[Sidenote: General characteristics of the period.]

Before proceeding to speak of the terrible catastrophe which filled the whole of Western Asia with ruin and desolation, I may offer a few preliminary remarks concerning the general character of the period which we shall briefly survey in this final chapter. It forms, one must admit, a melancholy conclusion to a glorious history. The Caliphate, which symbolised the supremacy of the Prophet's people, is swept away.

Mongols, Turks, Persians, all in turn build up great Mu?ammadan empires, but the Arabs have lost even the shadow of a leading part and appear only as subordinate actors on a provincial stage. The chief centres of Arabian life, such as it is, are henceforth Syria and Egypt, which were held by the Turkish Mamelukes until 1517 A.D., when they pa.s.sed under Ottoman rule. In North Africa the petty Berber dynasties (?af?ids, Ziyanids, and Marinids) gave place in the sixteenth century to the Ottoman Turks. Only in Spain, where the Na?rids of Granada survived until 1492 A.D., in Morocco, where the Sharifs (descendants of 'Ali b. Abi ?alib) a.s.sumed the sovereignty in 1544 A.D., and to some extent in Arabia itself, did the Arabs preserve their political independence. In such circ.u.mstances it would be vain to look for any large developments of literature and culture worthy to rank with those of the past. This is an age of imitation and compilation. Learned men abound, whose erudition embraces every subject under the sun. The ma.s.s of writing shows no visible diminution, and much of it is valuable and meritorious work. But with one or two conspicuous exceptions--_e.g._ the historian Ibn Khaldun and the mystic Sha'rani--we cannot point to any new departure, any fruitful ideas, any trace of original and illuminating thought. The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries "witnessed the rise and triumph of that wonderful movement known as the Renaissance,... but no ripple of this great upheaval, which changed the whole current of intellectual and moral life in the West, reached the sh.o.r.es of Islam."[817] Until comparatively recent times, when Egypt and Syria first became open to European civilisation, the Arab retained his mediaeval outlook and habit of mind, and was in no respect more enlightened than his forefathers who lived under the 'Abbasid Caliphate.

And since the Mongol Invasion I am afraid we must say that instead of advancing farther along the old path he was being forced back by the inevitable pressure of events. East of the Euphrates the Mongols did their work of destruction so thoroughly that no seeds were left from which a flourishing civilisation could arise; and, moreover, the Arabic language was rapidly extinguished by the Persian. In Spain, as we have seen, the power of the Arabs had already begun to decline; Africa was dominated by the Berbers, a rude, unlettered race, Egypt and Syria by the blighting military despotism of the Turks. Nowhere in the history of this period can we discern either of the two elements which are most productive of literary greatness: the quickening influence of a higher culture or the inspiration of a free and vigorous national life.[818]

[Sidenote: The Mongol Invasion.]

Between the middle of the eleventh century and the end of the fourteenth the nomad tribes dwelling beyond the Oxus burst over Western Asia in three successive waves. First came the Seljuq Turks, then the Mongols under Chingiz Khan and Hulagu, then the hordes, mainly Turkish, of Timur. Regarding the Seljuqs all that is necessary for our purpose has been said in a former chapter. The conquests of Timur are a frightful episode which I may be pardoned for omitting from this history, inasmuch as their permanent results (apart from the enormous damage which they inflicted) were inconsiderable; and although the Indian empire of the Great Moguls, which Babur, a descendant of Timur, established in the first half of the sixteenth century, ran a prosperous and brilliant course, its culture was borrowed almost exclusively from Persian models and does not come within the scope of the present work. We shall, therefore, confine our view to the second wave of the vast Asiatic migration, which bore the Mongols, led by Chingiz Khan and Hulagu, from the steppes of China and Tartary to the Mediterranean.

[Sidenote: Chingiz Khan and Hulagu.]

