Antalas is one of the leaders of the Amazigh resistance:
(In English: Antalas) He is considered one of the most important leaders of the Amazigh resistance, and one of the most ferocious and intense Amazigh leaders in the resistance in Numidia. He was one of the most important kings of the Emirate of the Phyraxians, which was located in the Tunisian Dhahr Mountains, and he was the son of the Moorish leader Guenefan. This Namudi leader appeared in the sixth century AD, and thus, he experienced the injustice and cruelty of the two invasions: the Vandals and the Byzantines. This is what made him fight the Vandals and the Byzantines for a long time, inflicting many defeats on them until he expanded his influence in many Amazigh regions in Libya, Tunisia, and Numidia. But his resistance did not begin until after the Vandals wreaked havoc in the land of Tamazgha.
After the Byzantines, under the leadership of Sergius, arrested the chiefs of his governors and killed them in his palace. Antalas was not subjected until the year 548 AD at the hands of the Byzantine commander Jean Troglita. The kingdom that was ruled by Antalas is located in the heart of the Bezakena state, in the Tunisian Dhahra Mountains, in the triangle that combines Tala, Thelepte (the ancient city), and Theveste (Tbessa). Within this triangle, the first nucleus of the Kingdom of the Frexes arose, led by Antalas, who, when he reached the age of seventeen, was able to organize multiple revolts during the reign of his father, Gwennivan, the leader of the tribe at the time. Although the Vandals organized a military campaign directed against him, he was able to defeat it and achieve its independence from Vandal rule between 532-523 AD.
When the Byzantines invaded, he looked for a way to preserve the independence of his tribe and his local sovereignty, so he quickly offered his loyalty to Justinian in exchange for recognition of his authority over his tribe. Therefore, he became an ally of the empire for ten years, during which Byzantium granted him an annual salary in exchange for his loyalty. But he quickly changed from the position of a loyal ally of Byzantium to an enemy rebelling against its authority.
This may be demonstrated by presenting some of the revolutions that the region witnessed, which could be taken as a form of Amazigh resistance to the Byzantine occupation.” Antalas was unable to achieve his victories and maintain the independence of his kingdom except by consulting the elders of the Kingdom of the Phrixes, unifying the Namudic tribes, and forming a strong, trained army. On hit and run, direct and indirect confrontation, seeking help from the toiling, complaining and oppressed social classes, implementing Masinissa’s policy of besieging the enemies and encircling them in their strongholds and fortresses, and allying with the leaders of the other Amazigh tribes in strengthening the Amazigh ranks in confronting the encroaching Byzantine enemy such as Irna, Judas, and Karazan.
The development of the Antalas resistance
A- Collapse:
It is known that the Byzantines did not settle in North Africa until after eliminating the brutal Vandal forces that came from the far reaches of the Germans to shed blood in Numidia, spread corruption in this region, plunder all of the country’s wealth, and destroy Amazigh architecture. The Vandals were barbarians who only knew the language of slaughter, liquidating opponents, killing the elderly, women and children, burning planted crops, and destroying and razing cities. Their hearts knew no mercy, and they did not believe in the foundations of civilization or the necessity of contributing to building human civilization.
Because in reality they were nomads, shepherds, and cruel-hearted gypsies, savage in their actions, resembling in medieval history the savage Tatar-Mongol forces that were led by Genghis Khan and Hulagu in order to shed human blood, obtain spoils, capture women, kill everything else, burn everything that the earth grows, and destroy all construction and human impact. When the Byzantines entered North Africa, they found the Vandals still fighting the Amazigh resistance, especially their gallant leader Antalas, whose resistance coincided with the appearance of the camel, which aroused fear in the hearts of the hostile Vandals. In this regard, the Moroccan researcher Muhammad Boukbut says: Some historians focused on a factor that they attached exaggerated importance to, and through which they tried to explain the collapse of Vandal rule, represented by the emergence of the camel and the camel tribes. According to their analysis, this animal upset the balance of military power between the Vandals - who were famous for brutality and severity in their wars - and the Amazighs because of the “panic” that the sight of the camel aroused among the ranks of the Vandal knights.
Once again, we stand on the attempts of European historians and those who followed their example to deprive the Amazighs of any positive historical action, by attributing their victories and gains to factors beyond their ability, understanding, and firm determination to expel the occupying invaders, so that the previous proposal ignores historical facts that confirm a truth in which there are princes, which is the continuation of resistance and opposition. On the part of the Amazighs against the foreigners who are usurping their land, this opposition, the nature of which varied according to the balance of power between them and their opponents.
