CHARACTER.
The natural or innate character of the modern Egyptians is altered, in a
remarkable degree, by their religion, laws, and government, as well as
by the climate and other causes; and to form a just opinion of it is,
therefore, very difficult. We may, however, confidently state, that they
are endowed, in a higher degree than most other people, with some of the
more important mental qualities; particularly, quickness of
apprehension, a ready wit, and a retentive memory. In youth, they
generally possess these and other intellectual powers; but the causes
above alluded to gradually lessen their mental energy.
Of the leading features of their character, none is more remarkable than
their religious pride. They regard persons of every other faith as the
children of perdition; and such, the Muslim is early taught to
despise.[404] It is written in the Kur-án, “O ye who have believed, take
not the Jews and Christians as friends: they are friends one to another;
and whosoever of you taketh them as his friends, verily he is [one] of
them.”[405] From motives of politeness, or selfish interest, these
people will sometimes talk with apparent liberality of sentiment, and
even make professions of friendship, to a Christian (particularly to a
European), whom, in their hearts, they contemn: but as the Muslims of
Egypt judge of the Franks in general from the majority of those in their
towns, some of whom are outcasts from their native countries, and others
(though not _all_ the rest, of course), men under no moral restraint,
they are hardly to be blamed for despising them. The Christians are,
however, generally treated with civility by the people of Egypt: the
Muslims being as remarkable for their toleration as for their contempt
of unbelievers.
It is considered the highest honour among the Muslims, to be religious;
but the desire to appear so leads many into hypocrisy and pharisaical
ostentation. When a Muslim is unoccupied by business, or amusement, or
conversation, he is often heard to utter some pious ejaculation. If a
wicked thought, or the remembrance of a wicked action that he has
committed, trouble him, he sighs forth, “I beg forgiveness of God, the
Great!” The shopkeeper, when not engaged with customers, nor enjoying
his pipe, often employs himself, in the sight and hearing of the
passengers in the street, in reciting a chapter of the Kur-án, or in
repeating to himself those expressions in praise of God which often
follow the ordinary prayers, and are counted with the beads; and in the
same public manner he prays.—The Muslims frequently swear by God (but
not irreverently); and also by the Prophet, and by the head or beard of
the person they address. When one is told anything that excites his
surprise and disbelief, he generally exclaims, “Wa-llah?” or,
“Wa-lláhi?” (by God?); and the other replies, “Wa-lláhi!”—As on ordinary
occasions before eating and drinking, so also on taking medicine,
commencing a writing, or any important undertaking, and before many a
trifling act, it is their habit to say, “In the name of God, the
Compassionate, the Merciful;” and after the act, “Praise be to God.”
When two persons make any considerable bargain, they recite together the
first chapter of the Kur-án (the Fát’hah). In case of a debate on any
matter of business or of opinion, it is common for one of the parties,
or a third person who may wish to settle the dispute, or to cool the
disputants, to exclaim, “Blessing on the Prophet!”—“O God, favour him!”
is said, in a low voice, by the other or others; and they then continue
the argument, but generally with moderation.
Religious ejaculations often interrupt conversation upon trivial and
even licentious subjects, in Egyptian society; sometimes, in such a
manner that a person not well acquainted with the character of this
people would perhaps imagine that they intended to make religion a jest.
In many of their most indecent songs the name of God is frequently
introduced; and this is certainly done without any profane motive, but
from the habit of often mentioning the name of the Deity in vain, and of
praising Him on every trifling occasion of surprise, or in testimony of
admiration of anything uncommon. Thus, a libertine, describing his
impressions on the first sight of a charming girl (in one of the
grossest songs I have ever seen or heard even in the Arabic language),
exclaims, “Extolled be He who formed thee, O full moon!”—and this and
many similar expressions are common in many other songs and odes; but
what is most remarkable in the song particularly alluded to above, is a
profane comparison with which it terminates. I shall adduce, as an
example of the strange manner in which licentiousness and religion are
often blended together in vulgar Egyptian poetry and rhyming prose, a
translation of the last three stanzas of an ode on love and wine:—
“She granted me a reception, the graceful of form, after her distance
and coyness. I kissed her teeth and her cheek; and the cup rang in her
hand. The odours of musk and ambergris were diffused by a person whose
form surpassed the elegance of a straight and slender branch. She
spread a bed of brocade; and I passed the time in uninterrupted
happiness. A Turkish fawn enslaved me.
“Now I beg forgiveness of God, my Lord, for all my faults and sins;
and for all that my heart hath said. My members testify against me.
Whenever grief oppresseth me, O Lord, Thou art my hope from whatever
afflicteth me. Thou knowest what I say, and what I think. Thou art the
Bountiful, the Forgiving! I implore Thy protection: then pardon me.
“And I praise that benignant being[406] whom a cloud was wont to
shade; the comely: how great was his comeliness! He will intercede for
us on the day of judgment, when his haters, the vile, the polytheists,
shall be repentant. Would that I might always, as long as I live,
accompany the pilgrims, to perform the circuits and worship and
courses, and live in uninterrupted happiness!”
In translating the first of the above stanzas, I have substituted the
feminine for the masculine pronoun; for, in the original, the former is
meant, though the latter is used, as is commonly the case in similar
compositions of the Egyptians. One of my Muslim friends having just
called on me after my writing the above remarks, I read to him the last
four stanzas of this ode, and asked him if he considered it proper thus
to mix up religion with debauchery. He answered, “Perfectly proper; a
man relates his having committed sins, and then prays to God for
forgiveness, and blesses the Prophet.”—“But,” said I, “this is an ode
written to be chanted for the amusement of persons who take pleasure in
unlawful indulgences; and see here, when I close the leaves, the page
which celebrates a debauch comes in contact, face to face, with that
upon which are written the names of the Deity; the commemoration of the
pleasures of sin is placed upon the prayer for forgiveness.” “That is
nonsense,” replied my friend; “turn the book over, place that side
upwards which is now downwards, and then the case will be the
reverse—sin covered by forgiveness; and God, whose name be exalted, hath
said in the Excellent Book, ‘Say, O my servants, who have transgressed
against your own souls, despair not of the mercy of God, seeing that God
forgiveth all sins [unto those who repent], for He is the Very
Forgiving, the Merciful.’”[407] His answer reminds me of what I have
often observed, that the generality of Arabs, a most inconsistent
people, are every day breaking their law in some point or other,
trusting that two words (“Astaghfir Alláh,” or “I beg forgiveness of
God”) will cancel every transgression. He had a copy of the Kur-án in
his hand, and on my turning it over to look for the verse he had quoted,
I found in it a scrap of paper containing some words from the venerated
volume; he was about to burn this piece of paper lest it should fall out
and be trodden upon; and on my asking him whether it was allowable to do
so, he answered, that it might either be burnt, or thrown into running
water; but that it was better to burn it, as the words would ascend in
the flames, and be conveyed by angels to heaven. Sometimes the Kur-án is
quoted in jest, even by persons of strict religious principles. For
instance, the following equivocal and evasive answer was once suggested
to me on a person’s asking of me a present of a watch, which, I must
previously mention, is called “sá-’ah,” a word which signifies an
“hour,” and the “period of the general judgment.”—“Verily, the ‘sá’ah’
shall come: I will surely make it to appear” (chap. xx. ver. 15).
There are often met with, in Egyptian society, persons who will
introduce an apposite quotation from the Kur-án or the Traditions of the
Prophet in common conversation, whatever be the topic; and an
interruption of this kind is not considered, as it would be in general
society in our own country, either hypocritical or annoying; but rather
occasions expressions, if not feelings, of admiration, and often diverts
the hearers from a trivial subject to matters of a more serious nature.