In 1219 A.D. Chingiz Khan, having consolidated his power in the Far East, turned his face westward and suddenly advanced into Transoxania, which at that time formed a province of the wide dominions of the Shahs of Khwarizm (Khiva). The reigning monarch, 'Ala'u 'l-Din Mu?ammad, was unable to make an effective resistance; and notwithstanding that his son, the gallant Jalalu 'l-Din, carried on a desperate guerilla for twelve years, the invaders swarmed over Khurasan and Persia, ma.s.sacring the panic-stricken inhabitants wholesale and leaving a wilderness behind them. Hitherto Baghdad had not been seriously threatened, but on the first day of January, 1256 A.D.--an epoch-marking date--Hulagu, the grandson of Chingiz Khan, crossed the Oxus, with the intention of occupying the 'Abbasid capital. I translate the following narrative from a ma.n.u.script in my possession of the _Ta'rikh al-Khamis_ by Diyarbakri ( 1574 A.D.):--

[Sidenote: Hulagu before Baghdad (1258 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Sack of Baghdad.]

In the year 654 (A.H. = 1256 A.D.) the stubborn tyrant, Hulagu, the destroyer of the nations (_Mubidu 'l-Umam_), set forth and took the castle of Alamut from the Isma'ilis[819] and slew them and laid waste the lands of Rayy.... And in the year 655 there broke out at Baghdad a fearful riot between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites, which led to great plunder and destruction of property. A number of Shi'ites were killed, and this so incensed and infuriated the Vizier Ibnu 'l-'Alqami that he encouraged the Tartars to invade 'Iraq, by which means he hoped to take ample vengeance on the Sunnis.[820] And in the beginning of the year 656 the tyrant Hulagu b. Tuli b.

Chingiz Khan, the Moghul, arrived at Baghdad with his army, including the Georgians (_al-Kurj_) and the troops of Mosul. The Dawidar[821] marched out of the city and met Hulagu's vanguard, which was commanded by Baju.[822] The Moslems, being few, suffered defeat; whereupon Baju advanced and pitched his camp to the west of Baghdad, while Hulagu took up a position on the eastern side. Then the Vizier Ibnu 'l-'Alqami said to the Caliph Musta'?im Billah: "I will go to the Supreme Khan to arrange peace." So the hound[823]

went and obtained security for himself, and on his return said to the Caliph: "The Khan desires to marry his daughter to your son and to render homage to you, like the Seljuq kings, and then to depart."

Musta'?im set out, attended by the n.o.bles of his court and the grandees of his time, in order to witness the contract of marriage.

The whole party were beheaded except the Caliph, who was trampled to death. The Tartars entered Baghdad and distributed themselves in bands throughout the city. For thirty-four days the sword was never sheathed. Few escaped. The slain amounted to 1,800,000 and more.

Then quarter was called.... Thus it is related in the _Duwalu 'l-Islam_.[824]... And on this wise did the Caliphate pa.s.s from Baghdad. As the poet sings:--

"_Khalati 'l-manabiru wa-'l-asirralu minhumu wa-'alayhimu hatta 'l-mamati salamu._"

"_The pulpits and the thrones are empty of them; I bid them, till the hour of death, farewell!_"

[Sidenote: Battle of 'Ayn Jalut (September, 1260 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Arabic ceases to be the language of the whole Moslem world.]

It seemed as if all Mu?ammadan Asia lay at the feet of the pagan conqueror. Resuming his advance, Hulagu occupied Mesopotamia and sacked Aleppo. He then returned to the East, leaving his lieutenant, Ketbogha, to complete the reduction of Syria. Meanwhile, however, an Egyptian army under the Mameluke Sultan Mu?affar Qu?uz was hastening to oppose the invaders. On Friday, the 25th of Rama?an, 658 A.H., a decisive battle was fought at 'Ayn Jalut (Goliath's Spring), west of the Jordan.

The Tartars were routed with immense slaughter, and their subsequent attempts to wrest Syria from the Mamelukes met with no success. The submission of Asia Minor was hardly more than nominal, but in Persia the descendants of Hulagu, the il-Khans, reigned over a great empire, which the conversion of one of their number, Ghazan (1295-1304 A.D.), restored to Moslem rule. We are not concerned here with the further history of the Mongols in Persia nor with that of the Persians themselves. Since the days of Hulagu the lands east and west of the Tigris are separated by an ever-widening gulf. The two races--Persians and Arabs--to whose co-operation the mediaeval world, from Samarcand to Seville, for a long time owed its highest literary and scientific culture, have now finally dissolved their partnership. It is true that the cleavage began many centuries earlier, and before the fall of Baghdad the Persian genius had already expressed itself in a splendid national literature. But from this date onward the use of Arabic by Persians is practically limited to theological and philosophical writings. The Persian language has driven its rival out of the field. Accordingly Egypt and Syria will now demand the princ.i.p.al share of our attention, more especially as the history of the Arabs of Granada, which properly belongs to this period, has been related in the preceding chapter.

