Alexander's lesson

Among the warnings by which Simocatta's avatar warns "Maurice", is a lesson from Alexander. The great king once coveted Libya and threatened India. Stephanos Efthymiadis thinks the intentional-irony here is to 'Amr bin al-'As in Egypt, and Sa'd bin Abî Waqqâs' rampage across Iran. He's wrong.

It is a commonplace in (saecular) Islamic studies that there existed no unified Qurân until 30/650 (at least), and that we should be taking about "Arabs" until then. And indeed: Simocatta has nothing on the Arabs' religion - yet. I do worry the later we set Simocatta, the more deafening his silence on protoIslam - the name "Mahmet", the desecration of crosses, the warcry "Allâh is Lord!". Also, the retreating Sasanians found a shah - Yazdegird III - over the 10s / 630s. Where he at?

Further to be noted is that Simocatta's lesson from Alexander is not, in fact, on how he ended the Achaemenids. It's about what happened next. Namely, that his generals carved up the empire. So... the last years of 'Uthman and the ensuing Shi'ite fitna? Err...

I propose that Simocatta's irony instead be pointing to the Neshané (an early target of Syriac dissidents). If Persia be conquered and occupied by "New Alexander", civil war is the result. The King is asked not to extend his writ beyond what his armies can hold whilst remaining loyal.

Although, in a slight irony directed here to Efthymiadis, in this case Hoyland seems at last right that here is the irony against Simocatta. Simocatta did not know that the Diadochi drama was going to play out again ... among the Arabs. He did not know that he was warning the wrong amir.