About the beginning of the third century after Christ a number of Bedouin tribes, wholly or partly of Yemenite origin, who had formed a confederacy and called themselves The foundation of Ḥíra. collectively Tanúkh, took advantage of the disorder then prevailing in the Arsacid Empire to invade ‘Iráq (Babylonia) and plant their settlements in the fertile country west of the Euphrates. While part of the intruders continued to lead a nomad life, others engaged in agriculture, and in course of time villages and towns grew up. The most important of these was Ḥíra (properly, al-Ḥíra, i.e., the Camp), which occupied a favourable and healthy situation a few miles to the south of Kúfa, in the neighbourhood of ancient Babylon.84 According to Hishám b. Muḥammad al-Kalbí (õ 819 or 821 a.d.), an excellent authority for the history of the Pre-islamic period, the inhabitants of Ḥíra during the reign of Ardashír Bábakán, the first Sásánian king of Persia (226-241 a.d.), consisted of three classes, viz.:—
(1) The Tanúkh, who dwelt west of the Euphrates between Ḥíra and Anbár in tents of camel's hair.
(2) The ‘Ibád, who lived in houses in Ḥíra.
(3) The Aḥláf(Clients), who did not belong to either of the above-mentioned classes, but attached themselves to the people of Ḥíra and lived among them—blood-guilty fugitives pursued by the vengeance of their own kin, or needy emigrants seeking to mend their fortunes.
Naturally the townsmen proper formed by far the most influential element in the population. Hishám, as we have seen, calls them 'the ‘Ibád.' His use of this The ‘Ibád. term, however, is not strictly accurate. The ‘Ibád are exclusively the Christian Arabs of Ḥíra, and are so called in virtue of their Christianity; the pagan Arabs, who at the time when Ḥíra was founded and for long afterwards constituted the bulk of the citizens, were never comprised in a designation which expresses the very opposite of paganism. ‘Ibádmeans 'servants,' i.e., those who serve God or Christ. It cannot be determined at what epoch the name was first used to distinguish the religious community, composed of members of different tribes, which was dominant in Ḥíra during the sixth century. Dates are comparatively of little importance; what is really remarkable is the existence in Pre-islamic times of an Arabian community that was not based on blood-relationship or descent from a common ancestor, but on a spiritual principle, namely, the profession of a common faith. The religion and culture of the ‘Ibád were conveyed by various channels to the inmost recesses of the peninsula, as will be shown more fully in a subsequent chapter. They were the schoolmasters of the heathen Arabs, who could seldom read or write, and who, it must be owned, so far from desiring to receive instruction, rather gloried in their ignorance of accomplishments which they regarded as servile. Nevertheless, the best minds among the Bedouins were irresistibly attracted to Ḥíra. Poets in those days found favour with princes. A great number of Pre-islamic bards visited the Lakhmite court, while some, like Nábigha and ‘Abíd b. al-Abraṣ, made it their permanent residence.
It is unnecessary to enter into the vexed question as to the origin and rise of the Lakhmite dynasty at Ḥíra. According to Hishám b. Muḥammad al-Kalbi, who gives a list of twenty kings, covering a period of 522 years and eight months, the first Lakhmite ruler was ‘Amr b. ‘Adí b. Naṣr The Lakhmites. b. Rabí‘a b. Lakhm, the same who was adopted by Jadhíma, and afterwards avenged his death on Queen Zabbá. Almost nothing is known of his successors until we come to Nu‘mán I, surnamed al-A‘war (the One-eyed), Nu‘mán I. ( circa400 a.d.). whose reign falls in the first quarter of the fifth century. Nu‘mán is renowned in legend as the builder of Khawarnaq, a famous castle near Ḥíra. It was built at the instance of the Sásánian king, Yazdigird I, who desired a salubrious residence for his son, Prince Bahrám Gór. On its completion, Nu‘mán ordered the architect, a 'Roman' ( i.e., Byzantine subject) named Sinimmár, to be cast headlong from the battlements, either on account of his boast that he could have constructed a yet more The Castle of Khawarnaq. wonderful edifice "which should turn round with the sun," or for fear that he might reveal the position of a certain stone, the removal of which would cause the whole building to collapse. One spring day (so the story is told) Nu‘mán sat with his Vizier in Khawarnaq, which overlooked the Fen-land (al-Najaf), with its neighbouring gardens and plantations of palm-trees and canals, to the west, and the Euphrates to the east. Charmed by the beauty of the prospect, he exclaimed, "Hast thou ever seen the like of this?" "No," replied the Vizier, "if it would Nu‘mán becomes an anchorite. but last." "And what is lasting?" asked Nu‘mán. "That which is with God in heaven." "How can one attain to it?" "By renouncing the world and serving God, and striving after that which He hath." Nu‘mán, it is said, immediately resolved to abandon his kingdom; on the same night he clad himself in sackcloth, stole away unperceived, and became a wandering devotee ( sá’iḥ). This legend seems to have grown out of the following verses by ‘Adí b. Zayd, the ‘Ibádite:—
"Consider thou Khawarnaq's lord—and oft Of heavenly guidance cometh vision clear— Who once, rejoicing in his ample realm, Surveyed the broad Euphrates, and Sadír;85 Then sudden terror struck his heart: he cried, 'Shall Man, who deathward goes, find pleasure here?' They reigned, they prospered; yet, their glory past, In yonder tombs they lie this many a year. At last they were like unto withered leaves Whirled by the winds away in wild career."86
The opinion of most Arabian authors, that Nu‘mán embraced Christianity, is probably unfounded, but there is reason to believe that he was well disposed towards it, and that his Christian subjects—a Bishop of Ḥíra is mentioned as early as 410 a.d.—enjoyed complete religious liberty.
