The elite factions of Medina disapproved of the hereditary succession of Yazid (unprecedented in Islamic history until that point), resented the caliph's impious lifestyle, and chafed under Umayyad economic acts and policies.

Despite an initial advantage, the Medinans were routed due to the defection of one of their factions, the Banu Haritha, which enabled Umayyad horse riders led by Marwan ibn al-Hakam to attack them from the rear.

In contrast to Ibn al-Zubayr's call for a shura to decide the caliphate and his success in resisting the Umayyads, the rebels in Medina lacked a political program and military experience.

The traditional Islamic sources list the Battle of al-Harra and its aftermath as one of the Umayyads' 'major crimes' and malign Ibn Uqba for his role in the plunder of Medina.

[1] The location of the battle was the lava field of Harrat Waqim, which straddles the eastern outskirts of Medina in the Hejaz (western Arabia).

[4] It formed part of the vast geological system of ḥarras (basaltic deserts) which spanned the region east of the Hauran in Syria southward to Medina's environs.

The capital was moved to Kufa in Iraq by the fourth caliph, Muhammad's cousin and son-in-law Ali (r. 656–661), during the First Muslim Civil War.

He was slain alongside his band of about seventy followers at the Battle of Karbala by the forces of the Umayyad governor Ubayd Allah ibn Ziyad; Yazid is alleged to have put the head of Husayn on display in Damascus.

mawla; non-Arab, Muslim freedmen or clients) of the Umayyad clan, to assault Ibn al-Zubayr, but many of the recruited Medinans were reticent to participate and paid others to fight in their place.

[8] Reports of impious behavior by Yazid, including entertainment by singing girls and a pet monkey, contributed to prevailing attitudes in Medina of his unsuitability as caliph.

According to reports cited by the 9th-century historian Ibn Qutayba, the people of Medina alleged that Mu'awiya purchased the lands at a hundredth of their value during hunger and desperation.

[18] To meet the workforce needs for cultivation and maintenance, Mu'awiya employed numerous mawali, consisting of war captives from the conquered provinces, including many skilled laborers.

[3] According to the historian al-Mada'ini (d. 843), the inaugurating act of rebellion by the Medinans occurred during a gathering in the mosque where the attendees each tossed an article of clothing, such as a turban or a shoe, an Arab custom symbolizing a severing of ties, to renounce their allegiance to Yazid.

[27] In these accounts, the Medinans expelled and pelted the Umayyads with stones in response to Uthman ibn Muhammad's rebukes to their leaders for barring the caliph's men from the estates.

[29] Upon hearing of the Syrian advance, the Medinans reinforced the siege against the Umayyads of Medina before allowing them to leave after they gave oaths not to assist the incoming army.

[30] Ibn Uqba's inquiries about Medina's defenses were rebuffed by most of the Umayyads,[30] some of whom continued on their way north,[26] but Marwan's son Abd al-Malik cooperated and offered valuable intelligence.

[31] Squadrons of Medinan mawali, fighting under the command of the mawla Yazid ibn Hurmuz, defended a large section of the ditch, and held off an assault by the Syrians, refusing demands to surrender.

[33] In Kister's observation, the rebellion in Medina lacked a political program, in contrast to the revolt of Ibn al-Zubayr, who called for a shura (consultation) to decide the caliphate.

In organizing the defense of their city, they adopted Muhammad's tactics at the Battle of the Trench, where he repulsed a siege against Medina by digging ditches to prevent the entry of enemy horsemen.

The survivors among Medina's leaders lamented the quick defeat of their pious men at the Harra, contrasting it to the successful six-month resistance against the Syrian army by Ibn al-Zubayr and his smaller coterie of supporters in Mecca.

[39] In Wellhausen's assessment, the suppression of the Medinan revolt was not the cause of the significant decline of the city's political status; this had already been precipitated by the assassination of Caliph Uthman in 656, the aftermath of which marked Medina's end as the capital of the nascent Muslim state.

[11] Vaglieri counters Wellhausen's doubts about the extent of the army's pillage, asserting that the "[traditional Muslim] sources are unanimous on this point".