[Sidenote: The Mamelukes of Egypt (1250-1517 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: Sultan Baybars (1260-1277 A.D.).]

[Sidenote: The 'Abbasid Caliphs of Egypt.]

The dynasty of the Mameluke[825] Sultans of Egypt was founded in 1250 A.D. by Aybak, a Turkish slave, who commenced his career in the service of the Ayyubid, Malik ?ali? Najmu 'l-Din. His successors[826] held sway in Egypt and Syria until the conquest of these countries by the Ottomans. The Mamelukes were rough soldiers, who seldom indulged in any useless refinement, but they had a royal taste for architecture, as the visitor to Cairo may still see. Their administration, though disturbed by frequent mutinies and murders, was tolerably prosperous on the whole, and their victories over the Mongol hosts, as well as the crushing blows which they dealt to the Crusaders, gave Islam new prestige. The ablest of them all was Baybars, who richly deserved his t.i.tle Malik al-?ahir, _i.e._, the Victorious King. His name has pa.s.sed into the legends of the people, and his warlike exploits into romances written in the vulgar dialect which are recited by story-tellers to this day.[827]

The violent and brutal acts which he sometimes committed--for he shrank from no crime when he suspected danger--made him a terror to the ambitious n.o.bles around him, but did not harm his reputation as a just ruler. Although he held the throne in virtue of having murdered the late monarch with his own hand, he sought to give the appearance of legitimacy to his usurpation. He therefore recognised as Caliph a certain Abu 'l-Qasim A?mad, a pretended scion of the 'Abbasid house, invited him to Cairo, and took the oath of allegiance to him in due form. The Caliph on his part invested the Sultan with sovereignty over Egypt, Syria, Arabia, and all the provinces that he might obtain by future conquests. This A?mad, ent.i.tled al-Mustan?ir, was the first of a long series of mock Caliphs who were appointed by the Mameluke Sultans and generally kept under close surveillance in the citadel of Cairo. There is no authority for the statement, originally made by Mouradgea d'Ohsson in 1787 and often repeated since, that the last of the line bequeathed his rights of succession to the Ottoman Sultan Selim I, thus enabling the Sultans of Turkey to claim the t.i.tle and dignity of Caliph.[828]

[Sidenote: Arabic poetry after the Mongol Invasion.]

[Sidenote: ?afiyyu 'l-Din al-?illi.]

The poets of this period are almost unknown in Europe, and until they have been studied with due attention it would be premature to a.s.sert that none of them rises above mediocrity. At the same time my own impression (based, I confess, on a very desultory and imperfect acquaintance with their work) is that the best among them are merely elegant and accomplished artists, playing brilliantly with words and phrases, but doing little else. No doubt extreme artificiality may coexist with poetical genius of a high order, provided that it has behind it Mutanabbi's power, Ma'arri's earnestness, or Ibnu 'l-Fari?'s enthusiasm. In the absence of these qualities we must be content to admire the technical skill with which the old tunes are varied and revived. Let us take, for example, ?afiyyu 'l-Din al-?illi, who was born at ?illa, a large town on the Euphrates, in 1278 A.D., became laureate of the Urtuqid dynasty at Maridin, and died in Baghdad about 1350. He is described as "the poet of his age absolutely," and to judge from the extracts in Kutubi's _Fawatu 'l-Wafayat_[829] he combined subtlety of fancy with remarkable ease and sweetness of versification. Many of his pieces, however, are _jeux d'esprit_, like his ode to the Prophet, in which he employs 151 rhetorical figures, or like another poem where all the nouns are diminutives.[830] The following specimen of his work is too brief to do him justice:--

"How can I have patience, and thou, mine eye's delight, All the livelong year not one moment in my sight?

And with what can I rejoice my heart, when thou that art a joy Unto every human heart, from me hast taken flight?

I swear by Him who made thy form the envy of the sun (So graciously He clad thee with lovely beams of light): The day when I behold thy beauty doth appear to me As tho' it gleamed on Time's dull brow a constellation bright.