The Muslims of Egypt, and, I believe, those of other countries, are
generally fond of conversing on religion; and the most prevalent mode of
entertaining a party of guests among the higher and middle ranks in this
place (Cairo) is the recital of a “khatmeh” (or the whole of the
Kur-án), which is chanted by fikees, hired for the purpose; or the
performance of a “zikr,” which has been before mentioned. Few persons
among them would venture to say, that they prefer hearing a concert of
music to the performance of a khatmeh or zikr; and they certainly do
take great pleasure in the latter performances. The manner in which the
Kur-án is sometimes chanted is, indeed, very pleasing; though I must
say, that a complete khatmeh is, to me, extremely tiresome. With the
religious zeal of the Muslims, I am daily struck: yet I have often
wondered that they so seldom attempt to make converts to their faith. On
my expressing my surprise, as I have frequently done, at their
indifference with respect to the propagation of their religion,
contrasting it with the conduct of their ancestors of the early ages of
El-Islám, I have generally been answered—“Of what use would it be if I
could convert a thousand infidels? Would it increase the number of the
faithful? By no means: the number of the faithful is decreed by God; and
no act of man can increase or diminish it.” The contending against such
an answer would have led to an interminable dispute: so I never ventured
a reply. I have heard quoted, by way of apology for their neglecting to
make proselytes, the following words of the Kur-án: “Dispute not against
those who have received the Scriptures”[408] (namely, the Christians and
Jews), without the words immediately following—“unless in the best
manner; except against such of them as behave injuriously [towards you]:
and say [unto them], We believe in [the revelation] that hath been sent
down unto us, and [also in that] which hath been sent down unto you: and
our God and your God is one.”[409] If this precept were acted upon by
the Muslims, it might perhaps lead to disputes which would make them
more liberal-minded, and much better informed.
The respect which most modern Muslims pay to their Prophet is almost
idolatrous. They very frequently swear by him; and many of the most
learned, as well as the ignorant, often implore his intercession.
Pilgrims are generally much more affected on visiting his tomb than in
performing any other religious rite. There are some Muslims who will not
do anything that the Prophet is not recorded to have done: and who
particularly abstain from eating anything that he did not eat, though
its lawfulness be undoubted. The Imám Ahmad Ibn-Hambal would not even
eat water-melons, because, although he knew that the Prophet ate them,
he could not learn whether he ate them with or without the rind, or
whether he broke, bit, or cut them: and he forbade a woman, who
questioned him as to the propriety of the act, to spin by the light of
torches passing in the street by night, which were not her own property,
because the Prophet had not mentioned whether it was lawful to do so,
and was not known to have ever availed himself of a light belonging to
another person without that person’s leave.—I once, admiring some very
pretty pipe-bowls, asked the maker why he did not stamp them with his
name. He answered “God forbid! My name is Ahmad” (one of the names of
the Prophet): “would you have me put it in the fire?”—I have heard
adduced as one of the subjects of complaint against the present Básha,
his causing the camels and horses of the government to be branded with
his names, “Mohammad ’Alee.” “In the first place,” said a friend of
mine, who mentioned this fact to me, “the iron upon which are engraved
these names, names which ought to be so much venerated, the names of the
Prophet (God favour and preserve him!), and his Cousin (may God be well
pleased with him!), is put into the fire, which is shocking: then it is
applied to the neck of a camel; and causes blood, which is impure, to
flow, and to pollute the sacred names both upon the iron and upon the
animal’s skin: and when the wound is healed, how probable is it, and
almost certain and unavoidable, that the camel will, when he lies down,
lay his neck upon something unclean!”
A similar feeling is the chief reason why the Muslims object to printing
their books. They have scarcely a book (I do not remember to have seen
one) that does not contain the name of God: it is a rule among them to
commence every book with the words “In the name of God, the
Compassionate, the Merciful,” and to begin the preface or introduction
by praising God, and blessing the Prophet; and they fear some impurity
might be contracted by the ink that is applied to the name of the Deity,
in the process of printing, or by the paper to be impressed with that
sacred name, and perhaps with words taken from the Kur-án. They fear,
also, that their books, becoming very cheap by being printed, would fall
into the hands of infidels; and are much shocked at the idea of using a
brush composed of hogs’ hair (which was at first done here) to apply the
ink to the name, and often to the words, of God. Hence, books have
hitherto been printed in Egypt only by order of the government: but two
or three persons have lately applied for, and received, permission to
make use of the government-press. I am acquainted with a bookseller here
who has long been desirous of printing some books which he feels sure
would bring him considerable profit; but cannot overcome his scruples as
to the lawfulness of doing so.
The honour which the Muslims show to the Kur-án is very striking. They
generally take care never to hold it, or suspend it, in such a manner as
that it shall be below the girdle; and they deposit it upon a high and
clean place; and never put another book, or anything else, on the top of
it. On quoting from it, they usually say, “He whose name be exalted” (or
“God, whose name be exalted”) “hath said, in the Excellent Book.” They
consider it extremely improper that the sacred volume should be touched
by a Christian or a Jew, or any other person not a believer in its
doctrines; though some of them are induced, by covetousness, but very
rarely, to sell copies of it to such persons. It is even forbidden to
the Muslim to touch it unless he be in a state of legal purity; and
hence, these words of the book itself—“None shall touch it but they who
are purified”[410]—are often stamped upon the cover. The same remarks
apply, also, to anything upon which is inscribed a passage of the
Kur-án. It is remarkable, however, that most of the old Arab coins bear
inscriptions of words from the Kur-án, or else the testimony of the
faith (“There is no deity but God: Mohammad is God’s Apostle”);
notwithstanding they were intended for the use of Jews and Christians,
as well as Muslims: but I have heard this practice severely
condemned.—On my once asking one of my Muslim friends whether figs were
esteemed wholesome in Egypt, he answered, “Is not the fig celebrated in
the Kur-án? God swears by it: ‘By the fig and the olive!’” (chap. xcv.,
ver. 1).
There is certainly much enthusiastic piety in the character of the
modern Muslims, notwithstanding their inconsistencies and superstitions:
such, at least, is generally the case. There are, I believe, very few
professed Muslims who are really unbelievers; and these dare not openly
declare their unbelief, through fear of losing their heads for their
apostasy. I have heard of two or three such, who have been rendered so
by long and intimate intercourse with Europeans; and have met with one
materialist, who has often had long discussions with me. In preceding
chapters of this work, several practices indicative of the religious
feeling which prevails among the Muslims of Egypt have been incidentally
mentioned. Religious appeals are generally used by the beggars in this
country: some examples of these will be given hereafter. Of a similar
nature, also, are the cries of many of the persons who sell vegetables,
etc. The cry of the nightly watchman in the quarter in which I lived in
Cairo during my first visit struck me as remarkable for its beauty and
sublimity—“I extol the perfection of the living King, who sleepeth not
nor dieth.” The present watchman, in the same quarter, exclaims, “O
Lord! O Everlasting!” Many other illustrations of the religious
character of the people whom I am endeavouring to portray might be
added. I must, however, here acknowledge, that religion has much
declined among them and most others of the same faith. Whoever has been
in the habit of conversing familiarly with the modern Muslims must often
have heard them remark, with a sigh, “It is the end of time!”—“The world
has fallen into infidelity.”—They are convinced that the present state
of their religion is a proof that the end of the world is near. The
mention which I have made, in a former chapter, of some of the tenets of
the Wahhábees, as being those of the primitive Muslims, shows how much
the generality of the modern professors of the faith of the Kur-án have
deviated from the precepts originally delivered to its disciples.
Influenced by their belief in predestination, the men display, in times
of distressing uncertainty, an exemplary patience, and, after any
afflicting event, a remarkable degree of resignation and fortitude,
approaching nearly to apathy;[411] generally exhibiting their sorrow
only by a sigh, and the exclamation of “Allah kereem!” (God is
bountiful!)—but the women, on the contrary, give vent to their grief by
the most extravagant cries and shrieks. While the Christian blames
himself for every untoward event which he thinks he has brought upon
himself, or might have avoided, the Muslim enjoys a remarkable serenity
of mind in all the vicissitudes of life. When he sees his end
approaching, his resignation is still conspicuous: he exclaims, “Verily
to God we belong; and verily to Him we return!” and to those who inquire
respecting his state, in general his reply is, “Praise be to God! Our
Lord is bountiful!”—His belief in predestination does not, however,
prevent his taking any step to attain an object that he may have in
view; not being perfectly absolute, or unconditional: nor does it in
general make him careless of avoiding danger; for he thinks himself
forbidden to do so by these words of the Kur-án,[412] “Throw not
yourselves[413] into perdition;” excepting in some cases; as in those of
pestilence and other sicknesses; being commanded, by the Prophet, not to
go into a city where there is a pestilence, nor to come out from it. The
lawfulness of quarantine is contested among Muslims; but the generality
of them condemn it.
