_Makāmat_ of Al Hariri. No one of polite scholarship would dare profess
ignorance of this great classic, and the reader of these “Assemblies”
is introduced to every branch of Mohammedan learning—poetry, history,
antiquities, theology and law. Recently Hariri has been translated
into English by Chenery and an earlier translation by Preston has also
been printed. Stanley Lane-Poole reviewing these translations thus
characterizes this Shakespeare of the Arabic world:
“It is difficult, no doubt, for most Westerns to appreciate the
beauties of this celebrated classic. There is no cohesion, no
connecting idea, between the fifty separate ‘Assemblies,’ beyond
the regular reappearance of an egregious Tartufe, called Abu-Zeyd,
a Bohemian of brilliant parts and absolutely no conscience, who
consistently extracts alms from assemblies of people in various cities,
by preaching eloquent discourses of the highest piety and morality,
and then goes off with his spoils to indulge secretly in triumphant
and unhallowed revels. Even in this framework there is no attempt at
originality; it is borrowed from Hamadâni, the ‘Wonder of the Age.’
The excellence lies in the perfect finish: the matter is nothing;
the charm consists in the form alone. Yet this form is, to English
readers, exotic and artificial. Among its special merits, in the eyes
of Easterns, is the perpetual employment of rimed prose. To us this
is apt to seem at once monotonous and strained, with its antithetic
balance in sense, and jingle of sound; but to the Arabs, as to many
primitive peoples, either riming or assonant prose was from early times
a natural mode of impassioned and impressive speech. It is the mode
adopted constantly and without strain in the Koran, and it is the mode
into which an historian, such as Ibn-el-Athîr, falls naturally when he
waxes eloquent over a great victory or a famous deed....
“But if we do not care for rimed prose, there is plenty besides in
Hariri to minister to varied tastes. In these wonderful ‘Assemblies,’
we shall find every kind of literary form, except the shambling and
the vulgar. Pagan rhetoric, Moslem exhortation, simple verse, elaborate
ode, everything that the immeasurable flexibility of the Arabic tongue
and the curious art of a fastidious scholar could achieve—all is here,
and we may take our choice.”
What is said by this scholarly critic of Hariri holds true of most
Arabic poetry, it lacks unity of idea and sobriety of expression. All
is intense. Every beautiful eye is a narcissus; tears are pearls; teeth
are pearls or hail-stones; lips are rubies; the gums, pomegranate
blossoms; piercing eyes are swords, and the eyelids, scabbards; a
mole is an ant creeping to suck the honey from the lips; a handsome
face is a full-moon; an erect form is the letter alif as penned by
Wazir Muhammed; black hair is night; the waist is a willow-branch or a
lance, and love is always passion. Far-fetched allusions abound and the
_sense_ at every turn must do homage to the _sound_. In the judgment of
Baron de Slane the two notable exceptions to the rule are Al Mutanabbi
and Ibn El Farid who exhibit a daring and surprising originality often
approaching the sublime and, in the case of the latter, mystic reveries
and spiritual beauties of no mean order.
The influence of the Arabic language on other tongues and peoples has
also been great, ever since the rise of Islam. The Persian language
adopted the Arabic alphabet and a large number of Arabic words and
phrases; so that, as Renan remarks, in some Persian books all the
words are Arabic and only the grammar remains in the vernacular. As
for Hindustani, three-fourths of its vocabulary consists of Arabic
words or Arabic words derived through the Persian. The Turkish language
also is indebted for many words taken from the Arabic and uses the
Arabic alphabet. The Malay language, with the Moslem conquest, was
also touched by Arabic influence and likewise adopted its alphabet.
In Africa its influence was yet more strongly felt. The language
extended over all the northern half of the continent and is still
growing in use to-day. The geographical nomenclature of the interior
is Arabic and Arabs preceded Livingstone, Stanley and Speke in all
their journeys. The languages of the southern Sudan, the Hausa, and
even those of Guinea borrowed largely from the Arabic. Europe itself
did not escape the influence of the conquering Semitic tongue. Spanish
and Portuguese betray a vast number of Arabic words and idioms. French
and English are also indebted to Arabic in no small degree for many
scientific and technical words introduced at the time of the crusades
and even earlier. Here is a partial list of those which we received
directly or indirectly from the Arab tongue, as given in Skeat’s
Etymological Dictionary and arranged into sentences; every word in
italics is of Arabic origin.
