The following are given passages.
Passage 1:
Siege of Germanicia
The siege of Germanicia or Marash was led by Muslim forces of the Rashidun Caliphate during their campaigns in Anatolia in 638. The city surrendered without much bloodshed. This expedition is important because it marks the end of the military career of the legendary Arab Muslim general Khalid ibn Walid, who was dismissed from the army a few months after his return from the expedition.

Background
The Muslims won a decisive victory at the Battle of Yarmouk fought in August 636, thus the attempt made by the Byzantine emperor Heraclius to roll back Roman Syria failed. Further, unable to send more imperial troops to Syria, Heraclius made yet another attempt to re-conquer Syria by the aid of his Christian Arab allies of Jazira. The army of the Christian Arabs laid siege to Emesa in mid-summer of 638. The Muslims avoided a battle in the open and instead opted for a defensive strategy which led to the Battle at Emesa. All the regiments from outposts in northern Syria were called to Emesa. The Christian Arab Army was forced to withdraw their siege when, by the orders of Caliph Umar, the Muslim army from Iraq attacked Jazira. At this point, the rear elements of the besieging army were attacked by a Mobile guard led by Khalid ibn Walid, which in effect left the Byzantine forces devastated. Caliph Umar then launched a full-scale invasion of Jazira which was completed without much resistance in just a few months. As soon as the western part of Jazira was occupied, Abu Ubaidah ibn al-Jarrah wrote to Umar and asked for Ayadh bin Ghanam, who was operating in western Jazira, to be put under his command so that he could use him in raids across the northern border. Umar agreed to this request, and Ayadh moved to Emesa with a part of the Muslim forces sent from Iraq to Jazira.

The siege
In the Autumn of 638, Abu Ubaidah launched several columns, including two commanded by Khalid ibn Walid and Ayadh, to raid Byzantine territory in Anatolia as far west as Tarsus. Khalid's objective was Germanicia (Arabic: Marash), the city which lies on a plain at the foot of the Taurus Mountains. The region is best known for its production of salep, a flour made from dried orchid tubers. In late 638, the Muslim army laid the siege to the city which contained a Byzantine garrison. Expecting no help from their Emperor, the Byzantine garrison surrendered the city on the usual terms of Jizya offered by the Rashidun army, which included terms stating that the garrison and the populace be spared. As for material wealth, the Muslims could take all they wished.

Aftermath
It is narrated that Khalid returned to Qinnasrin laden with spoils of war that had seldom been seen before. Many Muslim historians commented that Just the spoils of Marash were sufficient to make the soldiers of this expedition rich for life. Khalid ibn Walid, who was at the peak of his military career was unfortunately dismissed by Caliph Umar because of his immense popularity which was a result of his very successful military career. It was a general view that Umar had dismissed Khalid because he was angry with Khalid, though it was clarified later by Caliph Umar that:

I have not dismissed Khalid because of my anger or because of any dishonesty on his part, but because people glorified him and were misled. I feared that people would rely on him, rather than God, for victory. I want them to know that it is God who does all things; and there should be no mischief in the land.
Khalid was urged by many of his companions to retaliate against Umar for this. Khalid did not, although he was powerful enough to launch a coup d'état against Umar and in effect seize the power of the Rashidun Empire. He instead chose to stay away from politics and died four years later in 642 in Emesa. Caliph Umar was said to have felt embarrassed for his conduct against Khalid and was reported to have said at his death that 'he would have appointed Khalid as his successor if he was still alive.'
Passage 2:
United Nations Security Council Resolution 862
United Nations Security Council resolution 862, adopted unanimously on 31 August 1993, after recalling resolutions 841 (1993), 861 (1993) and an agreement between the President of Haiti and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Haiti, the Council reaffirmed the international community's commitment to a solution in Haiti and discussed the establishment of a new police force in Haiti under a proposed United Nations Mission in Haiti (UNMIH).The immediate dispatch of an advance team of no more than 30 personnel to assess requirements and prepare for the possible dispatch of both the civilian police and military assistance components of UNMIH. The mandate of the advance team would last for one month with the prospect of incorporating it into the UNMIH peacekeeping mission when established.
The Council awaited a further report by the Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali concerning the proposed establishment of UNMIH and its financial costs, time-frame, projected conclusion and co-ordination with the work of the Organization of American States, further requesting him to enter into a Status of Forces Agreement with the Government of Haiti to facilitate an early dispatch of UNMIH when the Council decided. The mission was formally established in Resolution 867.

See also
History of Haiti
List of United Nations Security Council Resolutions 801 to 900 (1993–1994)
Passage 3:
United Nations General Assembly resolution ES-10/L.22
United Nations General Assembly resolution ES‑10/19 is an emergency session resolution declaring the status of Jerusalem as Israel's capital as "null and void". It was adopted by the 37th Plenary meeting of the tenth emergency special session of the United Nations General Assembly during the tenure of the seventy-second session of the United Nations General Assembly on 21 December 2017. The resolution was drafted by Yemen and Turkey. Though strongly contested by the United States, it passed by 128 votes to 9 against with 21 absentees and 35 abstentions.

Background
On 6 December 2017, US President Donald Trump said that he would recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital and begin the process of moving the embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. This was a departure from previous Security Council resolutions and prevailing international norms (where no state either recognises Jerusalem as a national capital nor has an embassy there).
After a United Nations Security Council resolution was vetoed by the U.S. three days earlier, Palestinian UN Ambassador Riyad Mansour said that the General Assembly would vote on a draft resolution calling for Trump's declaration to be withdrawn. He sought to invoke Resolution 377, known as the "Uniting for Peace" resolution, to circumvent a veto. The resolution states that the General Assembly can call an Emergency Special Session to consider a matter "with a view to making appropriate recommendations to members for collective measures" if the Security Council fails to act.

Campaign
On 20 December, US President Donald Trump threatened to cut US aid to countries voting against the US's side. The day before the vote, he said: "Let them vote against us...We don't care...this isn't like it used to be where they could vote against you and then you pay them hundreds of millions of dollars. We're not going to be taken advantage of any longer." Ambassador Nikki Haley warned her country would remember and "take names" of every country that voted in favour of the resolution. The governments of Turkey and Iran denounced the threats made by the US as "anti-democratic" and "blackmail". Haley had sent a letter to dozens of member states that warned Trump had asked her to "report back on those countries who voted against us." Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said "I call on the whole world: Don't you dare sell your democratic struggle and your will for petty dollars" and warned Trump that "he cannot buy Turkey's democratic will with his dollars." He added: "I hope and expect the US won't get the result it expects from there (UN) and the world will give a very good lesson to the United States".Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Israel rejects this vote before it passes and called the UN a "house of lies".Hanan Ashrawi, a member of the PLO’s Executive Committee, condemned Trump's warning to countries receiving aid from the US: "Trump should know that there are things that are not for sale or subject to blackmail, particularly issues of principle, legality and morality."Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland's spokesman, a country which was seeking re-negotiations of the NAFTA,  confirmed its intention to abstain from the vote and that the resolution should not have come to the General Assembly.