The same belief in predestination renders the Muslim utterly devoid of
presumption with regard to his future actions, or to any future events.
He never speaks of anything that he intends to do, or of any
circumstance which he expects and hopes may come to pass, without
adding, “If it be the will of God;” and, in like manner, in speaking of
a past event of which he is not certain, he generally prefaces or
concludes what he says with the expression “God is all-knowing” (or, “—
most knowing.”).
Benevolence and charity to the poor are virtues which the Egyptians
possess in an eminent degree, and which are instilled into their hearts
by religion; but from their own profession it appears that they are as
much excited to the giving of alms by the expectation of enjoying
corresponding rewards in heaven, as by pity for the distresses of their
fellow-creatures, or a disinterested wish to do the will of God. It may
be attributed, in some measure, to the charitable disposition of the
inhabitants, that beggars are so numerous in Cairo. The many handsome
“Sebeels,” or public fountains (buildings erected and endowed for the
gratuitous supply of water to passengers), which are seen in this city,
and the more humble structures of the same kind in the villages and
fields, are monuments of the same virtue.
In my earlier intercourse with the people of Egypt, I was much pleased
at observing their humanity to dumb animals; to see a person, who
gathered together the folds of his loose clothes to prevent their coming
in contact with a dog, throw, to the impure animal, a portion of the
bread which he was eating. Murders, burglaries, and other atrocious
crimes, were then very rare among them. Now, however, I find the
generality of the Egyptians very much changed for the worse, with
respect to their humanity to brutes and to their fellow-creatures. The
increased severity of the government seems, as might be expected, to
have engendered tyranny, and an increase of every crime, in the people:
but I am inclined to think that the conduct of Europeans has greatly
conduced to produce this effect; for I do not remember to have seen acts
of cruelty to dumb animals excepting in places where Franks either
reside or are frequent visitors, as Alexandria, Cairo, and Thebes. It is
shocking to see the miserable asses which are used for carrying dust,
etc., in Cairo; many of them with large crimson wounds, like carbuncles,
constantly chafed by rough ropes of the fibres of the palm-tree which
are attached to the back part of the pack-saddle. The dogs in the
streets are frequently beaten, both by boys and men, from mere
wantonness; and I often see children amusing themselves with molesting
the cats, which were formerly much favoured.[414] Robberies and murders,
during two or three months after my last arrival here, were occurrences
of almost every week. Most of the Turkish governors of districts used to
exercise great oppression over the felláheen: but since persons of the
latter class have been put in the places of the former, they have
exceeded their predecessors in tyranny; and it is a common remark, that
they are “more execrable than the Turks.”[415]
Though I now frequently see the houseless dogs beaten in the streets of
Cairo, and that when quite inoffensive and quiet, I still often observe
men feeding them with bread, etc.; and the persons who do so are mostly
poor men. In every district of this city are many small troughs, which
are daily replenished with water for the dogs. In each street where
there are shops, a sakka receives a small monthly sum from each shopman
for sprinkling the street, and filling the trough or troughs for the
dogs in that street. There is also a dogs’-trough under almost every
shop of a sharbetlee, or seller of sherbets.—It may here be mentioned,
that the dogs of Cairo, few of which have masters, compose regular and
distinct tribes; and the dogs of each tribe confine themselves to a
certain district or quarter, from which they invariably chase away any
strange dog that may venture to intrude. These animals are very numerous
in Cairo. They are generally careful to avoid coming in contact with the
men; as if they knew that the majority of the people of the city regard
them as unclean: but they often bark at persons in the Frank dress; and
at night they annoy every passenger. They are of use in eating the offal
thrown out from the butchers’ shops, and from houses. Many dogs also
prowl about the mounds of rubbish around the metropolis; and these, with
the vultures, feed upon the carcases of the camels, asses, etc., that
die in the town. They are mostly of a sandy colour; and seem to partake
of the form and disposition of the jackal.
The general opinion of the Muslims, which holds the dog to be unclean,
does not prevent their keeping this animal as a house-guard, and
sometimes even as a pet. A curious case of this kind occurred a short
time ago. A woman in this city, who had neither husband nor child nor
friend to solace her, made a dog her companion. Death took this only
associate from her; and, in her grief and her affection for it, she
determined to bury it; and not merely to commit it to the earth without
ceremony, but to inter it as a Muslim, in a respectable tomb, in the
cemetery of the Imám Esh-Sháfe’ee, which is regarded as especially
sacred. She washed the dog according to the rules prescribed to be
observed in the case of a deceased Muslim, wrapped it in handsome
grave-clothes, sent for a bier, and put it in; then hired several
wailing-women; and, with them, performed a regular lamentation. This
done (but not without exciting the wonder of her neighbours, who could
not conjecture what person in her house was dead, yet would not intrude,
because she never associated with them), she hired a number of chanters,
to head the funeral-procession, and schoolboys, to sing, and carry the
Kur-án before the bier; and the train went forth in respectable order;
herself and the hired wailing-women following the bier, and rending the
air with their shrieks: but the procession had not advanced many steps,
when one of the female neighbours ventured to ask the afflicted lady who
the person was that was dead; and was answered, “It is my poor child.”
The inquirer charged her with uttering a falsehood; and the bereaved
lady confessed that it was her dog; begging, at the same time, that her
inquisitive neighbour would not divulge the secret; but, for an Egyptian
woman to keep a secret, and such a secret, was impossible: it was
immediately made known to the by-standers; and a mob, in no good humour,
soon collected, and put a stop to the funeral. The chanters and
singing-boys and wailing-women vented their rage against their employer
(as soon as they had secured their money) for having made fools of them;
and if the police had not interfered, she would probably have fallen a
victim to popular fury.[416]
It is a curious fact, that, in Cairo, houseless cats are fed at the
expense of the Kádee; or, rather, almost wholly at his expense. Every
afternoon, a quantity of offal is brought into the great court before
the Mahkem′eh; and the cats are called together to eat. The Sultán
Ez-Záhir Beybars (as I learn from the Básh Kátib of the Kádee)
bequeathed a garden, which is called “gheyt el-kuttah” (or the garden of
the cat), near his mosque, on the north of Cairo, for the benefit of the
cats: but this garden has been sold, over and over again, by the
trustees and purchasers: the former sold it on pretence of its being too
much out of order to be rendered productive, excepting at a considerable
expense; and it now produces only a “hekr” (or quit-rent) of fifteen
piasters a year, to be applied to the maintenance of the destitute cats.
Almost the whole expense of their support has, in consequence, fallen
upon the Kádee, who, by reason of his office, is the guardian of this
and all other charitable and pious legacies, and must suffer for the
neglect of his predecessors. Latterly, however, the duty of feeding the
cats has been very inadequately performed. Many persons in Cairo, when
they wish to get rid of a cat, send or take it to the Kádee’s house, and
let it loose in the great court.
The affability of the Egyptians towards each other has been mentioned in
a preceding chapter. Towards foreigners who do not conform with their
manners and customs, and profess the same way of thinking, they are
polite in their address, but cold and reserved, or parasitical, in
conversation. With such persons, and even among themselves, they often
betray much impertinent curiosity. They are generally extremely afraid
of making to themselves enemies; and this fear frequently induces them
to uphold each other, even when it is criminal to do so.
Cheerfulness is another remarkable characteristic of this people. Some
of them profess a great contempt for frivolous amusements; but most take
pleasure in such pastimes; and it is surprising to see how easily they
are amused: wherever there are crowds, noise, and bustle, they are
delighted. In their public festivals, there is little to amuse a person
of good education; but the Egyptians enjoy them as much as we do the
best of our entertainments. Those of the lower orders seem to be
extremely happy with their pipes and coffee, after the occupations of
the day, in the society of the coffee-shop.
