Yarmuk 636 M: Perang Besar Muslim vs "Romawi"

Osprey Campaign #31

by David Nicolle

Sepeninggal Nabi Muhammad, umat Islam mulai ber­hadapan dengan negara-negara adidaya Timur Tengah yakni Persia dan Romawi Timur atau Byzantium. Sesudah mengukuhkan kekuatan di seluruh Arabia, Khalifah Umar bin Khatthab menggerakkan laskar Muslim Arab ke wilayah Suriah yang berisi kota-kota penting seperti Damaskus dan Yerusalem. Para panglima Muslim seperti Khalid bin Walid, Abu Ubaidah, Amr bin al-Ash, dan Dhirar bin al-Azwar memimpin balatentara Muslim menantang pasukan Kaisar Heraklius. Laskar Muslim merebut satu demi satu kota hingga akhirnya berhadapan dengan Byzantium dalam pertempuran besar di medan laga Yarmuk. Kemenangan gemilang Muslim di Yarmuk membuat agama Islam mampu keluar dari Jazirah Arab dan terus menyebar ke seluruh dunia.

Buku ini menyajikan pertempuran Yarmuk dan berbagai pertempuran lain antara Byzantium dan Muslim dalam penaklukan Suriah. Disajikan pula mengenai tokoh-tokoh yang terlibat dari kedua pihak, persenjataan dan strategi, serta rincian aksi dalam pertempuran.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Military History, Islam, Middle East, Medieval

88 pages, Paperback

First published May 26, 1994

About the author

David C. Nicolle is a British historian specialising in the military history of the Middle Ages, with a particular interest in the Middle East.

Reviews

[Suzannah Rowntree · Rating 3 out of 5]

Helpful, if perhaps one-sided, history of the events leading up to the epic six-day pitched battle at Yarmouk during the Muslim invasion of Syria in 636. The book forms a decent introduction to the battle but left me with a ton of new questions. For instance, it may be beyond the scope of the book, but Nicholle says that Khalid's flanking movement may have occurred either on the fourth or the sixth day, with the result of bottling the Byzantine army up on a high bluff between the Ruqqad, Yarmouk, and 'Allan river gorges. He then retells the battle assuming that this occurred on the fourth day, without any explanation for why he thinks this is the more likely explanation, nor discussion of the relevant arguments for each respective position. It's a question with huge ramifications for any reconstruction of the battle, but this and other significant debates (like why he chooses to prioritise the Muslim sources above the Byzantine sources - granted, I've discovered for myself how much more scholarship has been done from the Byzantine point of view by English-speaking authors than, say, the Mamluk or the Ottoman point of view, but let's face it, BOTH sides' account of Yarmouk is pretty mythologised and distanced from actual events) get skipped over without any substantive argument.

[Anatolikon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Like much of Nicolle's work, this book has both good and bad points. Most of the research is decent, although for a book on Yarmuk, the narrative is rather weak. The paucity of the sources clearly isn't a problem, as Dr. Haldon has a much better description in his "Byzantine Wars" book. While Nicolle's pro-Islamic bias is well-known amongst Osprey readers, this book could be a showcase for it. The Byzantines aren't given nearly as much page space as the Muslims, and the Byzantine sources are given more criticism than the Arab sources.

I have a few factual quibbles with this book as well. I don't buy Nicolle's assertion that the Byzantine line was 13km long. This goes against everything that we know of Late Antique warfare, and is in violation of the standard Byzantine emphasis on Late Roman and Hellenistic warfare. The respect sizes of the army are also discussed frequently, but not even a rough estimate is given. Nicolle asserts that the Byzantines outnumbered the Arabs 4:1, but this would suggest a Byzantine field army of around 75,000, which is quite unbelievable, considering that from 610-622 Herakleios barely had enough troops to leave Thrace. It is also in violation of the much more reasonable military estimates of John Haldon and Warren Treadgold. Whether Nicolle is not being critical enough with the sources (Theophanes suggests 80,000, which is quite impossible) or he is over-inflating the accomplishment of the Arabs, it is still bad history.

The three stars comes from the inconsistency in this book. Throughout much of the book he talks about Herakleios as if he was present at Yarmuk, but only in the last 10 pages or so does he finally say that Herakleios wasn't present.

The battle maps are decent, and the information is mediocre. Haldon's "Byzantine Wars" has a better battle narrative and scholarly analysis. Many of the pictures just aren't that good, being black and white and grainy. This isn't a bad book, but it is far from the defining work on Yarmuk.

[عبد الله القصير · Rating 4 out of 5]

كتاب صغير لكن يحتوي على تفاصيل عسكرية دقيقة عن معركة اليرموك والأحداث المرافقة لها.

[Reiza · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pertempuran Yarmuk adalah salah satu dari sekian banyak pertempuran yang menentukan dalam sejarah dunia.

