The methods of waging war

The origin of war is the desire of certain human beings to take revenge on others. Each (party) is supported by the people sharing in its group feeling.

When they have sufficiently excited each other for the purpose and the two parties confront each other, one seeking revenge and the other trying to defend itself, there is war. It is something natural among human beings.

No nation and no race is free from it because revenge comes from jealousy, hostility, or zeal in behalf of God, or zeal in behalf of royal authority and the effort to found a kingdom.

There are 4 kinds of war:

1. War between neighboring tribes and competing families
2. War caused by hostility in savage nations living in the desert, such as the Arabs, the Turks, the Turkomans, the Kurds, and similar peoples.

They earn their sustenance with their lances and their livelihood by depriving other people of their possessions. They declare war against those who defend their property against them. They have no further desire for rank and royal authority. Their minds and eyes are set only upon depriving other people of their possessions.614

3. Holy war
4. Dynastic [civil] war against seceders and those who refuse obedience

The first two are unjust and lawless, the other two are holy and just wars.

War is waged in two ways:

• by advance in closed formation.
• by attack and withdrawal

Advance in Closed Formation

This has been the technique of all the non-Arabs.

Attack and Retreat

This has been used by the Arabs and of the Berbers of the Maghrib.

Fighting in closed formation is more steady and fierce than fighting with the technique of attack and withdrawal. That is because in fighting in closed formation, the lines are orderly and evenly arranged, like arrows or like rows of worshipers at prayer.

People advance in closed lines against the enemy. This makes for greater steadiness in assault and for better use of the proper tactics. It frightens the enemy more.

A closed formation is like a long wall or a well-built castle which no one could hope to move. In the divine revelation, it is said= “God loves those who fight in His behalf in a line, as if they were a strongly constructed building.” 615 They steady each other.

A tradition says:

“One believer is to another believer like a building of which every part supports the rest.”

This makes it obvious what great wisdom there is in requiring that the lines be kept steady and in forbidding anyone to fall back during an attack.

Battle lines are intended to preserve order. Those who turn their backs to the enemy bring disorder into the line formation. They are guilty of the crime of causing a rout. They somehow cause the Muslims to be routed and enable the enemy to gain power over them. This is a great sin, because the resulting damage is general and affects Islam, in that it makes a breach in the protecting fence.

Therefore, it is considered one of the great sins.617 All this evidence shows that fighting in close formation is more important (than any other kind) in the opinion of the Lawgiver (Muhammad).

Fighting with the technique of attack and withdrawal is not as fierce or as secure against the possibility of rout, as is fighting in closed formation, unless there is set up a steady line formation to the rear, to which the fighting men may fall back in attack and withdrawal throughout the fighting. Such a line formation would take the place of the closed formation, as we shall mention later on. 618

The ancient dynasties had many soldiers and a vast realm. They subdivided their armies into smaller units. 619 The reason for this was that their soldiers grew exceedingly numerous and were assembled from the most remote regions. This made it unavoidable that some of the soldiers would not know others, when they mingled on the field of battle and engaged the enemy in shooting and close fighting. It was feared lest, on such occasions, they would fall to fighting each other because of the existing confusion and their ignorance of each other. Therefore, they divided the armies into smaller units and put men who knew each other together. They arranged the units in an arrangement resembling the natural one of the four directions (of the compass).

The chief of all the armies, either the ruler himself or a general, was in the center. This arrangement was called “the battle order” (ta’biyah).

It is mentioned in the history of the Persians, that of the Byzantines, and that of the (Umayyad and ‘Abbasid) dynasties at the beginning of Islam. In front of the ruler stood one army with its own battle lines, it own general and its own flag 621 It was called “the advance guard.”

Then, to the right of the 622 place where the ruler was, stood another army. It was called “the right flank.” There was another army to the left, called “the left flank.”

Then, there was another army behind the army, called “the rear guard.” The ruler and his entourage stood at the middle of these four (armies). The place where he was, was called the center.

When this ingenious arrangement was completed - covering an area within the field of vision (of a single observer) or extending over a wider area but with at most one or two days’ (journey) between each of the two armies, and utilizing the possibilities suggested by the greater or smaller number of soldiersthen, when the battle order was thus set up, the advance in closed formation could begin.

This may be exemplified by the history of the (Muslim) conquests and the history of the (Umayyad and ‘Abbasid) dynasties. There also is the wellknown story mentioned above from the history of Abd-alMalik, of how his armies fell back while he was on the move because (the elements of) the battle order were so widely separated, and how someone was needed to drive them from behind and al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf was appointed for that purpose.623

Much the same sort of arrangement was also to be found among the Spanish Umayyads. It is not known among us now, because we live in a time when dynasties possess small armies which cannot mistake each other on the field of battle. 624 Most of the soldiers of both parties together could nowa-days be assembled in a hamlet or a town. Everyone of them knows his comrade and calls him by his name and surname in the thick of battle.

Therefore, this particular battle order can be dispensed with.One of the techniques of the people who use the technique of attack and withdrawal, is to set up, behind their armies, a line formation (barricade) of solid objects and dumb animals to serve as a refuge for the cavalry during attack and withdrawal. It is intended to steady the fighters, so that they will fight more persistently and have a better chance of winning. Those who fight in closed formation do the same, in order to increase their steadfastness and power.

The Persians who fought in closed formation used to employ elephants in their wars. They made them carry wooden towers like castles, loaded with combatants, weapons, and flags. They disposed them in successive lines behind them in the thick of battle, as if they were fortresses. This fortified them psychologically and gave them added confidence.

In this connection, one may compare what happened at al-Qadisiyah. On the third day, the Persians pressed the Muslims hard with (the elephants), 625 Eventually, some outstanding Arabs counterattacked, infiltrated among the ele- phants, and struck them on the trunk with their swords. (The elephants) fled and turned back to their stables in al-Mada’in. This paralyzed the Persian camp, and they fled on the fourth day.

The Rum (Byzantines), the Gothic rulers in Spain, and most other non-Arab peoples used to employ thrones for the purpose of steadying the battle lines. A throne would be set up for the ruler in the thick of battle and surrounded by those of the ruler’s servants, entourage, and soldiers who were thought to be willing to die for him. Flags were run up at the corners of the throne. A further wall of sharpshooters and foot soldiers was put around it. The throne thus assumed considerable dimensions. It became, for the fighters, a place to fall back upon and a refuge in attack and withdrawal. This was what the Persians did in the battle of al- Qadisiyah. Rustum sat upon a throne that had been set up for him there. Finally, the Persian lines became disordered, and the Arabs penetrated to (Rustum’s) throne. He abandoned it and went to the Euphrates, where he was killed.

The Arabs and most other Bedouin nations that move about and employ the technique of attack and withdrawal, dispose their camels and the pack animals carrying their litters in lines to steady the fighting men. (Such lines) become for them a place to fall back upon. They call it al

follows this technique can be observed to be more steady in battle and to be better protected against being surprised and routed. This is a well attested fact, but it has been altogether neglected by the contemporary dynasties. Instead, they dispose the pack animals carrying their baggage and large tents behind them, as a rear guard.

These animals cannot take the place of elephants and camels. Therefore, the armies are exposed to the danger of being routed, and they are always ready to flee in combat.