The Press Saturday, November 15, 1924. "The Caliphate."

Press, Volume LX, Issue 18231, 15 November 1924, Page 12

The Press Saturday, November 15, 1924. "The Caliphate."

As tho time was ripe for a full and systematic story of the Caliphate, it is a cause for thankfulness that the task has fallen into the hands of a master. Few men are as highly qualified as Sir Thomas Arnold to write of the history, the faiths, and the institutions of the Orient. Tho story of the Caliphate was j a theme after his own heart, and he has ] brought to bear on it all. his powers of exhaustive research and lucid exposition. The subject has a peculiar fascination for students of history. The Caliphate, in its combination of spiritual and temporal power v has been compared to the mediaeval Papacy; but, as Sir Thomas Arnold points out, the contrast lies in the respective proportions in which the two elements were blended. In the Papacy the temporal power was insignificant compared with the spiritual; whereas in the Caliphate, after it had once passed out of its primitive stage as a mere regulator of public worship, the secular power dominated tho whole sphere of its activity, and the spiritual power dwindled down into a kind of sanctimonious, semi-mystical emblem. When tho Araks emerged from a mere tribal status into that of a conquering race, the Caliph was the commander-in-chief of their armies; and, as the driving power of their conquests was not merely the lust of conquest, but a fanatical religious propagandism, it -was useful land inspiring to have.at their head a living embodi-' Btent of their faith. .And so, under this double inspiration, they swept on, like an irresistible tide, in one direction over, Syria, Asia Minor, Egypt, North Africa, and Spain'; and, in the other, over Mesopotamia, Persia, Central Asia, and almost to the wall of China. The incredible rapidity of these conquests, however, cannot bev attributed wholly to religious or national enthusiasm. They were largely aided by the corruption and degeneracy the nations or peoples whom they encountered: whether Eomans or Persians or European barbarians. The Byzantine Em- [ pire at Constantinople seemed to stand out as a lonely beacon of European civilisation amid the advancing flood. With success the trouble began. The rapidity of the conquests was only equalled by their; instability. The r Arab could conquer, but he could not govern or administer. The Caliph was the nominal head of a vast, unwieldy' empire, stretching from Central Asia to the Pyrenees, and Baghdad (or Damascus) ; became the seat of his government. But cohesion was impossible under such a system; and tho sacred office failed to operate aa a binding forced Provinces /were constituted, and emirs,were sent to govern them. It was a glorious opportunity for greedy and ambitions rulers to' consolidate a power of their own, and eyentually to throw off all allegiance tp a figure-head at Baghdad. The Caliphate was' played with as. a pawn, or, held but as a- bribe. There were strong Caliphs and feeble Caliphs; some were promoters of religion and conquest; others- of science and culture. For long periods the office ran in families; one of these was exterminated by assassination, and the office passed to the murderers. Minor.Caliphates sprang up in all directions; it looked as if the whole Arab system had sunk into a slough, of revolutions, assassinations, and internecine wars. But one bright patch emerges. Early in the eighth century the Moslems crossed from Africa into Spain, to settle accounts with Boderick "the last of .the Goths." About the middle of the century, a young prince of the Ommeyad dynasVy of Caliphs escaped tho general assassination of his family at Damascus, and made his way into Spain. There ho was elected to a Kingship or'local Caliphate, and founded a dynasty of rulers, who | for over two hundred years kept Spain at the head of Europe and of the world for chivalrous heroism, for art, science, culture, education, and broad religious toleration. Under this Abdurrahman dynasty we read of libraries, fountains, and gardens, and of halls of learning. And for Arab art the Alhambra and the great Mosque at Cordova are still there for all to see. It must always be remembered, too, that Arabs were the earliest expositors , of ancient Greek philosophy to mediaeval Europe—though, conveniently for their own purposes, they found a way of adapting the ethical teaching of Aristotle in a sense favourable to the Caliph theory. Meantime, the Baghdad Caliphate waß becoming more and more the puppet of a new power from the north, the Scljuk Turks*. The Turk was originally invited in by one Caliph party to assist it against a rival party; much as Count Julian had invited North African Arabs into Spain to help to avenge a private insult; or as, a century or so later, the Norman Barons of Henry EL; were to be invited into Ireland by a King of Leinster. And the result in all three cases wa3 the same: the power which came in to assist remained to dominate. Boman history furnishes | familiar examples of the same process. At first the Turks were "protectors" of j the Caliphate, then its masters. Finally, j -the doom of the ancient Arab Caliphate]

was sealed when, in 1258, Hulagu took Baghdad, and put to death tho last Abassido Caliph. Sir Thomas Arnold shows especial skill in disentangling tho confused details of this transition period. Hero we can only eay that the Ottoman Sultans took up tho Caliphate "in their stride," and exploited it for what it was worth in tho vast career of conquest on which they were entering. Ono pretty Btory, which has'always been held to be historical fact, Sir Thomas shows, by exhaustive analysis, to be utterly without historical foundation. According to this tradition, when Sultan Selim I. conquered Egypt in 1517, he found there a solitary survivor of the Abasside dynasty, enjoying the empty title of Caliph; and, in consideration of his life being spared, this exile there and then formally transferred the sacred office to his conqueror. No doubt tho story had its origin in a dosiro of the Turks to give some colour of legitimacy to their uusurpation. However this may be, in tho course of Turkish history, the Caliphate always hangs as a sort of ghostly appendago on tho fringe of the Sultanate, utilised especially in diplomatic schemes, in support of claims to a protectorate over Mohammedans, in whatever country they are found. That, so used, it could be productive of much mischief has been abundantly proved in India and elsewhere. Probably we may now regard tho speetral anachronism as laid to rest for over.