Lane-Poole — Mohammadan Treaties with C/irisiians. 255 



reward for his treachery from his Arab ally? On the contrary, 

 according to Mr. Butler, the only request made by Cyrus to 'Amr was 

 apparently refused. Certainly the ambitious patriarch took little by 

 his treachery, if indeed treachery it was. Looking at the transaction 

 in the cool light of history, it has more the aspect of wise submission to 

 the inevitable. 



Admitting, as we must, that Cyrus was recalled and reprimanded 

 for concluding the Treaty of Misr, is it necessary to hold that he was 

 the sole negotiator? Supposing that the catholicos who according to 

 Tabari came to 'Amr and treated for peace was Cyrus, we are told 

 that he went away to report the negotiations to el-Mukawkis. Now 

 if el-Mukawkis was the military prefect, or comes limitis Aegypti,'^' it 

 "was essential that he should be consulted by the civil prefect before 

 peace could be concluded. According to Mr. Butler, who follows the 

 indications of John of Nikiu, Theodorus the military prefect was at 

 Alexandria at the time of the Arab invasion ; was then brought to 

 Babylon by Cyrus ; and commanded at the battle of Heliopolis. IS'ow 

 this is exactly what is related of el-Mukawkis by Tabari. El- 

 Mukawkis was absent from Babylon when the catholicos was treating 

 with 'Amr. He appeared at HeKopolis, where the catholicos also 

 appeared after the battle. He was the commander who corresponded, 

 so far as we can see, with the military prefect. So far as the Arabic 

 evidence goes, except for his names, el-Mukawkis may have been 

 Theodorus. 



This only illustrates the extreme doubtfulness of any identification 

 of the mysterious Mukawkis. Until further evidence is obtained, 



* This is the later title of the military commander formerly styled dux- Aegi/pti. 

 See Milne, Egypt under Soman Rule, Note viii, 215, and cp. 181. 