Content
The text of the resolution includes the following key statements:
The General Assembly,

Bearing in mind the specific status of the Holy City of Jerusalem and, in particular, the need for the protection and preservation of the unique spiritual, religious and cultural dimensions of the City, as foreseen in the relevant United Nations resolutions,
Stressing that Jerusalem is a final status issue to be resolved through negotiations in line with relevant United Nations resolutions,
Expressing in this regard its deep regret at recent decisions concerning the status of Jerusalem,
Affirms that any decisions and actions which purport to have altered, the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council, and in this regard, calls upon all States to refrain from the establishment of diplomatic missions in the Holy City of Jerusalem, pursuant to resolution 478 (1980) of the Security Council;
Demands that all States comply with Security Council resolutions regarding the Holy City of Jerusalem, and not to recognize any actions or measures contrary to those resolutions;
Reiterates its call for the reversal of the negative trends on the ground that are imperiling the two-State solution and for the intensification and acceleration of international and regional efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967.

Motion
The motion was proposed by Yemen and Turkey.

Debate
In introducing the resolution as chair of the Arab Group, Yemen's Ambassador said the US decision was a "blatant violation of the rights of the Palestinian people, as well as those of all Christians and Muslims." He emphasized that it constituted a "dangerous breach of the Charter of the United Nations and a serious threat to international peace and security, while also undermining the chances for a two‑State solution and fuelling the fires of violence and extremism."Turkey, who was the co-sponsor of the draft resolution, also spoke as current chair of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said that Trump's decision was an outrageous assault to all universal values. "The Palestinians have the right to their own state based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. This is the main parameter and only hope for a just and lasting peace in the region. However, the recent decision of a UN Member State to recognise Jerusalem, or Al-Quds, as the capital of Israel, violates international law, including all relevant UN resolutions."The General Assembly heard from Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki, who said that the meeting was "not because of any animosity to the United States of America" but instead the sessions was "called to make the voice of the vast majority of the international community — and that of people around the world — heard on the question of Jerusalem/Al‑Quds Al‑Sharif." He called the US decision to recognise Jerusalem as Israel's capital and to move its embassy there "an aggressive and dangerous move" which could inflame tensions and lead to a religious war that "has no boundaries." He added that though the decision would have no impact on the city's status, it would nevertheless compromise the role of the United States in the Middle East peace process. He urged member states to reject "blackmail and intimidation."US Ambassador Nikki Haley then said that her country was "singled out for attack" because of its recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. She added that: "The United States will remember this day in which it was singled out for attack in the General Assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation,” Haley said. "We will remember it when we are called upon to once again make the world’s largest contribution to the United Nations, and so many countries come calling on us, as they so often do, to pay even more and to use our influence for their benefit." She added that: "America will put our embassy in Jerusalem. That is what the American people want us to do, and it is the right thing to do. No vote in the United Nations will make any difference on that...this vote will make a difference in how Americans view the UN."Israel's Ambassador Danny Danon then told the assembly that the vowed that "no General Assembly resolution will ever drive us from Jerusalem."Venezuela's ambassador, speaking for the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), expressed "grave concern about Israel’s ongoing violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including attempts to alter the character, status and demographic composition of the City of Jerusalem. [It was] also concerned about the decision to relocate the United States embassy [and] warned that such provocative actions would further heighten tensions, with potentially far‑reaching repercussions given the extremely volatile backdrop.Other speakers included Pakistan, Indonesia, Maldives, Syria, Bangladesh, Cuba, Iran, and China.Malaysia's Ambassador Datuk Seri Mohammed Shahrul Ikram Yaakob said that, as a member of the OIC and NAM,  "Malaysia joins the international community in expressing our deep concern and rejects the decision by the United States to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. It is also an infringement of the Palestinian people’s rights and their right to self determination." He called for a peaceful two-state solution and that Malaysia is concerned the situation will only feed into the agenda of extremists."Other speakers included, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and South Africa. The Permanent Observer for the Holy See, Tomasz Grysa, emphasised that Jerusalem was most sacred to the Abrahamic faiths and a symbol for millions of believers around the world who considered it their "spiritual capital." Its significance went "beyond the question of borders, a reality that should be considered a priority in every negotiation for a political solution."  The Holy See, he said, called for a "peaceful resolution that would ensure respect for the sacred nature of Jerusalem and its universal value...reiterating that only international guarantee could preserve its unique character and status and provide assurance of dialogue and reconciliation for peace in the region."After the motion was passed, more speeches continued with Estonia, who also spoke on behalf of other states. Australia's Ambassador then explained her country's government did "not support unilateral action that undermined the peace process [and] it did not believe today’s text would help to bring the parties back to the negotiating table."Other speakers included, Paraguay, whose Ambassador said that the country would abstain because "the question of Jerusalem was a matter for the Security Council, as the primary body responsible for the maintenance of international peace and security." This was followed by El Salvador, Argentina and Romania.Canada's Ambassador Marc-Andre Blanchard called the proposal "one-sided" and said: "We are disappointed that this resolution is one sided and does not advance prospects for peace to which we aspire, which is why we have abstained on today’s vote." He, however, added that Canada wanted to emphasise Jerusalem's special significance to the Abrahamic religions of  Jews, Muslims and Christians. "Denying the connection between Jerusalem and the Jewish, Muslim and Christian faiths undermines the integrity of the site for all. We also reiterate the need to maintain the status quo at Jerusalem’s Holy sites.Nicaragua explained its support of the resolution, as it "rebuffed recent unilateral attempts to modify the character and status of Jerusalem. Such unilateral actions were in blatant violation of resolution 2234 (2016) and others...unilateral actions jeopardised peace and stability in the Middle East and drew the international community further away from a solution."Mexico's ambassador then explained the abstention and emphasised that convening an emergency session was a disproportionate response. "The United States must become part of the solution, not a stumbling block that would hamper progress...the international community was further than ever from agreement."The Czech Republic then said that while it supported the European Union position, it had abstained because it "did not believe the draft resolution would contribute to the peace process."Armenia said that is position "remained unchanged. The situation should be resolved through negotiations paving the way for lasting peace and security."Hungary echoed Armenia's stance and said it would not comment on the foreign relations of the United States.Latvia then spoke, before Estonia re-took the floor to say it had also spoken on behalf of Albania, Lithuania and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Result
Reactions
States – UN Ambassador Nikki Haley announced that the U.S. will move its embassy to Jerusalem and "no vote in the UN will make any difference on that" and that the US was "by far the single largest contributor to the UN." She also warned that the US might also cut funding to the UN itself. During the 2018 State of the Union Address, Trump said that the countries which voted against the resolution opposed the United States' "sovereign right to make this recognition" and said he would ask Congress to pass legislation which would ensure foreign aid would "only go to America's friends, not enemies of America."
 – Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the result shortly after it was announced in call it "preposterous," while he also thanked the states that supported "the truth" by not participating in "the theater of the absurd." He added that: "Jerusalem is our capital. Always was, always will be...But I do appreciate the fact that a growing number of countries refused to participate in this theatre of the absurd. So I appreciate that, and especially I want to again express our thanks to [US] President (Donald) Trump and Ambassador [Nikki] Haley, for their stalwart defense of Israel and their stalwart defense of the truth."  Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, reminded Israelis of the longstanding Israeli disdain for such votes. "Let us just remember that this is the same UN about which our first ambassador to the organization, Abba Eban, once said: 'If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions'. There is nothing new in what just happened at the UN." He also praised the US as "the moral beacon shining out of the darkness." Minister of Strategic Affairs and Public Security Gilad Erdan said: "The historic connection between Israel and Jerusalem is stronger than any vote by the 'United Nations' — nations who are united only by their fear and their refusal to recognize the simple truth that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and the Jewish people."
However, opposition Joint List Chairman and MK Ayman Odeh called the vote a wake-up call for Israel: "In the international arena, there still exists a large and definitive majority that believes that the Palestinian people, like all other nations, deserve a place in this world and the right to self-determination. This evening's vote by the majority of the world's nations against Trump's announcement, in spite of the pressure and threats, flies in the face of Trump's and Netanyahu's diplomatic policy and is a clear statement by the international community in support of peace and the right of the Palestinians to an independent state, whose capital is East Jerusalem."
 – A spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called the vote "a victory for Palestine;" Abbas himself thanked the member states who voted in support of the resolution "in spite of the pressures they faced." UN Ambassador Riyad Mansour called the vote "a massive setback" for the US.
 – Minister of Foreign Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif called the result a "resounding global no" to the Trump administration's "thuggish intimidation."
 – Foreign Minister Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa said that it was "unhelpful to pick up a fight with Trump over a side issue and urged countries to concentrate on the threat posed by "theo-fascist" Iran instead."
Israel's Foreign Affairs Ministry reacted in writing on Twitter that Khalifa had denounced an Arab boycott of Israel and confirmed Bahraini citizens were free to visit Israel.
Iran responded to this by saying that "Palestine's freedom from the clutches of Israeli occupation remains the Islamic world's highest priority" and that "despite all complex plots, manufactured crises and fictitious threats propagated by the US-Zionism axis, Palestine still is and will remain the Islamic world's number one priority until it is liberated, and no one... can distract Muslims from this serious issue."
 – Jimmy Morales, the president of Guatemala, one of the nine countries which voted against the resolution, announced on 24 December 2017 that he would follow Trump in move his country's embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.MediaHaaretz's Noa Landau, wrote, in citing unnamed diplomatic sourced, that Israel was particularly disappointed with countries like India that have enhanced bilateral relations with it recently. "The main disappointment in Israel was with the countries that have enhanced bilateral relations in recent years, especially those that share a particularly conservative worldview with the Netanyahu government. For example, India – whose Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, visited Israel in July, a tour that was memorable mainly for the pastoral photographs of him and Netanyahu embracing and wading in the waves – voted for the resolution against Israel and the United States."
OthersAt a "Solidarity to Save Jerusalem" rally organised by the Barisan Nasional government in Malaysia, one of the attendees Association of NextGen Christians of Malaysia President Joshua Hong said at the Putra Mosque: "We are here because we feel that the decision made by President Trump on announcing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is merely a political decision. He added that the decision also hurts Christian and Arabic churches in Palestine and not just the Muslims. "To us as Christians, Jerusalem is a city of peace and after that announcement, we feel there is no more peace. I think it is not right and unjust. We believe we should continue pursuing the sustainable peace solution for Palestine and Israel, rather than just a single nation declaring it just like that." He claimed that about 50 members of the group turned up in a show of support for the Palestinian people.

