Ahmed ibn Hanbal and Small Government
We've all heard how Ahmed ibn Hanbal saved Islam in a sectarian sense but I was thinking about how Caliph Al Mamun was very clearly attempting to reach the culmination of the political developmemt that preceded Islam
The Roman Empire had been attempting very fervently to merge the institures of Empire with Church by merging the Greek Orthodox church into itself and harshly crushing minor differences as political dissent whereas in parallel the Sassanians had developed ideas of Farr i.e. the Monarchy being divine favour of Ahura Mazda (God).
The latter finds its earliest trace in Darius attributing his successes to Ahura Mazda but much earlier than this it finds root in god men led cities being taken over by military strong men who institute priesthood as a subordinate institute
The Roman impulse finds root in early roman caesar cults which had collapsed in the face of christianity
Both of these ideas developed alongside a 700 year war between Persia and Rome. This war led to the development of very early forms of the idea of holy war on the roman side.
Maybe Ibn Hisham was not aware of this but by chosing to begin his redaction of the Sirah with the collapse of Jewish Himyarite Yemen in the face of a Roman sponsored invasion by Aksum (Abyssinia), his attempt at bolstering his own yemeni origins ironically preserved what I believe one of the earliest impulses of crusade when the jewish oppression of christians were responded to with the sword by a unified christian effort.
Shortly after in 623 Heraclius presents his massive campaign against the persians as a holy war aimed at regaining the Holy Cities of Antioch, Alexandria and Jerusalem. Most importantly, the true cross.
With the Umayyad state (modeled on roman ideology) the state was viewed as a jihad state perpetually expanding the borders of God's Kingdom, however this impulse neglected the church and the throne which led to the Abbasid Revolution
Al Mamun saw all three and attempted to sieze the future. He named a descendant of the Prophet PBUH and Ali r.a. as his heir and made him his own son in law, he patronised the mutazalites which would give him absolute interpretive and legislative authority over the sharia and he pursued an aggressive policy of expansion.
He saw the Caliph not as a caretaker but as an absolute emperor who ruled both church and state. A warrior god king. The Caliph as a superior successor to Shahanshah AND Caesar.
One man refused to comply.
But how did this save (political) Islam? Wouldn't it seem to have crippled the establishment of a robust absolute empire?
The Buyids (or Seljuks or Mongols)
Within a few decades of Mamun, hordes of shiite turks invaded the caliphate and carved it up among themselves. Most importantly the buyid shahs of Iraq patronised the early scholars of twelver shiism and forced the SUNNI Caliph to show allegiance to the shia cause and participate in muharram mournings.
Only the seljuk invasion ended this humiliation. However if Mamun suceeded. And an absolute Caliph clung on to Empire and God and Prophet. The Buyids might very well have been our end. The reason why the invasion isn't even remembered in our cultural memory is because the Abbasids allowed their regional states to slowly gain independence and foster independent local ideas of statehood.
We look back to that era and see Mahmud Ghaznavid charging into Somnath, cutting down hindus and idols - Indian Islamic Statehood was Ghazwa e Hind
Turkey looks back and sees a migration into Iran and Anatolia where they convert to Islam and cross swords with Rome
Egypt and Syria looks back and sees the Fatimid Caliphate and Saladin
All because one man decided to protect God's rights from an Emperor.