O thou scorner of my pa.s.sion, for whose sake I count as naught All the woe that I endure, all the injury and despite, Come, regard the ways of G.o.d! for never He at life's last gasp Suffereth the weight to perish even of one mite!"[831]

[Sidenote: Popular poetry.]

We have already referred to the folk-songs (_muwashsha?_ and _zajal_) which originated in Spain. These simple ballads, with their novel metres and incorrect language, were despised by the cla.s.sical school, that is to say, by nearly all Moslems with any pretensions to learning; but their popularity was such that even the court poets occasionally condescended to write in this style. To the _zajal_ and _muwashsha?_ we may add the _dubayt_, the _mawaliyya_, the _kanwakan_, and the _?imaq_, which together with verse of the regular form made up the 'seven kinds of poetry' (_al-funun al-sab'a_). ?afiyyu 'l-Din al-?illi, who wrote a special treatise on the Arabic folk-songs, mentions two other varieties which, he says, were invented by the people of Baghdad to be sung in the early dawn of Rama?an, the Moslem Lent.[832] It is interesting to observe that some few literary men attempted, though in a timid fashion, to free Arabic poetry from the benumbing academic system by which it was governed and to pour fresh life into its veins. A notable example of this tendency is the _Hazzu 'l-Qu?uf_[833] by Shirbini, who wrote in 1687 A.D. Here we have a poem in the vulgar dialect of Egypt, but what is still more curious, the author, while satirising the uncouth manners and rude language of the peasantry, makes a bitter attack on the learning and morals of the Mu?ammadan divines.[834] For this purpose he introduces a typical Fellah named Abu Shaduf, whose role corresponds to that of Piers the Plowman in Longland's _Vision_. Down to the end of the nineteenth century, at any rate, such isolated offshoots had not gone far to found a living school of popular poetry. Only the future can show whether the Arabs are capable of producing a genius who will succeed in doing for the national folk-songs what Burns did for the Scots ballads.

[Sidenote: Ibn Khallikan (1211-1282 A.D.).]

Biography and History were cultivated with ardour by the savants of Egypt and Syria. Among the numerous compositions of this kind we can have no hesitation in awarding the place of honour to the _Wafayatu 'l-A'yan_, or 'Obituaries of Eminent Men,' by Shamsu 'l-Din Ibn Khallikan, a work which has often been quoted in the foregoing pages.

The author belonged to a distinguished family descending from Ya?ya b. Khalid the Barmecide (see p. 259 seq.), and was born at Arbela in 1211 A.D. He received his education at Aleppo and Damascus (1229-1238) and then proceeded to Cairo, where he finished the first draft of his Biographical Dictionary in 1256. Five years later he was appointed by Sultan Baybars to be Chief Cadi of Syria. He retained this high office (with a seven years' interval, which he devoted to literary and biographical studies) until a short time before his death. In the Preface to the _Wafayat_ Ibn Khallikan observes that he has adopted the alphabetical order as more convenient than the chronological. As regards the scope and character of his Dictionary, he says:--

[Sidenote: His Biographical Dictionary.]

"I have not limited my work to the history of any one particular cla.s.s of persons, as learned men, princes, emirs, viziers, or poets; but I have spoken of all those whose names are familiar to the public, and about whom questions are frequently asked; I have, however, related the facts I could ascertain respecting them in a concise manner, lest my work should become too voluminous; I have fixed with all possible exactness the dates of their birth and death; I have traced up their genealogy as high as I could; I have marked the orthography of those names which are liable to be written incorrectly; and I have cited the traits which may best serve to characterise each individual, such as n.o.ble actions, singular anecdotes, verses and letters, so that the reader may derive amus.e.m.e.nt from my work, and find it not exclusively of such a uniform cast as would prove tiresome; for the most effectual inducement to reading a book arises from the variety of its style."[835]

Ibn Khallikan might have added that he was the first Mu?ammadan writer to design a Dictionary of National Biography, since none of his predecessors had thought of comprehending the lives of eminent Moslems of every cla.s.s in a single work.[836] The merits of the book have been fully recognised by the author's countrymen as well as by European scholars. It is composed in simple and elegant language, it is extremely accurate, and it contains an astonishing quant.i.ty of miscellaneous historical and literary information, not drily catalogued but conveyed in the most pleasing fashion by anecdotes and excerpts which ill.u.s.trate every department of Moslem life. I am inclined to agree with the opinion of Sir William Jones, that it is the best general biography ever written; and allowing for the difference of scale and scope, I think it will bear comparison with a celebrated English work which it resembles in many ways--I mean Boswell's _Johnson_.[837]

[Sidenote: Historians of the Mameluke period.]