Sekiranya Pasukan Muslim dikalahkan oleh Bizantium di Pertempuran Yarmuk, mungkin kekuasaan Kekhalifahan Islam tidak akan dengan cepat menyebar ke Afrika Utara. Atau bahkan mungkin tidak akan dikuasai sama sekali. Syam mungkin akan tetap menjadi salah satu provinsi Bizantium, dan sekiranya itu terjadi, mungkin peta dunia Islam akan berubah.

Saat itu tahun 636 Masehi. Kekhalifahan Islam dibawah pimpinan Umar bin Khattab berupaya untuk mengamankan posisi Kekhalifahan di utara Arabia yang berbatasan dengan provinsi Syam Bizantium. Damaskus, salah satu kota penting di Syam berhasil dikuasai dua tahun silam, tetapi peta kekuasaan di Syam masih dibawah kendali Bizantium.

Kaisar Bizantium, Heraklius, sangat berupaya untuk mengambil alih kembali provinsi pentingnya ini secara total. dikatakan bahwa Kaisar Heraklius bahkan sampai mengadakan aliansi dengan Kekaisaran Persia Sassanid yang sebenarnya merupakan musuh bebuyutannya (Akram, 2004). Bizantium dan Persia sudah cukup lama saling berperang satu sama lain, dan peperangan tersebut sangat menguras sumber daya dan moral mereka. Sehingga ketika kekuatan Muslim datang, pasukan Bizantium di Syam dan Persia di Irak pun dengan cepat dapat dikalahkan.

Kali ini, Kaisar Heraklius berupaya untuk menyergap kekuatan pasukan Muslim dari dua arah. Persia akan menyerang balik Irak yang sudah dikuasai oleh pasukan Muslim, sementara Bizantium akan mendorong pasukan Muslim untuk keluar dari Syam.

Ofensif Bizantium di Syam dimulai pada Mei 636 M. Pasukan Muslim yang kalah jumlah memutuskan untuk mundur secara teratur.

Bagi pasukan Bizantium, kesempatan untuk menghancurkan pasukan Muslim pun datang di dekat Sungai Yarmuk. Tempat dimana pasukan Muslim melakukan reorganisasi.

Pasukan Muslim, yang kalah jumlah hingga hampir 5 kali lipat, mengandalkan kemampuan taktis, strategi, dan tentu semangat dalam berjuang demi agama.

Sementara pasukan Bizantium menang secara jumlah dan unggul dalam segi perlengkapan perang, pasukannya tidak begitu kuat secara moril. Bizantium yang sudah kekurangan kas berusaha sekuat tenaga untuk menjaga pasukannya agar tetap kuat dan disiplin. Namun ternyata, salah perhitungan dan taktik membawa pasukan Bizantium hancur di tanah Yarmuk di Syam.

Dan pasukan Persia? 3 bulan setelah pertempuran Yarmuk, pasukan Persia pun kalah pada pertempuran di Qadisiyah. Serangan yang direncanakan akan dilakukan secara bersamaan dengan ofensif Bizantium di Syam ternyata tidak jadi dilakukan karena permasalahan pemerintahan (Akram, 2004).

Dilengkapi dengan peta, foto-foto kondisi alam di sekitar medan pertempuran dan juga gambar dan ilustrasi mengenai kondisi peperangan dan juga perlengkapan perang membuat pembaca dapat membayangkan kondisi ketika peperangan sedang berlangsung dengan cukup baik. Hanya saja untuk foto-foto, kualitas yang ditampilkan tidak begitu baik.

Bagi para penggemar game-game strategi militer seperti Age of Empires dan seri Total War, nampaknya akan sangat cocok dengan buku ini (y)

Sumber tambahan dari buku: Akram, A.I (2004), The Sword of Allah: Khalid bin al-Waleed – His Life and Campaigns, third edition, (dari Wikipedia)

[Bruinrefugee · Rating 2 out of 5]

For one of the most momentous military engagements in history, I was hoping for a little something more. The Islamic conquest of Syria marks a huge transition point between Byzantine/traditional rule (and place names) and the new bosses in town.

What I found frustrating, in particular, is that it appears that the book uses Islamic names for most of the locations described, while the maps don't. I may be just betraying my ignorance but so be it. In addition, while the book did a pretty good job putting in place the historical setting, I thought it's descriptions of the actual battle and the aftermath were less sharp.

[Marcus · Rating 2 out of 5]

One of less well executed volumes in the series, partly due to very limited primary sources for the battle. The narrative is therefore filled with educated guesses and speculations (although it has to be said that Nicolle never 'spaces out' and stays withing the boundaries of reason and common sense at all times).

[Indah Threez Lestari · Rating 4 out of 5]

929 - 2012