CHAPTER XII

MY INTERCOURSE WITH NASREDDIN SHAH AND HIS SUCCESSOR

Following up my intercourse with the Sultan of Turkey, I must not omit

to relate the episode of my second meeting with the King of Persia. It

was on the occasion of the Shah's third visit to Europe that I met him

in Budapest.

Thirty years ago I had been presented to him as a Dervish who had

visited Central Asia and spent many years among the Turcomans, at that

time held in great fear by the Persians. I now appeared before him as

representative of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and was not

surprised that he did not at once recognise me. When at the head of the

Academicians I welcomed him in a Persian speech in the pillared hall of

the Academy palace, the good Persian monarch was quite amazed and

hastily turning to his courtiers, inquired, "_In kist?_" ("Who is

that?"). They told him my name and function, and made some comments in a

low voice, whereupon the cunning Persian exclaimed, "_Belli! belli!_"

("Of course"), "Vambéry!" He maintained (which I take the liberty to

doubt) that he remembered me; but he warmly shook hands with me, and

said to the Hungarian Minister standing at his side, "_Il parle bien,

très bien notre langue!_" I do not wonder that my speech, in the Shirazi

dialect and delivered in true Oriental style, took him by surprise, for

as he afterwards told me, on the whole Continent he had not met with any

scholar who could speak Persian idiomatically and without foreign

accent. What did seem to me somewhat odd was a remark in his Journal (p.

378) that there were, even in Persia, few orators who for elegance and

force of speech could compete with me, a compliment which struck me as

particularly strange from the mouth of the Persian king. I remained

three days in attendance on Nasreddin Shah, and had ample opportunity to

admire the marvellous progress made by this Oriental since the time when

I knew him at Teheran in 1864. Nasreddin Shah was the first sovereign of

the True Believers who had learned to speak French tolerably well, and

if he did make a little too much show of this accomplishment, seeing

that his knowledge was but very superficial, it must be admitted that

his judgment in matters of art, his knowledge of geography and

palæontology, and his acquaintance with the genealogical relationships

of the various kingdoms of Europe was most astonishing. In any case, he

surpassed in knowledge of our countries and towns, our manners and

customs, all magnates and princes of the Moslem East, not excepting even

the Khedive Ismail Pasha and the late Sir Salar Jung. As we saw more of

one another he did not hesitate to express his opinion about many of our

social and political views. So, for instance, being an Asiatic _pur

sang_ he detested Liberalism, and if it had not been for the dangerous

nearness which made him turn against Russia, he would have looked upon

the Czar as the model of sovereign greatness and the Russian _régime_ as

the ideal form of government. Naturally, the French republic was an

abomination to him, the most woeful absurdity, and he could not

understand how a society where, as he maintained, no one commands and no

one obeys, a land without a ruler, _i.e._, a sovereign, can possibly

exist.

In his political utterances he was a good deal more cautious; he always

made an evasive answer to my insinuations. Once, sailing on the Danube,

I remarked that the Karun is wider but not so long as the Danube, the

Kadjar prince looked gravely at me and said, "Thank God, no!" ("_If it

had been the English would before now have taken Teheran_," was my

mental comment.) But in spite of his great reserve and cautiousness in

political matters, I got a pretty clear insight into his political

views. He had not for the future of his land the same bold confidence as

his royal brother on the throne of the Osmanli, for while the latter's

plans reach far into the future, and to all appearances, at least, are

of a very exalted nature, especially those relating to Panislamism, the

Kadjar monarch devotes all his energies to the welfare of his dynasty,

or rather of his own person. "_L'État c'est moi_" is also Sultan Abdul

Hamid's motto, but the glorious past of his dynasty and his people

awakens in him great and exalted ideas, the accomplishment of which he

never doubts, while Nasreddin Shah, as the offspring of a Turcoman

family, only lately come into power, and, intimidated by the danger

which surrounded him on all sides, hardly dared to think of the distant

future. In their personalities they are also very different. Sultan

Abdul Hamid, although inferior in European culture to his _cher frère_

on the throne of Persia, is shy and timid by nature, more affable and

generous than Nasreddin Shah, who, in spite of all his European manners,

remained the Asiatic despot and comported himself with all the peculiar

pride and strictness of the Oriental ruler. His Grand-Vizier had

sometimes to stand for hours before him, and when he wanted some

information or other from me, I was often kept standing for a

considerable time, regardless of my great fatigue; and he used closely

to scrutinise my face if I dared to express an opinion different from

his. In his character he certainly was more Oriental than the Sultan,

and considered this severity as indispensable to his sovereign dignity.

