THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
loyalty and by his promise still to make his home with them. As master of Mecca, the center of pilgrimage and the sanctuary of all the Arabs, the prophet was able to dictate the terms on which the tribes might worship there. Taif, a rival stronghold of idolatry, submitted in Dec, 630, and its idol was destroyed. A last attempt to overturn the new religion, made by a confederation of tribes, was defeated with comparative ease. The tribes soon accepted Islam, since Mohammed's policy toward Arabs was — conciliation if possible, but at any cost submission. In 631 the Kaaba was closed to all but Moslems. This act marked the peninsula as Mohammedan. Before the prophet's death all Arabia was at his feet; Christians and Jewish tribes were permitted to exist, but only upon condition of paying a heavy tribute.
The non-Mohammedan estimates of the founder vary in all possible ways, some classing him among the most highly endowed prophets and others placing him with rank impostors. Of his mental abilities there can be no doubt — the Koran 5. Char- is incontestable testimony to his acter. powers as poet and orator, organizer and statesman; and this book, chronologically arranged, affords an index to his character and is the chart of his development from the time when he began to write. His courage was magnificent and seems to have failed him but once (when he compromised temporarily with idolatry). To preach against idolatry in its home and under such circumstances to incur persecution for what had become conviction, later to prohibit wine to wine-loving Arabs, still later to refuse compromise when that seemed an easy way out of an apparent impasse, to insist upon the absolute submission which eventually unified Arabia — these are marks of a courage almost sublime — paralleled, indeed, perhaps often in the history of Christian religion, yet none the less worthy of acknowledgment when found in Mohammed. Not the least eminent of his characteristics was his faith in himself and his mission. Two meritorious qualities, aside from what have been mentioned, were enthusiasm and patriotism. Once more, the loyalty which he inspired among men of worth such as Abu Bekr is absolute proof of his deep sincerity. Of his spiritual nature his abhorrence of idolatry and lofty doctrine of God are sufficient evidence. On the other hand, Mohammed had many of the vices of his age and surroundings. He showed often a cold vindictiveness, a savage Insistence upon vengeance, and a severe ruthlessness in procuring or permitting the wholesale slaughter of his foes or of those whose property he needed for his followers. His lenience after the taking of Mecca was due not to motives of mercy but to policy. Those who escaped the proscription at that time owed their lives to the urgent intercession of Mohammed's trustiest friends, not to his clemency. Of his early sincerity as a reformer there can be as little doubt as of his courage. But he failed under the test of success. His decline began with the Medina period. The early Surahs of the Koran, long after they pass the period of inquiry, bear well the test of examination. But after success seemed assured, they show advancing deterioration
in the prophet's character. Revelations thereafter were not always in the interest of the faith, they pandered often to Mohammed's desires. When he wished another wife, a revelation was forthcoming to sanction it. If former utterances stood in the path of present wish, the doctrine of abrogation permitted removal of the obstacle. When he desired the wife of his adopted son Zaid — among Arabs a scandalous thing — Surah xxxiii. sanctioned the divorce by Zaid of his wife that she might be free to marry the prophet. Four was the legal limit of wives for a believer, but the same Surah gave the prophet all license. And when old age and approaching death aroused his uxorious jealousy, though by Arab law a widow not only may but rather must marry, it was revealed for his comfort that his wives were to remain bereaved.
III. The Koran: There is no room to question that the Bible of Islam is the work of one man and that man Mohammed. The speaker, except in the prayer in the opening Surah and in a few scattered passages, is Allah. But as he is too exalted to speak directly even with his prophet, Gabriel is the medium of communication. The book, the claim runs, is not a new creation, but exists in archetype in heaven, fixed in the very essence of God, and was delivered piecemeal to the prophet. But the arrangement is due to the editor. Mohammed had not only memorized his own deliverances but had taught them to his followers. Necessarily many knew parts of the Koran, none knew all. When the prophet died, the utterances existed on scattered bits of leather, ribs of palm leaf, even on stones, and in the memory of the faithful. In the wars of revolt which followed the path of Mohammed, many who knew parts of the Koran perished, and Omar began to fear that it would be wholly lost. He therefore begged Caliph Abu Bekr to have it collected. From all the sources named Zaid of Medina, who was made editor, gathered it. But variant texts existed. A second edition was therefore made by Zaid with the help of three members of the Koraish tribe; this was made canonical, and all variants obtainable were destroyed. In the editing no principle was thoroughly carried out, the one that is partly observable being to place the longer Surahs first. The immediate acceptance of this text by those who had heard the original is fairly presumptive of its fidelity, especially in view of the antagonisms of the times. The claim is made by Mohammedans that its contents evince its entire and complete inspiration. Since it is spoken by Allah, it is absolutely and wholly true. As a historical monument the Koran is valuable for the light it throws upon the mentality of the prophet. Significant is the diffuse and prosaic character of the latest Surahs as compared with the concise, exalted, and poetic style exhibited by the earlier ones. As to the order in which the Surahs were delivered, it must be said that of five authorities, Jajalu al-Din, Rodwell, Muir, Noldeke, and Hughes, no two agree and Palmer favors a still different order. As to the originality it displays, there is now no doubt that while most of the matter is new, Mohammed wove into his deliverances bits of tribal tradition, popular sayings, legends beloved by the