[Sidenote: Maqrizi.]

To give an adequate account of the numerous and talented historians of the Mameluke period would require far more s.p.a.ce than they can reasonably claim in a review of this kind. Concerning Ibn Khaldun, who held a professorship as well as the office of Cadi in Cairo under Sultan Barquq (1382-1398 A.D.), we have already spoken at some length. This extraordinary genius discovered principles and methods which might have been expected to revolutionise historical science, but neither was he himself capable of carrying them into effect nor, as the event proved, did they inspire his successors to abandon the path of tradition. I cannot imagine any more decisive symptom of the intellectual lethargy in which Islam was now sunk, or any clearer example of the rule that even the greatest writers struggle in vain against the spirit of their own times. There were plenty of learned men, however, who compiled local and universal histories. Considering the precious materials which their industry has preserved for us, we should rather admire these diligent and erudite authors than complain of their inability to break away from the established mode. Perhaps the most famous among them is Taqiyyu 'l-Din al-Maqrizi (1364-1442 A.D.). A native of Cairo, he devoted himself to Egyptian history and antiquities, on which subject he composed several standard works, such as the _Khi?a?_[838] and the _Suluk_.[839] Although he was both unconscientious and uncritical, too often copying without acknowledgment or comment, and indulging in wholesale plagiarism when it suited his purpose, these faults which are characteristic of his age may easily be excused. "He has acc.u.mulated and reduced to a certain amount of order a large quant.i.ty of information that would but for him have pa.s.sed into oblivion. He is generally painstaking and accurate, and always resorts to contemporary evidence if it is available. Also he has a pleasant and lucid style, and writes without bias and apparently with distinguished impartiality."[840] Other well-known works belonging to this epoch are the _Fakhri_ of Ibnu 'l-?iq?aqa, a delightful manual of Mu?ammadan politics[841]

which was written at Mosul in 1302 A.D.; the epitome of universal history by Abu 'l-Fida, Prince of ?amat ( 1331); the voluminous Chronicle of Islam by Dhahabi ( 1348); the high-flown Biography of Timur ent.i.tled _'Aja'ibu 'l-Maqdur_, or 'Marvels of Destiny,' by Ibn 'Arabshah ( 1450); and the _Nujum al-Zahira_ ('Resplendent Stars') by Abu 'l-Ma?asin b. Taghribirdi ( 1469), which contains the annals of Egypt under the Moslems. The political and literary history of Mu?ammadan Spain by Maqqari of Tilimsan ( 1632) was mentioned in the last chapter.[842]

[Sidenote: Jalalu 'l-Din al-Suyu?i (1445-1505 A.D.).]

If we were asked to select a single figure who should exhibit as completely as possible in his own person the literary tendencies of the Alexandrian age of Arabic civilisation, our choice would a.s.suredly fall on Jalalu 'l-Din al-Suyu?i, who was born at Suyu? (Usyu?) in Upper Egypt in 1445 A.D. His family came originally from Persia, but, like Dhahabi, Ibn Taghribirdi, and many celebrated writers of this time, he had, through his mother, an admixture of Turkish blood. At the age of five years and seven months, when his father died, the precocious boy had already reached the _Suratu 'l-Ta?rim_ (Sura of Forbidding), which is the sixty-sixth chapter of the Koran, and he knew the whole volume by heart before he was eight years old. He prosecuted his studies under the most renowned masters in every branch of Moslem learning, and on finishing his education held one Professorship after another at Cairo until 1501, when he was deprived of his post in consequence of malversation of the bursary monies in his charge. He died four years later in the islet of Raw?a on the Nile, whither he had retired under the pretence of devoting the rest of his life to G.o.d. We possess the t.i.tles of more than five hundred separate works which he composed. This number would be incredible but for the fact that many of them are brief pamphlets displaying the author's curious erudition on all sorts of abstruse subjects--_e.g._, whether the Prophet wore trousers, whether his turban had a point, and whether his parents are in h.e.l.l or Paradise.

