Chapter IV: Part XII (2)

The Arabs of that period knew how to conquer and to hold fast what they had won; for organisation they had less aptitude. Wherever they could they left administration, and taxation more especially, as they found it. At first the register of taxes was kept in Greek in the former dominions of Rome, and in Persian in those of Persia; and not until after more than half a century did the Arabic language become predominant in official book-keeping. The Omayyads had gained the mastery by the loyalty of the Arabs of Syria; they were tied to Syria, and the great tracts of territory to the east were hard to rule from thence. Moreover the Moslems of Babylonia, in many respects a more important province, were on the whole hostile to them. And, what was worse, the old lack of discipline among the Arabs had manifested itself strongly in a new form. Instead of small clans being at feud with one another, as had usually been the case in former days, they had ranged themselves in large and mutually hostile groups. One of these was composed of the Arabs of Yemen (real or reputed), two others of the tribes which claimed descent from Ishmael, the Mudhar and Rabia. If a caliph or a caliph’s vicegerent sided with the Yemen he had the Mudhar against him; if he favoured the Rabia the Mudhar were likewise hostile, etc. In the remoter provinces the hostile Arabs sometimes waged regular wars with one another on their own account. To add to this, there were risings of fanatics of various kinds. None but the ablest of the Omayyads (and on the whole they were an able dynasty) could maintain even tolerable order in the vast empire which extended its borders farther and farther when once the civil wars were over. The brief reign of a weakling or a libertine was enough to spoil everything. The purely Arab empire lacked the elements of stability.

Meanwhile, however, great masses of the conquered peoples had gone over to Islam. Temporal advantages on the one hand, and on the other the suitability of this coarse-grained religion to the Semites, and probably to the less educated Egyptians too, led steadily to the abandonment of a Christianity which in these parts was but little superior to Islam. But in Iran also the new religion soon made great advances on its own merits, though in some places (it must be admitted) very much at the expense of the purity of its pristine character. The national pride of the Arabs could not endure the practical application of the theoretical precept of Islam that all believers should be on an absolutely equal footing. The new converts remained Moslems of the second class, and, in certain districts at least, they felt the distinction bitterly. Even at the time of the second great civil war these so-called “clients” (_mawali_) had on one occasion played a prominent part, though only as the tools of an ambitious Arab.

The action of a “client” population of this sort was fraught with far greater consequences when another Koreishite family--the Abbasids, descendants of an uncle of Mohammed--rose up against the Omayyads. One of their great emissaries placed himself at the head of the Moslem natives of eastern Persia (Khorasan) and by the help of these Iranians the Abbasids secured the throne (750). The change must be regarded as in great measure a strong reaction of the Persian element against the Arab. The long succession of great oriental empires had been interrupted by an empire purely Arab, and the sequence was now renewed. The seat of government was once more transferred to Babylonia; Baghdad took the place of Babylon and Ctesiphon. The great offices of state were already largely filled by persons of other than Arab descent. The old Arab pride of birth was outraged by the fact that no weight was now attached to the consideration of whether the mother of the ruler had been a free woman or a slave, and that thus the Arab strain of the reigning dynasty became more and more interfused with foreign blood as time went on. A second Persian reaction is signalised by the victory won, after a protracted struggle, by the caliph Mamun, the son of a Persian woman, over his brother Amin, whose mother was of the stock of the Abbasids (813). Mamun’s troops were nearly all of them Persians. Their leader, the Persian Tahir, founded the first semi-independent sovereignty on Iranian soil. The forms of government remained Arab to a great extent, and Arabic likewise remained the official language, but genuine Arabdom receded more and more into the background. Above all, professional troops recruited from the peoples of the East, or even of the far West, had almost wholly superseded the Arab levies.

The process of Arabisation went on apace, in the north Semitic countries, Egypt, and even in great tracts of the “Occident” (Maghreb),[22] but this Arab-speaking population, with its profession of Islam and its preponderance of non-Arabic elements, differed widely in thought and feeling from the Arabs of pure blood, who from that time forward were represented (much as they were before the days of Islam) almost entirely by the Bedouins and dwellers in the oases of Arabia and a few places in Africa. The great historic rôle of the pure Arab was played out. But this neo-Arabic nationality gave more or less of the same character to all Islamite countries. This holds good in great measure of Iran and the countries that bordered on it to the northeast, south and southeast, in so far as they fell under the influence of the Arab religion.[23] Nevertheless the eastern provinces of the caliphate no more adopted the Arab tongue (which gained the mastery in the principal countries of the western half and even in a great part of the Maghreb) than the eastern half of the Roman Empire had adopted the Latin tongue at the time that the west was almost completely Romanised. The Arab tongue exercised a profound influence none the less upon the Persians and all such nations as drew their culture from Persia. It was not for nothing that even in the last-named country Arabic was long the language of government, religion, erudition, and poetry, and so remained to some extent even after the native language had reasserted itself. Persian (and Hindustani, Kurdish, etc., likewise) had borrowed largely from Arabic, especially in the department of abstract terms--a thing we should not have expected in view of the antiquity of Persian civilisation and the newness of that of Arabia. The influence of Arabic is apparent even in the remotest branches of modern Persian literature, just as all Teutonic languages bear traces of the profound influence of Latin, which formerly occupied a position in Europe analogous in many respects to that of Arabic in Islamite countries.

INFLUENCE OF PERSIA ON THE MOSLEMS

But if the Arab spirit modified the spirit of Persia in many ways, the converse action was no less strong, possibly stronger. Many political institutions, the forms of polite society, nay, of town life as a whole, luxury, art, and even the fashion of dress, came to the Arabs from Persia. In the Omayyad period Arabic poetry remains in essentials true to the methods of the old heathen Bedouin poets; though side by side with them--and more particularly in the works of the best poets--we mark the gradual growth of a more elegant style, suited to the more cultivated tastes of the towns, and even of a courtly school of poetry. Even in later times, however, the methods of the elder poets found many imitators. But after the Abbasid period the writers of Arabic poems, taken as a whole, were no longer men of pure Arab descent; many were freedmen or of humble origin and Persian or Aramaic nationality. Thus during the Moslem period even the native poets of Persia began by writing in Arabic, and hence the rising school of Persian poetry adhered closely to the traditions of the Arabic school, both in metre and all points of structure, and in subject-matter and verbal expression. Unhappily it showed itself equally ready to imitate the artificiality into which Arabic poetry had sunk at that period. It is true, indeed, that from the outset Persian poetry displayed certain distinctive features, and that its noblest achievement, the national epic, is, broadly speaking, original, though even there Arabic influence is potent in the details.