See also
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 43/177
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 67/19
List of United Nations resolutions concerning Israel
List of United Nations resolutions concerning Palestine
United Nations General Assembly resolution
Passage 4:
Rebellion of the Alpujarras (1499–1501)
The First Rebellion of the Alpujarras (Arabic: ثورة البشرات الأولى; 1499–1501) were a series of uprisings by the Muslim population of the Kingdom of Granada, Crown of Castile (formerly, the Emirate of Granada) against their Catholic rulers. They began in 1499 in the city of Granada in response to mass forced conversions of the Muslim population to the Catholic faith, which were perceived as violations of the 1491 Treaty of Granada. The uprising in the city quickly died down, but it was followed by more serious revolts in the nearby mountainous area of the Alpujarras. The Catholic forces, on some occasions led personally by King Ferdinand, succeeded in suppressing the revolts and inflicted severe punishment on the Muslim population.
The Catholic rulers used these revolts as a justification to repudiate the Treaty of Granada and abrogate the rights of the Muslims guaranteed by the treaty. All Muslims of Granada were subsequently required to convert to Catholicism or be expelled, and in 1502 these forced conversions applied to all of Castile. However, they did not apply in the kingdoms of Valencia or Aragon.

Background
Muslims had been present in the Iberian peninsula since the Umayyad conquest of Hispania in the 8th century. By the end of the 15th century, the Emirate of Granada was the last Muslim-ruled area in the peninsula. In January 1492, after a decade-long campaign, Muhammad XII of Granada (also known as "Boabdil") surrendered the Emirate to the Catholic forces led by the Catholic monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. The Treaty of Granada, signed on November 1491, guaranteed a set of rights to the Muslims of Granada, including religious tolerance and fair treatment, in return for the capitulation.At this point, the Muslim population in the former Emirate of Granada was estimated to be between 250,000 and 300,000, making up the majority in the former emirate, and constituting roughly half of the entire Muslim population in Spain.Initially, the Catholic rulers upheld the treaty. Despite pressure from the Spanish clergy, Ferdinand and the Archbishop of Granada Hernando de Talavera chose a laissez-faire policy towards the Muslims in the hope that interaction with Catholics would make them "understand the error" of their faith and abandon it. When Ferdinand and Isabella visited the city in the summer of 1499, they were greeted by enthusiastic crowds, including Muslims.In the summer of 1499, Francisco Jiménez de Cisneros, the archbishop of Toledo, arrived in Granada and began working alongside Talavera. Cisneros disliked Talavera's approach and began sending uncooperative Muslims, especially the noblemen, to prison, where they were treated harshly until they agreed to convert. Emboldened by the increase in conversions, Cisneros intensified the efforts and in December 1499 he told Pope Alexander VI that three thousand Muslims converted in a single day. Cisneros' own church council warned that these methods might be a breach of the Treaty, and sixteenth-century hagiographer Álvar Gómez de Castro described the approach as "methods that were not correct".

Uprising in the Albayzín
The increasing forced conversions of Muslims triggered resistance, initially among the urban population of the Albayzín (also spelled Albaicín), the Muslim quarter of Granada.  The situation was exacerbated by the treatment of elches, former Christians who converted to Islam. Specific clauses in the Treaty of Granada forbade the conversion of the elches back to Christianity against their will, but the treaty allowed for questionings of such converts by Christian clerics, in the presence of Muslim religious authorities. Cisneros used this 'loophole' to summon elches and imprison those who refused to return to Christianity. These efforts were often focused on wives of Muslim men – an emphasis that angered the Muslim population who considered this a violation of their families.