“The _Nabob Mohammedan Magazine_ relates, that years after the
_Hegira_, a _saracen caliph_ or _Mameluke sultan_, sat with
his _mussulman emir_, _admiral_, _vizier_, _moslem mufti_ and
_Koran-munshee_, (who knew _alchemy_ and _algebra_ and could
_cipher_ the _azimuth_ and _nadir_ to _zero_), _sheikh_ of the
_hareem_, _muezzin_ and _tariff-dragoman_ of the _arsenal_, under a
_carob_-tree, on _sofas_ of _mohair-mattress_ covered with _jerboa-_
and _gazelle-skins_, drinking _coffee_, _saffron-elixer_, _arrack_,
_alcohol_ and _syrup_ of _senna, carraway_ and _sumach_. For tonic
they also had _rose-attar_, _artichokes_, _alkaline-nitre_ in
_myrrh_, _taraxacum_, _otto-sherbet_, and _naphtha_ in _amber_ cups.
The _Sultan’s_ infant daughter wore a _carmine cotton_ and-_muslin
chemise_ or _diaper_ with a _civet talisman_ and _jasper amulet_;
she played a _Tartar lute_. Suddenly a _giaour Bedouin assassin_
with an _assagai_ and _hookah-masque_ came down on them from behind
an _alcove_ of the neighboring _arabesque mosque minaret_ like a
_sirocco-simoon_ or _monsoon_ and killed them all.”
Most of these words came from the Arabic through other languages such
as French and Spanish; others were directly transferred from the Arabic
to English; and still others have passed the long journey from Arabic
to Greek, to Latin, to Italian, to French and thence to English. The
word _magazine_ is perhaps the best example of how an Arabic-root
found shelter in the soil of all the European languages and grew into
manifold significations from its original meaning with the Arabs,
_ghazana_ = to collect or store.
In modern days, especially since the opening of the Suez canal, the
English language is beginning to exert its influence on Arabic. In
Egypt, Syria and the Persian Gulf many English commercial terms are
being adopted into the language and the newspapers spread their use
everywhere.
Last, but not least, there is the immense, incalculable influence
on the Arabic-tongue for all time exerted by the toil and sacrifice
of the early missionaries to Syria through their college and press
in giving to the world a modern Christian and scientific literature
and that crowning work of Drs. Eli Smith and C. V. A. Van Dyck—the
Arabic Bible. The mission press at Beirut has four hundred and eighty
three volumes on its catalogue and prints about twenty-five million
pages annually.[90] The Arabic Bible “one of the noblest literally
monuments of the age” will yet prove a mighty influence in purifying
and ennobling the language and preserving its classical diction to
the utmost bounds of the Arab-world. There was only one Koran and
there will be only one Arabic Bible—the finished product of American
scholarship and her best gift to the Mohammedan world.
[Illustration: TITLE PAGE OF A CHRISTIAN PAPER PRINTED IN ARABIC.]
XXVI
THE ARAB
“Children of Shem! Firstborn of Noah’s race
And still forever children; at the door
Of Eden found, unconscious of disgrace,
And loitering on while all are gone before;
Too proud to dig, too careless to be poor
Taking the gifts of God in thanklessness,
Not rendering aught, nor supplicating more,
Nor arguing with Him if He hide His face.
Yours is the rain and sunshine, and the way
Of an old wisdom, by our world forgot,
The courage of a day which knew not death;
Well may we sons of Japhet, in dismay,
Pause in our vain mad fight for life and breath,
Beholding you—I bow and reason not”—_Anon._
Concerning the origin of the tribes and people that now inhabit
the Arabian peninsula there is disagreement among the learned. It
is generally held that the original tribes of Northern Arabia are
descendants of Ishmael. This is also the tradition of all Arab
historians. As to the South Arabians, who occupied their highlands with
the Hadramaut coast for centuries before the Ishmaelites appeared on
the scene there are two opinions. Some believe them to be descendants
of Joktan (Arabic _Kahtan_) the son of Heber and therefore, like
the Northern Arabs, true Semites. Others think that the earliest
inhabitants of South Arabia were Cushites or Hamitic; while some German
scholars hold that in the earlier Arabs the children of Joktan and of
Cush were blended into one race.