The lustre of Arab culture, especially as displayed in the large cities of Babylonia, the central province, arose from a liberal intermixture of Persian and Arab elements. In some of these cities Persian was actually spoken by the bulk of the population, at least in the early centuries of Islamism. The influence of Byzantine civilisation on that of Arabia, though far slighter, should not be overlooked. For centuries the upper classes of Babylonia, luxurious and often frivolous as they were, maintained a high level of intellectual activity. The gift of expressing oneself in elegant Arabic with Persian charm and Persian wit was held in the highest esteem. Similar centres of superior culture existed in other Arabic-speaking countries right across to Spain, and for a time even in Sicily. Through all the wide domains of Islam men travelled much, partly to complete their education and acquire the polish of the man of the world, partly for pure love of travel and thirst of adventure. Public and private societies of _beaux-esprits_ and scholars existed in every town of any importance. A brisk trade by land and sea did much to insure the rapid interchange of commodities between regions the most remote, even such as lay far beyond the pale of Islamism, and the result of trade was the accumulation of vast wealth in the great cities. Thither also flowed the taxes levied _per fas et nefas_, upon the inhabitants of the plains. Of course there was no lack of misery in the great cities of the Arab world, any more than in those of Europe and America at the present day.

ARAB RECORDS AND TRADITIONS

The Moslems very early began to hand down biographical records of the prophet, at first by oral, but in the main authentic tradition. More important still to the whole Moslem world was the transmission and collection of precepts covering the whole of life, which pretended to be preserved in the exact form in which they had been uttered by the prophet or made current by his act.[24] It is of the utmost advantage to us to-day that the history of Mohammed’s successors, of their great conquests, and of the empire, follows so immediately upon his own. The several records used to be handed on with the names of those who vouched for them, from the first eye-witness down to the last teller of the tale, variations of statement being placed close side by side. In this way narratives told from the point of view of absolutely different parties have come down to us side by side, many of them dealing with the most important events of the first centuries of Islam, so that historical criticism is frequently in a position to ascertain the main features of what really took place with far greater certainty than if the Arabs themselves had proceeded to draw up a regular history and had manipulated their authorities in their own fashion. The tradition of the deeds and adventures of the ancient heroes of Arabia, too, was carefully cherished, and much of it has come down to us.

ARAB LEARNING

In this, as in all branches of exact learning of the Moslems, the Arabic language stands alone at first and even in later times occupies the foremost place, whether the student immediately concerned was of pure Arab descent (which was probably very seldom the case) or of mixed or foreign blood. This holds good of the sciences related to theology, above all, and of all branches of knowledge taught in the schools. Not one of the sciences properly so called was evolved by the Arabs (and the word may be taken in the most comprehensive sense) out of their own inner consciousness, not even grammar, the first branch of learning to assume the form of an exact science; some of the fundamental conceptions involved in it originated in the logic of Aristotle. This science, arising, as it did, out of the necessity of expounding the _Koran_ and ancient poetry and the desire to preserve the classic tongue of the Bedouins, which was liable to rapid alteration in the lands they had conquered, developed then, it is true, on very independent lines. Above all, Arab philosophy is wholly dependent upon Greek works, most of them translated from the original by Syrians or known through Syrian versions.[25] Even Islamite dogmatism found itself constrained to adopt the methods of the pagan philosophy of Greece.

The men who laid the foundations of Arab learning were for the most part not of Arab descent, though exceptions are more numerous than is commonly supposed. Sibawaih, who drew up the first great compendium of the Arabic language, was a Persian; though practically all he did was to compile what he had heard from his teachers, the chief of whom, Khalil, was in all likelihood a pure-blooded Arab. And this work, upon which that of later schools made little advance as far as the substance is concerned, is very clumsy in form, and as unsystematic as though he had been of pure Arab descent. Exact systematisation is a hard thing for the true Semite to compass. The ascendency exercised by the Arabic language during the centuries in which the intellectual life of Islamite countries was in its glory is best seen from the fact that even those Persians who claimed precedence for their own nation set forth their opinions to that effect in Arabic works.

In this place it is of course impossible to enter upon the history of Arab learning; we can only insist upon one single point, namely that (at least in the branches of scholarship which were held in the highest esteem) the culmination was reached early, and they were then treated of in countless works--compendiums, abstracts, commentaries, and versifications--without any particular variation in the subject-matter. How far medicine, natural science, and mathematics were advanced beyond the stage which the Greeks (and it may be, the Hindus) had attained by works written in Arabic I am not in a position to say.[26] The average standard of the very numerous chronicles in Arabic is considerably higher than that of the Latin chronicles of the Middle Ages, because, for one thing, the writers of the former were men in the thick of actual life, some of them indeed men of considerable consequence, while the latter were generally written in monasteries. We even come upon the rudiments of historical criticism, or at least of a comprehensive historical survey. The number of Arabic works containing the biography of eminent men, scholars, poets, and so forth, is positively amazing, as is the wealth of anthologies of every kind, in which poetry alternates with prose. In their works on literary history, again, they are in the habit of giving many specimens of the poems of the particular writers discussed. Among these anthologies and works on the history of literature are some of remarkable merit and of the highest value to us.

Furthermore we are much beholden to Arab authors of works on geography. These are almost all based upon actual observation and written with a practical aim; and thus have a great advantage over mere scholastic works. Wherever geography assumes a strictly scientific form, however, it is indebted to the system of Ptolemy.

