah (Amin-Mamun civil war)
After Harun's death in 809, the viziers of both Amin and Mamun were pushing for civil war, leading to a battle near Tehran in May 811. Which to everyone's surprise was a victory for Mamun, leaving the path to Baghdad clear.
Amin showed little leadership in wake of this major defeat, leading to many of his supporters abandoning him, and his remaining supporters fighting between each other. So much so that on 29 March 812 their was a brief
coup against Amin by some factions within Baghdad, before being reinstated a few days later...
A few months later on 25 August 812 Tahir began the
Siege Of Baghdad. Due to most of Amin's supporters abandoning him, the defense of the metropolis was in the hands of the common people and urban proletariat of Baghdad. Despite having no military experience, armour or even proper weapons they defended with a fierce and determined resistance, and occasionally manage to push back the professionally trained attakers and even briefly captured the major general, Harthama. Hugh Kennedy compares it to the 1871 Paris Commune.
The fighting was vicious and brutal, the breakdown of law and order leading to criminal gangs. Unlike previous Muslim civil wars, women and children were often the victims. Food became scarce, even for the Caliph. Tahir went as far as digging trenches to secure and fortify the parts of the city he had already taken. The mangonels, fires and ferocity of fighting had led to the destruction of most of the formerly glorious city, in what Hugh Kennedy calls a sort of
Medieval Stalingrad
Throughout all of this, Amin had abandoned himself to drink, while many of the wealthier citizens disassociated themselves from the mob and defected to Tahir's side. Eventually, in September 813, after over a year of brutal fighting, and briefly considering fleeing to Syria, Amin decided to surrender. Unexpectedly he was killed by Tahir, becoming the first Abbasid to be killed in such a way, reducing the sanctity of spilling royal blood....
Incompetence of Mamun
But this didn't end the conflict. Mamun made the
unbelievably stupid decision of attempting to rule the Caliphate from Merv (Turkmenistan). Throwing Iraq and everything further west into complete anarchy, prolonging the civil war an extra 6 years.
Part of this was due to the appointment of the dehqan Hassan ibn Sahl and dismissal of Tahir. Like the Barmakids before him, Hassan had a lack of military support. Shortly after his appointment a massive Alid rebellion under ibn Tabataba broke out. Managing to take most of southern Iraq, including the major city of Basra, which was only put down with great difficulty.
Seeing Hassan's incompetence and inability to pay the Abna their salaries, as well as the provincialization and decline of their formerly great city, the disparate factions of Baghdad united to restore their city to its former glory, beginning to oust Hassan from the city.
The final straw came in 817 when Mamun made
another unbelievably stupid decision; to appoint Ali alRida as his successor, alienating the entirety of the Abbasid house and further alienating the Baghdadis, leading them to appoint their own Caliph, Ibrahim ibn Mahdi. Even in Marw the policy caused disturbances.
And ironically the Iraqi Shia who Mamun was trying to gain favour from by this move were skeptical of his ploy since Mamun's "heir" was 20 years older than him, so probably would never become Caliph. After a few months Ibrahim ibn Mahdi defeated the Shi'ites and took back Kufa, making the policy a complete and utter failure, without the slightest positive outcome.....
It was then that Mamun finally decided to move back to Baghdad, but first murdering his vizier of Marw. But the journey to Baghdad was extremely slowly, taking a year and a half to reach the city. En route he poisoned his heir Ali alRida, alienating what little Shi'ite support he had gained....
Finally in August 819, Mamun arrived in Baghdad, after a long and devastating decade ending the fourth fitnah.
But the Caliphate was in tatters. Most regions had become independent under local warlords, Mamun and his dehqan allies lacked military support, but the Abna couldn't be trusted due to siding with Amin and then Ibrahim, and the finances were strained after a decade of civil war, making the raising of a new army a difficult task...
The pillars of the Caliphate Mansur had created had been shattered: The cadet branches of the Abbasid family were now excluded from political power, no longer given governorates or leading armies. Similarly other great houses, such as the Muhallabids or sons of Ma'n b.Za'ida were also excluded. The Abna, descendants of the original revolution 70 years earlier and backbone of the state lost their elite position with many being demilitarised and other groups such as the Mawaali also lost influence.