Hospitality is a virtue for which the natives of the East in general are
highly and deservedly admired; and the people of Egypt are well entitled
to commendation on this account. A word which signifies literally “a
person on a journey” (“musáfir”) is the term most commonly employed in
this country in the sense of a visitor or guest. There are very few
persons here who would think of sitting down to a meal, if there were a
stranger in the house, without inviting him to partake of it, unless the
latter were a menial; in which case, he would be invited to eat with the
servants. It would be considered a shameful violation of good manners if
a Muslim abstained from ordering the table to be prepared at the usual
time because a visitor happened to be present. Persons of the middle
classes in this country, if living in a retired situation, sometimes
take their supper before the door of their house, and invite every
passenger of respectable appearance to eat with them. This is very
commonly done among the lower orders. In cities and large towns, claims
on hospitality are unfrequent; as there are many wekálehs, or khans,
where strangers may obtain lodging; and food is very easily procured:
but in the villages, travellers are often lodged and entertained by the
Sheykh or some other inhabitant; and if the guest be a person of the
middle or higher classes, or even not very poor, he gives a present to
his host’s servants, or to the host himself. In the desert, however, a
present is seldom received from a guest. By a Sunneh law, a traveller
may claim entertainment, of any person able to afford it to him, for
three days.—The account of Abraham’s entertaining the three angels,
related in the Bible, presents a perfect picture of the manner in which
a modern Bedawee sheykh receives travellers arriving at his encampment.
He immediately orders his wife or women to make bread; slaughters a
sheep or some other animal, and dresses it in haste; and bringing milk
and any other provisions that he may have ready at hand, with the bread,
and the meat which he has dressed, sets them before his guests. If these
be persons of high rank, he stands by them while they eat; as Abraham
did in the case above alluded to. Most Bedawees will suffer almost any
injury to themselves or their families rather than allow their guests to
be ill-treated while under their protection. There are Arabs who even
regard the chastity of their wives as not too precious to be sacrificed
for the gratification of their guests;[417] and at an encampment of the
Bisháreen, I ascertained that there are many persons in this great tribe
(which inhabits a large portion of the desert between the Nile and the
Red Sea) who offer their unmarried daughters to their guests, merely
from motives of hospitality, and not for hire.
There used to be, in Cairo, a numerous class of persons called
“Tufeyleeyeh,” or “Tufeylees” (that is, Spungers), who, taking advantage
of the hospitality of their countrymen, subsisted entirely by spunging:
but this class has, of late, very much decreased in number. Wherever
there was an entertainment, some of these worthies were almost sure to
be found; and it was only by a present of money that they could be
induced to retire from the company. They even travelled about the
country, without the smallest coin in their pockets, intruding
themselves into private houses whenever they wanted a meal, or
practising various tricks for this purpose. Two of them, I was told, a
little while since, determined to go to the festival of the seyyid
El-Bedawee, at Tanta; an easy journey of two days and a half from Cairo.
Walking at their leisure, they arrived at the small town of Kalyoob at
the end of their first day’s journey; and there found themselves at a
loss for a supper. One of them went to the Kádee; and, after saluting
him, said—“O Kádee, I am a traveller from the Sharkeeyeh, going to Masr;
and I have a companion who owes me fifty purses, which he has with him
at present, and refuses to give me; and I am actually in want of them.”
“Where is he?” said the Kádee. “Here, in this town,” answered the
complainant. The Kádee sent a rasool to bring the accused; and in the
meantime, expecting considerable fees for a judgment in such a case,
ordered a good supper to be prepared; which Kádees of country towns or
villages generally do under similar circumstances. The two men were
invited to sup and sleep before the case was tried. Next morning, the
parties were examined: the accused admitted that he had in his
possession the fifty purses of his companion; and said that he was ready
to give them up; for they were an encumbrance to him, being only the
paper purses in which coffee was sold. “We are Tufeylees,” he added; and
the Kádee, in anger, dismissed them.
The natives of Egypt in general, in common with the Arabs of other
countries, are (according to our system of morals) justly chargeable
with a fault which is regarded by us as one of great magnitude: it is
want of gratitude.[418] But this I am inclined to consider a relic of
the Bedawee character; and as arising from the very common practice of
hospitality and generosity, and from the prevailing opinion that these
virtues are absolute duties which it would be disgraceful and sinful to
neglect.
The temperance and moderation of the Egyptians, with regard to diet, are
very exemplary. Since my first arrival in Egypt, I have scarcely ever
seen a native of this country in a state of intoxication; unless it were
a musician at an entertainment, or a dancing girl, or a low prostitute.
It hardly need be added that they are extremely frugal. They show a
great respect for bread, as the staff of life,[419] and on no account
suffer the smallest portion of it to be wasted, if they can avoid it. I
have often observed an Egyptian take up a small piece of bread, which
had by accident fallen in the street or road, and, after putting it
before his lips and forehead three times, place it on one side, in order
that a dog might eat it, rather than let it remain to be trodden under
foot. The following instance of the excessive and unreasonable respect
of the Egyptians for bread has been related to me by several persons;
but I must say that I think it hardly credible.—Two servants were
sitting at the door of their master’s house, eating their dinner, when
they observed a Memlook Bey, with several of his officers, riding along
the street towards them. One of these servants rose, from respect to the
grandee, who, regarding him with indignation, exclaimed, “Which is the
more worthy of respect, the bread that is before you, or myself?”
Without waiting for a reply, he made, it is said, a well-understood
signal with his hand; and the unintending offender was beheaded on the
spot.
The higher and middle orders of Muslims in Egypt are scrupulously
cleanly; and the lower orders are more so than in most other countries:
but were not cleanliness a point of their religion, perhaps it would not
be so much regarded by them. From what has been said in a former chapter
of this work,[420] it appears that we must not judge of them, with
respect to this quality, from the dirty state in which they generally
leave their children. Their religious ablutions were, certainly, very
wisely ordained; personal cleanliness being so conducive to health in a
hot climate. The Egyptians in general are particularly careful to avoid
whatever their religion has pronounced unclean and polluting. One of
their objections against wine is, that it is unclean; and I believe that
very few of them, if any, could be induced by any means, unless by a
considerable bribe, to eat the smallest piece of pig’s flesh; excepting
the peasants of the Boheyreh (the province on the west of the western
branch of the Nile), many of whom eat the flesh of the wild boar, and
rats.[421] I was once amused with the remark of a Muslim, on the subject
of pork: he observed that the Franks were certainly a much calumniated
people: that it was well known they were in the habit of eating swine’s
flesh; but that some slanderous persons here asserted that it was not
only the flesh of the unclean beast that was eaten by the Franks, but
also its skin, and its entrails, and its very blood. On being answered
that the accusation was too true, he burst forth with a most hearty
curse upon the infidels, devoting them to the lowest place in hell.
Many of the butchers who supply the Muslim inhabitants of the metropolis
with meat are Jews. A few years ago, one of the principal ’ulama here
complained of this fact to the Básha; and begged him to put a stop to
it. Another of the ’ulama, hearing that this person had gone to make the
complaint above mentioned, followed him, and urged, before the Básha,
that the practice was not unlawful. “Adduce your proof,” said the
former. “Here,” answered the other, “is my proof, from the word of
God—‘Eat of that whereon the name of God hath been commemorated.’”[422]
The chief of the Jewish butchers was then summoned, and asked whether he
said anything previously to slaughtering an animal: he answered, “Yes:
we always say, as the Muslims, ‘In the name of God! God is most great!’
and we never kill an animal in any other way than by cutting its
throat.”—The complaint was consequently dismissed.
A few days ago, a man, purchasing a fateereh of a baker in this city,
saw him take out of his oven a dish of pork which he had been baking for
a Frank; and, supposing that the other things in the oven might have
been in contact with the unclean meat, and thus contaminated,
immediately brought a soldier from the nearest guard-house, and caused
the baker (who was in no slight alarm, and protested that he was
ignorant of there being any pig’s flesh in his oven) to be conducted
before the Zábit. This magistrate considered the case of sufficient
importance to be referred to the Básha’s deewán; and the president of
this council regarded it as of too serious and difficult a nature for
him to decide, and accordingly sent the accused to be judged at the
Mahkem′eh. The Kádee desired the opinion of the Muftee, who gave the
following sentence:—That all kinds of food, not essentially or radically
impure, were purified, of any pollution which they might have
contracted, by fire; and consequently, that whatever thing of this
description was in the oven, even if it had been in contact with the
pork, was clean as soon as it had been baked.
A short time since the Básha received, from Europe, a set of mattresses
and cushions stuffed with horse-hair, to form a deewán for his hareem.
The ladies opened one of the cushions, to ascertain what was the
substance which rendered them so agreeably elastic; and, disgusted in
the highest degree at seeing what they supposed to be hogs’ hair,
insisted upon throwing away the whole deewán.