Moslem philosophy (of which the most notable exponents were men of non-Arab descent, Persians, Spaniards, etc., though they all wrote in Arabic as a matter of course) is entirely an emanation from that of Greece, although it rises here and there to the exposition of grand original ideas. The same holds good even of mysticism, which is at bottom in sharp opposition to scientific speculation. Originally an alien growth among the Arabs, with its roots partly in neo-Platonism and Christianity, partly in Hindu and Persian soil, it nevertheless attained a notable development among the Moslems. All speculation was kept within strict limits by the dominant religion. More liberal spirits (of which there were never many) were forced to observe the utmost caution in their utterances; although there was probably more freedom of thought in Islam than in Christian Europe.

But whatever judgment we may pass upon Arabic scientific literature as a whole, however readily we may concede that in proportion to its vast bulk the part played by originality is small, while that played by the repetition of repetitions is very large indeed, it is nevertheless, on the whole, greatly superior to the contemporary literature of Europe. There we should seek in vain for such works as, _e.g._, the great _Book of Songs_, which sets before us in varied guise the course of Arabic poetry down to late Moslem days, and the lives and doings of the Arabs of old time and of the later courts (tenth century) alike; or the geographical work of Mukaddasi (tenth century), the works of Biruni (a Persian from the neighbourhood of what is now Khiva, tenth and eleventh centuries) on chronology and other subjects, which are equally remarkable for their keen observation and strictly scientific temper; the geographical dictionary of Yakut (a man of Byzantine lineage of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries); the politico-historical _Introduction to the Chronicle of Ibn Khaldun_ (of Tunis, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries) and many others. Not until close upon the dawn of the Renaissance does Europe gradually assert her decisive superiority over the East in every sphere of intellectual life. Arabic literature is of peculiar and supreme importance to ourselves because its vast store presents to us a comprehensive and vivid picture of life and thought in wide regions of the nearer East. Without it we should find the oriental peoples of antiquity far harder to understand. From this point of view the study of Arabic is of even greater importance as an aid to the right comprehension of the Old Testament and the cuneiform inscriptions than it is, on purely linguistic grounds, for the interpretation of the Hebrew and Assyrian languages.

INFLUENCE OF THE ARABS UPON EUROPE

The principal effect of Arab learning upon that of Europe consists in this--that a few Greek works which had been translated into Arabic and a few Arabic works which had followed in the footsteps of the Greek, were translated into Latin either from the original or through the medium of Hebrew versions, and thus became text-books to the Europeans. The original ideas of Arabic writers on medicine and mathematics may also have been imparted to western nations by translations of their writings. In all likelihood a European now and again studied medicine under the direct guidance of an oriental physician. Translations of certain Arabic books of tales and fables, native to India in the first instance, were widely circulated in Europe. Arabic poetry scarcely influenced that of Europe at all, at the utmost a few Romance verse-forms may be imitated from those of later Arabic poetry. Generally speaking we cannot but say that, in the region of intellectual activity, the influence of the Moslem on the Christian world was far slighter than we should have expected, considering the innumerable points of contact between the two in Spain, Sicily, the scene of the Crusades, and elsewhere. On the other hand, the Europeans borrowed many details of outward culture and luxury from the Orientals.

LATER EVENTS OF ARABIC CIVILIZATION

During the early period of the Abbasid dynasty the Arab empire continued to expand more and more. It is true that the perpetual wars with Byzantium did not result in any permanent conquests in Asia Minor; but Islam, and with it a certain process of Arabisation, advanced with giant strides, especially in the East. This advance continued even while the caliphate fell lower and lower and its power passed to other despots, most of them not even of Arab descent, who usually treated the caliph with a show of reverence as their lord, but practically took little heed of him. Moreover, the Abbasids never ruled over Spain, whither an Omayyad had fled to found there an empire of his own, which soon attained a high degree of prosperity. Other empires, either absolutely independent of the caliphate, or actually hostile to it, presently arose in their places. But the glory of Arab civilisation suffered no great eclipse, even when the caliphs were mere puppets in the hands of the Buids, who had come as mercenaries from the semi-barbaric mountain tract of Gilan in Iran and had established a mighty empire (tenth century). Even the terrible Turkish migration, which led to the rise of the far mightier empire of the Seljuks, left much unharmed. The brisk and joyous life of a refined civilisation still shines forth from the pages of Hariri’s _Makamat_ (eleventh century). The Crusades did indeed bring greater misery than ever upon the wretched land of Palestine, but on the whole they affected the nations of Islam far less than those which adhered to the church of Rome. The attacks of the Mongols were the first shock which destroyed the fairest flower of Islamite civilisation. Traces of the ravages perpetrated by these monsters are visible to this day. The destruction of Baghdad (1258) inflicted a terrible blow upon Arab culture. At that time the caliphate was in reality a petty state having for its capital a metropolis with which Constantinople alone could vie in importance.

The end of the caliphate coincided with and marked the close of the glorious period of the Arab empire. Even before it came to pass, the Mongols had annihilated the flourishing civilisation of the East by destroying the great cities there, and massacring their inhabitants. A remnant of Arab culture found refuge in Egypt, whither happily the Mongols did not penetrate.

Yet even this conquest actually promoted the spread of Islam. The Mongols settled among the Moslems and soon went over to Islam themselves. The greater part of Asia Minor had already been won over by the Seljuks to Turkish nationality and the faith of Islam, and from thence arose the empire of the Ottoman Turks, for centuries the terror of Europe. At the very time when Islamism, after a protracted struggle, was thrust forth from Spain, the fierce and fanatical worshippers of the God of Arabia bore the banner of his prophet far on the way towards Europe. And while warriors fought for the glory of Allah, Arabic learning was zealously pursued in the theological schools of the Ottoman empire, as it had been in the Middle Ages, and there was much instruction and literary labour after the older Arabic and Persian model, and now and again a work of real scientific value came into being. This mediæval pursuit of learning still prevails wherever Islam holds sway, and its sphere, though circumscribed in Europe, is of vast extent in Asia and Africa, and still continues to expand. It is true that in many Islamite countries the influence of modern Europe makes itself felt even in learning, but it does not go deep, and the genuine Moslem scholar still treads closely in the footprints of the true believers, his predecessors. And Mecca, the home of the prophet, with his sanctuary and his school of theology, is to this day the religious centre for all who admit his claims, and recite the Arabic formulæ of the salat, and listen--though in most cases without the faintest comprehension--to the Arabic _Book of God_. Thither the pious pilgrim makes his way once in his life at least, if he possibly can, nor does he neglect to visit at the same time Mohammed’s grave at Medina. This constant gathering of pilgrims from every quarter at Mecca, and the influence exercised upon their native countries by the theologians who settled there, either temporarily or permanently, are of the utmost importance to the unity and strength of Islam, or, at least, of the creed it involves, which is that held by far the greater number of Semitic races. The language of the Holy City is Arabic, but the population is a mixture of the most diverse elements of nationality.[27]