In place of the previous foundations, Mamun built his Caliphate on two new ones: the Tahirids and the
Slave army of his brother Mutasim.
Tahir had managed to efficiently use the limited military resources of Mamun as well as diplomacy/compromise to successfully restore Caliphal rule over Syria in 825 and Egypt the next year (Andalusi pirates had managed to take Alexandria, after being pushed out they founded the Emirate of Crete...). As a reward, he and his descendants then became the hereditary governors of Khurasan, and head of the armed forces of Baghdad.
Mamun's success in the west wasn't reflected in the east, where a massive rebellion had sprung up in Azerbaijan. The lack of military resources and finances meant Mamun had to resort to a series of commanders who offered to raise and pay armies at their own expense in exchange for the revenues of the province. All of these failed, and the Tahirids were reluctant to get involved in a difficult and costly battle. It wasn't until 838, after
20 years of rebellion, that Mutasim managed to defeat Babak....
Rise of the Slaves
Speaking of Mutasim, he had begun collecting Turkish slaves in 815. By the end of Mamun's reign they only numbered around 4,000 but were highly disciplined and efficient troops, known for their horse archery.
This was the beginning of the demilitarisation of the Arabs and the emergence of a military caste seperate from the rest of society, they didn't have relatives running shops, teaching in schools or working in the city. Most of them, even Ashinas one of the highest ranking generals couldn't even speak Arabic properly, making interaction with the populace difficult. Similarly most of them had only converted to Islam recently if at all. Overall the people saw them as brutal barbarians.
An army drawn from the masses wants the state to thrive, since they have friends, family and dependants living in the state. Thus they want the state to be peaceful and prosperous so their family can benefit.
Unlike foreign troops, who have no attachments to any denizens of the state and are often despised by the populace. Though this characteristic is seen as increased loyalty, since they are wholly dependant on the state, without connections to call upon to plot a rebellion like an army drawn from the masses.
However said loyalty is only when the Caliph is acting in their interests. As soon as he begins to veer from that path they act desperately and violently, since their livelihoods and existence depend on the goodwill of the Caliph towards them and their continued military monopoly. Leading to them murdering Caliphs hostile to them and becoming the new kingmakers to ensure their interests. As shown by the anarchy at Samarra.
The move to Samarra was due to the discontent between the Turks and the Baghdadis, who saw the Turks as barbarians and the Abna saw them as usurpers of their rightful position as the military of the state. Leading to the Turks being beaten up and even murdered in their barracks. Requiring to Mutasim founding a new capital for his supporters. Further isolating the regime.
(Though Samarra seems a poor choice, lacking naturally flowing water supply and with poor river communications. Becoming mostly abandoned soon after the Caliphs left it... If he wanted a new capital, a better choice may have been Raqqa, which would strengthen Abbasid control over the west and the frontier, with a fertile hinterland, thriving glass industry and would harken back to the glory days of Harun arRashid when it was his capital)
The Turks showed their military superiority in their successes against Babak in Azerbaijan, Mazyar in Tabaristan and the Byzantines in the siege of Amorion. On the way back from Amorion, Mutasim coordinated a massive purge against the remnants of the Abna, killing over 70 of their officers, as well as Mamun's son Abbas over a coup attempt and highlights the insecurity of Mutasim's claim to the Caliphate.
Mutasim's reign also led to a great increase in the centralisation of the state. With the provinces remitting more money to the centre than ever before. Even the governors of the provinces were centralised, since most of them didn't actually visit their governorates, instead delegating that to others while they lived in Samarra.
So by the end of Mutasim's reign the Caliphate was being run by a few thousand Turks and bureaucrats, with basically no popular support. A far cry from the broad based Caliphate of alMansur...
The Mihna was just another part of this, further alienating the populace via the brutal inquisition. With an attempted rebellion in Baghdad in April 846, headed by Ahmed ibn Nasr, a senior figure of the Abna. Against the inquisition and as a form of protest against the Samarra regime in general.
The Reign of Mutawakkil
After Mutasim, his son Wathiq succeeded him and maintained the status quo, leaving all the officials Mutasim had appointed in their places, then dying suddenly 5 years later. His brother alMutawakkil succeeded him in 847, but unlike alWathiq he want to leave Mutasim's cabal in place, and was determined to assert his control over the Caliphate.