If during the power of the Roman Empire it was of a negative nature...it became a positive organized opposition during the rule of the Vandals, because multiple emirates arose in the areas liberated from the foreign yoke and worked to achieve the historical goal of the Amazighs who were expelled to the margins and mountain strongholds, which was to return to the north and the rich areas. .
However, as this historical process approaches the coronation, it collides with a powerful wave that aborts it, represented by the will of another foreign power whose intervention had a disruptive effect.” The long Antalas revolution against the Vandals and the ignition of religious, social, military and cultural revolutions will help accelerate the collapse of the Vandals and pave the way for the Byzantines to enter North Africa for stability. It lasts for a century.
B- The entry of the Byzantines into Numidia:
The Byzantine Empire did not begin sending its military forces to North Africa to confront the Vandals until it felt the weakness of the German enemy militarily and on the ground in the face of the fierce Amazigh resistance that exhausted the Vandals’ power, and dealt them painful blows in various battles on Numidian, Tunisian and Libyan soil in particular.
Thus, the Byzantine forces sailed towards North Africa to confront the Vandals in the year 534 AD, and Belizir did not find any difficulty in crushing them and entering their capital, Carthage, thus annexing Africa to the fold of the Byzantine Empire for a century (434-534 AD).
The truth is that this rapid victory achieved by the Byzantines had appropriate conditions related to the status of the Vandal Kingdom, the most important of which were the social-religious revolutions sparked by the Amazighs in the region under Vandal influence, with their negative political and military repercussions. The Catholic Amazigh also sent messengers to Byzantium asking their emperor to Abstracting a military campaign while giving guarantees of its victory over the Vandals, which explains why the Byzantines did not collide with popular Amazigh resistance. Rather, we find that after the landing of the Byzantine forces, the Vandal King Jalmar was at the head of the majority of his forces in a campaign to suppress a revolution on the southern coast of Africa, led by a Amazigh prince called Antalas.”
The Byzantine government adopted a policy of fortification and building strongholds similar to the Roman Limes Line to maintain their presence in North Africa after they occupied Tunisia and part of Eastern Numidia (Algeria). In the west, it occupied the ports of Tipaza, Cherchell, Ceuta and Tinji. The government began to exploit Tamazgha's wealth and exhaust its resources, similar to the policy followed by the Romans in previous eras.
It encouraged landlords, clergy, and usurers to own lands, exploit the Berbers, impose outrageous taxes, and expand into many areas of North Africa in order to serve the strategic interests of the Byzantine Empire.
However, this expansionist policy will be met with fierce Amazigh resistance, especially in Numidia, Tunisia, and Libya. It was led by Antilas, Judas, and Kotzinas after they took advantage of the weakness of the Byzantines, their struggle over power, and their scramble over spoils and political and financial influence: “After the death of Justinian (Justinianus) in the year 565 AD, it was tangible that the situation had changed. Deep in Byzantine Africa, as major landlords, employees, and army officers colluded to dominate the reins of power, and greedy plunder and exploitation spread, and the large number of fortifications around cities in that era is nothing but evidence of the disappearance of authority and the widening of the gap between the Byzantine rulers and the ruled Amazighs. , so that they announced the revolution and the widening of the gap between the Byzantine rulers in their cities, and the Amazigh princes also followed the long-standing policy of Massinissa (Masinissa), represented by constant pressure and harassment. Among the most famous of these Amazigh leaders who confronted the Byzantine occupation was Judas, Prince of the Auras, whose field of movement was Numidia, and Cortisas, who fought the Byzantines in Africa, and other Amazigh princes who, according to historians, led eight or nine emirates.
On the other hand, the Byzantines, through their policy of fortification and building strongholds, ensured that their positions on the African Mediterranean coast remained marginal for centuries, without being able to penetrate into the interior lands as they did in Egypt, the Levant, Asia Minor, and Italy. . They guaranteed her survival, without guaranteeing security; They usually did not move from site to site except by sea.
When the attention of the Romans extended to some lands in Africa and eastern Numidia, the Amazigh resistance became very active, led by leaders from the “Auras” tribes and the Libyan “Lawata” tribes, such as Yabdas, Antalas, and Karazan.
The Byzantines were defeated several times, even though they resorted to treachery on inappropriate occasions, and a number of their senior military commanders were killed. They were repeatedly forced to pay ransoms and present precious gifts.
In addition to the skirmishes that constantly occur between the two parties, fierce battles took place between them in the years 537 AD, 543 AD, 550 AD, and 563 AD. In those battles, skilled Berber military commanders such as “Garmul” emerged, who successively defeated and killed three generals.