LATER ISLAMITE MOVEMENTS

The Arabs of Arabia (as has been said before) have long since lost the place in the history of the world which they once occupied under circumstances wholly exceptional. Only twice since then has a strong movement made itself felt in at least the nearest of Islamite lands. In the tenth century the Karmates, a secret sect of Persian origin, hostile to the Abbasid caliphs and, at bottom, to Islam altogether, established themselves firmly in a part of northeastern Arabia, very difficult of access. Their leaders succeeded in winning over many Bedouins by the prospect of booty, and thus caravans of pilgrims were frequently massacred or robbed of all they possessed; some of the large cities of Babylonia were several times captured and pillaged; Mecca itself was taken during the pilgrim festival; the sacrosanct Black Stone carried off (930), and an end put to pilgrimages for a time. These proceedings were accomplished by much bloodshed. The Black Stone was ultimately restored after an interval of twenty-one years, on payment of a heavy ransom. The Karmates were secretly in league with the Fatimites, the anti-caliph dynasty in Africa, which claimed descent from Ali and Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed. They sank back into insignificance by slow degrees.[28] A connection of some sort exists between the above-mentioned occurrences and the migration of certain Bedouin tribes, under the auspices of the Fatimites, from Arabia to Upper Egypt and remoter parts of northern Africa, where they committed great ravages (eleventh century).

And in the eighteenth century the puritanic movement of Abd al-Wahhab arose in the heart of Arabia, with the object of restoring Islam to its pristine purity and repudiating all innovations that had crept in by lapse of time, from the veneration of the tombs of saints to the smoking of tobacco. The Wahhabees brought the greater part of Arabia, inclusive of the holy cities, under their influence for a while, exacted a minute observation of the precepts of religion, bore strict rule in all things, and established a condition of peace such as that country, predestinate to lawlessness, had not known since the days of the caliphate. The Wahhabees were heretics inasmuch as they did not regard the “catholic” principle, which had won acceptance in Islam, that all things adopted by the consensus of the whole church were binding upon all men; though of course the fiction was kept up that this consensus was invariably in harmony with the original character of the faith. They, on the contrary, held in all seriousness the principle, which was universally recognised in theory, that every innovation in the sphere of religion was wholly reprehensible.

The great simplicity of the religion of Mohammed made it possible to effect the restoration of its pristine purity in a far higher degree than the mighty efforts of the sixteenth and subsequent centuries could effect a return to primitive Christianity; and besides, the conditions of contemporary life in Arabia were not widely different from those that had prevailed in the time of the prophet. A few of the theologians of the Ottoman empire actually recognised the Wahhabees as orthodox. These fanatical zealots were, however, obnoxious to the Turkish government for more reasons than one, and hence their power was broken by Muhammed Ali of Egypt, after a desperate struggle. Wahhabism actually exists to this day in the interior of Arabia, but under two mutually hostile dynasties and (in spite of having occasionally sent its emissaries as far as India) without any great prospect of spreading. It is firmly rooted only among the non-nomadic Arabs. The Bedouins never obey a Wahhabee ruler except under compulsion. They are at all times loath to serve a master, and though animated by the Moslem spirit, they are very negligent in the performance of their religious duties. They do not even hesitate to extort all they possibly can from pilgrim caravans, either by openly waylaying them or by levying toll for the privilege of passing through their territory. Taken as a whole, the life of the Bedouin of to-day still bears a strong resemblance to that of his ancestors long ago, but his intellectual level seems to have sunk from the height it maintained at the time of Mohammed. Even the number of places in Arabia suitable for agriculture appears to have diminished through the neglect and decay of irrigation.

The fact that a few points on the coast are of some importance to European commerce and politics is of no consequence to the country as a whole, at least for the present.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Delitzsch, _Wo lag das Paradies_, pp. 295; 304 ff.; Schrader, _Keilschrift und Geschichtsforschung_, pp. 202, 261.

[2] In Jeremiah iii, 2 and xxv, 24; Ezekiel xxvii, 21; xxx, 5; Jeremiah xiii, 20 (from the end of the Captivity); Jeremiah xxi, 13, ערב is “desert.”

[3] _Die alte Geographie Arabiens_, p. 293. Berne, 1875.

[4] Cf. S. A. Barton. _A Sketch of Semitic Origins_ (New York, 1902), Ch. 1, where the various opinions of the subject are compared.

[5] Var. Σαρακηνοί as a tribe.

[6] Cureton, _Spicilegium Syriacum_, 16 ult.

[7] The powerful Shammar of the present day, some who live in Nejd, the ancient home of the tribe, and some in the Mesopotamian desert, belong to the Tai.

[8] That whole peoples should be called after certain frontier tribes by neighbouring nations is not altogether an unusual phenomenon, as everybody knows.

[9] These forms have to a certain extent survived to our own day, as the name of an Iranian people in Transirania and elsewhere, who accepted the Arab religion earlier than their neighbours and were consequently called “Arabs.” In the same way later Syrians often call all Moslems “Taits.”

[10] _Acta Martyr._ ed. St. Ev. Assemani, 2, 345, 1.

[11] Migne, _Patrol. græca_, 79, LXXIX, 611 _seqq._

[12] The proper translation of εὐδαὶμων in this connection. The usual _felix_ or the Horatian _beatus_ (_Carm._ 1, 29, 1) is like our “happy,” too strong.