On 18 December 1499, as part of this effort, constable Velasco de Barrionuevo and an assistant were taking a female elche from the Albayzín for such questioning. When they passed through a square, she shouted that she was being forced to become Christian. The officials were then surrounded by a hostile crowd, the constable was killed and the assistant managed to escape after being sheltered by a local Muslim woman.This incident escalated into an open revolt. The residents of the Albayzín barricaded the streets and armed themselves. An angry crowd marched to Cisneros' house, apparently for an assault. This crowd later dispersed, but over the following days the revolt become more organized. The population of the Albayzín elected their own officials and leaders. In the standoff that ensued, the archbishop Hernando de Talavera and the Captain-General Marquis de Tendilla attempted to defuse the situation through negotiations and gestures of good-will. After ten days, the uprising ended as the Muslims handed in their weapons and handed over the constable's killers, who were promptly executed.Subsequently, Cisneros was summoned to the court in Seville to account for his actions, facing a furious Ferdinand. Cisneros however argued that it was the Muslims, not him, who breached the Treaty by engaging in armed rebellion. He convinced Ferdinand and Isabella to declare a collective pardon to the rebels, on condition that they convert to Christianity. Cisneros returned to Granada, which now nominally became a fully Christian city.

Uprising in the Alpujarra
Although the uprising in the Albayzín appeared to be put down and Granada was nominally transformed to a Christian city, the rebellion spread to the countryside. The leaders of the Albayzín uprising fled to the Alpujarra mountains. The inhabitants of the mountains, almost exclusively Muslims, had only accepted Christian rule reluctantly. They quickly rose up in revolts against what they regarded as the violation of the terms of the Treaty of Granada, and because they feared they would suffer the same forced conversions as the residents of the Albayzín. By February 1500, 80,000 Christian troops were mobilized to put down the rebellion. By March, King Ferdinand arrived to personally direct the operations.The rebels were often tactically well led and made use of the mountainous terrain to conduct guerrilla warfare. However, they lacked a central leadership and coherent strategy. This was partly caused by the previous Castilian policy of encouraging and facilitating the Granadan upper class to leave the country or convert and be absorbed into the Christian upper class. The rebels' lack of strategic command allowed the Christian forces to proceed by defeating the rebels in one area separately, then moving on to the next.The rebelling towns and villages in the Alpujarra were gradually defeated. Ferdinand personally led the assault on Lanjarón. Rebels who surrendered were generally required to be baptized in order to keep their lives. Towns and villages which had to be taken by assault were treated harshly. One of the most violent episodes occurred in Laujar de Andarax, where the Catholic forces under Louis de Beaumont took 3,000 Muslims prisoner and then slaughtered them. Between two and six hundred women and children who took refuge in a local mosque were blown up with gunpowder. During the capture of Velefique, all the men were killed and the women enslaved. At Nijar and Güéjar Sierra, the whole population was enslaved except children who were kidnapped in order to be brought up as Christians.On 14 January 1501, Ferdinand ordered his army to stand down because the uprising seemed to be suppressed. However, further unrest occurred in Sierra Bermeja. An army under Alonso de Aguilar, one of the most distinguished captains of Spain, marched to put down this rebellion. On 16 March, the army's undisciplined troops, eager for pillage, charged the rebels. However, this was met by a fierce counterattack. The result was a catastrophe for the Catholic army; Aguilar himself was killed in battle and the army was nearly annihilated.However, the Muslims soon sued for peace, and Ferdinand, aware of the weakness of the army and the difficulty of mountain warfare, declared that the rebels must choose between exile or baptism. Only those who could pay ten gold doblas were given passage, and the majority who could not pay had to stay and be baptized. The insurgents surrendered in waves, beginning from the middle of April, since some waited to see whether the first insurgents who surrendered were safe. The emigrants were escorted under guards to the port of Estepona and given passage to North Africa. The remaining were allowed to return home after converting, surrendering their arms, and forfeiting their property.

Aftermath
By the end of 1501, the rebellion was put down. The Muslims were no longer given their rights provided by the Treaty of Granada, and were given the choice of: (1) remain and accept baptism, (2) reject baptism and be enslaved or killed, or  (3) be exiled. Given the expensive fee exacted for passage out of Spain, conversion was the only realistic option for them. Therefore, only a decade after the fall of the Emirate of Granada, the entire Muslim population of Granada had nominally become Christian.A proclamation in 1502 extended these forced conversions to the rest of the lands of Castile, even though those outside Granada had nothing to do with the rebellion. The newly converted Muslims were known as nuevos cristianos ("new Christians") or moriscos  (lit. "Moorish"). Although they converted to Christianity, they maintained their existing customs, including their language, distinct names, food, dress and even some ceremonies. Many secretly practiced Islam, even as they publicly professed and practiced Christianity. In return, the Catholic rulers adopted increasingly intolerant and harsh policies in order to eradicate these characteristics. This culminated in Philip II's Pragmatica of 1 January 1567 which ordered the Moriscos to abandon their customs, clothing and language. The pragmatica triggered the Morisco revolts in 1568–1571.

See also
Expulsion of the Moriscos
Morisco rebellions in Granada
Mudéjar
Reconquista
Passage 5:
Dutch Republic
The United Provinces of the Netherlands, officially the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands (Dutch: Republiek der Zeven Verenigde Nederlanden), and commonly referred to in historiography as the Dutch Republic, was a confederation that existed from 1579 until the Batavian Revolution in 1795. It was a predecessor state of the present-day Netherlands. The republic was established after seven Dutch provinces in the Spanish Netherlands revolted against Spanish rule, forming a mutual alliance against Spain in 1579 (the Union of Utrecht) and declaring their independence in 1581 (the Act of Abjuration). It comprised Groningen, Frisia, Overijssel, Guelders, Utrecht, Holland and Zeeland.
Although the state was small and contained only around 1.5 million inhabitants, it controlled a worldwide network of seafaring trade routes. Through its trading companies, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the Dutch West India Company (GWC), it established a Dutch colonial empire. The income from this trade allowed the Dutch Republic to compete militarily against much larger countries. It amassed a huge fleet of 2,000 ships, initially larger than the fleets of England and France combined. Major conflicts were fought in the Eighty Years' War against Spain (from the foundation of the Dutch Republic until 1648), the Dutch–Portuguese War (1602–1663), four Anglo-Dutch Wars (the first against the Commonwealth of England, two against the Kingdom of England, and a fourth against the Kingdom of Great Britain: 1652–1654, 1665–1667, 1672–1674 and 1780–1784), the Franco-Dutch War (1672–1678), War of the Grand Alliance (1688–1697), the War of the Spanish Succession (1702–1713), the War of Austrian Succession (1744–1748) and the War of the First Coalition (1792–1795) against the Kingdom of France.
The republic was more tolerant of different religions and ideas than its contemporary states were, allowing freedom of thought to its residents. Artists flourished under this regime, including painters such as Rembrandt, Johannes Vermeer and many others. So did scientists, such as Hugo Grotius, Christiaan Huygens and Antonie van Leeuwenhoek. The Dutch trade, science, military, and art were among the most acclaimed in the world during much of the 17th century, a period which became known in Dutch history as the Dutch Golden Age.
The republic was a confederation of provinces each with a high degree of independence from the federal assembly, known as the States General. In the Peace of Westphalia (1648) the republic gained approximately 20% more territory, located outside the member provinces, which was ruled directly by the States General as Generality Lands. Each province was led by an official known as the stadtholder (Dutch for 'steward'); this office was nominally open to anyone, but most provinces appointed a member of the House of Orange. The position gradually became hereditary, with the Prince of Orange simultaneously holding most or all of the stadtholderships, making him effectively the head of state. This created tension between political factions: the Orangists favoured a powerful stadtholder, while the Republicans favoured a strong States General. The Republicans forced two Stadtholderless Periods, 1650–1672 and 1702–1747, with the latter causing national instability and the end of Great Power status.
Economic decline led to a period of political instability known as the Patriottentijd (1780–1787). This unrest was temporarily suppressed by a Prussian invasion in support of the stadtholder. The French Revolution and subsequent War of the First Coalition caused these tensions to reignite. Following military defeat by France, the stadtholder was expelled in the Batavian Revolution of 1795. This ended the Dutch Republic; it was succeeded by the Batavian Republic.

