Abbasid vs Umayyad Empire
After the death of Prophet Muhammad, Islamic world was guided by Caliphs, the last of whom was Ali (Muhammad’s son in law). Ali’s death split the Muslim world into two with Husain forming and leading one group under the premise that only blood descendents of Ali (he was Ali’s son), while the other group came to be known as Sunnis as they believed that any Muslim could become a leader of the Islamic world. The first leader of this group, Muawiyah, laid the foundation of the Umayyad Dynasty that was finally overthrown by Abbasid Dynasty.
• While Umayyad Dynasty ruled for nearly 100 years from 661 to 750 AD, Abbasid Dynasty, that overthrew Umayyad Dynasty, ruled for nearly 500 years (750 AD to 1258 AD). Abbasid Dynasty was overthrown by the Mongols in 1258 AD.
• Despite the similarity of faith (both Umayyad and Abbasid Dynasty shared Muslim faith), there were many differences in the two dynasties that were to lay the foundation of the future of Islam in the world. While the tenets of Islam took roots in the phase of Umayyad’s, all the expansion of Islam around the world took place in the times of Abbasids. For one, Umayyad’s has much greater interest in the Mediterranean coast while Abbasids focused on the plains of Iran and Iraq. This was the reason why Syria, Israel, Lebanon, and Egypt were important in the time of Umayyad Dynasty; the focus shifted to Iran and Iraq during Abbasid Dynasty. Thus, one big difference between the two dynasties lies in their orientation towards the sea and land. While the capital of the Islamic world under Umayyad Dynasty was Damascus, the capital of Syria, it shifted to Baghdad under Abbasid Dynasty.
• The role and power of women during Umayyad Dynasty was significant. They were treated with respect and not secluded like wives and concubines and slaves as was the case in Abbasid Dynasty. Women did not wear veils, and their advice was considered important in Umayyad Dynasty, while their position in the society degraded during Abbasid Dynasty.
• A major difference between the two dynasties lies in their attitude towards Muslims and non Muslims. Umayyad’s did not favor conversions, and as such the numbers of Muslims did not increase in their 100 year rule, Abbasids accepted non Muslims into their fold thereby leading to a large increase in the number of Muslims around the world.
• Umayyad’s focused upon military expansion and conquer of territories while Abbasids favored expansion of knowledge.
• Umayyad Muslims are referred to as Sunni Muslims while Abbasid Muslims are called the Shiites.
• Abbasid had been content with inherited empire while Umayyad’s were aggressive and espoused expansion militarily.
Abbasids were not Shiites, they were also Sunnis. They were supported by Shiites while overthrowing the Umayyads, but they widened the rift between Sunnis and Shiites later on.
hahahahah lolllz J sandes, does u belong from abasida dynasty….
ehehehhe they were not sunnis they are write and babe ur r wrong
buwahahha belongs to abbasids dynast
No, J Sandes is correct. Both the Umayyads and Abbasids were Sunnis, while the Shiites were minority groups among both of them.
Sorry for the necro post. Also, please excuse my ignorance if I am mistaken on this point. However, I always was under the impression that the Umayyads were Sunni, as well as the Abbasids, and that the Fatamids were Shia. Historically speaking, (again, to my knowledge) the Umayyads were the rulers of the second Caliphate, but were overthrown by the Abbasid’s (who, maybe not technically, but in basic terms sort of a “cousin family”, with both of them being two cadet dynasties originating from Abu Bakar. The Umayyads ruled first, then the Abbasids rose up, took most of Arabia, then pushed the Umayyads to the Iberian peninsula. At that point, while they were both Sayyids, the Abbasids claimed the Caliphate, in part because they were now the rulers of holy lands such as Mecca and Medina.
While all this was going on however, there were the decedents of Fatima, who were known as the Fatamids. I believe they were based in the Egypt, Sanai area, and while they lived under the Sunnis, eventually asserted their claim to the Caliphate. (this was called the Shia uprising possibly?)
This let to the official schism as there were now two Caliphs. (Similar to how the Orthodox church had a schism when the Orthodox Patricarch of Rome appointed Charlimagne “Emperor of the Romans”, creating the short lived first iteration of the Holy Roman Empire / Empire of Francia. While the center of Orthodoxy was in Constantinople, and each of the Patriarchs (popes) in Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Jerusalem, were all supposed to be equals. Meaning one of them could definitely not just “proclaim the Emperor of Rome”, especially when there was still a Roman Empire and Roman Emperor “Constantine the V”. )
Anyways, please correct me if I am wrong. I was just stating my understanding of the whole subject, but would love to know more. Also, if there are any statements up there that are wrong, I would want to know, that way I gain a better understanding of it.
Thanks for reading.
yes, Abbasids were also Sunni and Shia always remained in minority even today.
haha he got owned nice one XD
You’re wrong and J Sandes is correct. The Umayyads and Abbasid’s were both Sunnis. The Abbasids were supported by Shiites.
It is a shame that the after the (friendly) First ummayad governor, all others after him imposed a non-muslim tax (dhimmi-tax) on Berber-Muslims! Just because they needed the funds so much. They also were very anti-non-arabs and discriminating towards Berber Muslims. This was the beginning of the end of the Muslim empire on its highest peak. Clashing with the berbers was a big and wrong path to choose as they always supporterd the islam and brought it to Europe on the highest level ever. Not holding to the Sunnah of the PRophet meant the end. Seeing your berber brother as a fellow muslim and even meant the best cooperation and the highest gains for the muslim world. What if more different races/regions united how strong would we be today!
Its weird to learn such a hard chapter
The story of the surviving Ummayad, Abd al-Rahman I, and his eventual consolidation of power in Spain is gripping. His legacy in Spain, despite all odds, was nearly three-hundred years of enlightened rule over a prosperous, if factious land.