[13] The name was extended to the whole peninsula, a country extremely poor as a whole. Ἀραβία ἔρημος, _Arabia Deserta_, stood only for the Syrian desert, and the Arab country to the southwest, with Petra as its capital, is Ἀραβία Πετραία, _Arabia Petræa_, as in Ptolemy, and elsewhere.

[14] Genesis xxxvii, 25.

[15] _Reste arabischen Heidenthums_, II, 93.

[16] For a lively description of it see Wellhausen, _Reste_, II, 89 _seqq._

[17] See, for example, Joshua xi, 20; 1 Samuel xv, 33.

[18] S. Nilus in Migne, _Patrol. græca_, 79, lxxix, 611 _seqq._

[19] The translation of _salat_ by “prayer” gives rise to misunderstandings. It is a religious exercise performed according to strict rule, with set formulæ and ceremonies (bending of the body, prostration, etc.). Voluntary prayer is _du’a_.

[20] The historical works of this admirable scholar deserve the strongest recommendation, particularly his _Culturgeschichte des Orients unter den Chalifen_, 2 vols. Vienna, 1875-1877.

[21] Babylonia (Arab Irak) should not be included, as is often done, in the term Mesopotamia, which last should be restricted to the very different region to the north, known in Arabic as Jezira.

[22] The portions of northern Africa west of Egypt and the Moslem parts of western Europe (Spain).

[23] “All men are become Arabs” was said in the year 728 or 729, in reference to an Iranian stock converted to Islam. Those who thus spoke would have used the word _Tadjik_ for _Arab_ (_vide supra_, p. 4); the Arabic chronicle restores _Arab_.

[24] Goldziher has rendered a most important service by proving how slight the importance of this form is on purely historic grounds, and how everything that passed as valid in certain circles was ascribed without more ado to the prophet himself. See particularly Part II of his _Muhammedanische Studien_ (Halle, 1890).

[25] But “the most precious heritage in art, poetry, and history, which the Greek spirit has bequeathed to us was never accessible to Orientals.” (T. J. de Boer, _Geschichte der philosophie in Islam_, Stuttgart 1901, p. 26.)

[26] The Arabs deserve great credit for the mere fact that they adopted that brilliant invention, the Hindu numerical system, and passed it on to the Europeans. It is singular that the latter continued so frequently to employ the extremely inconvenient Roman numerals.

[27] Cf. Snoucke-Hurgronge, _Mekka_ (two parts, The Hague, 1888 and 1889).

[28] Cf. de Goeje, _Mem. sur les Carmathes de Bahraïn et les Fatimides_ (Leide, 1886). In this connection we may observe that in our own days the Dutch, with de Goeje at their head, have rendered far greater services in the elucidation of the history and geography of the Arabs than the schools of any of the great nations.

HISTORY IN OUTLINE OF PARTHIANS, SASSANIDS, AND ARABS

We turn back now to the scene of the earlier history, turning back in time also. The events of three great empires will pass quickly before the view, the period of time involved being more than seventeen hundred years. The territories occupied by the peoples under consideration were wide, and the peoples themselves successively dominated the eastern world, and contested supremacy there with Rome. Of the Parthians and Sassanids it must be said that, while important in holding Rome back, they had otherwise an inconsiderable influence in the West; moreover, Rome could not have retained the Orient even had she conquered it. As regards the culture influence of the Parthians and Sassanids in Europe, this was virtually _nil_. The case is quite different when we come to the Arabs. Here was a race which not only became dominant in the East, but seriously threatened to overthrow and supplant the entire civilisation of Europe; and which, foiled in this, retained supremacy in the East and developed an indigenous culture that powerfully influenced all Christendom.

It must be understood that the relations between the Parthians, Sassanids, and Arabs is geographical and chronological rather than ethnological. The Parthians were overthrown by the Sassanids, and the Sassanids by the Arabs. The three peoples successively ruled over similar territories, and their histories may advantageously be considered in sequence; but it will be understood that they represented different races and bore to one another merely the relation of the conquered to the conqueror. An outline of the history of Armenia is appended, to give completeness to the subject, much as we gave chronologies of various other minor nations of Western Asia in a previous volume.

THE PARTHIAN EMPIRE

(250 B.C.-228 A.D.)

B.C. During the reign of the Seleucid king Antiochus II,
Diodotus, viceroy of Bactria, seizes the northeastern provinces
and assumes the title of king. The formation of this kingdom is
not agreeable to the chiefs of the desert tribes who, under the
Seleucid rule, have never felt direct control, and some of them
migrate into Parthia. Among them are two brothers, Arsaces and
Tiridates, of the Parnians. In a quarrel which arises between
them and Pherecles, presumably satrap of Astauene, the latter
is slain and Arsaces is proclaimed king in Asaak, northwest of
Parthia.

250 Foundation of an independent monarchy by =Arsaces I=.
Antiochus, on account of civil and foreign wars, is unable to
proceed against Arsaces.

248 Death of Arsaces. His brother, =Tiridates=, succeeds,
taking the name of Arsaces, which is also borne by all his
successors as a throne name. They take the title of “king of
kings.”

242 After defeat of Seleucus Callinicus at Ancyra, Tiridates
invades Parthia, slays the eparch Andragores, and takes
possession of the province. He next seizes Hyrcania, and causes
a large army to oppose Seleucus.

238 Decisive victory of Tiridates over Seleucus. The latter
is obliged to return to Antioch on account of civil war, and
Tiridates is enabled to consolidate his kingdom.

211 Death of Tiridates. His son, =Arsaces II=, sometimes, but
incorrectly, called =Artabanus=, succeeds.

209 Antiochus the Great wins a victory over Arsaces on the
summit of Mount Labus. The Parthians retire to Sirynca and are
besieged by Antiochus. Surrender of Sirynca, and treaty of
peace. Arsaces retains Parthia, but is reduced to a vassal of
Antiochus. Parthia remains undisturbed for some years.

