18 A Short History of the Middle East
and the constant necessity for such supplementation gave rise in
succeeding decades to the production, first orally and later in
writing, of many scores of thousands of Traditions of the Prophet's
conduct, each enshrining some legal or ritual principle. Many of
these Traditions were fictitious, but the fiction was an innocent
device whereby religious sanction could be obtained for sonic
necessary piece of legislation, generally borrowed at this early
stage from the customary law of Madina.1
It was also necessary, however, for the new Arab rulers to regu-
late the legal position of the millions of their non-Muslim subjects,
who represented the overwhelming majority of the population of
the Empire.2 In this 'Umar followed the example of Mohammed,
who had left undisturbed the Christian and Jewish communities of
the northern Hijaz whom he brought under his sway, on condition
of the payment of an annual tribute. 'Umar extended this usage to
all the Christian and Jewish inhabitants of the Empire and to the
Zoroastrians of Persia; and these subjects thus became known as
the Alii adh-Dhimma or 'people of the covenant'. Far from there
being any idea of compulsorily converting them to Islam, their role
was to provide revenues for the Arab ruling-race by the payment
of taxation, which apparently was at first lighter than that of the
Byzantine Empire; and since Muslims were exempt from such
taxation, the conversion of non-Muslims was actually discouraged,
as it would have lessened the number of taxpayers. Since moreover
the Muslim law (the Shari'a) was not applicable to the non-Muslim
majority, they were left under the jurisdiction of the civil code
which had obtained before the Conquest, such jurisdiction being
now placed in the hands of their own religious dignitaries. This
was the origin of the system of self-administering religious com-
munities or millets which was to prevail throughout Islam until the
collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and still survives for the purposes
of civil law in that majority of Middle Eastern countries which
have not yet undergone a thorough secularization.3
^ For the compilation of fictitious documents by the early Christian Church
with similarly innocent motives, cf. C.Delisle Burns, The First Europe (London,
1947), 3 54f.
a It is hardly necessary in these days to remark that the traditional Christian
account, that the Muslim conquerors gave the conquered Christians and Jews
the choice only of conversion to Islam or death by the sword, is totally erroneous.
8 The institution had indeed already been foreshadowed in the dealings of the
Hellenistic monarchies and the Roman Empire with the Oriental temple-
communities under the authority of local priesthoods. In Alexandria under the