The Mohammedans of Nigritia
IN the present discussion, by Nigritia must be understood all the region of West Central Africa embraced between Lake Tchad on the east, and Sierra Leone and Liberia on the west, and between Timbuktu on the north, and the Bight of Benin on the south, including the Niger from its source to its mouth. The European travellers who have described various portions of this country are Mungo Park, Denham and Clapperton, the Landers, Laing, Caillie, and more recently, Richardson, Barth, Overweg, Vogel, and Win wood Reade; the Liberian travellers are Benjamin Anderson James L. Sims, and George L. Seymour.
The country east of Lake Tchad to the Red Sea is occupied largely by Mohammedans; but we will now deal only with the countries west of Lake Tchad, in which are situated the well known cities of Kano, Sokoto, Illorin, Timbuktu, Sego, Kankan, Timbo, Musardu.
This part of Africa, although so near to Europe, seems to have been shut out from the knowledge of Europeans, until the publication of the travels of Mungo Park, about one hundred years ago. His descriptions are characterised by a marvellous fidelity and accuracy. It is a remarkable fact that the accounts of the earlier African travellers are, as a rule, more trustworthy than the statements of more recent adventurers. In all delineations which depend for their intelligibility upon the reflective power, and not merely upon the perceptive organs, the older travellers are far superior to their successors. There are some transactions— or, rather, there is a condition of things— which can be made intelligible only by an imaginative delineation of their accompaniments. Alike in the statement of facts which need only to be narrated, in order to be understood, and in the delineation of conditions, which need the help of the imagination in order to their thorough appreciation, the older African travellers are far safer guides than those who, in countless numbers, are following them. The earlier travellers came out unfurnished with any previous ideas of the objects they were to explore. Their minds seem to have been a complete tabula rasa in relation to the country and people. The result was that the facts were given as they appeared to them, not coloured or modified with a view to support or disprove any theory. The greatest masters in any art are those who have first trodden the way. Others must necessarily be imitators. It has been so with sculpture, painting and music; and it is so with travels in Africa. In an old Atlas, published at Amsterdam, in 1665, the position of the Victoria Nyanza, there called “Zaflan lacus,” is laid down with wonderful accuracy, whereas Central Africa appears almost as a pure blank in the maps of forty years ago. For the Nigritian country, therefore, we would recommend Mungo Park’s Travels; and, after his, those of Denham and Clapperton, Caillie and the Landers. The modern traveller is hampered by a commercial exigency. He is under the necessity of making a book that will sell; and he is more anxious to conform to, and perpetuate popular notions, than to give a faithful portraiture of what he sees, for he would then have to walk in the old goove. He must bring forth something new, something original, something sensational. Sir Richard F. Burton, an experienced African traveller, has recently made the following just observation:--
In Africa, strangers had two things to learn; in the first place, what there was, and in the second place what there was not; and generally, what there was not was more circumstantially reported than what there was.[1]
In the days of Park, Denham and Clapperton, the countries which they visited were chiefly Pagan. They are now, through the energy and zeal of Negro converts to Mohammedanism, all under the rule of Islam. They enjoy a settled constitution, a written code of laws, and a regular government.
Mohammedanism was not quite half a century old when it was introduced into North-western Africa. Its conquests swept like a whirlwind over the northern portion of the continent, from Egypt to the Atlantic. An incident illustrative of the passionate faith, the vigour and fervour of its first propagators, is given by Gibbon:--
The title of “Conqueror of Africa” is justly clue to Akbah. He marched from Damascus at the head of ten thousand of the bravest Arabs. . . . It would be difficult, nor is it necessary, to trace the accurate line of progress of Akbah. . . . He plunged into the heart of the country, traversed the wilderness in which his successors erected the splendid capitals of Fez and Morocco, and at length penetrated to the verge of the Atlantic and the Great Desert. . . . The career, though not the zeal, of Akbah, was checked by the prospect of a boundless ocean. He spurred his horse into the waves, and raising his eyes to Heaven, exclaimed, with the tone of a fanatic, “Great God! if my course were not stopped by this sea, I would still go on to the unknown kingdoms of the West, preaching the unity of Thy holy name, and putting to the sword the rebellious nations who worship any other gods than Thee.” [2]
Through the irrepressible energy of these indomitable Arabs, the Mohammedan religion superseded a higher creed, which seemed powerless to penetrate the continent. Various reasons have been assigned for the failure of the North African Church to maintain its position, and extend its influence. These reasons refer mainly to defects in the Church itself, to its internal differences and dissensions;[3] but it did not yield to the attacks of the Eastern propagandism without determined and protracted resistance.
It must not be believed (says Cardinal Lavigerie) that the African church disappeared at a single thrust from the Arab’s sword. This is a mistake too widely spread, and against which our filial piety feels bound to protest.
Leo XIII has just proclaimed it loudly, with an authority that dispenses with the necessity of any further proof. In the Bull ‘Materna Ecclesiae caritas,’ he says:--
Even as the Church of Africa had grown and increased with honours, even so it accepted its destruction with dignity. The Faith of these unhappy populations did then struggle long and desperately with its persecutors. Fourteen times, according to the account of Ebn-Khaldoun, it was driven back by the sword into apostacy, and, fourteen times, it returned to its ancient Faith. In spite of the banishment to the deserts of Arabia of multitudes of men of all ranks— senators, wealthy lords, women, children, simple plebeians; in spite of solicitations, seductions, caresses, the Catholic Church remained steadfast at its post at Carthage and in Tunis proper, for more than six centuries after the Mussulmans’ conquest. We have proof of this in the letters of Popes Saint Leo IX and Saint Gregory the Great, during the 11th century and during the 13th, in the testimony of the historian of the Crusades, who mention in the time of St. Louis, regiments belonging to the Sultan of Tunis composed of Christian natives.[4]
The country east of Lake Tchad to the Red Sea is occupied largely by Mohammedans; but we will now deal only with the countries west of Lake Tchad, in which are situated the well known cities of Kano, Sokoto, Illorin, Timbuktu, Sego, Kankan, Timbo, Musardu.
This part of Africa, although so near to Europe, seems to have been shut out from the knowledge of Europeans, until the publication of the travels of Mungo Park, about one hundred years ago. His descriptions are characterised by a marvellous fidelity and accuracy. It is a remarkable fact that the accounts of the earlier African travellers are, as a rule, more trustworthy than the statements of more recent adventurers. In all delineations which depend for their intelligibility upon the reflective power, and not merely upon the perceptive organs, the older travellers are far superior to their successors. There are some transactions— or, rather, there is a condition of things— which can be made intelligible only by an imaginative delineation of their accompaniments. Alike in the statement of facts which need only to be narrated, in order to be understood, and in the delineation of conditions, which need the help of the imagination in order to their thorough appreciation, the older African travellers are far safer guides than those who, in countless numbers, are following them. The earlier travellers came out unfurnished with any previous ideas of the objects they were to explore. Their minds seem to have been a complete tabula rasa in relation to the country and people. The result was that the facts were given as they appeared to them, not coloured or modified with a view to support or disprove any theory. The greatest masters in any art are those who have first trodden the way. Others must necessarily be imitators. It has been so with sculpture, painting and music; and it is so with travels in Africa. In an old Atlas, published at Amsterdam, in 1665, the position of the Victoria Nyanza, there called “Zaflan lacus,” is laid down with wonderful accuracy, whereas Central Africa appears almost as a pure blank in the maps of forty years ago. For the Nigritian country, therefore, we would recommend Mungo Park’s Travels; and, after his, those of Denham and Clapperton, Caillie and the Landers. The modern traveller is hampered by a commercial exigency. He is under the necessity of making a book that will sell; and he is more anxious to conform to, and perpetuate popular notions, than to give a faithful portraiture of what he sees, for he would then have to walk in the old goove. He must bring forth something new, something original, something sensational. Sir Richard F. Burton, an experienced African traveller, has recently made the following just observation:--
In Africa, strangers had two things to learn; in the first place, what there was, and in the second place what there was not; and generally, what there was not was more circumstantially reported than what there was.[1]
In the days of Park, Denham and Clapperton, the countries which they visited were chiefly Pagan. They are now, through the energy and zeal of Negro converts to Mohammedanism, all under the rule of Islam. They enjoy a settled constitution, a written code of laws, and a regular government.