History
Until the 16th century, the Low Countries—corresponding roughly to the present-day Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg—consisted of a number of duchies, counties, and prince-bishoprics, almost all of which were under the supremacy of the Holy Roman Empire, with the exception of the County of Flanders, most of which was under the Kingdom of France.
Most of the Low Countries had come under the rule of the House of Burgundy and subsequently the House of Habsburg. In 1549, Holy Roman Emperor Charles V issued the Pragmatic Sanction, which further unified the Seventeen Provinces under his rule. Charles was succeeded by his son, King Philip II of Spain. In 1568, the Netherlands, led by William I of Orange, together with Philip de Montmorency, Count of Hoorn, and Lamoral, Count of Egmont revolted against Philip II because of high taxes, persecution of Protestants by the government, and Philip's efforts to modernize and centralize the devolved-medieval government structures of the provinces. This was the start of the Eighty Years' War. During the initial phase of the war, the revolt was largely unsuccessful. Spain regained control over most of the rebelling provinces. This period is known as the "Spanish Fury" due to the high number of massacres, instances of mass looting, and total destruction of multiple cities and in particular Antwerp between 1572 and 1579.
In 1579, a number of the northern provinces of the Low Countries signed the Union of Utrecht, in which they promised to support each other in their defence against the Army of Flanders. This was followed in 1581 by the Act of Abjuration, the declaration of independence of the provinces from Philip II. Dutch colonialism began at this point, as the Netherlands was able to swipe a number of Portuguese and Spanish colonies, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region. After the assassination of William of Orange on 10 July 1584, both Henry III of France and Elizabeth I of England declined offers of sovereignty. However, the latter agreed to turn the United Provinces into a protectorate of England (Treaty of Nonsuch, 1585), and sent the Earl of Leicester as governor-general. This was unsuccessful and in 1588 the provinces became a confederacy. The Union of Utrecht is regarded as the foundation of the Republic of the Seven United Provinces, which was not recognized by Spain until the Peace of Westphalia in 1648.
During the Anglo-French War (1778–1783), the internal territory was divided into two groups: the Patriots, who were pro-French and pro-American, and the Orangists, who were pro-British. The Republic of the United Provinces faced a series of republican revolutions in 1783–1787. During this period, republican forces occupied several major Dutch cities. Initially on the defence, the Orangist forces received aid from Prussian troops and retook the Netherlands in 1787. The republican forces fled to France, but then successfully re-invaded alongside the army of the French Republic (1793–1795), ousting stadtholder William V, abolishing the Dutch Republic, and replacing it with the Batavian Republic (1795–1806). After the French Republic became the French Empire under Napoleon, the Batavian Republic was replaced by the Napoleonic Kingdom of Holland (1806–1810).
The Netherlands regained independence from France in 1813. In the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814 the names "United Provinces of the Netherlands" and "United Netherlands" were used. In 1815, it was rejoined with the Austrian Netherlands and Liège (the "Southern provinces") to become the Kingdom of the Netherlands, informally known as the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, to create a strong buffer state north of France. On 16 March 1815, the son of stadtholder William V crowned himself King William I of the Netherlands. Between 1815 and 1890, the King of the Netherlands was also in a personal union the Grand Duke of the sovereign Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. After Belgium gained its independence in 1830, the state became unequivocally known as the "Kingdom of the Netherlands", as it remains today.

Economy
During the Dutch Golden Age in the late-16th and 17th centuries, the Dutch Republic dominated world trade, conquering a vast colonial empire and operating the largest fleet of merchantmen of any nation. The County of Holland was the wealthiest and most urbanized region in the world. In 1650 the urban population of the Dutch Republic as a percentage of total population was 31.7 percent, while that of the Spanish Netherlands was 20.8 percent, of Portugal 16.6 percent, and of Italy 14 percent. In 1675 the urban population density of Holland alone was 61 percent, compared to the rest of the Dutch Republic, where 27 percent lived in urban areas.The free trade spirit of the time was augmented by the development of a modern, effective stock market in the Low Countries. The Netherlands has the oldest stock exchange in the world, founded in 1602 by the Dutch East India Company, while Rotterdam has the oldest bourse in the Netherlands. The Dutch East-India Company exchange went public in six different cities. Later, a court ruled that the company had to reside legally in a single city, so Amsterdam is recognized as the oldest such institution based on modern trading principles. While the banking system evolved in the Low Countries, it was quickly incorporated by the well-connected English, stimulating English economic output.The Dutch Republic was a master of banking, often compared to 14th century Florence. When Southern Europe was experiencing poor harvests, surplus grain from Poland was sold by the Dutch for large profits.

Politics
The republic was a confederation of seven provinces, which had their own governments and were very independent, and a number of so-called Generality Lands. The latter were governed directly by the States General, the federal government. The States General were seated in The Hague and consisted of representatives of each of the seven provinces. The provinces of the republic were, in official feudal order:

Duchy of Guelders
County of Holland
County of Zeeland
Lordship of Utrecht
Lordship of Overijssel
Lordship of Frisia
Lordship of GroningenThere was an eighth province, the County of Drenthe, but this area was so poor that it was exempt from paying federal taxes, and as a consequence, it was denied representation in the States General.
Each province was governed by the Provincial States, their main executive official (though not the official head of state) being a raadpensionaris or landsadvocaat. In times of war, the stadtholder, who commanded the army, would have more power than the raadpensionaris. In theory, the stadtholders were freely appointed by and subordinate to the states of each province. However, in practice the princes of Orange of the House of Orange-Nassau, beginning with William the Silent, were always chosen as stadtholders of most of the provinces.
Zeeland and usually Utrecht had the same stadtholder as Holland. There was a constant power struggle between the Orangists, who supported the stadtholders and specifically the princes of Orange, and the Republicans, who supported the States General and hoped to replace the semi-hereditary nature of the stadtholdership with a true republican structure.
After the Peace of Westphalia, several border territories were assigned to the United Provinces. They were federally governed Generality Lands. These were Staats-Brabant, Staats-Vlaanderen, Staats-Overmaas, and (after the Treaty of Utrecht) Staats-Opper-Gelre. The States General of the United Provinces were in control of the Dutch East India Company and the Dutch West India Company, but some shipping expeditions were initiated by some of the provinces, mostly Holland and Zeeland.
The framers of the United States Constitution were influenced by the Constitution of the Republic of the United Provinces, as Federalist No. 20, by James Madison, shows. Such influence appears, however, to have been of a negative nature, as Madison describes the Dutch confederacy as exhibiting "Imbecility in the government; discord among the provinces; foreign influence and indignities; a precarious existence in peace, and peculiar calamities from war." Apart from this, the American Declaration of Independence is similar to the Act of Abjuration, essentially the declaration of independence of the United Provinces, but concrete evidence that the latter directly influenced the former is absent.