Just six weeks after his accession, he killed the cruel vizier ibn Zayyat who had humiliated him a few years prior. Then he tried to break the Turkish monopoly, moving on their most senior commander, Itakh, getting the Tahirids to assassinate him in 849. The removal of these two broke the back of the old guard.
Beyond that, Mutawakkil ended the inquisition, winning support among the traditionalists. Then in 858 he tried to move the capital away from Turkish dominated Samarra. Oddly he chose Damascus, spending 38 days in the city, before huge opposition from the Turks, recognising the move as a ploy to undermine their power, forced him to return to Samarra.
(Why didn't he move back to Baghdad? Which be understandable to the Turks and much less suspicious than Damascus. Baghdad also houses power bases Mutawakkil could draw upon like the Tahirids, Abna remnants and traditionalists. As well as giving him the support of the massive Baghdadi populace.......)
He was also an extravagant builder, trying to outshine Mutasim's already huge 125 ha palace by building the staggeringly gigantic Jafari palace, covering some
211 hectares!
(3x larger than Forbidden Place. Third largest palace in all human history after Weiyang and Daming palaces of ancient China) As well as the iconic grand mosque of Samarra with its spiral minaret, the largest mosque in the world until the late 20th century covering 165,886m2 in total.
The problem is that Mutawakkil didn't learn from his grandfather Harun arRahsid's mistake, and tried to give all 3 of his sons a share in the succession. Muntasir was to be Caliph and received Egypt, Iraq and western Iran. Mutazz received Khurasan, Armenia and Fars, while Muayyad received the Levant. Though all 3 never actually visited these provinces, and stayed in Samarra delegating their rule. This created tension in the family and the court.
For some unknown reason, Mutawakkil treated his heir apparent Muntasir with open contempt and frequently humiliated him. To the extent he ordered his courtiers to slap him on the head...
Finally on the last Friday of Ramadan, 5 December 861, Muntasir was supposed to deliver the public sermon and lead the prayer, but his brother Mutazz was appointed for it instead, with Muntasir being obliged to remain in the palace. It was huge public humiliation, and gave Muntasir the clear impression that his father would drop him from the succession.
Due to this, Muntasir teamed up with the other major group threatened by the regime; the Turks.
In October 861, Wasif, last of Mutasim's original generals, learned of a plot by Mutawakkil to confiscate his estates. Making them feel they had little to lose by supporting a coup.
While the rank and file Turks also felt their position threatened by Mutawakkil recruiting North Africans and Armenians to undermine them.
Though for some reason, the
Turks still formed the palace guard, despite Mutawakkil actively threatening their interests, which was to prove fatal for him.... (Why wasn't the palace guard changed???)
Finally, on Tuesday 10 December 861, Mutawakkil was murdered by the Turkish guards at the age of 38. Muntasir immediately set about finding Mutazz due to fears of him rallying the non Turkish troops against him. But he managed to secure Mutazz's oath of allegiance, and become the unchallenged Caliph.
The Anarchy at Samarra
This event was catastrophic for the future of the caliphate, since it made clear to all that the
Turks were the ones in charge and
any Caliph who opposed their interests could be easily murdered.
In fact, Muntasir
publicly recognised this, when he announced that the reason why he breached the succession protocol of his father and removed Mutazz and Muayyad from the succession was due to the demands of the Turks, and his fear that they would kill them if he did not agree. Publicly admitting his weakness against the Turks...
But he died only 6 months later. Throwing the entire Caliphate into chaos. He left no succession plans. So
3 Turks, Bugha the Elder, Bugha the Younger and Baghir, appointed the Caliph of their choosing for the entire Muslim world. The Caliphate of the Rashidun, of Muawiyah, Ibn Zubayr, Umar II, Mansur and Harun was now being decided by 3 Turkish slaves, who barely speak Arabic and know little about Islam...
To emphasize the humiliation of the caliphate, these 3 had been personally involved in murdering Mutawakkil.
They appointed Musta'in, a young man with no military experience, entirely beholden to the Turks.
(Apparently Bughä the Elder argued against this: 'We should appoint someone we fear and respect because then we will remain with him. If we appoint someone who fears us, then we will compete among ourselves and end up by killing each other........)