A Frenchman who was employed here, a few years ago, to refine sugar, by
the present Básha, made use of blood for this purpose; and since that,
very few of the people of this country have ventured to eat any sugar
made by the Franks: the Básha was also obliged to prohibit the use of
blood in his own sugar-bakeries; and the white of eggs has been employed
in its stead. Some of the Egyptians, seeing the European sugar to be
very superior to that made here, use it; holding the doctrine that what
is originally clean may become clean again after pollution: but I am
obliged to keep the coarse Egyptian sugar for the purpose of making
sherbet for my visitors; some of whom hold long discussions with me on
this subject.
It is a general custom among the Egyptians, after washing clothes, to
pour clean water upon them, and to say, in doing so, “I testify that
there is no deity but God; and I testify that Mohammad is God’s
Apostle.”[423] In speaking of their religion, I have mentioned several
other practices instituted for the sake of cleanliness; most of which
are universally observed. But, notwithstanding these cleanly practices
and principles, and their custom of frequently going to the bath, the
Egyptians do not change their linen so often as some people of more
northern climates, who need not so much to do this frequently: they
often go to the bath in a dirty shirt, and, after a thorough washing,
put on the same again.
Filial piety is one of the more remarkable virtues of this people. The
outward respect which they pay to their parents I have already had
occasion to mention. Great respect is also shown by the young to those
far advanced in age;[424] particularly to such as are reputed men of
great piety or learning.
Love of their country, and more especially of _home_, is another
predominant characteristic of the modern Egyptians. In general, they
have a great dread of quitting their native land. I have heard of
several determining to visit a foreign country, for the sake of
considerable advantages in prospect; but when the time of their intended
departure drew near, their resolution failed them. Severe oppression has
lately lessened this feeling; which is doubtless owing, in a great
degree, to ignorance of foreign lands and their inhabitants. It was
probably from the same feeling prevailing among the Arabs of his time,
that Mohammad was induced to promise such high rewards in a future world
to those who fled their country for the sake of his religion. I have
heard it remarked as a proof of the extraordinary love which the
Egyptians have for their native place, that a woman or girl in this
country will seldom consent, or her parents allow her, to marry a man
who will not promise to reside with her in her native town or village;
but I rather think that the reluctance to change the place of abode in
this case arises from the risk which the female incurs of wanting the
protection of her relations. The Bedawees are so attached to their
deserts, and have so great a contempt for people who reside in towns,
and for agriculturists, that it is a matter of surprise that so many of
them were induced to settle even upon the fertile banks of the Nile. The
modern Egyptians, though mostly descended from Bedawees, while they
resemble their ancestors in love of their _native_ country, have a
horror of the desert. One journey in the desert furnishes them with
tales of exaggerated hardships, perils, and wonders, which they are
extremely fond of relating to their less experienced countrymen.
Indolence pervades all classes of the Egyptians, excepting those who are
obliged to earn their livelihood by severe manual labour. It is the
result of the climate, and of the fecundity of the soil. Even the
mechanics, who are extremely greedy of gain, will generally spend two
days in a work which they might easily accomplish in one; and will leave
the most lucrative employment to idle away their time with the pipe: but
the porter, the groom, who runs before his master’s horse, and the
boatmen, who are often employed in towing the vessels up the river
during calm and very hot weather, as well as many other labourers,
endure extreme fatigue.
The Egyptians are also excessively obstinate. I have mentioned, in a
former chapter, that they have been notorious, from ancient times, that
is, from the period of the Roman domination, for refusing to pay their
taxes until they have been severely beaten; and that they often boast of
the number of stripes which they have received before they would part
with their money. Such conduct is very common among them. I was once
told, that a felláh, from whom the value of about four shillings was
demanded by his governor, endured so severe a bastinading rather than
pay this paltry sum, which he declared he did not possess, that the
governor ordered him to be dismissed; but, striking him on his face as
he limped away, there fell out of his mouth a gold coin of the exact
value of the sum demanded of him; so that his beating, terrible as it
was, fell short of what was necessary to make him pay. This disposition
seems a strange peculiarity in their character; but it is easily
accounted for by the fact that they know very well, the more readily
they pay, the more will be exacted from them. In other respects,
however, they are extremely obstinate and difficult to govern; though
very obsequious in their manners and professions. It is seldom that an
Egyptian workman can be induced to make a thing exactly to order: he
will generally follow his own opinion in preference to that of his
employer; and will scarcely ever finish his work by the time he has
promised.
Though very submissive to their governors, the felláheen of Egypt are
not deficient in courage when excited by feuds among each other; and
they become excellent soldiers.
In sensuality, as far as it relates to the indulgence of libidinous
passions, the Egyptians, as well as other natives of hot climates,
certainly exceed more northern nations; yet this excess is not to be
attributed merely to the climate, but more especially to the institution
of polygamy, to the facility with which divorcements are accomplished
whenever a man may wish to marry a new wife, and to the custom of
concubinage. It is even said, and, I believe with truth, that, in this
respect, they exceed the neighbouring nations, whose religion and civil
institutions are similar;[425] and that their country still deserves the
appellation of “the abode of the wicked,” which, in the Kur-án,[426] is,
according to the best commentators, applied to ancient Egypt, if we take
the word here translated “wicked” in its more usual modern sense of
“debauchees.”—A vice for which the Memlooks who governed Egypt were
infamous was so spread by them in this country as to become not less
rare here than in almost any other country of the East; but of late
years, it is said to have much decreased.
The most immodest freedom of conversation is indulged in by persons of
both sexes, and of every station of life, in Egypt; even by the most
virtuous and respectable women, with the exception of a very few, who
often make use of coarse language, but not unchaste. From persons of the
best education, expressions are often heard so obscene as only to be fit
for a low brothel; and things are named, and subjects talked of, by the
most genteel women, without any idea of their being indecorous, in the
hearing of men, that many prostitutes in our country would abstain from
mentioning.
The women of Egypt have the character of being the most licentious in
their feelings of all females who lay any claim to be considered as
members of a civilized nation; and this character is freely bestowed
upon them by their countrymen, even in conversation with foreigners.
Numerous exceptions doubtless exist; and I am happy to insert the
following words translated from a note by my friend the sheykh Mohammad
’Eiyád Et-Tantáwee, on a passage in “The Thousand and One Nights.” “Many
persons reckon marrying a second time among the greatest of disgraceful
actions. This opinion is most common in the country-towns and villages;
and the relations of my mother are thus characterized, so that a woman
of them, when her husband dies while she is young, or divorces her while
she is young, passes her life, however long it may be, in widowhood, and
never marries a second time.”—But with respect to the majority of the
Egyptian women, it must, I fear, be allowed, that they are very
licentious. What liberty they have, many of them, it is said, abuse; and
most of them are not considered safe, unless under lock and key; to
which restraint few are subjected. It is believed that they possess a
degree of cunning in the management of their intrigues that the most
prudent and careful husband cannot guard against; and, consequently,
that their plots are seldom frustrated, however great may be the
apparent risk of the undertakings in which they engage. Sometimes, the
husband himself is made the unconscious means of gratifying his wife’s
criminal propensities. Some of the stories of the intrigues of women in
“The Thousand and One Nights” present faithful pictures of occurrences
not unfrequent in the modern metropolis of Egypt. Many of the men of
this city are of opinion that almost all the women would intrigue if
they could do so without danger; and that the greater proportion of them
do. I should be sorry to think that the former opinion was just; and I
am almost persuaded that it is over-severe, because it appears, from the
customs with regard to women generally prevailing here, that the latter
must be false. The difficulty of carrying on an intrigue with a female
in this place can hardly be conceived by a person who is not moderately
well acquainted with Eastern customs and habits. It is not only
difficult for a woman of the middle or higher classes to admit her
paramour into the house in which she resides, but it is almost
impossible for her to have a private interview with a man who has a
hareem in his own house; or to enter the house of a man who is neither
married nor has a concubine-slave, without attracting the notice of the
neighbours, and causing their immediate interference. But, as it cannot
be denied that many of the women of Egypt engage in intrigues
notwithstanding such risks, it may be supposed that the difficulties
which lie in the way are the chief bar to most others. Among the females
of the lower orders, intrigues are more easily accomplished, and
frequent.