I was very much amused with the airs the Persian king put on, as he

went about bedizened with diamonds, emeralds, rubies, and other jewels.

Although his dynasty had been founded by a condottiere of the lowest

rank, viz., Mehemmed Aga Khan, and as grandson of Feth Ali Shah, a

cousin of this Aga Khan's, he was only the fourth Kadjar on the throne

of Iran, he always wanted to parade the antiquity of his race. Before me

he especially prided himself on his descent from the Mongol chief,

Kadjar Noyan, and when I dared to question the correctness of this

genealogy, merely brought forward by Persian historians to flatter their

monarch, he looked at me quite angrily and ejaculated that "the

sovereigns of the West were nothing but parvenus compared to their

brother monarchs of the East." Persia, in fact, is the only land in

Moslem Asia which can boast of a hereditary nobility, in a miserable

condition, it is true, for not only Khans and Mirzas, but even royal

princes may be found as drivers, house servants, and artisans of various

kinds, but this does not prevent one from being proud of one's noble

blood, and when Nasreddin Shah was in a good temper he expressed his

astonishment that European counts, princes, and dukes attempted to be on

a familiar footing with him, who could find his equal only among crowned

heads. It is curious that the Turks even, who on account of their

nomadic antecedents have never had any hereditary nobility, always try

to make themselves out as aristocrats. Sultan Abdul Medjid was highly

pleased when the French poet Lamartine, whom he had invited to his court

and afterwards presented with a country seat near Brussa, called his

attention to the fact that after the Bourbons the Osmanli was the oldest

dynasty in Europe. The high dignitaries of the Porte, frequently tracing

their descent from simple peasants, labourers, or shepherds, had at one

time serious thoughts of setting up coats-of-arms, and much regretted

the religious restriction which forbids their taking some animal for

their device. Human weakness is after all the same in the East and in

the West, and in spite of the strongly democratic tendencies of the

Arabian prophet, we may yet live to see Islam adopting hereditary

nobility with many other evils of European culture. In the personality

of Nasreddin Shah I have always detected this curious mixture of East

and West, of the old and the new aspect of life which we find in so many

neophytes of European culture in the Moslemic East. The Iranian despot

held in particular favour Malcolm Khan and Jahya Khan, and the Europeans

who for a time were physicians in ordinary to his Majesty.

Doctors Cloquet, Polak, and Tholozan instructed him in many things, and

point for point the influence of one or the other could be detected in

his manners and behaviour. That he always wanted to act the Grand

Seigneur, and ostentatiously displayed his Frenchified airs, must

chiefly be attributed to his Iranian boastfulness; he always wished to

appear as the perfect European gentleman, and there was a time when at

the court no one but his Majesty was allowed to wear a starched European

shirt. Nasreddin Shah inherited many characteristics from his

grandfather, Feth Ali Shah--I refer here especially to his love of show

and tyrannical arbitrariness--but he lacked his grandfather's affability

and kindly generosity. Nasreddin Shah was sometimes even particularly

miserly, hence the story, circulated during his lifetime, of his

fabulous private wealth, of which, however, after his death very little

was to be found.