Beyond that, a Turkish vizier was appointed for the first and only time in the history of the Caliphate, showing the complete monopoly on power the Turks had....
But during the coronation procession of the new Caliph, a group of Tahirids and sons of Mutawakkil started a massive armed riot against the Turks. Throwing all Samarra into chaos.
But the biggest problem was the financial situation, which meant the state was unable to pay the salaries of the troops. This also created a divide between the commanders who had vast estates and the rank and file, who weren't even getting their salaries.
Eventually they mutinied and slaughtered the vizier, and we're determined to murder the Caliph, Bugha and Wasif. So those three fled, abandoning Samarra for Tahirid Baghdad. In response, the Turks appointed Mutazz, despite him being the figurehead of the anti-turkish party. Having two Caliphs meant civil war....
Mutazz and the Turks took the initiative and put Baghdad on the defensive. On the 10th of March 865 the second siege of Baghdad began, with the Turks led by the determined Abbasid prince and later Caliph alMuwaffaq, though only had some 19,000 men. The Baghdadis were led by Ibn Tahir and massively outnumbered their enemy. But lacked military experience. And Ibn Tahir led from his palace, as opposed to Muwaffaq on the front lines....
Initially the Baghdadis won massive victories, but ibn Tahir refused to follow it up with an offensive attack, sticking to his defensive policy, that was the main reason for their defeat.
Eventually hunger set in, in November the Baghdadis protested, demanding food. On January 7th 866, ibn Tahir negotiated with Muwaffaq about betraying Musta'in. On 25th of January Mutazz was acknowledged and the siege ended.
But the civil war, crippled the irrigation systems of Iraq leading to major financial problems. And like previous Amin-Mamun civil war, instability in the centre meant collapse of authority in the provinces, with dozens of new independant dynasties popping up. (With ibn Tulun becoming the first independent ruler of Egypt since Cleopatra...) Which meant the loss of provincial tax revenues, even nearby Baghdad wasn't forwarding any taxes, making the financial crisis worse.
The total payments of military amounted to
200 million dirhams annually, equivalent to two year's taxes for the entire realm. But the Turks were determined to get their pay. Eventually the rank and file Turks murdered their commanders, Bugha and Wasif and due to Mutazz's attempts to curb the military, they turned on him too, killing another Caliph on 16 July 869.
He was succeeded by Muhtadi, who tried to emulate the pious and austere rule of Umar II, to win the support of the masses. Unfortunately Samarra was a government city so it didn't have the demographic Muhtadi was trying to appeal to. Perhaps if he was in Baghdad he would've had more success.
The financial crisis worsened, and the Turkish infighting continued. Eventually Muhtadi tried to undermine one of the Turkish generals by getting his subordinate to betray him. But this failed. So the Turks killed him on 20th June 870 by
Crushing His Testicles.....
The Revival
After this the 9 year long Anarchy at Samarra ended due to the rise of Muwaffaq, the only Abbasid with military experience and rapport among the Turks, having led the army in the siege of Baghdad as well as opposing the policy of Mutazz to curb the military.
Muwaffaq assured the Turks of their place as the unchallenged military of the Caliphate. With no more attempts to curb or undermine their military monopoly. The various factions of the Turks had also finished their feuds, leaving Musa ibn Bugha the unchallenged leader, with whom Muwaffaq had very strong ties.
Though he didn't claim the Caliphate for himself, instead allowing the appointment of his brother Mutamid as his puppet Caliph, while he de facto ran the Caliphate.
His strong and personal control over the military, as well as that of his son and grandson, along with some excellent financial administrators and a close connection between the civilian adminstration and military leaders, allowed the an Abbasid revival.
The most immediate concern was to deal with the Saffarids, a Persian coppersmith who had taken all Sistan in 865. Then taking the Tahirid capital, Nishapur in 873 ending their rule. Then pushing westwards into Fars and Ahwaz. Before in 876 marching on Baghdad itself. Muwaffaq and Musa ibn Bugha met their advance at Dayr Aqul, only 75 km from Baghdad. With this the Saffarid threat to Iraq ended.
Next was the massive Zanj Slave revolution, all of Southern Iraq was in the hands, unchallenged, between 869 and 879. Who
brutally sacked Basra in 871, from which the great city, founded by the companions, has never recovered. (Old Basra is modern azZubayr).