Mohammedanism was not quite half a century old when it was introduced into North-western Africa. Its conquests swept like a whirlwind over the northern portion of the continent, from Egypt to the Atlantic. An incident illustrative of the passionate faith, the vigour and fervour of its first propagators, is given by Gibbon:--
The title of “Conqueror of Africa” is justly clue to Akbah. He marched from Damascus at the head of ten thousand of the bravest Arabs. . . . It would be difficult, nor is it necessary, to trace the accurate line of progress of Akbah. . . . He plunged into the heart of the country, traversed the wilderness in which his successors erected the splendid capitals of Fez and Morocco, and at length penetrated to the verge of the Atlantic and the Great Desert. . . . The career, though not the zeal, of Akbah, was checked by the prospect of a boundless ocean. He spurred his horse into the waves, and raising his eyes to Heaven, exclaimed, with the tone of a fanatic, “Great God! if my course were not stopped by this sea, I would still go on to the unknown kingdoms of the West, preaching the unity of Thy holy name, and putting to the sword the rebellious nations who worship any other gods than Thee.” [2]
Through the irrepressible energy of these indomitable Arabs, the Mohammedan religion superseded a higher creed, which seemed powerless to penetrate the continent. Various reasons have been assigned for the failure of the North African Church to maintain its position, and extend its influence. These reasons refer mainly to defects in the Church itself, to its internal differences and dissensions;[3] but it did not yield to the attacks of the Eastern propagandism without determined and protracted resistance.
It must not be believed (says Cardinal Lavigerie) that the African church disappeared at a single thrust from the Arab’s sword. This is a mistake too widely spread, and against which our filial piety feels bound to protest.
Leo XIII has just proclaimed it loudly, with an authority that dispenses with the necessity of any further proof. In the Bull ‘Materna Ecclesiae caritas,’ he says:--
Even as the Church of Africa had grown and increased with honours, even so it accepted its destruction with dignity. The Faith of these unhappy populations did then struggle long and desperately with its persecutors. Fourteen times, according to the account of Ebn-Khaldoun, it was driven back by the sword into apostacy, and, fourteen times, it returned to its ancient Faith. In spite of the banishment to the deserts of Arabia of multitudes of men of all ranks— senators, wealthy lords, women, children, simple plebeians; in spite of solicitations, seductions, caresses, the Catholic Church remained steadfast at its post at Carthage and in Tunis proper, for more than six centuries after the Mussulmans’ conquest. We have proof of this in the letters of Popes Saint Leo IX and Saint Gregory the Great, during the 11th century and during the 13th, in the testimony of the historian of the Crusades, who mention in the time of St. Louis, regiments belonging to the Sultan of Tunis composed of Christian natives.[4]
Footnotes:
1 Remarks at Meeting of Royal Geographical Society, June 29th, 1885.
2 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chap. Ii.
3 Lloyd’s North African Church, p. 18.
4 Annals of the Propagation of the Faith; March, 1885.
1 Remarks at Meeting of Royal Geographical Society, June 29th, 1885.
2 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chap. Ii.
3 Lloyd’s North African Church, p. 18.
4 Annals of the Propagation of the Faith; March, 1885.
But, notwithstanding so much faith, so many catastrophes, and such heroism, the Crescent superseded the Cross. We are disposed to regard it as a question at least open to entertainment, whether, upon the whole, the continuance and growth of the Christians in the North of the continent would have promoted the welfare or contributed as much to the future civilisation of the people, as the triumph of the Saracens. When we consider what has happened to the native races of other continents where Christianity is said to have established itself, we are inclined to the conclusion that the North African Church failed because it was not competent to deal with the indigenous races of the country. The Gospel, pure and simple, would have been an unspeakable blessing. But it would not have come pure and simple. A writer in the Church Missionary Intelligencer (July, 1885) candidly says:--
It is cheering to observe that as the veil is gradually being withdrawn from unknown Africa, some attempt, however incommensurate with the resources of a Christian nation, is being made to send to the population the only blessing which can possibly compensate them for the privilege of being made knoton, namely, the glorious Gospel of Christ.
There is no evidence that Christianity, or, rather, professing Christians (in all we say we refer to the professors, not the system) would have been less unscrupulous in their dealings with natives of Africa, than they have been with the natives of America, of Australia, of New Zealand. We can hardly doubt that, in the wake of Christianity, would have followed such transactions as would have inspired the eloquent and indignant pen of some Prescott or Robertson. There would have been the counterparts of Gortez and Pizarro, and probably no Las Gasas to check, if he could not altogether prevent, the extermination of the aborigines. The greater divergence of race would have intensified the antagonism. The successful invaders would have assumed a right to-the persons and labour of the natives, slavery would have been the normal condition of the aborigines, and the cruelty and rapacity of their European masters would have exceeded anything witnessed in the New World—a whole continent would have lain prostrate at the feet of unprincipled greed and irresponsible tyranny.
Mohammedanism, in Africa, has left the native master of himself and of his home; but wherever Christianity has been able to establish itself, with the exception of Liberia, foreigners have taken possession of the country, and, in some places, rule the natives with oppressive rigour.[5]
Mr. Anthony Trollope, in his work on South Africa, says the white people of Natal told him there were no workmen to be found, though the streets were full of Zulus, who will do anything for a shilling, and half anything for a sixpence. In Bloemfontein, no coloured person is allowed to walk about after eight o’clock in the evening. And, with the unfeeling hardness of the cold Northern intellect, the eminent novelist makes the following comment:--
There are cases in which justice—abstract justice—cannot be executed. Had justice only been done, there would have been no United States, no British India, no Australia, no New Zealand, no South Africa, Humanity, forbearance and Christianity must put themselves as closely as possible into alliance with physical supremacy, and, together, make the best they can of the bargain.[6]
This is not the way the Founder of Christianity taught it to the world. He said, “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them.”
Christianity, then, failed in North Africa, and a people was brought from a distance, of a race cognate with the African, whose social sympathies, and foreseeing, and discriminating laws as to food and drink, and other matters— supported, as they believed, by Divine sanction—supplied elements for the preservation of the natives. The Atlantic interposed its threatening billows to the progress of Islam; the Sahara interposed its perilous sands to the progress of Christianity. The propagators of Christianity constructed for themselves the conveyances in which they crossed the Atlantic. The bearers of Islam had the “ships of the desert” created for them. The ocean was a highway for Christianity; the desert a highway for Islam. Europe could not penetrate Africa; Arabia could. A slave and an African was the mother of Ishmael, the progenitor of the founder and first followers of Islam. Shem and Ham unite in Mohammed. Instances of the union of Shem and Ham are frequent in Holy writ. We have Joseph and the Priestess of On; Moses and the Ethiopian woman; Solomon and Pharaoh’s daughter. They have been together in ruling and in serving, on the throne and in the dungeon. So, when the descendants of the union of these two great families appeared in the north and north-east of Africa with their religion, Central Africa, readily opened to them. The desert gave forth water, and the fever tempered its intensity. Japheth and Ham have never yet come together in large numbers, except in the capacity of master and slave. And, if the present attempt of Europeans to take possession of the vast regions of the Congo could succeed—but happily it cannot—they could not make their acquisition of any value without introducing a system of enforced labour, which is slavery.