The European Press has delivered most unjustly severe criticisms upon

the personality of this Oriental prince, and made fun of his Oriental

manners. It is only natural that he should commit occasional mistakes of

etiquette, for what Western sovereign or prince when visiting at an

Eastern court would not be guilty of similar blunders? It is said that

in Berlin, after dining at the royal table, he turned to the Emperor

William and the Empress Augusta and loudly belched, which in Central

Asia is an expression of gratitude for the hospitality received and

always acknowledged with good grace. At dinner with the Prince of Wales

at Marlborough House he is said to have thrown the asparagus stumps over

his back on to the floor, and, in order not to shame his guest, the

Prince, now King of England, and all the other guests immediately did

the same, greatly to the disgust of the attendants. Quite a collection

of similar anecdotes were at the time in circulation about him, but I

think they must be grossly exaggerated, for Nasreddin Shah never

neglected to make strict inquiry into the customs of the lands he

visited, and more than once I have given him information upon minor

details. The Persian king felt much freer in Europe than in his own

land. In Teheran, when he went out for a drive, a long row of attendants

marched on either side of him, who, armed with long staves, cleared

every one out of the way. In Budapest it happened that a poor labourer's

wife pressed up quite close to him to admire the great diamonds on his

coat. I motioned to the woman to go out of the way, but the King said,

"Let her come; she wants to see my jewels close to." He even stopped a

minute or two to let the woman stare at him to her heart's content. In a

word, the man was better than his reputation, and when in May, 1896, a

day before the Jubilee of his fifty years' reign, he fell a victim to

the murderous bullet of Riza Khan, I thought to myself the man deserved

a better end, for as a matter of fact he had to pay with his life for

the tyranny of his officials. At first it was supposed that Riza Khan

belonged to the secret society of the Babis, but, as was proved later

on, he took this means to revenge himself for the unheard-of injustice

of the Governor of Kerman, against which he had vainly sought

protection.

Eleven years after my meeting with Nasreddin I met with his son,

Mozaffareddin Shah, who in 1900 on his return from Paris passed through

the capital of Hungary. From my _Wanderings and Experiences in Persia_

the reader will recall that I had made the acquaintance of the young

ruler in Tabris in 1862, where, a nine year old boy and the

heir-apparent to the throne, he occupied the position of Governor of

Azerbaidshan. Physically weak and insignificant as he was then, I found

him now sickly and quite broken down. Contrexéville and Marienbad were

resorted to in vain to relieve his intense suffering, and the undeniable

signs of disease impressed upon his features clearly revealed the

desperate struggle that he fought within himself. The poor prince was

really worthy of a better fate.

Being by nature timid and reticent, the very strict education which his

father had deemed it necessary to give him had robbed him of all energy.

He liked best to lose himself in quiet contemplation, and in his

childish simplicity was hardly a fit ruler for a land so miserably

desolate as Persia, nor was he likely to carry out his good intentions

of leading his people into the way of modern culture. He was very

pleasant with me, more so than his father had been. He hardly remembered

our meeting at Tabris, but he had carefully read the memoirs of his

father's travels, in which my small personality had received most

laudatory mention, and so he was prepared to meet me long before he

arrived at Budapest. On the journey from Vienna to Budapest he had asked

several times if I was still alive, and if he would be sure to see me at

Budapest. Arrived at the station, where he was received by the son of

the Archduke Joseph and the Hungarian State Ministers, he looked round

inquiringly and said, "_Vambéry kudjast?_" ("Where is Vambéry?"). I was

called; he pressed my hand in the friendliest manner, and straightway

invited me to come with him to the hotel. I did as he asked me, and

during his stay in the Hungarian capital was frequently with him. These

visits led to a more intimate intercourse, and I found out (1) that the

much-to-be-pitied-king was very ill, and that the throne of Iran was not

at all the right place for him; (2) that he had the best intentions in

the world, was quite alive to the superior advantages of modern culture,

and had a great desire to reform his country if only he had the

necessary energy, money, and men. But all three unfortunately failed

him, as well as all other means, and when I gave him a picture of

Persia's future in its regenerate condition, with railways, streets,

manufactories, and similar advantages of modern culture, he looked

straight before him and said, "_Belli, belli! leikin wakit mikhahed_"

("Very well, very well, but that will take time"). Also in discussing

political questions I found him less close than his father, who loved to

give himself the appearance of a Persian Bismarck. Mozaffareddin

expressed himself quite freely and frankly about the political condition

of his land, and when I remarked jokingly that in Europe he was looked

upon as a partisan of Russia, because in Tabris as heir to the throne he

had complied with all Russia's demands, he laughed out loud and said,

"Am I the only one who in default of counter-arms has feigned friendship

for this mighty, ambitious opponent?" He had not much to say in favour

of England, although he agreed with me that this country would never do

any harm to Persia. "But," said he, "Britain's friendship is cold as

ice, and has always expressed itself in empty words." And perhaps he was

not altogether wrong. He was very much down on the politics of Lord

Salisbury, who had declined his support to a contemplated Persian loan

in London, Persia thus being compelled to borrow money from Russia.