Religion
In the Union of Utrecht of 20 January 1579, Holland and Zeeland were granted the right to accept only one religion (in practice, Calvinism). Every other province had the freedom to regulate the religious question as it wished, although the Union stated every person should be free in the choice of personal religion and that no person should be prosecuted based on religious choice. William of Orange had been a strong supporter of public and personal freedom of religion and hoped to unite Protestants and Catholics in the new union, and, for him, the Union was a defeat. In practice, Catholic services in all provinces were quickly forbidden, and the Dutch Reformed Church became the "public" or "privileged" church in the republic.During the republic, any person who wished to hold public office had to conform to the Reformed Church and take an oath to this effect. The extent to which different religions or denominations were persecuted depended much on the time period and regional or city leaders. In the beginning, this was especially focused on Roman Catholics, being the religion of the enemy. In 17th-century Leiden, for instance, people opening their homes to services could be fined 200 guilders (a year's wage for a skilled tradesman) and banned from the city. Throughout this, however, personal freedom of religion existed and was one factor—along with economic reasons—in causing large immigration of religious refugees from other parts of Europe.In the first years of the republic, controversy arose within the Reformed Church, mainly around the subject of predestination. This has become known as the struggle between Arminianism and Gomarism, or between Remonstrants and Contra-Remonstrants. In 1618, the Synod of Dort tackled this issue, which led to the banning of the Remonstrant faith.
Beginning in the 18th century, the situation changed from more or less active persecution of religious services to a state of restricted toleration of other religions, as long as their services took place secretly in private churches.

Decline
Long-term rivalry between the two main factions in Dutch society, the Staatsgezinden (Republicans, Dutch States Party) and the Prinsgezinden (Royalists or Orangists), sapped the strength and unity of the country. Johan de Witt and the Republicans did reign supreme for a time at the middle of the 17th century (the First Stadtholderless Period) until his overthrow and murder in 1672. Subsequently, William III of Orange became stadtholder. After a 22-year stadtholderless era, the Orangists regained power, and his first problem was to survive the Franco-Dutch War (with the derivative Third Anglo-Dutch war), when France, England, Münster, and Cologne united against this country.
Wars to contain the expansionist policies of France in various coalitions after the Glorious Revolution, mostly including England and Scotland—after 1707, Great Britain—burdened the republic with huge debts, although little of the fighting after 1673 took place on its own territory. The necessity to maintain a vast army against France meant that less money could be spent on the navy, weakening the republic's economy. After William III's death in 1702 the Second Stadtholderless Period was inaugurated. Despite having contributed much in the War of the Spanish Succession, the Dutch Republic gained little from the peace talks in Utrecht (1713). However, the Dutch had over a period of forty years successfully defended their positions in the Southern Netherlands and their troops were central in the alliances which had halted French territorial expansion in Europe until 1792. The end of the War of the Austrian Succession in 1748, and Austria becoming allies with France against Prussia, marked the end of the republic as a major military power.Fierce competition for trade and colonies, especially from France and England, furthered the economic downturn of the country. The three Anglo-Dutch Wars and the rise of mercantilism had a negative effect on Dutch shipping and commerce.

See also
List of countries that gained independence from Spain
Dutch Empire
Dutch East India Company
Passage 6:
Project Daedalus
Project Daedalus (named after Daedalus, the Greek mythological designer who crafted wings for human flight) was a study conducted between 1973 and 1978 by the British Interplanetary Society to design a plausible uncrewed interstellar probe. Intended mainly as a scientific probe, the design criteria specified that the spacecraft had to use existing or near-future technology and had to be able to reach its destination within a human lifetime. Alan Bond led a team of scientists and engineers who proposed using a fusion rocket to reach Barnard's Star 5.9 light years away.  The trip was estimated to take 50 years, but the design was required to be flexible enough that it could be sent to any other target star.
All the papers produced by the study are available in a BIS book, Project Daedalus: Demonstrating the Engineering Feasibility of Interstellar Travel,

Concept
Daedalus would be constructed in Earth orbit and have an initial mass of 54,000 tonnes including 50,000 tonnes of fuel and 500 tonnes of scientific payload. Daedalus was to be a two-stage spacecraft. The first stage would operate for two years, taking the spacecraft to 7.1% of light speed (0.071 c), and then after it was jettisoned, the second stage would fire for 1.8 years, taking the spacecraft up to about 12% of light speed (0.12 c), before being shut down for a 46-year cruise period. Due to the extreme temperature range of operation required, from near absolute zero to 1600 K, the engine bells and support structure would be made of molybdenum alloyed with titanium, zirconium, and carbon, which retains strength even at cryogenic temperatures. A major stimulus for the project was Friedwardt Winterberg's inertial confinement fusion drive concept, for which he received the Hermann Oberth gold medal award.This velocity is well beyond the capabilities of chemical rockets or even the type of nuclear pulse propulsion studied during Project Orion. According to Dr. Tony Martin, controlled-fusion engine and the nuclear–electric systems have very low thrust, equipment to convert nuclear energy into electrical has a large mass, which results in small acceleration, which would take a century to achieve the desired speed; thermodynamic nuclear engines of the NERVA type require a great quantity of fuel, photon rockets have to generate power at a rate of 3×109 W per kg of vehicle mass and require mirrors with absorptivity of less than 1 part in 106, interstellar ramjet's problems are tenuous interstellar medium with a density of about 1 atom/cm3, a large diameter funnel, and high power required for its electric field. Thus the only suitable propulsion method for the project was thermonuclear pulse propulsion.Daedalus would be propelled by a fusion rocket using pellets of a deuterium/helium-3 mix that would be ignited in the reaction chamber by inertial confinement using electron beams. The electron beam system would be powered by a set of induction coils trapping energy from the plasma exhaust stream. 250 pellets would be detonated per second, and the resulting plasma would be directed by a magnetic nozzle. The computed burn-up fraction for the fusion fuels was 0.175 and 0.133 producing exhaust velocities of 10,600 km/s and 9,210 km/s respectively. Due to scarcity of helium-3 on Earth, it was to be mined from the atmosphere of Jupiter by large hot-air balloon supported robotic factories over a 20-year period, or from a less distant source, such as the Moon.The second stage would have two 5-metre optical telescopes and two 20-metre radio telescopes. About 25 years after launch these telescopes would begin examining the area around Barnard's Star to learn more about any accompanying planets. This information would be sent back to Earth, using the 40-metre diameter second stage engine bell as a communications dish, and targets of interest would be selected. Since the spacecraft would not decelerate, upon reaching Barnard's Star, Daedalus would carry 18 autonomous sub-probes that would be launched between 7.2 and 1.8 years before the main craft entered the target system. These sub-probes would be propelled by nuclear-powered ion drives and would carry cameras, spectrometers, and other sensory equipment. The sub-probes would fly past their targets, still travelling at 12% of the speed of light, and transmit their findings back to the Daedalus' second stage, mothership, for relay back to Earth.
The ship's payload bay containing its sub-probes, telescopes, and other equipment would be protected from the interstellar medium during transit by a beryllium disc, up to 7 mm thick, weighing up to 50 tonnes.  This erosion shield would be made from beryllium due to its lightness and high latent heat of vaporisation. Larger obstacles that might be encountered while passing through the target system would be dispersed by an artificially generated cloud of particles, ejected by support vehicles called dust bugs about 200 km ahead of the vehicle. The spacecraft would carry a number of robot wardens capable of autonomously repairing damage or malfunctions.