After the first conquests of the Muslims in North Africa, their religion advanced southward into the continent, not by arms, but by schools, and books, and mosques, by trade and intermarriage. They could not have brought a force sufficient to subjugate the people, for they had to deal with large, powerful and energetic tribes. The Nigritian and Soudanic tribes have never been subdued by a foreign foe, but they have, over and over again, driven back both Arabs and Europeans. We learn from a distinguished African geographer, that when the Portuguese discovered and took possession of the western coast, they found a Negro king who had not only extended his conquests from the centre of Housa to the border of the Atlantic, and from the Pagan countries of Mosé in 12° north latitude, as far as Morocco, but governed his subjects with justice, and adopted such of the customs of Mohammedanism as he thought conducive to civilisation.[7]
Major Denham gives a graphic account of the disastrous issue of two expeditions made by Arabs against natives, armed only with spears and arrows, in one of which he himself nearly lost his life. In both cases the rout was complete—the Arabs fled in dismay. When Major Denham was flying, in a naked and miserable state, from the victorious enemy, he experienced something of the hospitality of the African, of which Mungo Park gives so many interesting instances. A young African prince pulled off his own trousers and gave them to him.”[8]
Neither by the wars of the ancients, nor by the improved methods of modern warfare—neither for political nor religious ends —have foreigners been able to penetrate and occupy the Soudan. It was after the great tribes had been peaceably converted to Islam that we hear of Jihads—military expeditions to reduce Pagans to the faith. This religious propagandism, conducted by native warriors, has been carried on with wonderful activity and success during the last fifty years. Thirty years ago, a religious devotee and military genius—a native of Futah Toro, Al-Hajj Omaru— reduced large districts on the Upper Niger to the faith of Islam. He received the title, “Al- Hajj,” “The Pilgrim,” after he had performed the pilgrimage to Mecca. He was well versed in the Arabic language and literature, and wrote a number of books on his travels, and on religious subjects, which are in circulation throughout Nigritia.[9]
It is cheering to observe that as the veil is gradually being withdrawn from unknown Africa, some attempt, however incommensurate with the resources of a Christian nation, is being made to send to the population the only blessing which can possibly compensate them for the privilege of being made knoton, namely, the glorious Gospel of Christ.
There is no evidence that Christianity, or, rather, professing Christians (in all we say we refer to the professors, not the system) would have been less unscrupulous in their dealings with natives of Africa, than they have been with the natives of America, of Australia, of New Zealand. We can hardly doubt that, in the wake of Christianity, would have followed such transactions as would have inspired the eloquent and indignant pen of some Prescott or Robertson. There would have been the counterparts of Gortez and Pizarro, and probably no Las Gasas to check, if he could not altogether prevent, the extermination of the aborigines. The greater divergence of race would have intensified the antagonism. The successful invaders would have assumed a right to-the persons and labour of the natives, slavery would have been the normal condition of the aborigines, and the cruelty and rapacity of their European masters would have exceeded anything witnessed in the New World—a whole continent would have lain prostrate at the feet of unprincipled greed and irresponsible tyranny.
Mohammedanism, in Africa, has left the native master of himself and of his home; but wherever Christianity has been able to establish itself, with the exception of Liberia, foreigners have taken possession of the country, and, in some places, rule the natives with oppressive rigour.[5]
Mr. Anthony Trollope, in his work on South Africa, says the white people of Natal told him there were no workmen to be found, though the streets were full of Zulus, who will do anything for a shilling, and half anything for a sixpence. In Bloemfontein, no coloured person is allowed to walk about after eight o’clock in the evening. And, with the unfeeling hardness of the cold Northern intellect, the eminent novelist makes the following comment:--
There are cases in which justice—abstract justice—cannot be executed. Had justice only been done, there would have been no United States, no British India, no Australia, no New Zealand, no South Africa, Humanity, forbearance and Christianity must put themselves as closely as possible into alliance with physical supremacy, and, together, make the best they can of the bargain.[6]
This is not the way the Founder of Christianity taught it to the world. He said, “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them.”
Christianity, then, failed in North Africa, and a people was brought from a distance, of a race cognate with the African, whose social sympathies, and foreseeing, and discriminating laws as to food and drink, and other matters— supported, as they believed, by Divine sanction—supplied elements for the preservation of the natives. The Atlantic interposed its threatening billows to the progress of Islam; the Sahara interposed its perilous sands to the progress of Christianity. The propagators of Christianity constructed for themselves the conveyances in which they crossed the Atlantic. The bearers of Islam had the “ships of the desert” created for them. The ocean was a highway for Christianity; the desert a highway for Islam. Europe could not penetrate Africa; Arabia could. A slave and an African was the mother of Ishmael, the progenitor of the founder and first followers of Islam. Shem and Ham unite in Mohammed. Instances of the union of Shem and Ham are frequent in Holy writ. We have Joseph and the Priestess of On; Moses and the Ethiopian woman; Solomon and Pharaoh’s daughter. They have been together in ruling and in serving, on the throne and in the dungeon. So, when the descendants of the union of these two great families appeared in the north and north-east of Africa with their religion, Central Africa, readily opened to them. The desert gave forth water, and the fever tempered its intensity. Japheth and Ham have never yet come together in large numbers, except in the capacity of master and slave. And, if the present attempt of Europeans to take possession of the vast regions of the Congo could succeed—but happily it cannot—they could not make their acquisition of any value without introducing a system of enforced labour, which is slavery.
After the first conquests of the Muslims in North Africa, their religion advanced southward into the continent, not by arms, but by schools, and books, and mosques, by trade and intermarriage. They could not have brought a force sufficient to subjugate the people, for they had to deal with large, powerful and energetic tribes. The Nigritian and Soudanic tribes have never been subdued by a foreign foe, but they have, over and over again, driven back both Arabs and Europeans. We learn from a distinguished African geographer, that when the Portuguese discovered and took possession of the western coast, they found a Negro king who had not only extended his conquests from the centre of Housa to the border of the Atlantic, and from the Pagan countries of Mosé in 12° north latitude, as far as Morocco, but governed his subjects with justice, and adopted such of the customs of Mohammedanism as he thought conducive to civilisation.[7]
Major Denham gives a graphic account of the disastrous issue of two expeditions made by Arabs against natives, armed only with spears and arrows, in one of which he himself nearly lost his life. In both cases the rout was complete—the Arabs fled in dismay. When Major Denham was flying, in a naked and miserable state, from the victorious enemy, he experienced something of the hospitality of the African, of which Mungo Park gives so many interesting instances. A young African prince pulled off his own trousers and gave them to him.”[8]
Neither by the wars of the ancients, nor by the improved methods of modern warfare—neither for political nor religious ends —have foreigners been able to penetrate and occupy the Soudan. It was after the great tribes had been peaceably converted to Islam that we hear of Jihads—military expeditions to reduce Pagans to the faith. This religious propagandism, conducted by native warriors, has been carried on with wonderful activity and success during the last fifty years. Thirty years ago, a religious devotee and military genius—a native of Futah Toro, Al-Hajj Omaru— reduced large districts on the Upper Niger to the faith of Islam. He received the title, “Al- Hajj,” “The Pilgrim,” after he had performed the pilgrimage to Mecca. He was well versed in the Arabic language and literature, and wrote a number of books on his travels, and on religious subjects, which are in circulation throughout Nigritia.[9]
Footnotes:
5 In a pamphlet issued in 1884, by the Committee of tho Wesleyan Foreign Missionary Society, they make pathetic and forcible appeal, in behalf of the “Natives in Bechuanaland, and the Transvaal, against European oppression.” The Committee says--
1st. It is a fundamental law of the constitution of Boer Government that no Native can purchase or hold land in his own name. The natives, therefore, simply occupy land under the Boer, its owner. No amount of genius or skill, no measure of industry or enterprise on the part of the native, can ever raise hi into the position of a joint-ownership.