Among the Ishmaelites are included not only Ishmael’s direct
descendants through the twelve princes,[91] but the Edomites,
Moabites, Ammonites, Midianites and probably other cognate tribes.
The names of the sons of Ishmael in relation to their settlements and
the traces of these names in modern Arabia is a subject which has been
taken up by Bible dictionaries but which still offers an interesting
field for further study. The Arabs themselves have always claimed
Abrahamic descent for the tribes of the north. The age-long, racial
animosity between the Yemenites and Māadites seems to confirm the
theory of two distinct races inhabiting the peninsula from very early
times; and they remain distinct until to-day in spite of a common
language and a common religion. “The animosity of these two races to
each other is unaccountable but invincible. Like two chemical products
which instantly explode when placed in contact, so has it always been
found impossible for Yemenite and Māadite to live quietly together.
At the present day the Yemenite in the vicinity of Jerusalem detests
the Māadite of Hebron, and when questioned as to the reason of their
eternal enmity has no other reply but that it has been so from time
immemorial. In the time of the Caliphs the territory of Damascus was
desolated by a murderous war for two years, because a Māadite had taken
a lemon from the garden of a Yemenite. The province of Murcia in Spain
was deluged with blood for seven years because a Māadite inadvertently
plucked a Yemenite vine-leaf. It was a passion which surmounted every
tie of affection or interest. ‘You have prayed for your father: why do
you not pray for your mother?’ a Yemenite was asked near the Kaaba.
‘For my mother!’ said the Yemenite, ‘How could I? She was of the race
of Māad.’”[92]
The Yemenites at a very early period founded the strong and opulent
Himyarite Kingdom. The Himyarites were the navigators of the East and
they were celebrated for their skill in manufacture as well as for
enterprise in commerce; they had a written language, inscriptions
in which were discovered all over south Arabia during the present
century. The Māadite or Ishmaelite Arabs on the contrary were more
nomad in their habits and were masters of the caravans which carried
the enormous overland trade by the two great trunk-lines of antiquity,
from the East to the West. One of these lines extended from Aden,
(Arabia Emporium of Ptolemy) along the western part of the peninsula
and through Yemen to Egypt; the other extended from Babylon to Tadmor
and Damascus. A third route, nearly as important, was also in the hands
of the Ishmaelite Arabs, by Wady Rumma and Nejd to the old capital of
the Himyarites, Mareb.[93] These caravans unified the Arabian peninsula
and fused into one its two peoples; the northern Arabs receiving
somewhat of the southern civilization and the southern Arabs adopting
the language of the north. But the decline in the caravan trade brought
disaster to Arabia; the ship of the desert found a competitor in the
ships of the sea. Old settlements were broken up, great cities, which
flourished because of overland trade, were abandoned and whole tribes
were reduced from opulence to poverty. In this time of transition,
long before the birth of Mohammed, the Arabic nation as it is known to
modern history seems to have been formed.
The modern Arabs classify themselves into Bedouins and town-dwellers;
or, in their own poetic way, _ahl el beit_ and _ahl el h’eit_,
“the people of the tent,” and “the people of the wall.” But this
classification is hardly sufficient, although it has been generally
adopted by writers on Arabia. Edson L. Clark, in his book, The Arabs
and the Turks, gives five classes: “Beginning at the lowest round of
the ladder we have first the sedentary or settled Arabs. .. who though
still many of them dwelling in tents have become cultivators of the
soil. By their nomadic brethren these settled Arabs are thoroughly
despised as degraded and denationalized by the change in their mode
of life. Secondly, the wandering tribes in the neighborhood of the
settled districts, and in constant intercourse with their inhabitants.
Both these classes, but more especially the latter, are thoroughly
demoralized.... The third class consists of the Arabs of the Turkish
towns and villages; but they too are a degenerate class both in
language and character.... The fourth class consists of the inhabitants
of the towns and villages of Arabia proper, who by their peculiar
situation have remained more secluded from the rest of the world than
even the wandering tribes.... Finally the great nomadic tribes of the
interior, still preserving unchanged the primitive character, habits
and customs of their race.” This last class and this alone are the real
Bedouins.