Specifications
Overall length: 190 metres
Payload mass: 450 tonnes

Variants
A quantitative engineering analysis of a self-replicating variation on Project Daedalus was published in 1980 by Robert Freitas. The non-replicating design was modified to include all subsystems necessary for self-replication. Use the probe to deliver a seed factory, with a mass of about 443 metric tons, to a distant site. Have the seed factory replicate many copies of itself on-site, to increase its total manufacturing capacity, then use the resulting automated industrial complex to construct probes, with a seed factory on board, over a 1,000-year period. Each REPRO would weigh over 10 million tons due to the extra fuel needed to decelerate from 12% of lightspeed.
Another possibility is to equip the Daedalus with a magnetic sail similar to the magnetic scoop on a Bussard ramjet to use the destination star heliosphere as a brake, making carrying deceleration fuel unnecessary, allowing a much more in-depth study of the star system chosen.

See also
Breakthrough Starshot
Project Icarus
Project Longshot
Enzmann starship

Further reading
K. F. Long (2012). "Project Daedalus". Deep Space Propulsion: A Roadmap to Interstellar Flight. Springer. pp. 190–197. ISBN 9781461406075.
Passage 7:
Kushla
Kushla (Кушла) is a village in southern Bulgaria, Zlatograd municipality, Smolyan Province, located near the border with Greece. In the Ottoman times the town was called Ugurli in Turkish and Kotyli in Greek. In 1918 the village was part of the Satres (bulg. Sinikovo) community. Following Greek and Bulgarian independence, the former town and its 350 families was divided between the countries in the Neuilly treaty in 1922 until 1941 when the Axis powers opened the borders briefly up to 1944 when Greece retook Kotyli and the local Bulgarian Muslims were since schooled in Greek language. The other part of the village lies in the Xanthi regional unit of Greece as Kotyli (Kozludzha). The villages have a Pomak (Bulgarian Muslim) majority.
Passage 8:
Siege of Jerusalem (636–637)
The siege of Jerusalem (636–637) was part of the Muslim conquest of the Levant and the result of the military efforts of the Rashidun Caliphate against the Byzantine Empire in the year 636–637/38. It began when the Rashidun army, under the command of Abu Ubayda, besieged Jerusalem beginning in November 636. After six months, the Patriarch Sophronius agreed to surrender, on condition that he submit only to the Caliph. According to Islamic tradition, in 637 or 638, Caliph Umar (r. 634–644) traveled to Jerusalem in person to receive the submission of the city. The Patriarch thus surrendered to him.
The Muslim conquest of the city solidified Arab control over Palestine, which would not again be threatened until the First Crusade in 1099.

Background
Jerusalem was an important city of the Byzantine province of Palaestina Prima. Just 23 years prior to the Muslim conquest, in 614, it fell to an invading Sassanid army under Shahrbaraz during the last of the Byzantine–Sasanian Wars. The Persians looted the city, and are said to have massacred its 90,000 Christian inhabitants. As part of the looting, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was destroyed and the True Cross captured and taken to Ctesiphon as a battle-captured holy relic. The Cross was later returned to Jerusalem by Emperor Heraclius after his final victory against the Persians in 628. The Jews, who were persecuted in their Christian-controlled homeland, initially aided the Persian conquerors.After the death of the prophet Muhammad in 632, Muslim leadership passed to Caliph Abu Bakr (r. 632–634) following a series of campaigns known as the Ridda Wars. Once Abu Bakr's sovereignty over Arabia had been secured, he initiated a war of conquest in the east by invading Iraq, then a province of the Sassanid Persian Empire; while on the western front, his armies invaded the Byzantine Empire.In 634, Abu Bakr died and was succeeded by Umar (r. 634–644), who continued his own war of conquest. In May 636, Emperor Heraclius (r. 610–641) launched a major expedition to regain the lost territory, but his army was defeated decisively at the Battle of Yarmouk in August 636. Thereafter, Abu Ubayda, the Rashidun commander-in-chief of the Rashidun army in Syria, held a council of war in early October 636 to discuss future plans. Opinions of objectives varied between the coastal city of Caesarea and Jerusalem. Abu Ubayda could see the importance of both these cities, which had resisted all Muslim attempts at capture. Unable to decide on the matter, he wrote to Caliph Umar for instructions. In his reply, the caliph ordered them to capture the latter. Accordingly, Abu Ubayda marched towards Jerusalem from Jabiyah, with Khalid ibn al-Walid and his mobile guard leading the advance. The Muslims arrived at Jerusalem around early November, and the Byzantine garrison withdrew into the fortified city.

Siege
Jerusalem had been well-fortified after Heraclius recaptured it from the Persians. After the Byzantine defeat at Yarmouk, Sophronius, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, repaired its defenses. The Muslims had so far not attempted any siege of the city. However, since 634, Saracen forces had the potential to threaten all routes to the city. Although it was not encircled, it had been in a state of siege since the Muslims captured the towns of Pella and Bosra east of the Jordan River. After the Battle of Yarmouk, the city was severed from the rest of Syria, and was presumably being prepared for a siege that seemed inevitable. When the Muslim army reached Jericho, Sophronius collected all the holy relics including the True Cross, and secretly sent them to the coast, to be taken to Constantinople. The Muslim troops besieged the city some time in November 636. Instead of relentless assaults on the city, they decided to press on with the siege until the Byzantines ran short of supplies and a bloodless surrender could be negotiated.Although details of the siege were not recorded, it appeared to be bloodless. The Byzantine garrison could not expect any help from the humbled Heraclius. After a siege of four months, Sophronius offered to surrender the city and pay a jizya (tribute), on condition that the caliph came to Jerusalem to sign the pact and accept the surrender. It is said that when Sophronius's terms became known to the Muslims, Shurahbil ibn Hasana, one of the Muslim commanders, suggested that instead of waiting for the caliph to come all the way from Madinah, Khalid ibn Walid should be sent forward as the caliph, as he was very similar in appearance to Umar. The subterfuge did not work. Possibly, Khalid was too famous in Syria, or there may have been Christian Arabs in the city who had visited Madinah and had seen both Umar and Khalid, remembering the differences. Consequently, the Patriarch of Jerusalem refused to negotiate. When Khalid reported the failure of this mission, Abu Ubaidah wrote to caliph Umar about the situation, and invited him to come to Jerusalem to accept the surrender of the city.