2nd. They are further oppressed by “The Location System” which may be thus described: A Municipality, however large or small, formed by the Boers of any town, enacts that the natives shall not be allowed to reside within the area of said town, but shall have a portion of land assigned to them somewhere in the neighbourhood, on which they must locate. A tax is exacted from the occupant of every shanty in the “ location.”
3rd. The “Curfew Bell,” with its most invidious associations, afflicts them.
4th. There is the absence of all marital laws and rights of the native people within the area of the Transvaal. They have no standing within the “ fundamental law” of the Boer as to marriage.
5th. The natives are plundered with impunity by the Boers under the title of “Commands.”—The English Government and the Natives in Bechuanaland and Transvaal. Published at the Wesleyan Mission House, London, 1884.
6. Trollope’s South Africa, p. 108.
7 See Cooley’s Negroland of the Arabs.
8 Narrative of Travels and Discoveries in Northern and Central Africa in the Years 1822, 1823 and 1824; by Major Dixon Denham, of His Majesty’s 17th Regiment of Foot; and Captain Hugh Clapperton, of the Boyal Navy.—London, 1826.
9 A sketch of Al-Hajj Omaru’s life is given by Lieutenant Mage, in his Voyage d’ Exploration dans le Soudan Occidental.
5 In a pamphlet issued in 1884, by the Committee of tho Wesleyan Foreign Missionary Society, they make pathetic and forcible appeal, in behalf of the “Natives in Bechuanaland, and the Transvaal, against European oppression.” The Committee says--
1st. It is a fundamental law of the constitution of Boer Government that no Native can purchase or hold land in his own name. The natives, therefore, simply occupy land under the Boer, its owner. No amount of genius or skill, no measure of industry or enterprise on the part of the native, can ever raise hi into the position of a joint-ownership.
2nd. They are further oppressed by “The Location System” which may be thus described: A Municipality, however large or small, formed by the Boers of any town, enacts that the natives shall not be allowed to reside within the area of said town, but shall have a portion of land assigned to them somewhere in the neighbourhood, on which they must locate. A tax is exacted from the occupant of every shanty in the “ location.”
3rd. The “Curfew Bell,” with its most invidious associations, afflicts them.
4th. There is the absence of all marital laws and rights of the native people within the area of the Transvaal. They have no standing within the “ fundamental law” of the Boer as to marriage.
5th. The natives are plundered with impunity by the Boers under the title of “Commands.”—The English Government and the Natives in Bechuanaland and Transvaal. Published at the Wesleyan Mission House, London, 1884.
6. Trollope’s South Africa, p. 108.
7 See Cooley’s Negroland of the Arabs.
8 Narrative of Travels and Discoveries in Northern and Central Africa in the Years 1822, 1823 and 1824; by Major Dixon Denham, of His Majesty’s 17th Regiment of Foot; and Captain Hugh Clapperton, of the Boyal Navy.—London, 1826.
9 A sketch of Al-Hajj Omaru’s life is given by Lieutenant Mage, in his Voyage d’ Exploration dans le Soudan Occidental.
He has had several successors in the work of disseminating the Mohammedan creed; and they are rapidly bringing the whole of Africa north of the equator under the influence of the Orescent. The most important kingdoms in this portion of the continent which are still subject to Paganism are, Dahomey and Ashantee, and their conversion is a question of a short time only. There is, at this moment, an energetic promoter of the Jihad, having under his command scores of thousands of zealous Mohammedans anxious for the spoils of time and the rewards of eternity. By means of these, he is reducing to the faith the most warlike and powerful tribes. His name is Samudu, born about forty years ago, in the Mandingo country, east of Liberia. His fame has gone far beyond Nigritia, all through the Soudan. It has crossed the Mediterranean to Europe, and the Atlantic to America. A narrative of his proceedings now lying before us, written in Arabic, by a native chronicler, contains an interesting account of his method and achievements. The introductory paragraph we translate as follows.--
This is an account of the Jihad of the Imam Ahmadu Samudu, a Mandingo, an inhabitant of the town of Sanankodu, in the extreme part of the Koniah country. God conferred upon him His help continually after ho began the work of visiting the idolatrous Pagans, who dwell between the sea and the country of Wasulu, with a view of inviting them to follow the religion of God, which is Islam.
Know all ye who read this—that the first effort of the Imam Samudu was at a town named Fulindiyah. Following the Book and the Law, and the Traditions, he sent messengers to the King at that town, Sindidu by name, inviting him to submit to his government, abandon the worship of idols, and worship one God, the Exalted, the True, whose service is profitable to His people in this world and in the next; but they refused to submit. Then he imposed a tribute upon them, as the Koran commands on this subject; but they persisted in their blindness and deafness. The Imam then collected a small force of about five hundred men, bravo and valiant, for the Jihad, and he fought against the town, and the Lord helped him againt them, and gave him the victory over them, and he pursued them with his horses until they submitted. Nor will they return to their idolatry, for now all their children are in schools, being taught the Koran, and a knowledge of religion and civilisation. Praise to be God for this.
Alimami Samudu then went to another idolatrous town called Wurukud, surrounded by a strong wall, and skilfully defended, &c.
The same course was adopted as with the former town, and this is the method pursued in all his operations. Large and powerful states which, two years ago, were practising all the irrational and debasing superstitions of a hoary Paganism, are now under the influence of schools and teachers, and the regular administration of law. In 1872, the present writer visited Falaba, the capital of the Soolima country, two hundred and fifty miles east of Sierra Leone, as Special Commissioner to the King from the British Government.
He found the King and his people intelligent, warlike, brave, and energetic, but determined Pagans. For fifty years, the Foulah Mohammedans, by annual military expeditions, had striven to bring them over to the faith of Islam, but they had always successfully resisted every attack. To-day, however, Falaba is Mohammedan, having fallen two years ago, before the troops of Samudu, under the melancholy circumstances detailed in the following letter, addressed to us by the Government Interpreter of Sierra Leone:--
Freetown, Sierra Leono,
October 30, 1884.
Dear Sir,—I am sure you will be sorry to hear that Falaba is taken. As you have visited that region of country on two occasions, I know that you must take a deep interest in it. The King, Royal Family, and principal men, were killed; and the rest of the inhabitants hurried into slavery, in countries above and below Falaba, by the captors, under the command of Alfa Samudu and Mahmudi Daranii. The latter is reported to have since died. It is reported that when Sewah, King of Falaba (well known to you), found that ho could do no more to save his capital, together with its inhabitants, and numerous villages, from being taken by the armed Mohammedans, he invited the whole Royal Family, and many of the principal persons, into a large house, where he had a largo quantity of gunpowder, and addressed them in the following words:--
“Falaba is an ancient country, and never has been conquered by any tribe; it has always been ruling, and never has been ruled. I will never submit to Mohammedanism, If any of you choose,’to become Mohammedans, you are at liberty to do so.” All unanimously replied “They would rather die than become Mohammedans.”