Referring to the riskiness of this step, the king remarked, "What were

we to do? When my father died it was said that he had left private means

to the amount of about four million pounds, and that these moneys were

packed away in chests in the cellar. There was not a word of truth in

all this. Instead of money my father left debts, and when I came to the

throne I was unable to pay not merely the State officials, but even the

court expenses and the servants. I was forced to get a loan from

somewhere, and England drove me into the arms of Russia."

Taking it altogether, Mozaffareddin Shah earnestly desired to reform

his land thoroughly, and in its internal arrangements to introduce many

of the modernisations which had particularly struck him in his European

travels. Unfortunately the good man did not know where to begin and what

means to use to attain his object. Discouraged and embittered by the

everlasting wrangling and quarrelling in his immediate _entourage_, he

seemed to stand in mortal dread of his Grand-Vizier, Ali Asghar Khan.

This man, the son of a Georgian renegade from the Caucasus, had

practically made the Shah the unwilling tool of his intriguing and rare

abilities. He comported himself as a servant, but was in reality the

master of his master and the ruler of Persia. I was often an eye-witness

when the two were together. The Shah, apathetically seated in his easy

chair, would speak with as much authority as the words of his first

minister were servile and submissive; but scarcely had he felt the

piercing glance of the latter than he would suddenly stop short and sink

back in his armchair. Behind the door listened his secretary and

faithful servant, who occasionally made his presence known by a low

cough, upon which the Vizier would angrily turn towards the door, and

strongly accentuating the submissive words continue his harangue. Master

of the situation and with an insatiable desire for power and gain, the

Grand-Vizier might possibly have been useful to the country if the

violent opposition of his many rivals had not occupied all his energy,

and the secret hostility of high dignitaries and the rivalry of European

ambassadors at court had not effectually frustrated all attempts at any

healthy reform. Even as Nasreddin's various journeys to Europe remained

fruitless for Persia, so it was with the efforts made by his son. After

his return from Europe the Shah hastened to change the cut and the

colour of the uniform of certain court officials. High-flown orders were

issued, but not followed up; the money borrowed from the Russians soon

came to an end; anarchy, misery, and confusion were bound to increase

apace.