Muwaffaq began the advance in 879, with 50,000 men, the vast marshes which enabled Zanj guerilla warfare, were impenetrable to the Turkish cavalry armies. So initially the focus was on destroying their ships to reduce their mobility in the mashes. Gradually they pushed to the Zanj capital, Mukhtara, besieging it for 2 and a half years from February 881 to August 883, killing their founder Ali ibn Muhammad ending the revolt. Though this devastated southern Iraqi agriculture, from which it has never recovered.
(
@John7755 يوحنا has some good posts on the Zanj)
After some failed campaigns against the Tulunids, Muwaffaq died in 891. His son Mutadid succeeded him, continuing to puppet Mutamid until his death in 892, when he became Caliph himself.
He had a strong personality and was incredibly effective, spending the most time on campaign out of any Caliph. Through a mixture of campaigning and diplomacy, he restored Abbasid rule to Western Iran, Jazira, Northern Syria, Cilicia and setting up the conquest of Egypt for his successor.
While the capital was moved back to Baghdad after almost 60 years, rebuilding the war-ravaged city. The administration was further developed, with reforms to taxation, although beginning Tax-farming, which was later incredibly destructive to the realm. The chief civilian administrator participated actively on campaigns and was good friends with the Mutadid's main commander, strengthening the ties between the civilian adminstration and the military.
After a decade of successful rule, he died in 892. Succeeded by his adequate son, Muktafi, continuing the policies of his father, though he had none the brilliant energy of his father, exercising less direct control and not campaigning in person. Similar to Wathiq after Mutasim.
Muktafi's reign faced the threat of the Qaramita, a large Bedouin coalition based in the Syrian desert and East Arabia who threatened Aleppo, Damascus and Iraq. But in late 903 they were decisively defeated near Hama, greatly reducing their threat.
From there, marching on Tulunid Egypt which had been weakened by internal strife and the Qaramita. 10,000 men and a fleet from Tarsus managed to restore Abbasid control over the province in 905/6 after 40 years.
In 908, after a short but successful reign, Muktafi died, leaving the treasury full and the army in the hands of the capable civilian administrators.
The Precipitous Decline and Collapse
But his successor was the
worst Abbasid, and perhaps worst Caliph in all history, alMuqtadir. He undid all the work of his predecessors, being constantly manipulated, exploited and deceived by his advisors for his entire 23 year reign.
Muktafi left no succession plans, but instead of the military choosing the successor as had been the case for Wathiq, and during the anarchy at Samarra, this time it was the
bureaucrats of the civilian adminstration who chose the next Caliph. Showing just how far they had taken control of the state.
But they were split between 2 factions. One who wanted the competent and experienced Ahmed ibn alMutazz, and another who wanted the
13 year old brother of Muktafi so that they could manipulate him to their benefit, it is this faction which won out. Though there was a brief coup to install ibn al Mutazz, which nearly succeeded...
(
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/908-continuation-of-the-abbasid-resurgence.545191/ made a TL about this. But need to remaster it, many things are glossed over and lacking...)
Muqtadir lived a life of decadence and immoral extravagance. Rarely leaving the palace and usying himself with the concubines and singing girls of the harem. The other Abbasid princes did similar.
alMuwaffaq, Mutadid and Muktafi, all had strong, personal involvement in the military, allowing them to prevent army mutinies and rebellions. But the new Caliph could do no such thing, nor could any other member of the abbasid house.
Similarly without the strong hand of the previous Caliphs, the bitter rivalries of different factions of the bureaucrats flourished unchecked, damaging the administration.
But the biggest problem was the financial catastrophe which plagued the Caliphate, which I have detailed the cause of which below. The result was viziers brutally torturing other officials to extract money out of them, the spread of exploitative tax farming and the Iqta/fiefs. All exacerbating the problem.
Yet despite the Caliphate being near bankruptcy, the Caliph insisted that his extravagant lifestyle pe paid for with public funds. Any vizier who tried to oppose this was dismissed. Particularly Ali ibn Isa, who repeatedly tried to reduce the Caliph's allowance, with the support of the main military leader, Mu'nis, but to no avail.
Meanwhile, the financial problems meant that the salaries of the troops couldn't be paid properly, causing great discontent among the army.