191 =Phriapatius= or =Arsaces (III) Philadelphus= succeeds
his father. Owing to the decay of Seleucid power, he acts as
protector of the Greeks in his kingdom.

176 =Phraates I= or =Arsaces (IV) Theopator= succeeds his
father. He conquers the Mardians.

171 Phraates dies, leaving the throne to his brother,
=Mithridates I= or =Arsaces (V) Epiphanes=, who at once annexes
several satrapies of Bactria to his kingdom. He holds court in
Hyrcania.

155 At death of King Eucratides of Bactria, Mithridates
continues the conquest of that country. The Hindu Kush becomes
the eastern boundary of Parthia. Mithridates turns to the west.

147 The province of Babylonia is wrested from the Seleucids.
The East is finally lost to the Macedonians.

139 Capture of Demetrius II of Syria, who has attempted to
establish himself in Mesopotamia.

138 Successful campaign in Elymais. Death of Mithridates. He
has made Parthia a great power. His son, =Phraates II= or
=Arsaces (VI) Euergetes=, succeeds. He adds Margiana to the
kingdom. The seat of the kingdom is transferred to Media.

130 Antiochus Sidetes begins a vigorous campaign against the
Parthians, whom he defeats in a great battle on the Upper Zab.
Babylon and Ecbatana are recovered.

129 The Parthians make secret terms with the Medes and attack
Antiochus, whose host is annihilated and he himself slain.
Phraates compelled to attack the Scythians, whom he had invited
to assist him against Antiochus. They have arrived too late,
and, as Phraates refuses to pay them, they begin to ravage the
country.

128 Death of Phraates in a disastrous battle with the
Scythians. His uncle, =Artabanus I= or =Arsaces (VII) Nicator=,
son of Phriapatius, succeeds. The Scythians withdraw, content
with their victory; Artabanus pays them tribute. There appear
to have been rival kings in this and the following reign.
Perhaps they are Scythians. The usurpers are suppressed.
Artabanus dies (date unknown), after a short reign, in battle
with the Tochari, and is succeeded by his son, =Mithridates
(II) the Great= or =Arsaces (VIII) Theos Euergetes=. He
wages many wars, and wins victories from the Scythians. Lost
territory is recovered. The Euphrates is fixed as the western
boundary of the kingdom.

94 Mithridates puts Tigranes II on the disputed throne of
Greater Armenia.

92 Sulla, proprætor of Cilicia, meets the ambassador of
Mithridates on the Euphrates, seeking the Roman alliance in
some connection with the Parthian schemes against Syria. First
contact of Parthia with Rome. Mithridates at war with Laodice,
queen of Commagene.

88 About this date Mithridates captures Demetrius III and his
army, dies shortly afterwards, and is succeeded by =Artabanus
II= or =Arsaces IX=. He is the last to bear title “king of
kings,” which passes to Tigranes II of Armenia.

77 =Sinatruces= or =Arsaces (X) Autocrator=, an exile living
with the Scythian tribe of the Sacarances, is placed on the
throne at the age of eighty. Continual wars with Tigranes, who
conquers Media, ravages Arbela and Nineveh, and compels the
cession of Adiabene and Nisibis.

73 Mithridates of Pontus appeals in vain to both Sinatruces and
Tigranes for help against Rome.

70 =Phraates III= succeeds his father.

69 Phraates declines to help Mithridates of Pontus, whom
Tigranes has joined. Tigranes offers to restore his Median
conquests to Phraates if he will assist. Phraates hesitates, but

66 accepts overtures of Pompey, and, with the younger Tigranes,
who has quarrelled with his father, prepares to invade Armenia.
Phraates besieges Artaxarta, but leaves the younger Tigranes
to continue. Defeat of Tigranes by his father. The former
flees to Pompey. The elder Tigranes surrenders to Pompey,
and the younger is put in chains. Phraates demands Tigranes’
deliverance, but it is refused. Phraates recovers Media and
resumes title “king of kings.”

64 While Pompey is in Syria, Phraates attacks and defeats the
elder Tigranes. Pompey refuses to interfere, but sends umpires
to settle the dispute.

57 Murder of Phraates by his two sons, who divide the kingdom.
=Orodes= or =Hyrodes I= takes Parthia, and =Mithridates III=
takes Media. The latter is soon expelled for his cruelty, and
Orodes reigns alone. Mithridates expects the Romans to restore
him, but they are compelled to go to Egypt to restore Ptolemy
XI.

55 He attacks Orodes alone, who flees, but with the help of
Surenas,

54 captures Mithridates in Babylon and puts him to death.
Crassus takes advantage of this civil strife to invade Parthia.

53 Great defeat of the Romans at Carrhæ by Surenas. Orodes
makes peace with Armenia. He puts Surenas to death through
jealousy.

52 Unsuccessful Parthian invasion of Syria.

51 Cassius defeats the Parthians at Antigonia.

50 The satrap of Mesopotamia raises a revolt in favour of
Pacorus, son of Orodes. Pacorus is recalled by Orodes and Syria
is evacuated. Orodes associates Pacorus with him on the throne.

After the battle of Philippi, Labienus, who has been sent from
Rome to obtain help from Orodes, advises him to seize Syria.

40 Pacorus, Labienus, and a large army attack Syria, which
falls into Parthian hands. All the Phœnician cities except
Tyre submit. The Parthians appear in Palestine and the country
rises against Herod and Phasael. Hyrcanus deposed and Antigonus
substituted. The cities of Asia Minor except Stratonicea open
their gates to Labienus.

39 Ventidius, Antony’s general, drives Labienus from Asia
Minor. Capture and execution of Labienus.

38 Complete rout of the Parthians and death of Pacorus at
battle of Cyrrhestica. The Parthians evacuate Syria.

37 Orodes, in grief at Pacorus’ loss, resigns crown to his son
=Phraates IV=. He at once murders his brothers and then his
father, his own son, and all possible claimants of the throne.
He removes the capital to Ctesiphon. Many of the nobles flee to
Antony, who plans a war against Parthia.