Surrender
The date of the surrender of Jerusalem is debatable. Primary sources, such as chronicles from centuries closer or further removed from the time of the events, offer the year 638, for instance Theophilus of Edessa (695–785); or 636, 636/37, and 637. Academic secondary sources tend to prefer 638. Encyclopaedia Britannica mentions both options in different articles.In early April 637, Umar arrived in Palestine and went first to Jabiya, where he was received by Abu Ubaidah, Khalid, and Yazid, who had travelled with an escort to receive him. Amr was left as commander of the besieging Muslim army.Upon Umar's arrival in Jerusalem, a pact known as the Umariyya Covenant was composed. It surrendered the city and gave guarantees of civil and religious liberty to Christians in exchange for jizya. It was signed by caliph Umar on behalf of the Muslims, and witnessed by Khalid, Amr, Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, and Mu'awiya. Depending on the sources, in either 637 or in 638, Jerusalem was officially surrendered to the caliph. For the Jewish community this marked the end of nearly 500 years of Roman rule and oppression. Umar permitted the Jews to once again reside within the city of Jerusalem itself.It has been recorded in the annals of Muslim chronicles, that at the time of the Zuhr prayers, Sophronius invited Umar to pray in the rebuilt Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Umar declined, fearing that accepting the invitation might endanger the church's status as a place of Christian worship, and that Muslims might break the treaty and turn the church into a mosque. After staying for ten days in Jerusalem, the caliph returned to Medina.

Aftermath
Following the Caliph's instructions, Yazid proceeded to Caesarea, and once again laid siege to the port city. Amr and Shurahbil marched to complete the occupation of Palestine, a task that was completed by the end of the year. Caesarea, however, could not be taken until 640, when at last, the garrison surrendered to Mu'awiya I, then a governor of Syria. With an army of 17,000 men, Abu Ubaidah and Khalid set off from Jerusalem to conquer all of northern Syria. This ended with the conquest of Antioch in late 637. In 639, the Muslims invaded and conquered Egypt.
During his stay in Jerusalem, Umar was led by Sophronius to various holy sites, including the Temple Mount. Seeing the poor state of where the Temple once stood, Umar ordered the area cleared of refuse and debris before having a wooden mosque built on the site. The earliest account of such a structure is given by the Gallic bishop Arculf, who visited Jerusalem between 679 and 682, and describes a very primitive house of prayer able to accommodate up to 3,000 worshippers, constructed of wooden beams and boards over preexisting ruins.More than half a century after the capture of Jerusalem, in 691, the Umayyad caliph Abd al-Malik commissioned the construction of the Dome of the Rock over a large outcropping of bedrock on the Temple Mount. The 10th-century historian al-Maqdisi wrote that Abd al-Malik built the shrine in order to compete in grandeur with the city's Christian churches. Whatever the intention, the impressive splendor and scale of the shrine is seen as having helped significantly in solidifying the attachment of Jerusalem to the early Muslim faith.Over the next 400 years, the city's prominence diminished as Saracen powers in the region jockeyed for control. Jerusalem remained under Muslim rule until it was captured by Crusaders in 1099 during the First Crusade.

Hadith
It is believed in Sunni Islam that Muhammad foretold the conquest of Jerusalem in numerous authentic hadiths in various Islamic sources, including a narration mentioned in Sahih al-Bukhari in Kitab Al Jizyah Wa'l Mawaada'ah (The Book of Jizya and Storage):
Narrated `Auf bin Mali:
I went to the Prophet during the Expedition to Tabuk while he was sitting in a leather tent. He said, "Count six signs that indicate the approach of the End Times: my death, the conquest of Jerusalem, a plague that will afflict you (and kill you in great numbers) as the plague that afflicts sheep..."The siege of Jerusalem was carried by Abu Ubaidah under Umar in the earliest period of Islam along with Plague of Emmaus. The epidemic is famous in Muslim sources because of the death of many prominent companions of Muhammad.

Notes
Passage 9:
Mawdud
Mawdud ibn Altuntash (Arabic: شرف الدولة المودود) (also spelled Maudud or Sharaf al-Dawla Mawdûd) (died October 2, 1113) was a Turkic military leader who was atabeg of Mosul from 1109 to 1113. He organized several expeditions to reconquer lands from the Crusaders and defeated them at  Battle of Al-Sannabra

Biography
Mawdud was an officer of Muhammad I Tapar who sent him to reconquer Mosul from the rebel atabeg Jawali Saqawa. After his conquest of the city, Mehmed entrusted him with several military attempts to push back the Crusaders from the nearby Principality of Antioch and County of Edessa. The first attempt was launched in 1110; having joined forces with Ilghazi, the emir of Mardin, and of Sökmen el-Kutbî, emir of Ahlat, they began by besieging Edessa from April of that year, but Baldwin I of Jerusalem intervened, and forced Mawdud to retreat.
The following year Mawdud marched against Edessa, but as the city walls had been quickly strengthened, he preferred to lay siege to the town of Turbessel, held by Joscelin I of Courtenay. When Ridwan of Aleppo sent news that the Christians under Tancred were on the verge of capturing Aleppo, he moved on to that city. On his arrival, however, he discovered that the capture of the city was not imminent at all, and that Ridwan even refused to open the city's gates for him. He also received the news that a relief army which had been sent by Baldwin I was now marching northwards, so he raised the siege of Turbessel and the subsequent Battle of Shaizar in 1111 proved to be indecisive and a tactical draw.
The 1112 campaign began again with the siege of Turbessel, but was halted when a party of the Mosul army was decimated by Joscelin on June 15. An attempt to capture Edessa with the assistance of its Armenian population was discovered by then count Baldwin II of Jerusalem, resulting in the slaughter of the Armenian participants.
In 1113 Toghtekin of Damascus, tired of the ravages by the Christian forces against his territories, appealed to Mawdud to join him to invade the Kingdom of Jerusalem. The two pillaged Galilee and besieged Tiberias, though without being able to capture it. On June 28, however, the Muslims defeated King Baldwin I of Jerusalem's army at the Battle of Al-Sannabra. Reinforcements saved the Christian forces from total annihilation and prevented the Muslim commanders from exploiting the victory, and ultimately forced them to retreat to Damascus due to a lack of supplies.
It was while in Damascus as a guest of Toghtekin that Mawdud was murdered by the Assassins, possibly with the knowledge of his host (who himself accused Ridwan of the deed). As Mawdud and Toghtekin returned from prayer an assailant stabbed Mawdud four times, fatally wounding him. The killer was beheaded by nearby guards and his body burned. Mawdud was taken into a nearby house and offered food but, according to Ibn al-Athir, refused to eat as he was in the middle of a fast and died later that day. He was succeeded as atabeg by Aqsunqur al-Bursuqi, his representative at Baghdad.

Answer the question based on the given passages. Only give me the answer and do not output any other words.

Question: Who led the muslim forces to retake the proposed embassy destination?



Answer: Abu Ubaidah