Nu‘mán's place was filled by his son Mundhir, an able and energetic prince. The power of the Lakhmites at this time may be inferred from the fact that on the death Mundhir I. of Yazdigird I Mundhir forcibly intervened in the dispute as to the Persian succession and procured the election of Bahrám Gór, whose claims had previously been rejected by the priesthood.87 In the war which broke out shortly afterwards between Persia and Rome, Mundhir proved himself a loyal vassal, but was defeated by the Romans with great loss (421 a.d.). Passing over several obscure reigns, we arrive at the beginning of the sixth century, when another Mundhir, the third and most illustrious of his Mundhir III, b. Má’ al-samá. name, ascended the throne. This is he whom the Arabs called Mundhir b. Má’ al-samá.88 He had a long and brilliant reign, which, however, was temporarily clouded by an event that cannot be understood without some reference to the general history of the period. About 480 a.d. the powerful tribe of Kinda, whose princes appear to have held much the same position under the Tubba‘s of Yemen as the Lakhmites under the Persian monarchs, had extended their sway over the greater part of Central and Northern Arabia. The moving spirit in this conquest was Ḥujr, Rise of Kinda. surnamed Akilu ’l-Murár, an ancestor of the poet Imru’u ’l-Qays. On his death the Kindite confederacy was broken up, but towards the year 500 it was re-established for a brief space by his grandson, Ḥárith b. ‘Amr, and became a formidable rival to the kingdoms of Ghassán and Ḥíra. Meanwhile, in Persia, the communistic doctrines of Mazdak had obtained wide popularity among the lower Mazdak. classes, and were finally adopted by King Kawádh himself.89 Now, it is certain that at some date between 505 and 529 Ḥárith b. ‘Amr, the Kindite, invaded ‘Iráq, and drove Mundhir out of his kingdom; and it seems not impossible that, as many historians assert, the latter's downfall was due to his anti-Mazdakite opinions, which Mundhir expelled from Ḥíra by Ḥárith of Kinda. would naturally excite the displeasure of his suzerain. At any rate, whatever the causes may have been, Mundhir was temporarily supplanted by Ḥárith, and although he was restored after a short interval, before the accession of Anúshirwán, who, as Crown Prince, carried out a wholesale massacre of the followers of Mazdak (528 a.d.), the humiliation which he had suffered and cruelly avenged was not soon forgotten;90 the life and poems of Imru’u ’l-Qays bear witness to the hereditary hatred subsisting between Lakhm and Kinda. Mundhir's operations against the Romans were conducted with extraordinary vigour; he devastated Syria as far as Antioch, and Justinian saw himself obliged to entrust the defence of these provinces to the Ghassánid Ḥárith b. Jabala (Ḥárith al-A‘raj), in whom Mundhir at last found more than his match. From this time onward the kings of Ḥíra and Ghassán are continually raiding and plundering each other's territory. In one of his expeditions Mundhir captured a son of Ḥárith, and "immediately sacrificed him to Aphrodite"— i.e., to the Arabian goddess al-‘Uzzá;91—but on taking the field again in 554 he was surprised and slain by stratagem in a battle which Death of Mundhir III. is known proverbially as 'The Day of Ḥalíma.'92 On the whole, the Lakhmites were a heathen and barbarous race, and these epithets are richly deserved by Mundhir III. It is related in the Agháníthat he had two boon-companions, Khálid b. al-Muḍallil and ‘Amr b. Mas‘úd, with whom he used to carouse; and once, being irritated by words spoken in wine, he gave orders that they should be buried alive. Next morning he did not recollect what had passed and inquired as usual for his friends. On learning the truth he was filled with remorse. He caused two obelisks to be erected over their graves, and two days in every year he would come and sit beside Mundhir's "Good Day and Evil Day." these obelisks, which were called al-Ghariyyán— i.e., the Blood-smeared. One day was the Day of Good ( yawmu na‘im in), and whoever first encountered him on that day received a hundred black camels. The other day was the Day of Evil ( yawmu bu’s in), on which he would present the first-comer with the head of a black polecat ( ẓaribán), then sacrifice him and smear the obelisks with his blood.93 The poet ‘Abíd b. al-Abraṣ is said to have fallen a victim to this horrible rite. It continued until the doom fell upon a certain Ḥanẓala of Ṭayyi’, who was granted a year's grace in order to regulate his affairs, on condition that he should find a surety. He appealed to one of Mundhir's suite, Sharík b. ‘Amr, who straightway rose and said to the king, "My hand Ḥanẓala and Sharík. for his and my blood for his if he fail to return at the time appointed." When the day came Ḥanẓala did not appear, and Mundhir was about to sacrifice Sharík, whose mourning-woman had already begun to chant the dirge. Suddenly a rider was seen approaching, wrapped in a shroud and perfumed for burial. A mourning-woman accompanied him. It was Ḥanẓala. Mundhir marvelled at their loyalty, dismissed them with marks of honour, and abolished the custom which he had instituted.94