36 Antony appears in Atropatene and besieges the capital. The
expedition proves a failure.

33 Rebellion against Phraates, culminating

32 in an unknown usurper taking the throne. He is succeeded in
a few months by =Tiridates II=.

30 After battle of Actium, which draws the Roman troops from
Media, and Parthia, the Parthians seize Media and Armenia and
put Artaxes II on the Armenian throne. Phraates regains his
kingdom for a short time. Tiridates flees to Syria, where he is
protected by Octavian.

27 Tiridates, with the help of the Arabs, surprises Phraates
and compels him to flee. Phraates finally persuades the
Scythians to help him and

26 Phraates is reinstated. Tiridates flees to Augustus,
carrying Phraates’ younger son with him.

23 Augustus restores Phraates’ son to him. Civil war rages in
Parthia.

20 Augustus visits the East. Phraates, in fear, returns Roman
captives and the ensigns taken from Crassus and Antony, to
Augustus.

10 Phraates sends his family to Rome in order to remove causes
of civil strife, keeping only his favourite wife Urania,
an Italian slave girl presented by Augustus, and her child
Phraates or Phraataces.

2 About this date Urania and =Phraates V= (or =Phraataces=)
murder Phraates IV. Phraataces expels Artavasdes III from
Armenia and puts Tigranes IV on the throne. He also deposes
Ariobarzanes II of Atropatene (Media), who was established
on that throne by Augustus about 10 B.C. A line of Parthian
princes succeed in Atropatene.

A.D.

1 Augustus makes terms with Phraates, who resigns all claims on
Armenia and sends his sons to Rome as hostages.

2 Phraataces marries his mother, in consequence of which

4 he is deposed and takes refuge in Rome. The Parthians bring
back an exiled prince, =Orodes II=, and make him king. He
proves a cruel ruler, and for this reason about

9 is murdered. The Parthians apply to Rome and receive =Vonones
I=, eldest son of Phraates IV, as their king. His long
residence in Rome and foreign sympathies make him unpopular in
Parthia, and

11 =Artabanus III=, an Arsacid on his mother’s side and who
had been king of Media (Atropatene), is set up as a pretender.
He is unsuccessful at first, but finally defeats Vonones at
Ctesiphon. The latter flees and is chosen king of Armenia in
16. Tiberius persuades him to give up this throne.

19 After death of Germanicus, Artabanus begins to treat the
Romans with contempt, and places his son Arsaces on the throne
of Armenia. He makes so severe a ruler that

35 the Parthians apply to Tiberius, who finds himself compelled
to interfere. He induces Pharasmanes, king of Iberia, to put
forward his brother Mithridates as a claimant to the Armenian
throne. War results.

36 A widespread revolt instigated by Tiberius puts Tiridates,
grandson of Phraates IV, on the throne and Artabanus flees.

37 Artabanus comes to terms with Rome and is restored.

40 Death of Artabanus. His son =Vardanes= succeeds, but is
deposed

41 by =Gotarzes=, chief official of Artabanus.

42 Vardanes recovers throne, owing to Gotarzes’ cruelties.
Civil war results.

43 Vardanes captures Seleucia, and Gotarzes retires to Hyrcania.

45 Gotarzes makes unsuccessful attempt to regain throne.

46 Vardanes murdered while hunting. Gotarzes again takes throne.

47 On account of Gotarzes’ misrule, the Parthians ask Claudius
to give them Meherdates (Mithridates V) son of Vonones as king.

50 Gotarzes captures Meherdates on his way to Parthia.

51 Death of Gotarzes succeeded by =Vonones II=, formerly king
of Media and probably brother of Artabanus III.

54 Death of Vonones succeeded by his eldest son, =Vologases I=,
who is the son of a concubine; but to compensate his brothers,
Vologases puts Pacorus on the throne of Media and Tiridates on
that of Armenia--having deposed Radamistus the usurper from
the latter country. A son of Vardanes contests the throne with
Vologases and apparently has the upper hand for a while.

55 The Romans compel the Parthians to evacuate Armenia.

58 Vologases again attacks Armenia and brings on war with Rome.
Revolt of Hyrcania. Corbulo destroys Artaxarta and occupies
Tigranocerta (59).

61 Peace restored in Hyrcania.

62 War with Rome resumed. The Romans are repulsed.

63 Corbulo crosses the Euphrates, and the Parthians sue for
peace.

72 The Alani drive Pacorus of Media from his throne.

75 The Alani enter Parthia. Vologases appeals in vain to
Vespasian.

78 About this date Vologases dies. He seems to have been
succeeded by two kings, =Vologases II= and =Pacorus II=,
probably brothers, and reigning together.

81 =Artabanus IV= appears to be the king in this year. He
protects Terentius Maximus, who pretends to be Nero. Parthia is
torn with civil wars.

93 Pacorus II is sole king.

110 Pacorus sells the crown of Edessa to Abgar VII. Death of
Pacorus. His brother (or perhaps son) =Chosroes= or =Osroes=
succeeds. Vologases II reappears as a rival king, also a
=Mithridates= or =Meherdates VI=. Parthia is completely upset
with civil war which goes on until

113 Chosroes wrests Armenia from King Exedares and gives it to
Parthamariris, both sons of Pacorus.

114 The emperor Trajan, indignant at Chosroes’ act, seizes
Armenia and makes it a Roman province.

115 Trajan takes Ctesiphon and Seleucia.

116 Revolt in Parthia with Mithridates VI at its head. Death of
Mithridates, and his son Sinatruces takes his place. Chosroes
regains Nisibis, Seleucia, and Edessa.

117 Trajan crowns =Parthamaspates= king of Parthia, deposing
Chosroes. Death of Trajan. Hadrian withdraws Roman soldiers and
Chosroes recovers throne. Parthamaspates expelled.

130 About this date Chosroes dies and Vologases II rules as
sole king. The influence of Rome preserves peace in the kingdom.

148 Death of Vologases, aged ninety-six, having reigned
seventy-one years. =Vologases III= succeeds. He continues the
peace with Rome until,

162 when, after death of Antoninus Pius, Vologases enters
Armenia and expels the king. The greatest war between Rome and
Parthia ensues.