The libidinous character of the generality of the women of Egypt, and
the licentious conduct of a great number of them, may be attributed to
many causes; partly to the climate, and partly to their want of proper
instruction, and of innocent pastimes and employments:[427] but it is
more to be attributed to the conduct of the husbands themselves; and to
conduct far more disgraceful to them than the utmost severity that any
of them is known to exercise in the regulations of his hareem. The
generality of husbands in Egypt endeavour to increase the libidinous
feelings of their wives by every means in their power; though, at the
same time, they assiduously study to prevent their indulging those
feelings unlawfully. The women are permitted to listen, screened behind
their windows of wooden lattice-work, to immoral songs and tales sung or
related in the streets by men whom they pay for this entertainment; and
to view the voluptuous dances of the ghawázee, and of the effeminate
khäwals. The ghawázee, who are professed prostitutes, are not
unfrequently introduced into the hareems of the wealthy, not merely to
entertain the ladies with their dances, but to teach them their
voluptuous arts; and even indecent puppets are sometimes brought into
such hareems for the amusement of the inmates.—Innumerable stories of
the artifices and intrigues of the women of Egypt have been related to
me. The following narratives of late occurrences will serve as
specimens.
A slave-dealer, who had been possessed of property which enabled him to
live in comfort, but had lost the greater part of it, married a young
and handsome woman in this city, who had sufficient wealth to make up
for his losses. He soon, however, neglected her; and as he was past the
prime of life, she became indifferent to him, and placed her affections
upon another man, a dustman, who had been in the habit of coming to her
house. She purchased for this person a shop close by her house; gave him
a sum of money to enable him to pursue a less degraded occupation, as a
seller of grain and fodder; and informed him that she had contrived a
plan for his visiting her in perfect security. Her hareem had a window
with hanging shutters; and almost close before this window rose a
palm-tree, out-topping the house. This tree, she observed, would afford
her lover a means of access to her, and of egress from her apartment in
case of danger. She had only one servant, a female, who engaged to
assist her in the accomplishment of her desires. Previously to her
lover’s first visit to her, she desired the servant to inform her
husband of what was about to take place in the ensuing night. He
determined to keep watch; and having told his wife that he was going
out, and should not return that night, concealed himself in a lower
apartment. At night, the maid came to tell him that the visitor was in
the hareem. He went up, but found the hareem-door shut. On his trying to
open it, his wife screamed; her lover, at the same time, escaping from
the window, by means of the palm-tree. She called to her
neighbours,—“Come to my assistance! Pray come! There is a robber in my
house!” Several of them soon came; and finding her locked in her room,
and her husband outside the door, told her there was nobody in the house
but her husband and maid. She said that the man they called her husband
was a robber: that her husband was gone to sleep out. The latter then
informed them of what had passed, and insisted that a man was with her:
he broke open the door, and searched the room; but, finding no man, was
reprimanded by his neighbours, and abused by his wife for uttering a
slander. The next day, his wife, taking with her, as witnesses of his
having accused her of a criminal intrigue, two of the neighbours who had
come in on hearing her screams for assistance, arraigned her husband at
the Mahkem′eh as the slanderer of a virtuous woman without the evidence
of his own sight or of other witnesses. Being convicted of this offence,
he was punished with eighty stripes, in accordance with the ordinance of
the Kur-án.[428] His wife now asked him if he would divorce her; but he
refused. For three days after this event, they lived peaceably together.
On the third night, the wife, having invited her lover to visit her,
bound her husband hand and foot, while he was asleep, and tied him down
to the mattress. Shortly after, her lover came up, and, waking the
husband, threatened him with instant death if he should call, and
remained with the wife for several hours, in his presence. As soon as
the intruder had gone, the husband was unbound by his wife, and called
out to his neighbours, beating her at the same time with such violence
that she, also, began to call for assistance. The neighbours coming in,
and seeing him in a fury, easily believed her assertion that he had
become raving mad, and, trying to soothe him with kind words, and
prayers that God would restore him to sanity, liberated her from his
grasp. She procured, as soon as possible, a rasool from the Kádee; and
went, with him and her husband and several of her neighbours who had
witnessed the beating that she had received, before the judge. The
neighbours unanimously declared their opinion that her husband was mad;
and the Kádee ordered that he should be conveyed to the Máristán[429]
(or common mad-house): but the wife, affecting to pity him, begged that
she might be allowed to chain him in an apartment in her house, that she
might alleviate his sufferings by waiting upon him. The Kádee assented,
praising the benevolence of the woman, and praying that God might reward
her. She accordingly procured an iron collar and a chain from the
Máristán, and chained him in a lower apartment of her house. Every
night, in his presence, her lover visited her: after which she
importuned him in vain to divorce her; and when the neighbours came in
daily to ask how he was, the only answer he received to his complaints
and accusations against his wife was—“God restore thee! God restore
thee!” Thus he continued about a month; and his wife, finding that he
still persisted in refusing to divorce her, sent for a keeper of the
Máristán to take him. The neighbours came round as he left the house:
one exclaimed, “There is no strength nor power but in God! God restore
thee!”—another said, “How sad! He was really a worthy man:”—a third
remarked, “Bádingáns[430] are very abundant just now.”—While he was
confined in the Máristán, his wife came daily to him, and asked him if
he would divorce her. On his answering “No,” she said, “Then chained you
may lie until you die; and my lover shall come to me constantly.” At
length, after seven months’ confinement, he consented to divorce her;
upon which she procured his liberation, and he fulfilled his promise.
Her lover was of too low a grade to become her husband, so she remained
unmarried, and received him whenever she pleased; but the maid revealed
the true history of this affair, and it soon became a subject of common
talk.
When the wife of a man of wealth or rank engages in a criminal intrigue,
both she and her paramour generally incur great danger.[431]—Last year,
the wife of an officer of high rank in the army took advantage of the
absence of her husband from the metropolis (where he always resided with
her when not on military duty) to invite a Christian merchant, of whom
she had been in the habit of buying silks, to pay her a visit. He went
to her house at the time appointed, and found a eunuch at the door, who
took him to another house, disguised him in the loose outer garments and
veil of a lady, and then brought him back, and introduced him to his
mistress. He passed nearly the whole of the night with her; and, rising
before she awoke, put into his pocket a purse which he had given her,
and went down to the eunuch, who conducted him again to the house where
he had put on his disguise: having here resumed his own outer clothes,
he repaired to his shop. Soon after, the lady, who had missed the purse,
came and taxed him with having taken it: she told him that she did not
want money, but only desired his company; and begged him to come to her
again in the ensuing evening, which he promised to do: but in the
afternoon, a female servant from the house of this lady came to his
shop, and told him that her mistress had mixed some poison in a bottle
of water which she had ordered to be given him to drink.—This mode of
revenge is said to have been often adopted when the woman’s paramour has
given her even a slight offence.
It is seldom that the wife of a Muslim is guilty of a criminal intrigue
without being punished with death if there be four witnesses to the
fact, and they or the husband prosecute her; and not always does she
escape this punishment if she be detected by any of the officers of
justice: in the latter case, four witnesses are not required, and often
the woman, if of a respectable family, is put to death, generally in
private, on the mere arbitrary authority of the government: but a bribe
will sometimes save her; for it will always be accepted, if it can with
safety. Drowning is the punishment now almost always inflicted,
publicly, upon women convicted of adultery in Cairo and other large
towns of Egypt, instead of that ordained by the law, which is stoning.—A
few months ago, a poor woman of this city married a man whose trade was
that of selling fowls, and, while living with him and her mother, took
three other lodgings, and married three other husbands; all of whom were
generally absent from the metropolis: so she calculated that when any of
these three persons came to town for a few days, she might easily find
an excuse to go to him. They happened, unfortunately for her, to come to
town on the same day; and all of them went, the same evening, to inquire
for her at her mother’s house. Being much embarrassed by their presence,
and her first husband being also with her, she feigned to be ill, and
soon to become insensible; and was taken, by her mother, to an inner
room. One of the husbands proposed to give her something to restore her:
another wished to try a different remedy: they began to contend which
was the best medicine; and one of them said, “I shall give her what I
please: is not she my wife?” “Your wife!” exclaimed each of the three
other husbands at the same time: “she is _my_ wife.”—Each proved his
marriage: the woman was taken to the Mahkem′eh; tried; condemned to
death; and thrown into the Nile.—Some time ago, when I was before in
this country, a similar case occurred: a woman married three soldiers,
of the nizám, or regular troops. She was buried in a hole, breast-deep,
and then shot.
