In the process of describing the Abbasid defeat and killing of the Umayyad caliph Marwan II in August 750, Theophanes the Confessor makes the claim that Marwan “belonged to the heresy of the Epicureans, that is the Automatists, an impiety he had imbued from the pagans who dwell at Harran” (Theophanes, Chron. AM6241).
Epicureanism is a philosophical system based on the teachings of the Samian Greek philosopher Epicurus (342-270BC) on atomism, materialism, the development of man's higher faculties and freedom from fear. The potential changing of the meaning of certain words and concepts call be seen in the modern meaning of ‘epicure’ - we would expect it to be associated with the philosophical tenets of the ancient Epicureanism it is named for; however, if anything, a modern ‘epicure’ would be seen as an opponent of Epicurus, seeking instant gratification and pleasure. The hedonism of the epicure is against the advocacy of a simple life in Epicureanism. The ‘Automatism’ Theophanes speaks of derives from the Epicurean belief in “immutable natural laws” (Turtledove (1982) 115 n.227)
So far, this does not seem like a significant issue for a caliph to have dabbled in such a philosophy; however, in looking at the philosophy and the colloquial portrayal of Epicureans, the accusation that Marwan was an ‘Epicurean’ or an ‘Automatist’ becomes much more significant.
In purely philosophical terms, being an Epicurean becomes an issue for a caliph with his politico-religious position because the materialism of Epicureanism led to religious scepticism and a rejection of superstition and notions of divine intervention. The extent to which such connotations can affect this accusation aimed at Marwan by Theophanes can be seen in the record of Michael the Syrian II.508 which goes so far in his religious 'denouncing' of Marwan in claiming that he did not believe in God/Allah at all.
Collating ‘Epicureanism’ with ‘atheism’ was not a new idea, even if it is incorrect. Lactantius, Divine Institutes 13.19 criticised Epicurus for championing the ‘problem of evil’ - that is the trilemma formulation that rejects the idea of omnipotent and omnibenevolent gods. This ‘problem’ was summarised by David Hume in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion...
1. If God is unable to prevent evil, then He is not all-powerful
2. If God is not willing to prevent evil, then He is not all-good
3. If God is both willing and able to prevent evil, then why does evil exist?
While Lactantius’ attack on Epicurus for championing the ‘problem’ likely contributed to it also being known as the Riddle of Epicurus, much like the issue with the modern ‘epicure’, it may be that this trilemma has no Epicurean origins and should perhaps be considered anti-Epicurean. In Dante’s Divine Comedy, Epicureans are depicted as heretics suffering in the sixth circle of hell. Epicurus may even be being used to represent the ultimate heresy.
It is not only Christian philosophy where Epicurus and the teachings ascribed to him get associated with religious heterodoxy. In Judaism, even without any clear reference to Epicurus, ‘epikoros’ became a term for ‘heretic’ due to what were considered Epicureanism's rejection of monotheism.
Such pagan or atheistic associations being made for Marwan could be part of the explanation of why Umayyad control of the caliphate had collapsed during his reign - a caliph who has lost his faith in Allah can no longer be caliph. However, there is no such questioning of Marwan's philosophy or faith in the pages of Tabari's history; Indeed, there is virtually no mention of Marwan’s ‘heresy’ in any of the modern material that addresses him. That it is an accusation of Theophanes, who used Syriac sources, and Michael the Syrian could hint that this accusation of Epicurean heresy or atheism towards Marwan II could be Syriac in origin. This could give the accusation a little more credence due to the geographic location, but then to any Syriac Christian, Marwan's Muslim faith alone could make him a target of accusations of heresy.
Could these limited accusations against Marwan stem from his choice of official residence, rather than any overt display of a lack of monotheistic belief? From the earliest days of his reign, Marwan II had taken up residence in Harran (Tabari XXVII.1892), making it the unofficial capital of the caliphate. The catalyst of this move was the opposition of some groups in and around Damascus - Marwan may have just been putting distance between himself and those who did not support his caliphate and likely wished him harm.
By the time of Marwan’s birth in the last decade of the seventh century, the city of Harran was approaching 2700 years old, seemingly being founded by the people of Ur as a trading post. Under the Assyrians, it became a prominent city, known for its Temple of Sin, a god of the Moon. In the baking heat of the desert, the Moon and its accompanying night provided relief from the harshness of the Sun, hence why the Moon would receive worship in a place like Harran.
This reverence for the Moon survived the many waves of conquest the region faced - Aramaeans, Babylonians, Medes, Persians, Greeks, Armenians, Parthians, Romans, Sassanid Persians, and then the Arabs; a good example of this continued reverence is the emperor Julian's visit to Harran in 363, when he consulted the oracles in the city's Temple of the Moon.