Next there were external foes. Particularly the Qaramita bedouin. Although defeated in Syria, from their new base in Bahrain they began to attack Iraq in 923. Once again sacking Basra, 50 years after the Zanj sack. At this, Mu'nis executed the vizier, ibn al Furat. Beginning the end of the bureaucrats dominating government.
In 927, the Qaramita marched towards Baghdad itself, and it seemed like the city would fall, but managed to hold out. Then in 930, they Sacked Makkah, shattered the Black stone and took it to Bahrain for 21 years. An unbelievable blow to Caliphal prestige. But the Qaramita now busied themselves with internal disputes, reducing their threat.
Mu'nis now set about gaining complete control over the civil administration. Leading to coups and counter-coups, resulting in Muqtadir's death in 932, the first Caliph to die a violent death since Muhtadi, 60 years earlier.....
The military appointed alQahir as Caliph. Who tried, publicly, to show a pious image in contrast to Muqtadir's immoral decadence, but he was seen as brutal and disliked. Resulting in his vizier organising a coup in which Qahir was blinded. Then came alRadi.
Meanwhile, with all the intrigues and coups in the capital, the rest of the Caliphate became independent once more. Egypt and Syria going to the Ikhshidids in 935, while northern Iraq went to the Hamdanids, Western Iran went to the Zoroastrian revivalist ibn Mardavij, in 934 he took nearby Ahwaz, intent on taking Baghdad and reforming the Sassanian empire, though his grand dreams were shattered by his murder by his own slaves... Then succeeded by the Buyids.
Even in Baghdad's backyard, Wasit refused to pay taxes and in Basra independent lords were negotiating alliances with the Buyids.
All this meant that almost no money was coming into the Caliphate....
In 936 ibn Ra'iq came to Baghdad and took over both the civilian and military administrations. The army of the Caliph, built up since Muwaffaq was completely disbanded, leaving the Caliph completely helpless, with no soldiers or administrators. It was at this point that the political Caliphate ended.
The vizierate, established by the Barmakids almost 200 years earlier, was also disbanded, the last great Abbasid vizier, having his tongue torn out and hands chopped off. The administration was reduced only to its most basic functions.
Beyond that, the new military of Ibn Ra'iq was no longer paid and dependant upon salaries, like all previous Caliphal armies. Instead they were rewarded with
fiefs, so it was in their interest that the central government collapse, so they can seize more land for themselves. Making
their interests antithetical to that of the Caliphate. (Unlike earlier military coups, who still wanted a strong and prosperous Caliphate to pay their salaries).
In 944, the Ikhshidid tried to persuade the Caliph to move to Egypt, which would've been somewhat like the Mamluk Cairo Caliphate, but 300 years earlier (it would've been interesting to see if this may've prevented the Fatimid conquest, perhaps taking over after Kafur....?) But the Caliph refused, and returned to Baghdad where his military deposed and blinded him...
Finally in January 946, the Buyids entered Baghdad...
The Financial Catastrophe
Southern Iraq/Sawad is probably the most fertile region of Western Eurasia. And it is this tremendous agricultural wealth that created the world's first empires like Akkadians and Babylonians, then under Assyria unified the entire fertile crescent. The Achaemenids used it's great wealth and fairly central position to unify the entire middle east and Seleucids had a large chunk of it. The reason the Persians had their capital so close to the Roman border was due to the immeasurable wealth of Iraq, providing almost 40% of total sassanian taxes.
But Iraqi agriculture is quite fragile, requiring a stable state to invest huge sums into the maintenance and upkeep of the immense canal and irrigation network. Lest the canals be breached, turning the region into salty and uncultivateable marshland.
During the late Sassanian era, Iraqi agriculture seems to have reached its peak at over 200 million dirhams. Perhaps as high as
340 million... [Probably highly exaggerated] Though these improvements increased the interdependence of the system, making it more fragile to instability and neglect.
In 627 Heraclius' campaigns in the region devastated much of the irrigation systems. Followed by an enormous flood in 628-29 wherein the Tigris shifted from its eastern/modern course to the Gharraf river. Submerging vast swaths of the central Sawad in marshlands for the next few centuries, making it unusable for agriculture. (As i covered here:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/744-the-alids-a-better-caliphate.548484/post-24687484) Then internal politcial instability hit the Sassanids, before the Arab invasions began in 633.