Whenever the resistance fighters were defeated, they took refuge in the mountains or the desert. The captives were challenging the Roman soldiers and insulting the emperor while they were handcuffed. The Byzantine commanders realized that “the Amazighs could only be defeated by the Amazighs !” So they lured the “Uras” tribes into an alliance with them, led by Iapdas and Ifisdaias. Antalas was killed. In the year 597 AD, the Romans deceived the Amazighs, betrayed them in a terrible treachery, and defeated them. Then, the skirmishes continued until Islam came.”
Thus, the Byzantines tried to maintain their presence in North Africa, even if for a temporary period, in order to quickly exploit the region to secure the economy of the central empire by buying the consciences of the Amazigh commanders, ensuring their alliance, and spreading division between the people and betraying them in the end. However, they did not succeed in doing so due to the intensification of Amazigh resistance in all parts of Tamazgha in protest against the Byzantine presence in their land.
C- Antalas’ resistance to the Byzantine forces:
Antalas did not fight the Byzantine forces until after the leaders of Luata were killed, his brother was killed, and his annual salary was stopped. Therefore, Antalas categorically rejected any shameful alliance with the Byzantines who wanted to starve the Amazigh kingdoms in order to export the goods of the free Amazigh to Byzantium. In this context, Professor Magda Benharbit says: “Among these tribes we mention the Levathes tribe, who used to occupy some lands located on the borders of The city of Lebdah. The Byzantine ruler Sergius’s insult to some of their representatives, and his killing of large numbers of them, when they complained to him about the Byzantine army’s encroachment on their lands, led to them declaring war on Byzantium. It seems that the Byzantines’ victory over them in the first battle prompted them to call on all the Numudic tribes, whether settled inside or outside Tripolitania, to organize their ranks in preparation for war, and they all moved to Bezakina to contact Antalas, who in turn announced his fight against the Byzantines because of the killing of his brother at the hands of Solomon, and he stopped. His annual salary which Byzantium has been offering him since his alliance with Belisarius.”
Antalas not only resisted the Byzantines, but also faced the Vandal armies before them, especially on the southern coast of Africa. He was able to defeat the Vandals and disturb the peace of their leaders and commanders, who devoted a great deal of time to defeating Antalas' forces, but to no avail. The wars that Antalas fought against the Vandals qualified him to have great experience in managing wars, directing their direction, and preparing armies well to confront the invading Byzantine forces.
In the beginning, the Byzantines failed miserably in confronting the Amazigh power due to the large number of unrest and strife that broke out from time to time in the areas of Byzantine influence, which were behind the great Amazigh commanders such as: Antalas, Iudas, and Kotzinas. These conflicting wars between the Byzantines and the Amazighs caused exhaustion. The power of the invaders
The Antalas Revolution was a comprehensive social, religious, and proletarian revolution in which the people, peasants, slaves, serfs, daily wage earners, and oppressed residents of Tamazgha participated. They rose up against Byzantine exploitation and demonstrated against the policy of exclusion and marginalization, and the expulsion of the Amazighs from their lands and possessions. They found in Antalas’ support a solution to take revenge on the enemies and recover from the Byzantine presence that had affected them. They starved and left them barefoot and naked, without their lands, possessions, and goods.
This means that the economic factor was among the factors that ignited the military resistance led by Antalas, and this factor is greatly emphasized by Dr. Abdullah Al-Arawi as a direct cause of the explosion of Antalas’ liberation revolution: ““At the beginning of the sixth century, Antalas and his followers expelled the Byzantine landlords from the region of present-day western Tunisia. How can we not imagine that the operation took place amid the joy of the farming people! When the Byzantines fortified themselves in the cities and surrounded Mount Aures so that its inhabitants would not surprise them, when the rebellious amazighs advanced from Tripoli to the suburb of Carthage in the year 587 AD, and the rule at that time was in the hands of the commander of the imperial army, Gennadius, would these victories have been achieved if the revolutionaries had not received the help of serfs, day laborers, and small landowners who Freed from the burden of forced labour, taxes and rent? It is true that the inhabitants of open Morocco, known as Africans today They differed in religion, language, and customs from the Maoris, or free amazighs, but since the Catholic Church linked its fate to the imperial system, may we not assume that the Moroccans ultimately prevailed over common interests over cultural differences?
Accordingly, the Antalas Revolution did not take place against the Byzantines except for the sake of taking revenge on the oppressors who were shedding the blood of the amazighs without mercy or pity, and to take revenge on those treacherous Romans who killed the heads of the Luata tribe in accordance with Sergius’s orders to liquidate opponents and honorable resistors. Antalas fought several wars against many Byzantine commanders, and with his seasoned experience in combat, he was able to defeat them bitterly, but he would ultimately be defeated by the Byzantine forces that were led by Jean Troglita (John of Troglita). After he suffered from the machinations of traitors collaborating with the invading enemy forces.