The King then threw a lighted torch into the powder, which immediately caught fire, and the whole place and people were burnt to death. Thus was Falaba taken by the great Mohammedan war, now coming to the coast. It is reported that Suluku, the chief of Big Boumba, in the Limba country, has surrendered and taken a new name, Ahmadu Sofala. Should I learn anything further, I will inform you. With kind regards,
I remain, dear Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
THOMAS G. LAWSON,
Govt, Interpreter.
Dr. E. W. Blyden.
This letter was published in the West African Reporter (Nov. 22, 1884), upon which the Editor remarked as follows:--
The capture of Falaba, the capital of the Soolima country, by the troops of Alfa Samudu, will form an important epoch in the history of the Western Soudan. The brief but graphic description of the circumstances of the capture of this important city, as given by Mr. Lawson in this issue, will be read with painful interest. . . . For more than three months, Falaba successfully resisted the forces of Samudu, commanded by three distinguished generals—Fodo Darami, Infalli and Bilal. These men believed themselves to be fighting for the establishment of the true religion, and for the freedom and security of trade. Falaba felt itself fighting for national life. The strife was exacerbated by fanaticism on the one hand, and the phrensy of personal peril and menaced independence on the other. At length, Samudu gave orders to cease active operations, and having a large number of men and vast resources at his command, established a siege, which ho maintained with relentless vigour, for several months, until the fatal surrender. Starvation did what his troops could not do.
The troops of this energetic commander are now moving westward toward the Atlantic. He has no quarrel with Christians, whom he treats with consideration and respect, and he would be an important auxiliary in the interior operations of Christian Governments on the coast, if only they knew how to utilise him. He displays in all his dealings a soldierly, as well as fatherly, heroism; so that he has the art, as a rule, without carnage, of making his iconoclastic message acceptable to the sympathies of the Pagans whom he summons to the faith. In every town taken, either by force of arms or by its own voluntary submission, he plants a mosque and schools, and stations a teacher and preacher. He lays great stress upon education. He trusts to the Koran and to the schools far more than to the sword, as instruments for the determination of the great moral and political controversy between him and the Pagans, and for the general amelioration. Indeed, throughout Mohammedan Africa, education is compulsory. A man might now travel across the continent, from Sierra Leone to Cairo, or in another direction, from Lagos to Tripoli, sleeping in a village every night, except in the Sahara, and in every village he would find a school. There is regular epistolary communication throughout this region in the Arabic language—sometimes in the vernacular, written in Arabic characters. Bishop Crowther informed us that he received a letter at Lagos, which had come across the continent from Tripoli.
The book chiefly taught in the schools, and with a view to the educidation of which all other books are studied, is the Koran. It is called Alkitab, “The Book,”par excellence, just as the Bible is by us. It is composed in the purest Arabic, and offers many difficulties to those not acquainted with the idom of the Desert Arabs, who alone speak the language in its perfection. The books which, beside the Koran, are taught in all the schools, are various theological treatises and the Moallakat—the six poems, which, in a literary contest of all Arabia, before the days of Islam, carried off the prize for grammatical excellence, purity and style. One of these poems was written by a Negro, and won the special admiration of Mohammed. Another work which is much studied is the Makamat, or Assemblies of Hariri, which are said, in fifty books or parts, to contain the whole Arabic language. This work is the result of the literary system of a period in which not only the sciences, but the useful arts of life, were sacrificed by the ingenious and studious of a great nation to a profound grammaticalresearch into the structure and resources of their own most copious language. The theological student, anxious to master Hebrew, and the Hebrew Scriptures, should know enough Arabic to read the Makamat. Gesenius, in his lexicon, frequently explains a Hebrew root by reference to this treasury of Semitic philology.
This is an account of the Jihad of the Imam Ahmadu Samudu, a Mandingo, an inhabitant of the town of Sanankodu, in the extreme part of the Koniah country. God conferred upon him His help continually after ho began the work of visiting the idolatrous Pagans, who dwell between the sea and the country of Wasulu, with a view of inviting them to follow the religion of God, which is Islam.
Know all ye who read this—that the first effort of the Imam Samudu was at a town named Fulindiyah. Following the Book and the Law, and the Traditions, he sent messengers to the King at that town, Sindidu by name, inviting him to submit to his government, abandon the worship of idols, and worship one God, the Exalted, the True, whose service is profitable to His people in this world and in the next; but they refused to submit. Then he imposed a tribute upon them, as the Koran commands on this subject; but they persisted in their blindness and deafness. The Imam then collected a small force of about five hundred men, bravo and valiant, for the Jihad, and he fought against the town, and the Lord helped him againt them, and gave him the victory over them, and he pursued them with his horses until they submitted. Nor will they return to their idolatry, for now all their children are in schools, being taught the Koran, and a knowledge of religion and civilisation. Praise to be God for this.
Alimami Samudu then went to another idolatrous town called Wurukud, surrounded by a strong wall, and skilfully defended, &c.
The same course was adopted as with the former town, and this is the method pursued in all his operations. Large and powerful states which, two years ago, were practising all the irrational and debasing superstitions of a hoary Paganism, are now under the influence of schools and teachers, and the regular administration of law. In 1872, the present writer visited Falaba, the capital of the Soolima country, two hundred and fifty miles east of Sierra Leone, as Special Commissioner to the King from the British Government.
He found the King and his people intelligent, warlike, brave, and energetic, but determined Pagans. For fifty years, the Foulah Mohammedans, by annual military expeditions, had striven to bring them over to the faith of Islam, but they had always successfully resisted every attack. To-day, however, Falaba is Mohammedan, having fallen two years ago, before the troops of Samudu, under the melancholy circumstances detailed in the following letter, addressed to us by the Government Interpreter of Sierra Leone:--
Freetown, Sierra Leono,
October 30, 1884.
Dear Sir,—I am sure you will be sorry to hear that Falaba is taken. As you have visited that region of country on two occasions, I know that you must take a deep interest in it. The King, Royal Family, and principal men, were killed; and the rest of the inhabitants hurried into slavery, in countries above and below Falaba, by the captors, under the command of Alfa Samudu and Mahmudi Daranii. The latter is reported to have since died. It is reported that when Sewah, King of Falaba (well known to you), found that ho could do no more to save his capital, together with its inhabitants, and numerous villages, from being taken by the armed Mohammedans, he invited the whole Royal Family, and many of the principal persons, into a large house, where he had a largo quantity of gunpowder, and addressed them in the following words:--
“Falaba is an ancient country, and never has been conquered by any tribe; it has always been ruling, and never has been ruled. I will never submit to Mohammedanism, If any of you choose,’to become Mohammedans, you are at liberty to do so.” All unanimously replied “They would rather die than become Mohammedans.”
The King then threw a lighted torch into the powder, which immediately caught fire, and the whole place and people were burnt to death. Thus was Falaba taken by the great Mohammedan war, now coming to the coast. It is reported that Suluku, the chief of Big Boumba, in the Limba country, has surrendered and taken a new name, Ahmadu Sofala. Should I learn anything further, I will inform you. With kind regards,
I remain, dear Sir,
Your obedient Servant,
THOMAS G. LAWSON,
Govt, Interpreter.
Dr. E. W. Blyden.
This letter was published in the West African Reporter (Nov. 22, 1884), upon which the Editor remarked as follows:--
The capture of Falaba, the capital of the Soolima country, by the troops of Alfa Samudu, will form an important epoch in the history of the Western Soudan. The brief but graphic description of the circumstances of the capture of this important city, as given by Mr. Lawson in this issue, will be read with painful interest. . . . For more than three months, Falaba successfully resisted the forces of Samudu, commanded by three distinguished generals—Fodo Darami, Infalli and Bilal. These men believed themselves to be fighting for the establishment of the true religion, and for the freedom and security of trade. Falaba felt itself fighting for national life. The strife was exacerbated by fanaticism on the one hand, and the phrensy of personal peril and menaced independence on the other. At length, Samudu gave orders to cease active operations, and having a large number of men and vast resources at his command, established a siege, which ho maintained with relentless vigour, for several months, until the fatal surrender. Starvation did what his troops could not do.