Suyu?i's indefatigable pen travelled over an immense field of knowledge--Koran, Tradition, Law, Philosophy and History, Philology and Rhetoric. Like some of the old Alexandrian scholars, he seems to have taken pride in a reputation for polygraphy, and his enemies declared that he made free with other men's books, which he used to alter slightly and then give out as his own. Suyu?i, on his part, laid before the Shaykhu 'l-Islam a formal accusation of plagiarism against Qas?allani, an eminent contemporary divine. We are told that his vanity and arrogance involved him in frequent quarrels, and that he was 'cut' by his learned brethren. Be this as it may, he saw what the public wanted. His compendious and readable handbooks were famed throughout the Moslem world, as he himself boasts, from India to Morocco, and did much to popularise the scientific culture of the day. It will be enough to mention here the _Itqan_ on Koranic exegesis; the _Tafsiru 'l-Jalalayn_, or 'Commentary on the Koran by the two Jalals,' which was begun by Jalalu 'l-Din al-Ma?alli and finished by his namesake, Suyu?i; the _Muzhir_ (_Mizhar_), a treatise on philology; the _?usnu 'l-Mu?a?ara_, a history of Old and New Cairo; and the _Ta'rikhu 'l-Khulafa_, or 'History of the Caliphs.'

[Sidenote: Other scholars of the period.]

To dwell longer on the literature of this period would only be to emphasise its scholastic and unoriginal character. A pa.s.sing mention, however, is due to the encyclopaedists Nuwayri ( 1332), author of the _Nihayatu 'l-Arab_, and Ibnu 'l-Wardi ( 1349). ?afadi ( 1363) compiled a gigantic biographical dictionary, the _Wafi bi 'l-Wafayat_, in twenty-six volumes, and the learned traditionist, Ibn ?ajar of Ascalon ( 1449), has left a large number of writings, among which it will be sufficient to name the _I?aba fi tamyiz al-?a?aba_, or Lives of the Companions of the Prophet.[843] We shall conclude this part of our subject by enumerating a few celebrated works which may be described in modern terms as standard text-books for the Schools and Universities of Islam. Amidst the host of manuals of Theology and Jurisprudence, with their endless array of abridgments, commentaries, and supercommentaries, possibly the best known to European students are those by Abu 'l-Barakat al-Nasafi ( 1310), 'A?udu 'l-Din al-iji ( 1355), Sidi Khalil al-Jundi ( 1365), Taftazani ( 1389), Sharif al-Jurjani ( 1413), and Mu?ammad b. Yusuf al-Sa.n.u.si ( 1486). For Philology and Lexicography we have the _Alfiyya_, a versified grammar by Ibn Malik of Jaen ( 1273); the _ajurrumiyya_ on the rudiments of grammar, an exceedingly popular compendium by ?anhaji ( 1323); and two famous Arabic dictionaries, the _Lisanu 'l-'Arab_ by Jamalu 'l-Din Ibn Mukarram ( 1311), and the _Qamus_ by Firuzabadi ( 1414). Nor, although he was a Turk, should we leave unnoticed the great bibliographer ?ajji Khalifa ( 1658), whose _Kashfu 'l-?unun_ contains the t.i.tles, arranged alphabetically, of all the Arabic, Persian, and Turkish books of which the existence was known to him.

[Sidenote: The 'Thousand and One Nights.']

The Mameluke period gave final shape to the _Alf Layla wa-Layla_, or 'Thousand and One Nights,' a work which is far more popular in Europe than the Koran or any other masterpiece of Arabic literature. The modern t.i.tle, 'Arabian Nights,' tells only a part of the truth. Mas'udi ( 956 A.D.) mentions an old Persian book, the _Hazar Afsana_ ('Thousand Tales') which "is generally called the Thousand and One Nights; it is the story of the King and his Vizier, and of the Vizier's daughter and her slave-girl: Shirazad and Dinazad."[844] The author of the _Fihrist_, writing in 988 A.D., begins his chapter "concerning the Story-Tellers and the Fabulists and the names of the books which they composed" with the following pa.s.sage (p. 304):--

[Sidenote: Persian origin of the 'Thousand and One Nights.']