In addition to this classification according to civilization there
is the universal genealogical classification; and no people in the
world are fonder of genealogies than the Arabs. The names of tribes
and families go back, in many cases to pre-islamic days. The earliest
tribal-names, therefore, are either taken from animals or totem-names,
like Panthers, Dogs, Lizards, _e. g._, _Anmar Kilab_, _Dibab_, etc.;
place-names transformed afterward by the genealogists into ancestors,
_e. g._, _Hadramaut_, _Hauāb_; or from idols and idol-worship, _e. g._,
_Abd el Kais_, _Abd al Lat_, etc. But the later system of genealogies
as given by the Arabs are utterly unreliable because they are so
evidently artificial. The backbone of the system was the pedigree of
Mohammed and this is notoriously untrustworthy. “Dummy ancestors” were
inserted in order to connect a particular but unimportant tribe with
a distinguished one, and Hamdani himself tells us that he found it a
common practice of obscure desert groups to call themselves by the name
of some more famous tribe.[94]
Character is difficult to define. To depict the moral physiognomy of a
nation and their physical traits in such a way that nothing important
is omitted and no single characteristic exaggerated at the cost of
others. This difficulty is increased in the case of the Arabs, by their
twofold origin and their present twofold civilization. That which is
true of the town-dweller, is not always true of the Bedouin and vice
versa. Moreover the influence of the neighboring countries must be
taken into account. Eastern Arabia has taken color by long contact with
Persia; this is seen in speech, architecture, food and dress. Southern
Arabia, especially Hadramaut, has absorbed East Indian ideas. While
Western Arabia, especially Hejaz, shows in many ways its proximity to
Egypt. Not losing sight of these distinctions, which will account for
many exceptions to the general statements made, what is the character
of the Arabs?
Physically, they are undoubtedly one of the strongest and noblest races
of the world. Baron de Larrey, surgeon-general of the first Napoleon,
in his expeditions to Egypt and Syria, says: “Their physical structure
is in all respects more perfect than that of Europeans; their organs
of sense exquisitely acute, their size above the average of men in
general, their figure robust and elegant, the color brown; their
intelligence proportionate to their physical perfection, and without
doubt superior, other things being equal, to that of other nations.”
The typical Arab face is round-oval, but the general leanness of the
features detracts from its regularity; the bones are prominent; the
eyebrows long and bushy; the eye small, deep-set, fiery black or a
dark, deep brown. The face expresses half dignity, half cunning, and is
not unkindly, although never smiling or benignant. The teeth are white,
even, short and broad. The Arabs have very scanty beards as a rule,
but those of the towns often cultivate a patriarchal beard like the
traditional beard of the prophet. The figure is well-knit, muscular,
long-limbed, never fat. The arms and legs are thin, almost shrunken,
but with muscles like whip-cords. As young men the Bedouins are often
good-looking, with bright eyes and dark hair, but the constant habit of
frowning to protect the eyes from the glare of the sun, soon gives the
face a fierce aspect; at forty their beards turn grey and at fifty they
appear old men.
It is a common mistake to consider the Arabs democratic in their ideas
of society. The genuine Arab was and is always an aristocrat. Feuds
originate about the precedence of one family or tribe over another;
marriage is only allowed between tribes or clans of equal standing; the
whole system of sheikh-government is an aristocratic idea; and as final
proof there still exists a species of caste in South Arabia, while in
North Arabia the Ma’adan Arabs of Mesopotamia and the _Suleyb_ of the
desert are little better than Pariahs as regards their neighbors. It is
with a heavy heart that any Arab sees set over him a man of less noble
extraction than himself. The religion of Arabia has made its people
fanatics, although according to Nöldeke, “fanaticism is characteristic
of all Semitic religions.” But he forgets the real distinction between
intolerance of another religion on ethical grounds as in the case of
Judaism, and the infinitely hard, one-sided, crude exclusiveness of
Islam.
