Thank you for your article. You make many excellent points but I think your portrayal of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq is a bit too rosy.
Personally, I think it is likely that al-Baghdadi chose the name Abu Bakr because of the first caliph's role in carrying out of the riḍḍa (apostasy) wars. Al-Baghdadi views himself as another "caliph" in Iraq and Syria who is wiping out the apostates and infidels.
We shouldn't gloss over the violence which took place during his short reign (632-34), as evidenced by the immense bloodshed at the battle of Yamama at Aqraba.
Also, the election of Abu Bakr is certainly not portrayed as a civil and fair exchange of power in all of our early sources. For an alternative interpretation of Abu Bakr's election and character (more in line with Alid sympathies), I'd suggest that interested readers check out Madelung's "The Succession to the Prophet".
Dear Professor Afsaruddin,
Thank you for your article. You make many excellent points but I think your portrayal of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq is a bit too rosy.
Personally, I think it is likely that al-Baghdadi chose the name Abu Bakr because of the first caliph's role in carrying out of the riḍḍa (apostasy) wars. Al-Baghdadi views himself as another "caliph" in Iraq and Syria who is wiping out the apostates and infidels.
We shouldn't gloss over the violence which took place during his short reign (632-34), as evidenced by the immense bloodshed at the battle of Yamama at Aqraba.
Also, the election of Abu Bakr is certainly not portrayed as a civil and fair exchange of power in all of our early sources. For an alternative interpretation of Abu Bakr's election and character (more in line with Alid sympathies), I'd suggest that interested readers check out Madelung's "The Succession to the Prophet".