The troops of this energetic commander are now moving westward toward the Atlantic. He has no quarrel with Christians, whom he treats with consideration and respect, and he would be an important auxiliary in the interior operations of Christian Governments on the coast, if only they knew how to utilise him. He displays in all his dealings a soldierly, as well as fatherly, heroism; so that he has the art, as a rule, without carnage, of making his iconoclastic message acceptable to the sympathies of the Pagans whom he summons to the faith. In every town taken, either by force of arms or by its own voluntary submission, he plants a mosque and schools, and stations a teacher and preacher. He lays great stress upon education. He trusts to the Koran and to the schools far more than to the sword, as instruments for the determination of the great moral and political controversy between him and the Pagans, and for the general amelioration. Indeed, throughout Mohammedan Africa, education is compulsory. A man might now travel across the continent, from Sierra Leone to Cairo, or in another direction, from Lagos to Tripoli, sleeping in a village every night, except in the Sahara, and in every village he would find a school. There is regular epistolary communication throughout this region in the Arabic language—sometimes in the vernacular, written in Arabic characters. Bishop Crowther informed us that he received a letter at Lagos, which had come across the continent from Tripoli.
The book chiefly taught in the schools, and with a view to the educidation of which all other books are studied, is the Koran. It is called Alkitab, “The Book,”par excellence, just as the Bible is by us. It is composed in the purest Arabic, and offers many difficulties to those not acquainted with the idom of the Desert Arabs, who alone speak the language in its perfection. The books which, beside the Koran, are taught in all the schools, are various theological treatises and the Moallakat—the six poems, which, in a literary contest of all Arabia, before the days of Islam, carried off the prize for grammatical excellence, purity and style. One of these poems was written by a Negro, and won the special admiration of Mohammed. Another work which is much studied is the Makamat, or Assemblies of Hariri, which are said, in fifty books or parts, to contain the whole Arabic language. This work is the result of the literary system of a period in which not only the sciences, but the useful arts of life, were sacrificed by the ingenious and studious of a great nation to a profound grammaticalresearch into the structure and resources of their own most copious language. The theological student, anxious to master Hebrew, and the Hebrew Scriptures, should know enough Arabic to read the Makamat. Gesenius, in his lexicon, frequently explains a Hebrew root by reference to this treasury of Semitic philology.
The African Mohammedans are still in that period in which devotion to the one divine book, and to whatever serves to illustrate it, supersedes every other feeling. Great attention is paid to grammatical analysis; indeed, the language is said to have been first reduced to system by Abu’l Aswad, Father of the Black of African extraction.[10] Nearly every Mandingo, or Foulah trader, or itinerant teacher, carries among his manuscripts the Alfiyeh of Ibn Malik, the most complete and celebrated of the Arabic grammatical poems. The regular subjects of study are grammatical inflexion and syntax, rhetoric, versification, theology, the exposition of the Koran, the traditions of the Prophet, and arithmetic. But, besides treatises on serious subjects, they have an abundance of light reading, story books, &c. Richardson says:--
Yusuf has been reading an Arabic book, which I at first thought was some commentary on the Koran; but to-day I was undeceived. Ho related what he read. It reminded me of Gulliver’s Travels. A tall man walks through the sea, cooks fish in the sun, and destroys a whole town, whose inhabitants had insulted him, by the same means that our comparative giant saved the palace of Liliput from conflagration.[11]
There are numerous native authors who have written in the Arabic, Foulah, Mandingo, and Jalof languages; but great reverence is paid to Arabic; it is the language of devotion, of civil and ecclesiastical law, of inspiration. It is the opinion of the Nigritian Mohammedans that Abraham spoke Arabic. They say it was carried—by the Father of the Faithful, the Friend of God, and his son Ishmael—into Arabia, where it was kept, and was not allowed to bo diffused until it was enshrined by the message of the Prophet, After it was embodied in the Koran, where it would be certain of preservation, it was allowed to go forth and to come into contact with other rites and customs; and they affirm that the Africans were the first people to whom it was sent.
There is, no doubt, some ground for the opinion of the African Mohammedans as to the antiquity of the Arabic language. Hebrew is regarded by Semitic scholars as really a dialect. Arabic comprises many peculiar and original formations, pointing to a remoter time and much earlier stage. And it is remarkable that a language confined to the Arabian peninsula until the seventh century after Christ should have attained such copiousness. And when it came into contact with new conditions, and strange races and customs, such is its wonderful elasticity that it adapted itself, not only by adaptations of existing roots, but by words already formed and in use, to the intelligible expression of the innumerable new notions, and even to the new ideas of modern thought and life. It is adapted to the solitudes of the desert, and to the multifarious and complex activities of the city; to the simple nomadic life of the Bedouin, and to the artificial civilisation of Alexandria, Beyrut and Bagdad. “In Arabia, as in Greece,” says Gibbon, “the perfection of language outstripped the refinement of manners, and her speech could diversify the fourscore names of honey, the two hundred of a serpent, the five hundred of a lion, the thousand of a sword, at a time when this copious dictionary was entrusted to the memory of an illiterate people.”
But it is interesting to meet, and to be able to converse with, one of the learned men from the heart of Nigritia, who knows nothing of the scientific discussions and discoveries of the day. It is our privilege, as we write this— one we rarely enjoy—to have the company, almost daily, of such a character. He is a man, not much over thirty, of the Mandingo tribe, now visiting the coast for the first time. He is learned in all the theological, controversial and political literature of Arabia and of his native country; is himself the author of several small treatises, speaks Arabic fluently and several native languages, and is now taking English lessons. He has in his possession two copies of the Arabic Bible (Beirut translation), and is familiar with its contents. We asked him to give, in writing, his opinion on several points on which we had conversed. We send you his views in his own handwriting (Arabic) on the Bible, on Slavery, on Pictorial and Plastic Representations, marked respectively No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, It might, perhaps, interest your readers if you could give a fac-simile of each, or a portion of each, in the pages of the Review. We give below translations:--
THE BIBLE AND THE KORAN.
Manifest differences between the Holy Bible and the illustrious Koran are presented to the careful observer. We mention five.
In the book of Genesis (chap, i and v. 27) it is said, “God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him.” This is contrary to his word, the Exalted, in the chapter on ‘Counsel’ (Koran, xlii, 9). “Creator of the heavens and the earth 1 He hath made for you pairs from among your own selves, and pairs from cattle—by this means he multiplies you. There is naught like Him.”
Again! in Genesis, chap, ii, ver. 2, 3, it is said: “He rested on the seventh day.” This is also contrary to the word of the Exalted, in the chapter on ‘The Cow (Koran, ii, 111). “Maker of the Heavens and the Earth! and when He decreeth a thing, Ho only saith to it, Be, and it is.” This is the truth accepted by us, that God (may He be exalted) does not work by means of tools—only by His word. “Be,” and it is. This is truth without contradiction. Glory be to Him. Weariness be far from Him. Rest is sought only after weariness or fatigue, and fatigue comes from effort through labouring with the hand or with implements, and this is not applicable to the method of our Lord. (May he be honoured and glorified!)