A woman may sometimes, but very rarely, trust in palliating
circumstances, or the support of powerful friends, to save her from the
penalty of death, in case of her detection in a criminal intercourse; as
in the following instance.—The Básha, last year, gave one of the slaves
in his hareem in marriage to a rich slave-merchant, from whom he had
purchased many of his memlooks and female slaves. This man was not only
unfaithful to her, but utterly neglected her; and she, in consequence,
formed an improper intimacy with a merchant of whom she was a frequent
customer. One day, when her husband was out, a black slave belonging to
him happened to see a man’s head at a small aperture in a window of the
hareem. He immediately went up to search the room of the wife; who,
hearing him coming, locked her paramour in an adjoining closet. The
slave broke open the door of the closet; and the man within rushed at
him with a dagger which he wore in his girdle; but the former seized the
blade in his hand; and the woman held him until her lover had escaped:
she then kissed the slave’s hand, and implored him not to cause her
death by informing her husband of what had passed: she, however, found
him inexorable: he immediately went to his master, showing his bleeding
hand, and telling him the cause of the wound. The woman, meanwhile, fled
to the Básha’s hareem, for protection. Her husband demanded of the Básha
that she should be given up, and put to death; and, the request being
deemed a proper one, she was brought before her former master to answer
for her crime. She threw herself at his feet; kissed the skirt of his
clothing; and acquainted him with her husband’s vicious conduct, and his
utter neglect of her; and the Básha, feeling _himself_ insulted by the
husband’s conduct, spat in his face; and sent back the wife to his own
hareem. Her paramour did not live long after this: he was smothered in
the house of some courtesans; but none of these women was punished, as
it could not be proved which of them committed the act.
For their sentiments with regard to women, and their general conduct
towards the fair sex, the Egyptians, in common with other Muslims, have
been reprehended with too great severity. It is true that they do not
consider it necessary, or even delicate, to consult the choice of a girl
under age previously to giving her away in matrimony; but it is not less
true that a man of the middle or higher classes, almost always, makes
his choice of a wife from hearsay, or as a person blindfold; having no
means of seeing her until the contract is made and she is brought to his
house. It is impossible, therefore, that there should be any mutual
attachment before marriage. Both sexes, in truth, are oppressed by
tyrannical laws and customs; but, happily, they regard their chains as
becoming and honourable: they would feel themselves disgraced by shaking
them off. As to the restraint which is exercised towards the women, I
have before remarked that it is in a great degree voluntary on their
part, and that I believe it to be less strict in Egypt than in any other
country of the Turkish empire: it is certainly far less so than it has
been represented to be by many persons. They generally look upon this
restraint with a degree of pride, as evincing the husband’s care for
them; and value themselves upon their being hidden as treasures.[432] In
good society, it is considered highly indecorous to inquire, in direct
terms, respecting the health of a friend’s wife, or of any female in his
house, unless she be a relation of the person who makes the inquiry.—One
of my Egyptian acquaintances asking another native of this country, who
had been in Paris, what was the most remarkable thing that he had seen
in the land of the infidels, the latter, thinking lightly of all that he
had observed really worthy of exciting the admiration of an unprejudiced
and a sensible man, gave the following answer:—“I witnessed nothing so
remarkable as this fact. It is a custom of every person among the rich
and great, in Paris and other cities of France, frequently to invite his
friends and acquaintances, both men and women, to an entertainment in
his house. The rooms in which the company are received are lighted with
a great number of candles and lamps. There, the men and women assemble
promiscuously; the women, as you well know, unveiled; and a man may sit
next to another’s wife, whom he has never seen before, and may walk,
talk, and even dance with her, in the very presence of her own husband,
who is neither angry nor jealous at such disgraceful conduct.”
The Egyptians are equally remarkable for generosity and cupidity. That
two such opposite qualities should be united in the same mind is not a
little surprising; but such is generally the case with this people. An
overreaching and deceitful disposition in commercial transactions, which
is too common among all nations, is one of the most notorious faults of
the Egyptian: in such cases, he seldom scruples to frame a falsehood
which may better his bargain. Among people who groan beneath the yoke of
a tyrannical and rapacious government (and such has long been the
government of Egypt), a disposition to avarice invariably predominates:
for a man is naturally most tenacious of that which is most liable to be
taken from him; and hence the oppressed Egyptian, when he has a sum of
money which he does not require for necessary expenses, and cannot
profitably employ, generally lays it out in the purchase of ornaments
for his wife or wives; which ornaments he can easily convert again into
money. Hence, also, it is a common practice in this country (as it is,
or has been, in almost every country under similar political
circumstances) for a man to hide treasure in his house, under the paved
floor, or in some other part; and as many a person who does so dies
suddenly, without being able to inform his family where is his “makhba,”
or hiding-place, money is not unfrequently discovered on pulling down
houses.—A vice near akin to cupidity, namely envy, I believe to be
equally prevalent among the modern Egyptians, in common with the whole
Arab race; for many of them are candid enough to confess their own
opinion that this hateful disposition is almost wholly concentrated in
the minds of their nation.
The Egyptians are generally honest in the payment of debts. Their
Prophet asserted that even martyrdom would not atone for a debt
undischarged. Few of them ever accept interest for a loan of money, as
it is strictly forbidden by their law.
Constant veracity is a virtue extremely rare in modern Egypt. Falsehood
was _commended_ by the Prophet when it tended to reconcile persons at
variance with each other: also, when practised in order to please one’s
wife; and to obtain any advantage in a war with the enemies of the
faith: though highly reprobated in other cases. This offers some little
palliation of the general practice of lying which prevails among the
modern Arabs; for, if people are allowed to lie in certain cases, they
insensibly contract a habit of doing so in others. Though most of the
Egyptians often lie designedly, they are seldom heard to retract an
unintentional misstatement without expressing themselves thus—“No: I beg
forgiveness of God: it was so and so;” as, in stating anything of which
they are not quite certain, they say, “God is all-knowing.” I may here
mention (and I do it with some feeling of national pride) that, some
years ago, there was an Armenian jeweller in this city (Cairo) so noted
for his veracity, that his acquaintances determined to give him some
appellation significant of his possessing a virtue so rare among them;
and the name they gave him was “El-Ingileezee,” or _The Englishman_,
which has become his family name. It is common to hear tradesmen in this
place, when demanding a price which they do not mean to abate, say, “One
word; the word of the English:” they also often say, “The word of the
Franks,” in this sense: but I have never heard any particular nation
thus honourably distinguished excepting the English and the Maghrab′ees,
or Western Arabs, which latter people have acquired this reputation by
being rather more veracious than most other Arabs.
I have before mentioned the practice of swearing by God which prevails
among the Egyptians: I must here add, that many of them scruple not to
make use of an oath with the view of obtaining credit to a falsehood. In
this case, they sometimes say, “Wa-lláhi!” (“By God!”)—but more
commonly, “Wallah!”—for, though the latter expression has the same
meaning as the former, they pretend that it may also be used as an
ejaculation in praise of God; whereas “Wa-lláhi” is a decided oath, and,
if uttered to a falsehood, is a heinous sin. Such an oath, if violated,
must be expiated by once feeding or clothing ten poor men, liberating a
Muslim slave or captive, or fasting three days.[433] This, however, is
the expiation allowed by the Kur-án only for an inconsiderate oath: yet
the modern Muslims sometimes observe it in order to free themselves from
the guilt of a deliberate false oath; and they generally prefer the fast
to either of the other modes of expiation. There are some oaths which, I
believe, few Muslims would falsely take; such as saying three times, “By
God, the Great!”—and the oath upon the mus-haf (or copy of the
Kur-án)—saying, “By what this contains of the word of God!”—but a form
of oath that is still more to be depended upon is that of saying, “I
impose upon myself divorcement” (that is, the divorce of my wife, if
what I say be false); or, “I impose upon myself interdiction!” which has
a similar meaning (“My wife be unlawful to me!”)—or, “I impose upon
myself a triple divorcement!”—which binds by the irrevocable divorce of
the wife. If a man use any one of these three forms of oath falsely, his
wife, if he have but one, is divorced by the oath itself, if proved to
be false, without further ceremony; and if he have two or more wives, he
must, under such circumstances, choose one of them to put away. There
are, however, abandoned liars who will swear falsely by the oath that is
generally held most binding. A poet, speaking of a character of this
description, says,—
“But Abu-l-Mo’alla is most false
When he swears by the oath of divorce.”