To complete the above notes about my intercourse with the Oriental

princes and grandees, I will attempt to throw some light upon their

private life and mental condition, points which would not be open to a

foreigner in their intercourse with them, but which could not be hidden

from me, the supposed Asiatic. The personality of the Oriental ruler is

still more or less a curiosity in Europe; he is still gazed at and

admired as something out of the common; and naturally so, for the

attributes of Oriental Majesty are always extravagantly magnified, and,

candidly speaking, our minds are still somewhat under the spell of the

"Thousand and One Nights" stories, although current literature has here

and there somewhat ruthlessly torn away the magic veil which surrounds

these demigods of our imagination. Demigods they are no longer to their

own subjects even, for their crowns have lost too many of the jewels

whose brilliancy dazzled the eyes of the beholders, and the source is

dry which furnished the means wherewith the faithfulness and loyalty of

their subjects could be secured. I have been on intimate terms with two

Sultans, two Shahs, and several Khans; I have watched them closely, and

I must honestly say that I consider their position anything but an

enviable one; for with a few exceptions they are more ruled over than

ruling, and in spite of their apparent omnipotence, the fear with which

they inspire those nearest them is not nearly so great as the fear to

which they themselves are exposed in their constant anxiety about their

personal safety. When late in the evening I was sitting quite alone in

one of the apartments of the Yildiz Palace, and in the stillness of the

night was startled by the echo of the dull, heavy step of the patrol

passing close under the windows, I often thought to myself "What in all

the world can compensate for such a terrible existence?" I will admit

that Sultan Abdul Hamid is more anxious and timorous than many of his

Oriental brother sovereigns, for his exaggerated precautions are rightly

ridiculed, but from the fact that he never feels safe by day or by

night, never sleeps peacefully, that with all he eats and drinks he

thinks of poison, and that on all occasions and everywhere he scents

danger, for such an existence the greatest power and majesty, all the

glory in the world and all its submissive homage are but a poor exchange

and in nowise adequate compensation for all the quaking and trembling

that it involves. A quiet and peaceful life is practically impossible at

an Oriental court, considering the everlasting quarrelling, intriguing,

and jealousy prevailing among the servants and officials. All covet the

favour of the unfortunate autocrat, each one tries to outdo the other,

each one seeks the destruction of his neighbour, and when to this

pandemonium are added the intrigues of the womenfolk in the harem, it is

easy to see how little joy there is in the life of an Oriental despot,

nay, rather how deplorable is the fate of such a monarch.

In cases where conceit has a stronger hold upon the senses, where the

ruler in his diseased fancy behaves himself like a superhuman being, as,

for instance, Sultan Abdul Aziz, such an one knows but little fear and

in the shelter of his imaginary security manages to make his existence

fairly tolerable. The story is told of this latter Sultan that during

his European journey in 1867, when making a pleasure trip on the Rhine

to Coblentz, he asked of those with him whether this canal had been dug

for his special benefit, and when in Budapest on board one of the Danube

steamers the Turkish Consul, Commandant A., a cultured officer educated

in Europe, met him and saluted in European fashion, the Sultan in my

presence turned to Fuad Pasha and remarked: "Why did not this rude

fellow kiss my feet?" This Sultan, half mad as he was, who decorated

horses, dogs, and rams, who spent many millions on useless buildings,

was little troubled with anxiety and fear, up to the memorable night

when he was informed of his deposition; but other despots are in

constant dread of their lives. Nasreddin Shah, even in his hunting lodge

in Djadjerud, never neglected to have his couch surrounded by a company

of soldiers; and his son, Mozaffareddin Shah, now on the throne, keeps

awake for whole nights together for fear of being attacked and murdered.

Can anything be more awful?

Of late years Oriental despots have come to the conclusion that in

foreign lands, among the unbelievers, they are safer, freer, and

altogether happier than in their own country. Abdul Ahad, the Emir of

Bokhara, visits the Russian baths of Pyatigorsk in preference to any

other, and from the frequent visits of the Persian kings to Europe it is

very evident that the Shehinshahs of Iran, notwithstanding their Asiatic

despotism, find in the land of the Franks--whose very touch defileth, in

the eyes of the Shiites--more of pleasure and recreation than they can

ever enjoy at home. In Teheran when the Shah rides or drives out, two

long rows of Ferrashes (attendants) precede him as already mentioned,

armed with long staves, to keep the beloved subjects at a safe distance

and to clear the way. Windows and doors are tightly shuttered and

curtained to prevent any one from setting eyes on their lord and master;

the sanctity (otherwise security) of the ruler's sublime person demands

this. When the Shah comes to a European city crowds of curious

Westerners receive him; he is cheered and welcomed, and the homage of

the public pleases him, and makes him feel stronger and more confident

than before. And then there is the courtesy he meets with at our courts;

he fancies himself on equality with the powerful sovereigns of the West;

all this increases his self-respect, and therein lies the special charm

of his European travels.

If here in Europe we have been under the impression that the experiences

gained in these visits to Western lands would be used in the interests

of Western culture and for the civilising of his own land, we have been

far too sanguine in our expectations, for these pleasure trips of

Oriental sovereigns have never benefited their respective countries. On

the contrary, they drain the land's resources. With his three journeys

to Europe Nasreddin Shah has utterly ruined the finances of Persia,

already in a very unsound condition. They did not lead to any profitable

innovations, and it is a well-known fact that the travels of his son

Mozaffareddin Shah were paid for by a Russian loan, originally intended

for the economic and administrative amelioration of the land.

No, these Asiatic demigods do not lie on a bed of roses. Their life is

bare and lonely, their enjoyment full of anxiety and fear, the hundreds

of thousands who writhe before them in the dust and do them homage with

bombastic titulations are their greatest enemies, and the worst victims

of despotism are the despots themselves. Can one be surprised that I

brought no rosy reminiscences from the Oriental courts?

The Struggle's End, and yet no End

The story of my struggles: the memoirs of Arminius Vambéry, Volume 2 · 第 6 / 8 章