Again: in the book of Exodus, xxxii, v, 2-4, it is said, “And Aaron said unto them, break off the golden earrings which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons and your daughters, and he received them and fashioned it with a graven tool after ho had made it a golden calf.” This is contrary to the words of the Exalted in the chapter, ‘Ta Ha’ (Koran, xx, 90-92), “And so did Samiri cast, and he brought forth to them in bodily shape a lowing calf, &c., &c. And Aaron had before said to them—O my people! by this calf are ye only proved, and verily your Lord is the Merciful: follow me, therefore, and obey my bidding.[12]
Again: in the Gospel of John (chap. xix, 16-18), it is said, “ And they took Jesus, and led Him away; and He, bearing His cross, went forth into a place called ‘The Place of a Skull,’ which is called in the Hebrew, ‘Golgotha,’ where they crucified Him and two others with Him, on either side one and Jesus in the midst.” This is contrary to the words of the Exalted in the chapter on ‘Women’ (Koraniv, p. 156). Their saying, “Verily, we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God. . . .”
Yet they slew him not, but they had only His likeness,[13] and verily, they who differed about Him were in doubt concerning Him. No sure knowledge had they about Him, but followed only an opinion; and they did not really slay Him, but God took Him up to Himself.
Again: In the prayer, “ Our Father, who art in heaven.” This is contrary to His word (May He be exalted). “Praise be to God, the Lord of all creatures.” The import of the words, “Our Father,” is an affirmation of Fatherhood on the part of God, the Truth, and disowns his Lordship (May Ho be glorified), and rejects the servitude (servanthood expresses the idea of the original letter) of the creature affirming sonship on their part.
This is not a doctrine acceptable to the people who hold to the unity[14] of God. The words, “Lord of all creatures,” affirm dominion, sovereignty, on the part of God, the Truth, for this is His prerogative, and submission and obedience on the part of the creature, which is their proper position. It is finished.
No. 2.—SLAVERY,
Saith God, the Exalted (and He is the most righteous of speakers): Verily, the most honourable of you in the sight of God is the most pious of you (Koran, xlix, 13).
From this the intelligent may understand that no creature can be a slave to a creature. God suffereth one to come into the possession of another as a test of the compassionate or merciful disposition of the possessor, and the nature of his gratitude to Him, the Exalted; and for the possessed (the slave), a test of the measure of his submission to the decree and power of God. And that it may be made manifest to thee that God is the controller of His creatures, verily the Exalted may make His enemy ruler over His friend, as He tried His servant Joseph—the righteous, the honourable, son of the honourable, who was son of the honourable, who was son of the Friend of God. He made him the slave of Potiphar, a ruler in Egypt, and ho submitted to the decree of his Lord and to His power; and God changed his servitude to the most excellent rank, and made him chief and King over the people of his time. Very often a man purchases a slave with his money, and he serves him till ho dies; and notwithstanding this, he is nearer to God than his master, as was the case with the Children of Israel who, in their time, on account of the revelation granted to them, were superior to all other people; yet God gave them in servitude to Pharaoh, with all his arrogance and Heathenism, until the period of the departure of Israel by the hand of his patient and prudent servant Moses, the son of Amram (Peace be upon them both). This was a trial to them, and a humiliation for their sins. Therefore, O man of understanding, be not arrogant over your slave or make yourself superior to him. Seek from him with kindness what God has decreed to you of profit from him, and know that God, who made you ruler over him, is able to make him ruler over you. Thank God for His gift, and be not ungrateful. Gratitude secures favour, ingratitude dismisses it. Saith God (May He be honoured and glorified) in his Book—chapter on the ‘Prophets’ (Koran, xxi, 36)—“For trial, we will prove you with evil and with good, and unto us shall ye return.” Oh God, I entreat Thee grant me firmness in the faith and preservation in this world, and in the next. Oh God! bless our Lord, Mohammed, and keep him safe, and all the Prophets and the Apostles, brethren of Mohammed. May the blessing of God be upon them all. Praise be to God, Lord of all creatures.
Yusuf has been reading an Arabic book, which I at first thought was some commentary on the Koran; but to-day I was undeceived. Ho related what he read. It reminded me of Gulliver’s Travels. A tall man walks through the sea, cooks fish in the sun, and destroys a whole town, whose inhabitants had insulted him, by the same means that our comparative giant saved the palace of Liliput from conflagration.[11]
There are numerous native authors who have written in the Arabic, Foulah, Mandingo, and Jalof languages; but great reverence is paid to Arabic; it is the language of devotion, of civil and ecclesiastical law, of inspiration. It is the opinion of the Nigritian Mohammedans that Abraham spoke Arabic. They say it was carried—by the Father of the Faithful, the Friend of God, and his son Ishmael—into Arabia, where it was kept, and was not allowed to bo diffused until it was enshrined by the message of the Prophet, After it was embodied in the Koran, where it would be certain of preservation, it was allowed to go forth and to come into contact with other rites and customs; and they affirm that the Africans were the first people to whom it was sent.
There is, no doubt, some ground for the opinion of the African Mohammedans as to the antiquity of the Arabic language. Hebrew is regarded by Semitic scholars as really a dialect. Arabic comprises many peculiar and original formations, pointing to a remoter time and much earlier stage. And it is remarkable that a language confined to the Arabian peninsula until the seventh century after Christ should have attained such copiousness. And when it came into contact with new conditions, and strange races and customs, such is its wonderful elasticity that it adapted itself, not only by adaptations of existing roots, but by words already formed and in use, to the intelligible expression of the innumerable new notions, and even to the new ideas of modern thought and life. It is adapted to the solitudes of the desert, and to the multifarious and complex activities of the city; to the simple nomadic life of the Bedouin, and to the artificial civilisation of Alexandria, Beyrut and Bagdad. “In Arabia, as in Greece,” says Gibbon, “the perfection of language outstripped the refinement of manners, and her speech could diversify the fourscore names of honey, the two hundred of a serpent, the five hundred of a lion, the thousand of a sword, at a time when this copious dictionary was entrusted to the memory of an illiterate people.”
But it is interesting to meet, and to be able to converse with, one of the learned men from the heart of Nigritia, who knows nothing of the scientific discussions and discoveries of the day. It is our privilege, as we write this— one we rarely enjoy—to have the company, almost daily, of such a character. He is a man, not much over thirty, of the Mandingo tribe, now visiting the coast for the first time. He is learned in all the theological, controversial and political literature of Arabia and of his native country; is himself the author of several small treatises, speaks Arabic fluently and several native languages, and is now taking English lessons. He has in his possession two copies of the Arabic Bible (Beirut translation), and is familiar with its contents. We asked him to give, in writing, his opinion on several points on which we had conversed. We send you his views in his own handwriting (Arabic) on the Bible, on Slavery, on Pictorial and Plastic Representations, marked respectively No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, It might, perhaps, interest your readers if you could give a fac-simile of each, or a portion of each, in the pages of the Review. We give below translations:--
THE BIBLE AND THE KORAN.
Manifest differences between the Holy Bible and the illustrious Koran are presented to the careful observer. We mention five.
In the book of Genesis (chap, i and v. 27) it is said, “God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him.” This is contrary to his word, the Exalted, in the chapter on ‘Counsel’ (Koran, xlii, 9). “Creator of the heavens and the earth 1 He hath made for you pairs from among your own selves, and pairs from cattle—by this means he multiplies you. There is naught like Him.”