The Arabs rarely have the power of taking in complex unities at a
glance; the talent for arrangement is absent. An Arab carpenter cannot
draw a right angle, nor can an Arab servant lay a tablecloth square
on the table. The old Arab temple called a cube (Kaaba) has _none_
of its sides or angles equal; their houses show the same lack of
the “carpenter’s eye” to-day. Streets are seldom parallel, even the
street, so-called, was not _straight_ in Damascus. The Arab mind loves
units, not unity; they are good soldiers, but poor generals; there is
no partnership in business; and no public spirit; each man lives for
himself. That is the reason why Yemen cannot shake off the yoke of the
Turk, and this explains why the smallest towns in Arabia have a great
many little mosques. The Arab has a keen eye for particulars, great
subjectivity, nervous restlessness, deep passion and inward feeling,
and yet joined with strong conservatism and love of the past. In
everything he follows old models and traditions; witness their poetry
and their tent-life—in Arab phrase, termed their “houses of hair” and
their “houses of poetry.” As a result of their language-structure,
the Arabs have naturally a strong tendency to a pointed, sharp speech
of epigrammatic brevity, but also go to the other extreme of ornate
tautology. The former is characteristic of the desert; the latter of
the towns. Eloquence and poetry are still worshipped. The only fine
art which Arabs admire is that of caligraphy; and those who have seen
finished specimens of an Arab master-penman, must acknowledge that in
them are all the elements of painting and sculpture.
The Arabs are polite, good-natured, lively, manly, patient, courageous
and hospitable to a fault. They are also contentious, untruthful,
sensuous, distrustful, covetous, proud and superstitious. One must
always keep in mind this paradox in dealing with an Arab. As Clark
expresses it, “an Arab will lie and cheat, and swear any number of
false oaths, in a pecuniary transaction; but when once his faith is
pledged he can be implicitly trusted, even to the last extremity.”
There are Arab oaths such as _wallah_, which are intended to confirm
falsehoods and signify nothing. There are others, such as the threefold
oath, with _wa_, _bi_ and _ti_ as particles of swearing, which not even
the vilest robber among them dare break. Grammatically, the two oaths
are nearly the same.
Robbery is a fine art among the nomads; but the high-minded Arab robs
lawfully, honestly and honorably. He will not attack his victims in
the night; he tries to avoid all bloodshed by coming with overwhelming
force; and if his enterprise miscarries, he boldly enters the first
tent possible, proclaims his true character and asks protection. The
_Dakheil_, or privilege of sanctuary, the salt covenant, the blood
covenant and the sacredness of the guest, all prove that the Arabs
are trustworthy. And yet, in the ordinary affairs of life, lying and
deception are the rule and seldom the exception. The true Arab is
niggardly when he buys, and will haggle for hours to reduce a price;
and yet he is prodigal and lavish in giving away his goods to prove his
hospitality.
According to Burckhardt, the Arab is the only real lover of the
Orient; if he limits this to the Bedouin-Arab he is correct. In matters
of love and marriage the Arab of the towns is what Mohammed, the Meccan
merchant was, after the death of the old lady Khadijah. But Arabic
poetry of the times of ignorance does occasionally breathe the true
tale of love and chivalry; and the desert Arabs as a rule are not
polygamists nor given to divorce.
It was a law among the ancient Arabs that whoever sheds the blood of
a man owes blood on that account to the family of the slain. This law
of blood-revenge was confirmed by the Koran and is a sacred right
everywhere in Arabia. An Arab is considered degenerate who accepts a
fine or any consideration save blood for blood. This law is both the
cause of continual feuds, and tends to terminate them without much
bloodshed. Arabs of the town and of the desert will quarrel for hours
without coming to blows; it is not cowardice that prevents an open
encounter, but the fear of shedding blood and blood-revenge.
Family life among the Arabs is best studied by looking at child-life
in the desert and at the position of women among the Bedouin and the
town-dwellers. In no part of the world does the newborn child meet
less preparation for its reception than among the Bedouin. A land
bare of many blessings, general poverty and the law of the survival
of the fittest, has made the Arab mother stern of heart. In the open
desert under the shade of an acacia bush or behind a camel, the Arab
baby first sees the daylight. As soon as it is born the mother herself
rubs and cleans the child with sand, places it in her handkerchief
and carries it home. She suckles the child for a short period, and
at the age of four months it already drinks profusely of camels’
milk. A name is given to the infant immediately; generally from some
trifling incident connected with its birth, or from some object
which attracts the mother’s fancy. Moslem names such as Hassan Ali
or Fatimah, are extremely uncommon among the true Bedouins; although
Mohammed is sometimes given. Beside his own peculiar name every
Bedouin boy is called by the name of his father and tribe. And what is
more remarkable, boys are often called after their sisters, _e. g._,
_Akhoo Noorah_, the brother of Noorah. Girls’ names are taken from the
constellations, birds, or desert animals like _Gazelle_.