156 THE PROGRESS THROUGH EGYPT 11.2.11.

merely according to their various leaders and not tribe by tribe. There is no doubt, however, that the leaders would naturally be

followed by more of their own respective tribes than others, for

instance, 'Amr and Zubayr by Kuraysh, and we also know that when 'Amr laid out a town he apportioned separate streets and

quarters to separate tribes^. A very remarkable lack of information

exists as to the names of the tribes that conquered Egypt, though

there is an enormous mass of literature dealing with this era, and the

explanation lies partly in the heterogeneous nature of the force^.

Two tribes which were certainly represented to a large degree were those of Lakhm and Gudham.

Considerable toleration was at first displayed towards the Copts,

to whom 'Amr guaranteed, in return for their paying the taxation imposed, "their religion, their goods, their churches and crosses,

their lands and waters"; and no doubt it was partly in consequence

of this policy, and not merely on account of the weakness of the Roman garrisons, that Egypt was so rapidly subdued^.

Before the end of 641 the whole country from the Red Sea to Barka and from the Mediterranean to Aswan had become a province

of the Muslim KhaHfate*.

Ill In this same year^ or the next 20,000 men were sent under the command of 'Abdulla ibn Sa'ad ibn Abu Sarh^ to invade Christian

Nubia. This constitutes the first Muhammadan invasion into the Sudan '^. Details of it are lacking, but the result was apparently not

^ See Yakut, ap. Butler, p. 339, and the remarks concerning the foundation of Fostat on p. 137 above.

^ Butler states (p. 198): "Most of 'Amr's following belonged to the tribe of 'Akk, although Al Kindi says that one-third were of the tribe of GhSfik." This does not help us much. In the first place, though this is not certain, there were,

it seems, two quite separate 'Akks. One was a son of 'Adnan (^^J*>t), and as such would be an ancestor of half the whole Isma'llitic stock; the other was son of 'Odthdn (^jl.Jj^, and hence the confusion), i.e. a Kahtanite. In the second place, Ghafik was grandson of 'Akk the son of 'Adnan, i.e. the Beni Ghafik were a section of Beni 'Akk. (See Wustenfeld, i, 55 ; 11, Table A, and Kay, p. 3.) 'Amr himself apparently thought little of them, as he summed up their achievements in the words '"The Ghafik [Bouriant reads

' 'Afeq'] are smitten and smite not" (Makrfzi, Khetdt,

II, 469). The sort of confusion mentioned is very rife and prevents our making

full use of even the scanty mentions of definite tribes which are extant. To make things worse we know that the Arabs very commonly took advantage of coincidences of nomenclature among their ancestors to claim identity with tribes with whom they had no real connection at all (so el Hamddni, q.v. in Kay, p. 214).

' Lane-Poole, Hist. pp. 5, 6, quoting el Tabari (i, 2588).

* Lane-Poole, p. 14.

^ Lane-Poole, p. 15; Makrfzi, Khetdt, 11, 581.

' A Kurayshite; see Wustenfeld, O.

' The Arabs are said, however, to have come into contact with the Nubians and Bega already at Bahnasa (Oxyrhinchus)—(see Budge, 11, 184, and Burckhardt,

p. 528)—but the story is of doubtful worth.