Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 16.djvu/589

MOHAMMED.] MOHAMMEDANISM 561 and added that Mohammed s emissaries would presently appear to destroy the Rabba. The destruction took place accordingly, to the terror of the women and children, but without a single man raising his hand. The pilgrimage undertaken by Mohammed in the year 10 (March 632) was like a very triumph. All Arabia, apart from the vassals of Persia and Greece, lay at his feet. The greatest success of his life had been effected by sheer moral force without a stroke of the sword. But Arabia no longer sufficed him ; he had wider aims. In his last War years he began to extend the holy war against the Greeks. with the Even on his return from Hodaibiya, he began to direct e envoys to several foreign potentates, with letters demand ing their adhesion to Islam. One of these envoys was seized and beheaded in the Belka (the ancient Moab). Hence sprang the first campaign against the Greeks, i.e. the Arabs who were subject to the Greek empire. The army directed against them was, however, entirely defeated at Mu ta (Autumn 629); Khdlid succeeded with difficulty in rallying and leading back the broken remnant of the host. Next summer the Nabataeans who visited the mar ket of Medina spread a rumour that the Emperor Heraclius was collecting a vast force to attack the Moslems ; and Mohammed set forth to meet him at the head of 30,000 men, but got no farther than Tabuk, on the southern borders of ancient Edom, when the rumour was found to be false. The expedition, however, was not altogether fruitless, as it led to the submission of several small Jewish and Christian communities in the north of the Peninsula. Mohammed equipped a new expedition against the Greeks on his return from his "farewell pilgrimage," and it was Deatli just ready to start when he died, on Monday, 8th June of Mo- 632. bammed. j n f orm j n g an estimate of one who has exercised so unexampled an influence on the history of the world, we shall do well to bear in mind the hint of Gibbon, that "some reverence is surely due to the fame of heroes and the religion of nations." The grounds on which Mohammed may be condemned are partly found in his private life. Although on the whole, even after he had become ruler of all Arabia, he maintained the original poverty and simplicity of his establishment, never set store by money and estate, eating and drinking and soft clothing, strictly continued to fast and watch and pray after his first fashion, and that, too, plainly out of a heartfelt need and without any osten tation, he nevertheless in one point at least used his supreme authority as prophet to make provision for the flesh. He claimed to be personally exempt from those restrictions in regard to the female sex which lay upon all other Moslems, and, as is well known, he made very extensive application of this fundamental principle. This fact is quite rightly urged against him as a reproach ; even pious Moslems have been scandalised by it. At the same time, it is unnecessary to judge him on this account more harshly than we do Charlemagne, the most Christian king of the Franks ; in any case we must not apply the standards of the present day to the circumstances of old Arabia. Of much weightier and indeed of crushing character is the accusation, that he did not really believe himself to be a prophet, but merely of set purpose played the part of one. For the first years of his activity indeed this charge is not now any longer maintained ; it is universally granted that at that period his enthusiasm was genuine and real. But in Medina, we are told, he used his prophetic character simply as a pretext for the establishment of his power. It seems to the present writer that into this opinion there enter modern notions as to the separation between religion and the civil magistracy, which ought to be carefully kept out of sight. By any other instrumentality than that of a prophet it would hardly have been possible to found the state of Medina ; religion was the soul of the community. The founding of a religion and the forming of a state were not connected in so merely external a way as is usually supposed ; on the contrary, the one was the natural and necessary consequence of the other. This must certainly be conceded, that, if we are to make any distinctions at all, Islam was far less rich in religious meaning than in social forces. The Koran is Mohammed s weakest performance ; the weight of his historical importance lies in his work at Medina and not in that at Mecca. And it is a fact that the politician in him outgrew the prophet more and more, and that in many cases where he assigned spiritual motives he merely did so to give a fair appearance to acts that emanated from secular regards. In this respect it appears to us particularly objectionable that he gave out as revelations of God and placed in the Koran all sorts of regulations and orders of the day, which proceeded simply from his own deliberations or even in part were suggested to him by advisers from outside. At the same time the element of self-deception is not excluded even here ; he took for a message sent down from heaven everything which in his cataleptic fits passed through his mind, however close might be its agree ment with his own previously cherished thoughts. It was pardonable that he went on with the idea after he had once grasped it, that he blew upon the coals when the flame threatened to die out. It is less easy to free him from the reproach of perfidy and cruel vindictiveness. The surprise of Nakhla in the month Rajab (ordered by him, though he afterwards repudiated it), the numerous assassinations which he instigated, the execution of the 600 Jews at the close of the War of the Fosse, burden the Prophet heavily, and sufficiently explain the widespread antipathy in which he is held. Yet even in this respect it is well not to forget the instance, already cited, of Charlemagne. It is precisely the man of vast aims who finds it most difficult to keep the beaten path. After the death of Mohammed arose the question who was to be his "representative" (Khalifa, Caliph). The choice lay with the community of Medina ; so much was understood ; but whom were they to choose 1 The natives of Medina believed themselves to be now once more masters in their own house, and wished to promote one of themselves. But the Emigrants asserted their opposing claims, and with success, having brought into the town a considerable number of outside Moslems, 1 so as to terrorize the men of Medina, who besides were still divided into two parties. The Emigrants leading spirit was Omar ; he did not, however, cause homage to be paid to himself but to Abubtkr Abubekr, the friend and father-in-law of the Prophet. Cahph. The affair would not have gone on so smoothly, had not Revolt the opportune defection of the Arabians put a stop to the of tlie inward schism which threatened. Islam suddenly found a s itself once more limited to the community of Medina ; only Mecca and Taif remained true. The Bedouins were willing enough to pray, indeed, but less willing to pay taxes ; their defection, as might have been expected, was a political movement. 2 None the less was it a revolt from Islam, for here the political society and the religious are identical. A peculiar compliment to Mohammed was involved in the fact that the leaders of the rebellion in the various districts did not pose as princes and kings, but as prophets ; in this the secret of Islam s success appeared to lie. Abubekr proved himself quite equal to the perilous situation. In the first place, he allowed the expedition against the Greeks, already arranged by Mohammed, quietly to set out, limiting himself for the time to the defence of Medina. On the return of the army he proceeded to 1 Compare Muir, iv. 263. 8 See Nolcleke, Beitriige zur Kenntniss der Poesie der alien Araler (1864), p. 89 sq.

XVI 71