The Arabs were initially busy with the conquests, though under Umar 128 million dirhams were collected. It seems like Muawiya's reign is the first time irrigation projects to reclaim land from the marshes began. Khalid alQasri is said to have attempted. Continuing throughout Umayyad rule and the early Abbasid era. During this time, the Sawad of Iraq provided around 100-120 million dirhams, a fifth of the Caliphate. If Ahwaz and Hulwan are included, Southern Iraq produced close to 165 million dirhams,
4x the revenues of Egypt.
It is this enormous wealth with funded the Abbasid Golden Age.
But the Mamun-Amin civil war greatly damaged the irrigation network, as commanders purposely breached canals for military advantage.
And for some reason, we no longer hear of new land reclamation projects after the reign of Harun. Only occasionally hearing of repairing existing systems. Yet despite the neglect and continued deterioration of the irrigation network, lifeblood of the Caliphate, the Abbasids were spending hundreds of millions of dirhams in founding Samarra, with alMutawakkil alone spent over 275 million for his gargantuan palaces.............
(Had they instead invested hundreds of millions into the irrigation network of the Sawad, they may've been able to reach the 200+ million dirham rates of the Sassanians. Greatly reducing the financial crises of later decades)
The true catastrophe came during the Anarchy at Samarra, due to the second siege of Baghdad causing much more damage to the irrigation. Then for 14 years from 869 onwards, the Zanj wreaked havoc throughout all southern Iraq.
The 4 decades of Muwaffaq, Mutadid and Muktafi were using all their resources to expand the state, and didn't have time to invest in irrigation systems, and needed money more immediately. So they resorted to Tax farming. Which extracted as much money as possible, with no care whatsoever for the long term, further deteriorating irrigation systems and encouraging emigration of the exploited peasantry. This practice got worse during the reign of Muqtadir, and was accompanied by Qaramita raids and severe military infighting.
By the 919, the Sawad only produced
31 dirhams, with that figure falling even more as the years progressed.
The last death knell to Iraqi agriculture was 937 the intentional breaching of the gigantic 300km Nahrawan canal, that had taken centuries to build. At this, most of southern Iraq was no longer being cultivated and still isn't to this day (most of modern Iraqi agriculture coming from the northern Jazira regions). In the coming centuries the heartland of civilizations became pastures for the bedouin....
Without wealthy Iraq in the middle, the link between the eastern Islamic world and the western Islamic world is largely severed. Making any later attempts at reforming the Caliphate incredibly difficult. Egypt is too westerly to attempt to extert control over Iraq let alone Iran. Syria is too poor, western Iran isn't quite wealthy enough whilst also being too far from Egypt.
Though, if steppe nomads based in Iran and Jazira/East Anatolia, can take Egypt, like the Mongols and to a lesser extent Seljuks almost did, they might be able to re-establish a good chunk of the Caliphate...
Many PoDs could've avoided this:
- WI Harun didn't make such stupid succession plans, allowing Amin or Mamun sole rule. Preventing the 4rd Fitnah (and maybe preventing fall of Barmakids). Thereby preventing the collapse of the Abna armies of the Abbasids.
- WI Mamun move to Baghdad in 813 instead of moving to Merv and needlessly extending the civil war, leaving the Abna in a stronger position
- WI Abbas ibn Mamun succeeded in overthrowing Mutasim and the Turks?
- WI Mutawakkil acted more covertly against the Turks, changed his palace guard and didn't humiliate his heir apparent? Perhaps allowing him to reign another 30 years
- WI Muntasir didn't die suddenly and reigned for decades?
- WI Musta'in and the Tahirids defeated the Turks?
- WI Mutadid/Muktafi reigned longer or ibn alMutazz became Caliph instead of incompetent Muqtadir, continuing the revival? (https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/908-continuation-of-the-abbasid-resurgence.545191/ made a TL about this. But need to remaster it, many things are glossed over and lacking...)
TLDR:
The main reason for the fall of the Caliphate and end of the Golden Age was the financial collapse of its bankroller: Iraq.
Brought about by violent civil wars caused by succession disputes and the Turks becoming kingmakers. As well as lack of investment in irrigation networks.