Professor Ibrahim Harakat explains what we said in his book “Morocco Through History”: “The recklessness of Sergius, the ruler of Tripoli, led to the arrest of the leaders of the governors and their killing in his palace. The amazighs rose up against the Byzantines in support of their brothers, and the amazigh revolution was led by Antalas, who eliminated Salomon and his army in the Battle of Kasserine in the year 543 AD.
Sergius, who succeeded Solomon, did not succeed in defeating the barbarians who swept through African cities and Numidia and defeated his armies everywhere. Despite the appointment of the commander Aréobindus as his assistant, Antalas continued his sweep of cities and villages, while a conspiracy was hatched against Aréobindus by some of his military enemies who presented his head to Antalas, and finally he appointed the commander Jean Troglita to the Byzantine army in Africa. After many years of conflict, he was able to subjugate Antalas in the year 548 AD. Even if Justinian died in the year 565 AD, the amazighs resumed the struggle against the Byzantines, who established many fortifications in the centers they occupied, including Ceuta.
Thus, we conclude that Antalas made the Byzantines taste the bitterness of successive defeats, especially in the Battle of Kasserine, in which Salomon was killed. After that, the defeats of the Byzantine commanders continued in a terrible manner: “The Namudians took advantage of the increase in their numbers at this stage compared to the numbers of the Byzantines, in addition to the dispersion of the latter’s ranks due to the rebellion of some of its members, so they achieved victory, during this battle during which Solomon was killed, and which is called the Battle of Kilium.” In reference to the city of Cilium (Qasrin), while the rest of the Byzantine elements resorted to fleeing. . The Moors continued to gain victories over the Byzantines in Byzakina, as they were able to advance towards the proconsular state, which in turn witnessed some phases of the Byzantine-Numudi conflict during this phase, which both Procope and Coribus were interested in describing. Which prompted Piustianus to appoint a large group of military commanders to eliminate these revolts. The last of them was John of Trulit, who led the final stage of the Namudi-Byzantine war.”
Results of the Antalas Revolution:
The results of the amazigh resistance that Antalas ignited were that the Byzantines rushed to surround the amazighs and besiege them militarily in order to continuously drain Tamazgha’s resources. Because they knew that they would not remain clinging to these lands because of the fierce resistance that the amazigh resistance was igniting, so the Byzantines worked to harass all the powerful amazigh leaders and execute them with unparalleled cruelty: “The amazigh leaders recognized the nominal sovereignty of those who ruled Carthage and its environs, but they rejected any return to the status quo. Before the third century, to the era of expansion and direct exploitation, a situation that was not characterized by deception, hatred and recklessness, as Western historians say. As much as it is characterized by the obstinacy and long-suffering that characterized Massenes’s policy, he resorted to an unchanging plan, which was to besiege the Romans in their fortified protectorate, protecting the Carthaginians and those who came after them, and harassing them to the south and east. Incidents from the late Byzantine era indicate extreme desperation, as they constantly resorted to treachery, betrayal, revenge, and surprise, to the tricks that besieged people were usually forced to follow.
Every leader who fell into their hands was executed at once, and this is what happened to Antalas, Karkazan, and Jarmul. From the beginning, they felt that their rule was temporary, so they decided to benefit from it in the shortest possible time. They exploited people beyond what they could bear, and they kindled the fire of a revolution that would not be extinguished.”
The Antalas Revolt was not eliminated - as we have previously proven - except with the help of Emperor Justinian and John of Trolot, who appointed him in the year 546 AD as the new governor of Africa to assume civil and military administration, eliminate all the opposing amazigh revolutions, and stop the Namudi resistance with fire and iron, especially the widespread Antalas Revolt.
When he left: “John departed from Constantinople, heading towards the African coast. Upon his arrival in the state of Bysaquina, he received a Namudi envoy, advising him, in the name of King Antalas of the Phryxes, to retreat and not engage in a war, during which he would achieve victory for the Namudians, reminding him of the victories achieved by the Namudi ancestors over the Roman Emperor Maximian in the third century AD 305-286 AD. .
But Trolita did not show interest in the message of the Namudi king, and legions of the Byzantine army fought a battle against the Namudians that ended with the defeat of the Byzantines and their flight. When Trolita learned of the defeat of the Byzantine legions, he organized his ranks to confront Antalas, the leader of the Phryxes, and Irna, the leader of the Laotians. He was also interested in searching for allies for him in the Namudi circles, and he achieved his victory. That is when the Nimudians, followers of Kutzina, turned away from their anti-Byzantium stance and fought alongside it in the final battles.”
Source: websites