The generality of the Egyptians are easily excited to quarrel;
particularly those of the lower orders, who, when enraged, curse each
other’s fathers, mothers, beards, etc.; and lavish upon each other a
variety of opprobrious epithets; such as “son of the dog, pimp, pig,”
and an appellation which they think still worse than any of these,
namely, “Jew.” When one curses the father of the other, the latter
generally retorts by cursing the father and mother, and sometimes the
whole household, of his adversary. They menace each other; but seldom
proceed to blows. In a few instances, however, I have seen low persons
in this country so enraged as to bite, and grasp each other by the
throat. I have also witnessed many instances of forbearance on the part
of individuals of the middle and lower classes, when grossly insulted: I
have often heard an Egyptian say, on receiving a blow from an equal,
“God bless thee!” “God requite thee good!” “Beat me again.” In general,
a quarrel terminates by one or both parties saying, “Justice is against
me:” often, after this, they recite the Fát’hah together; and then,
sometimes, embrace and kiss one another.
The Egyptians are particularly prone to satire; and often display
considerable wit in their jeers and jests. Their language affords them
great facilities for punning, and for ambiguous conversation, in which
they very frequently indulge. The lower order sometimes lampoon their
rulers in songs, and ridicule those enactments of the government by
which they themselves most suffer. I was once much amused with a song
which I found to be very popular in the town and district of Aswán, on
the southern frontier of Egypt: its burden was a plain invocation to the
plague to take their tyrannical governor and his Copt clerk. Another
song, which was popular throughout Egypt during my first visit to this
country, and which was composed on the occasion of an increase of the
income-tax called “firdeh,” began thus: “You who have [nothing on your
head but] a libdeh! sell it, and pay the firdeh.” The libdeh, I have
before mentioned, is a felt cap, which is worn under, or instead of, the
turban; and the man must be very poor who has no other covering than
this for his head.
-----
Footnote 404:
I am credibly informed that children in Egypt are often taught, at
school, a regular set of curses to denounce upon the persons and
property of Christians, Jews, and all other unbelievers in the
religion of Mohammad. See Appendix D.
Footnote 405:
Chap. v., ver. 56. Verses 62 and 63 of the same chapter explain the
reason of this precept:—“O ye who have believed, take not those who
have made your religion a laughing-stock and a jest, of those who have
received the Scripture before you, and the unbelievers [or
polytheists], as friends; (but fear God, if ye be believers;) and
[those who], when ye call to prayer, make it [namely, the prayer] a
laughing-stock and a jest. This [they do] because they are a people
who do not understand.” (The words enclosed in brackets are from the
Commentary of the Geláleyn.)
Footnote 406:
The Prophet.
Footnote 407:
Kur-án, chap. xxxix. ver. 54.
Footnote 408:
Chap. xxix., ver. 45.
Footnote 409:
In the first edition of the present work, copying Sale, who gives no
authority for the remark, I here added, “This precept is, however,
generally considered as abrogated by that of the sword.” These words
might lead the reader into error, as is shown by what I have said on
the subject of war in page 81.
Footnote 410:
Kur-án, chap. lvi. ver. 78.
Footnote 411:
They are not, however, so apathetic as some travellers have supposed;
for it is not uncommon to see them weep; and such a demonstration of
feeling is not considered by them as unmanly: even heroes are
frequently represented, in their romances and histories, as weeping
under heavy affliction.
Footnote 412:
Chap. ii., ver. 191.
Footnote 413:
Literally, “your hands;” but in the Commentary of the Geláleyn, the
meaning is said to be “yourselves.”
Footnote 414:
I think it proper to remark here, that I have good reason for
believing Burckhardt to have been misinformed when stating (see his
“Arabic Proverbs,” No. 393) that children in the East (in Egypt, etc.)
torture serpents by putting them into a leather bag, then throwing
unslaked lime upon them, and pouring water on it. I find no one who
has heard of such cruelty; and it is not likely that boys in this
country would dare to put a serpent in a bag (for they are excessively
afraid of this reptile), or would give several piasters for a bag to
destroy in this manner. The proverb upon which this statement is
founded perhaps alludes to a mode of destroying serpents; but not for
sport.
Footnote 415:
“The oppression of the Turks, rather than the justice of the Arabs,”
is a proverb often heard from the mouth of the Arab peasant; who, in
this case, applies the term “Arabs” to his own class, instead of the
Bedawees, to whom it now usually belongs. See Burckhardt’s “Arabic
Proverbs,” No. 176.
Footnote 416:
D’Herbelot mentions a somewhat similar case, in which a Turk, having
buried a favourite dog with some marks of respect, in his garden, was
accused, before the Kádee, of having interred the animal with the
ceremonies practised at the burial of a Muslim, and escaped punishment
(perhaps a severe one) by informing the judge that his dog had made a
will, leaving to him (the Kádee) a sum of money.—(Bibliothèque
Orientale, art. Cadhi.)
Footnote 417:
See Burckhardt’s Notes on the Bedouins, etc., 8vo edition, vol. i. pp.
179 and 180.
Footnote 418:
It has been remarked that this is inconsistent with the undeniable
gratitude which the Arabs feel towards God. To such an objection they
would reply, “We are entitled to the good offices of our
fellow-creatures by the law of God; but can claim no benefit from our
Maker.” I once afforded a refuge to a Bedawee who was in fear for his
life; but on parting, he gave me not a word of thanks: had he done so,
it would have implied his thinking me a person of mean disposition,
who regarded a positive duty as an act imposing obligation. Hence the
Arab usually acknowledges a benefit merely by a prayer for the long
life, etc., of his benefactor.
Footnote 419:
The name which they give to it is “’eysh,” which literally signifies
“life.”
Footnote 420:
Page 46.
Footnote 421:
Dogs, too, are eaten by many Maghrab′ees settled at Alexandria, and by
descendants of the same people; of whom there are also a few in Cairo,
in the quarter of Teyloon.
Footnote 422:
Kur-án, chap. vi., ver. 118.
Footnote 423:
To express that a person has done this, they say, “sháhad el-hawáïg,”
for “ghasal el-hawáïg wa-teshahhad ’aleyha.”
Footnote 424:
See Leviticus xix. 32.
Footnote 425:
This is not meant to reflect upon the Turks, nor upon the Arabs of the
desert.
Footnote 426:
Chap. vii., ver. 142.
Footnote 427:
In the first edition of the present work, I included, among these
supposed causes, the degree of restraint imposed upon the women, and
their seclusion from open intercourse with the other sex. This I did,
not because confinement is said to have this effect in the West,
where, being contrary to general custom, it is felt as an oppression,
but because the assertion of the Egyptians, that the Eastern women in
general are more licentiously disposed than the men, seemed to be an
argument against the main principle of the constitution of Eastern
society. I did not consider that this argument is at least
counter-balanced by what I have before mentioned, that the women who
are commonly considered the _most licentious_ (namely, those of Egypt)
are those who are said to have _most licence_.
Footnote 428:
Chap. xxiv., ver. 4.
Footnote 429:
Vulgarly called “Muristán.”
Footnote 430:
Madness is said to be more common and more violent in Egypt when the
black bádingán (or black egg-plant) is in season; that is, in the hot
weather.
Footnote 431:
“How many men, in Masr,” said one of my friends to me, “have lost
their lives on account of women! A very handsome young libertine, who
lived in this house which you now occupy, was beheaded here in the
street, before his own door, for an intrigue with the wife of a Bey,
and all the women of Masr wept for him.”
Footnote 432:
A respectable female is generally addressed, in a letter, as “the
guarded lady, and concealed jewel” (“es-sitt el-masooneh wa-l-góharah
el-meknooneh”).
Footnote 433:
Kur-án, chap. v., ver. 91.
----------------------------