164 Aridius Cassius drives Vologases from Syria, enters
Babylonia, and burns Seleucia, the most important city of the
East.

165 Great plague, originating in Parthia, spreads over the
whole world.

166 Peace with Rome. Mesopotamia becomes a Roman province.
Parthia begins steadily to decline.

191 Death of Vologases III. =Vologases IV= succeeds.

194 Vologases permits the Medes to assist Orrhœne in revolt
against the Romans.

196 The Parthians ravage Mesopotamia.

199 Severus surprises the Parthians and takes Seleucia, Coche,
and Ctesiphon.

201 Siege of Atra by Severus, who is compelled to raise it.

209 Vologases succeeded by his son, =Vologases V=.

213 His brother, =Artabanus (IV)=, appears as a claimant of the
throne. Civil war.

215 Caracalla demands the surrender of Tiridates, brother of
Vologases IV, who has taken refuge with Vologases V. The latter
refuses to give him up. Caracalla declares war, and the exile
is delivered up. Artabanus gains the upper hand and holds
Ctesiphon. Caracalla declares war on Artabanus on the latter’s
refusal to give his daughter to the Roman emperor.

216 The Romans penetrate to Arbela.

217 On death of Caracalla an immense Parthian force invades
Mesopotamia. Macrinus defeated and purchases peace.

222 Artabanus replaces his brother over the whole of Parthia.

224 Ardashir, the Sassanian king of Persis (or Persia), invades
Parthia, taking several cities.

227 Battle of Hormizdjan. Victory of Ardashir and death of
Artabanus.

228 Ardashir completes his conquest. End of the Parthian empire.

THE EMPIRE OF THE SASSANIDS

(228-651 A.D.)

While the Arsacids were ruling their kingdom and lording it
over the minor kings of the neighbouring country, the rulers
of Persis (or Persia proper) seem to have occupied an isolated
position and not been included in the Parthian empire. At the
beginning of the third century A.D. the kings of Persia have
lost all power of keeping the empire together; all the land is
ruled by a number of local potentates. One of these is Pabak,
son and descendant of a certain Sasan of Khir. Pabak conquers
considerable territory beyond his own dominions. On his death
the succession of Shapur or Sapor, the eldest son, is disputed
by Ardashir, a younger son. Sapor dies suddenly and Ardashir
puts his other brother to death, and settles himself on his
throne in 211 or 212 A.D. About 224 he invades the land of the
“great king” Artabanus IV of Parthia, and by 228 the conquest
is complete and the title of “great king” devolves upon
Ardashir. He makes his capital at Ctesiphon.

228 Foundation of the Sassanian empire by =Ardashir=
or =Artaxerxes=. He passes his reign in extending and
consolidating his empire.

236-238 War with Rome. Nisibis and Carrhæ taken.

241 Death of Ardashir. His son =Shapur= or =Sapor I= succeeds.

242 Sapor penetrates to Antioch but is driven back by the
Romans.

244 Philippus concludes a humiliating peace with Sapor. Peace
reigns until

251 when Sapor invades Armenia and puts the king to flight. The
Persians now make repeated invasions of Syria.

258 The Roman emperor Valerian takes the field against the
Persians.

260 Capture of Valerian by Sapor. He proceeds towards Asia
Minor but is repulsed by Odenathus, king of Palmyra, who
lays siege to Ctesiphon. Sapor acquires no permanent gain of
territory. In his reign Mani preaches his doctrines tending
to the amalgamation of Christianity and Zoroastrianism, and
leading to the formation of the Manichæan sect.

272 or 273 Sapor succeeded by his son =Hormuz= (=Hormizd=) or
=Hormisdas I=.

274 Death of Hormuz and accession of his brother (?) =Bahram=
or =Varanes I=--a weak prince, given to pleasure. Mani executed
in his reign. Persecution of the Manichæans and Christians.

277 =Bahram= or =Varanes II= succeeds his father. He wars with
Rome, ending

282 with a peace with Probus.

283 After murder of Probus, Carus invades Persia, takes
Ctesiphon and Coche, and dies suddenly. There are civil
wars, probably led by a brother of the king, assisted by the
barbarous tribes in the northwest.

294 Death of Bahram. The throne seems to be contested by
=Bahram= or =Varanes III=, probably a son of Hormuz, who reigns
a short time, and =Narses= or =Narseh=, who soon gains the
upper hand.

297 Narseh occupies Armenia and defeats the Roman general
Galerius.

298 Peace with Rome after a great defeat of Narseh by Galerius.
Armenia and Mesopotamia ceded to Rome. Peace lasts forty years.

303 Abdication of Narseh in favour of his son =Hormuz II=.

310 Death of Hormuz. His son =Adharnarseh= succeeds, but is
soon deposed for cruelty. His brothers are killed or imprisoned
and the new born (or unborn) son of Hormuz, =Shapur= or =Sapor
(II) Postumus= is chosen king. He proves to be the greatest of
the Sassanians.

337 Sapor begins a long war with Rome, owing to the latter
becoming Christianised.

339-340 Terrible persecution of the Christians in Persia. The
war with Rome continues. Sapor aims to seize Nisibis and reduce
Armenia.

348 Great defeat of the emperor Constantius at the battle of
Singara.

350 Sapor almost succeeds in capturing Nisibis when troubles
with the barbarians in the East compel him to raise the siege.

350-358 War in the East causes almost complete suspension in
the conflict with Rome.

358 Peace made in the East and Romans sue for peace. Sapor
declines and war is continued.

359 Sapor captures Amida, but the Romans regain it the
following year. Hostilities are suspended until

363 when the emperor Julian attempts to strike a death-blow at
Sapor. He takes Seleucia but fails to capture Ctesiphon. Death
of Julian in battle. His successor Jovian makes a shameful
peace with Sapor, granting him the lands east of the Tigris,
and part of Mesopotamia with Nisibis and Singara. The Romans
also agree not to help Arsaces of Armenia, and Sapor proceeds
against him.

365-366 Reduction of Armenia and Iberia by Sapor.