Ismâʿîl ibn-Aiyâsh's opinion. The following is what Ismâʿîl ibn-ʿAiyâsh wrote: "The people of Cyprus are humiliated and oppressed and they are subjugated, together with their wives, by the Greeks. It is therefore proper for us to defend and protect them. In the covenant of the people of Taflîs, Ḥabîb ibn-Maslamah wrote, 'In case something should arise to divert the attention of the Moslems from you and some enemy should subjugate you, that would not be a violation of your covenant, so long as ye keep loyal to the Moslems.' I, therefore, consider it best that they be left on their covenant and the security promised them, especially because when al-Walîd ibn-Yazîd expelled them to Syria, the Moslems considered the act outrageous, and the canonists disapproved of it; so much so that when Yazîd ibn-al-Walîd ibn-ʿAbd-al-Malik came to power, he restored them to Cyprus, which act was approved of by the Moslems and considered just."
Yaḥya ibn-Ḥamzah's opinion. The following was the statement issued by Yaḥya ibn-Ḥamzah: "The case of Cyprus is parallel to that of ʿArbassûs[1] in which it has a good example and a precedent to be followed. This is the case of ʿArbassûs: ʿUmair ibn-Saʿd once came to ʿUmar ibn-al-Khaṭṭâb saying, 'here lies between us and the Greeks a city called ʿArbassûs, whose people disclose to our enemy our secrets, but do not disclose to us our enemy's.' ʿUmar replied, 'When thou goest there, propose to give them for every ewe they possess two; for every cow, two; and for everything, two. If they consent, give that to them, expel them from the city and raze it to the ground. But if they refuse, then cast off their treaty to them and give them one year at the expiration of which thou mayest destroy the city.' ʿUmair went to the city; and its people refused the
- ↑ Yâḳût, vol. iii, p. 633.