“Julian stayed at [Harran] some days to complete his preparations, and sacrificed according to the local rite to the moon, which is worshipped in that region” (Ammianus XXIII.3.1; as an aside, the omens Julian received here may have so poor as to encourage him to make his maternal cousin Procopius his heir).
Harran remaining a centre of Greek paganism made it a potential haven for pagan philosophers made unwelcome in the Christian Roman Empire. The most prominent example would be the emperor Justinian I's closing of the Athenian Neoplatonist Academy in 529 (John Malalas 18.47), with its last crop of scholars, led by Damascius, accepting an invite to continue their research and teaching in the territory of the Persian king Khusro I (Agathas II.30.3). Initially hosted in the Persian capital of Ctesiphon, these Neoplatonists may have set up a school in Harran.
This Neoplatonist Academy-in-exile may have survived in Harran long enough to influence the Graeco-Arabic translation movement in the mid-8th century and then an Arabic revival of neoplatonic commentary in 9th century Baghdad, including the foundation of the House of Wisdom in 832 (Sorabji (2005) 11).
This pre-existing scholarly reputation may also have influenced the first Muslim university seemingly being founded at Harran under Umar II in 717. This foundation possibly saw a further influx of Graeco-Roman philosophers from other parts of the caliphate, such Egyptian Alexandria. This shows that Harran was still a major centre of paganism and Graeco-Roman philosophy by the time of Marwan II's accession in 744. Marwan then associating himself closely with Harran could open him to being associated with its most prominent and well-known aspects - paganism and Graeco-Roman philosophy, even if he had no actual connection to either.
Any connection to the 'conversion' of a caliph does not seem to have overly hindered Harran, as it continued to be a centre of philosophy, scholarship and paganism. The Temple of Sin was not destroyed until 1081, and even after that Harran continued to be viewed through a pagan lens, with Crusader Christians continuing to refer to the city as ‘Hellenopolis’ - while Harran had been known to the Romans as Carrhae, Christian antiquity had also called it ‘Hellenopolis’, meaning ‘city of the Hellenes’, that is ‘city of the [pagan] Greeks’, in reference to the persistent pagan traditions, such as the Temple of Sin.
The story of city's demise is somewhat peculiar - it was not sacked or destroyed. Rather, upon capturing the area, Hugalu’s Mongols found Harran too much trouble to retain in terms of its limited strategic value and depleted water supply. But rather than relinquish the area or physically destroy the city, the Mongols merely deported all its inhabitants and left Harran to be reclaimed by the desert sands it had emerged from over three millennia previously.
It is possible that we are dealing with a series of generalisations, jumping to conclusions and even false equivalences that have led to the labelling of Marwan II as a ‘heretic’. There is the more straightforward ‘Harran is a centre of paganism; therefore, anyone connected to Harran must be a pagan’. There is also the more circuitous ‘Harran is a centre of Graeco-Roman scholarship; therefore, anyone connected to Harran must be interested in such Graeco-Roman philosophy; as Epicureanism seems to reject monotheism; therefore, it, all Graeco-Roman philosophy and anyone/anything must be pagan/heretical.’ This all combined together leaves Epicureanism = heretical/pagan, and Marwan + Harran, therefore Marwan = Epicurean, therefore Marwan = heretic/pagan.
Of course, we cannot overlook the possibility that there was some truth in this association. While political necessity might have required Marwan to choose a new capital, but that choice falling upon Harran could reflect some pre-existing connection the caliph had with the city, rather than just its useful position on lines of trade and communication.
Or the amount of time Marwan spent in Harran could have engendered some actual appreciation for aspects of its culture, whether that be its Graeco-Roman learning or its moon worship. But, again, if any such interest or even reverence affected Marwan II's Islamic orthodoxy then surely it would have left more of a mark in Muslim sources, particularly any of Abbasid origin.
Bibliography
Frew, D. ‘Harran: Last Refuge of Classical Paganism’, The Pomegranate: The International Journal of Pagan Studies 13 (1999) 17-29
Pingree, D. ‘The Ṣābians of Ḥarrān and the Classical Tradition’, International Journal of the Classical Tradition. 9 (2002) 8-35
Sorabji, R. The Philosophy of the Commentators, 200–600 AD: Psychology (with Ethics and Religion) London (2005)
Watts, E. ‘Justinian, Malalas, and the End of Athenian Philosophical Teaching in A.D. 529’, JRS 94 (2004) 168-182
Comments