Again! in Genesis, chap, ii, ver. 2, 3, it is said: “He rested on the seventh day.” This is also contrary to the word of the Exalted, in the chapter on ‘The Cow (Koran, ii, 111). “Maker of the Heavens and the Earth! and when He decreeth a thing, Ho only saith to it, Be, and it is.” This is the truth accepted by us, that God (may He be exalted) does not work by means of tools—only by His word. “Be,” and it is. This is truth without contradiction. Glory be to Him. Weariness be far from Him. Rest is sought only after weariness or fatigue, and fatigue comes from effort through labouring with the hand or with implements, and this is not applicable to the method of our Lord. (May he be honoured and glorified!)
Again: in the book of Exodus, xxxii, v, 2-4, it is said, “And Aaron said unto them, break off the golden earrings which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons and your daughters, and he received them and fashioned it with a graven tool after ho had made it a golden calf.” This is contrary to the words of the Exalted in the chapter, ‘Ta Ha’ (Koran, xx, 90-92), “And so did Samiri cast, and he brought forth to them in bodily shape a lowing calf, &c., &c. And Aaron had before said to them—O my people! by this calf are ye only proved, and verily your Lord is the Merciful: follow me, therefore, and obey my bidding.[12]
Again: in the Gospel of John (chap. xix, 16-18), it is said, “ And they took Jesus, and led Him away; and He, bearing His cross, went forth into a place called ‘The Place of a Skull,’ which is called in the Hebrew, ‘Golgotha,’ where they crucified Him and two others with Him, on either side one and Jesus in the midst.” This is contrary to the words of the Exalted in the chapter on ‘Women’ (Koraniv, p. 156). Their saying, “Verily, we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God. . . .”
Yet they slew him not, but they had only His likeness,[13] and verily, they who differed about Him were in doubt concerning Him. No sure knowledge had they about Him, but followed only an opinion; and they did not really slay Him, but God took Him up to Himself.
Again: In the prayer, “ Our Father, who art in heaven.” This is contrary to His word (May He be exalted). “Praise be to God, the Lord of all creatures.” The import of the words, “Our Father,” is an affirmation of Fatherhood on the part of God, the Truth, and disowns his Lordship (May Ho be glorified), and rejects the servitude (servanthood expresses the idea of the original letter) of the creature affirming sonship on their part.
This is not a doctrine acceptable to the people who hold to the unity[14] of God. The words, “Lord of all creatures,” affirm dominion, sovereignty, on the part of God, the Truth, for this is His prerogative, and submission and obedience on the part of the creature, which is their proper position. It is finished.
No. 2.—SLAVERY,
Saith God, the Exalted (and He is the most righteous of speakers): Verily, the most honourable of you in the sight of God is the most pious of you (Koran, xlix, 13).
From this the intelligent may understand that no creature can be a slave to a creature. God suffereth one to come into the possession of another as a test of the compassionate or merciful disposition of the possessor, and the nature of his gratitude to Him, the Exalted; and for the possessed (the slave), a test of the measure of his submission to the decree and power of God. And that it may be made manifest to thee that God is the controller of His creatures, verily the Exalted may make His enemy ruler over His friend, as He tried His servant Joseph—the righteous, the honourable, son of the honourable, who was son of the honourable, who was son of the Friend of God. He made him the slave of Potiphar, a ruler in Egypt, and ho submitted to the decree of his Lord and to His power; and God changed his servitude to the most excellent rank, and made him chief and King over the people of his time. Very often a man purchases a slave with his money, and he serves him till ho dies; and notwithstanding this, he is nearer to God than his master, as was the case with the Children of Israel who, in their time, on account of the revelation granted to them, were superior to all other people; yet God gave them in servitude to Pharaoh, with all his arrogance and Heathenism, until the period of the departure of Israel by the hand of his patient and prudent servant Moses, the son of Amram (Peace be upon them both). This was a trial to them, and a humiliation for their sins. Therefore, O man of understanding, be not arrogant over your slave or make yourself superior to him. Seek from him with kindness what God has decreed to you of profit from him, and know that God, who made you ruler over him, is able to make him ruler over you. Thank God for His gift, and be not ungrateful. Gratitude secures favour, ingratitude dismisses it. Saith God (May He be honoured and glorified) in his Book—chapter on the ‘Prophets’ (Koran, xxi, 36)—“For trial, we will prove you with evil and with good, and unto us shall ye return.” Oh God, I entreat Thee grant me firmness in the faith and preservation in this world, and in the next. Oh God! bless our Lord, Mohammed, and keep him safe, and all the Prophets and the Apostles, brethren of Mohammed. May the blessing of God be upon them all. Praise be to God, Lord of all creatures.
Footnotes:
10 Biographies of Ibn Khallikan; vol. i, p. 662.
11 Narratives of a Mission to Central Africa; vol. i, p. 57.
12 See note on this passage in Rodwoll’s translation of the Koran. Mohammedans affirm that Aaron was opposed to the making of the calf.
13 Literally, “ One was made to appear to them like Jesus.”—Rodwell. Tho Mohammedans believe it was an eidolon, and not Jesus Himself, who was crucified.—Palmers translation of the Koran, in loco.
14 Not only the oneness, but the unapproachable singularity of the Divine Being.
10 Biographies of Ibn Khallikan; vol. i, p. 662.
11 Narratives of a Mission to Central Africa; vol. i, p. 57.
12 See note on this passage in Rodwoll’s translation of the Koran. Mohammedans affirm that Aaron was opposed to the making of the calf.
13 Literally, “ One was made to appear to them like Jesus.”—Rodwell. Tho Mohammedans believe it was an eidolon, and not Jesus Himself, who was crucified.—Palmers translation of the Koran, in loco.
14 Not only the oneness, but the unapproachable singularity of the Divine Being.
No. 3.—PICTUHES.
Moses and Jesus (Blessing and peace upon them), were prophets indeed, and in truth. Their excellence and superiority are not hidden, but they have no followers. I have not seen their followers, nor have I heard of them from the mouth of men. I have not seen among them, i.e., those to whom has been given the Bible, any opposition to the making of images and figures in their houses and churches, and on walls. I have even soon in the markets loaves of bread made into figures—some to resemble men, and some other things. Now, among things well understood by those to whom there is the slightest perception in this: that in the Holy Bible, God, through the prophets and their followers, forbade the making of images and the worship of them. He has explained that He is a jealous God, and said, “Thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven image, &c.” Is this abrogated? Why, then, is not the verse shown by which it is abrogated? And if you ask them concerning this, what is their answer? Do they not say that this is an old prohibition? Or they say, “When we make images and pictures it shows our intelligence;” or, “God has forbidden the worship of images, not the making of them. Verily this is the delusion of Satan to them. The house has neither foundation nor support. Know that the making of images, as well as the worshipping of them, after receiving the Divine revelation against it, is a work of the devil; who, through his envy of the believing followers of the prophets, whispers this wickedness into the hearts of the servants of God—from among those who have the books of Moses and Jesus and our Prophets, and deceives many, except those who believe and do the things that are right of the people of Mohammed. Some of those of whom we have heard, of the followers of Moses and Jesus, who bow down before images, say falsely that they are the images of those whom they love and honour, of the prophets, and great men who followed them—that they worship God (May He be glorified) by means of these images. But they do not perceive that such work is contrary to the command of God, and cannot be pleasing to Him. They are carried away by this mockery of Satan, who rejoiceth in their degradation through these deeds of theirs. May the curse of God rest upon the devil and his associates; and may God separate between the people of Mohammed and the accursed, as He separates between them and His Forgiveness and His Paradise. Ho is over all things mighty!
It must be interesting to every intelligent and earnest Christian, to get the glimpse which these papers which we have laid before them, give of the views and feelings of the Negro Mohammedans of Africa, on the questions discussed. It will be seen in No. 1, that one of the most precious doctrines of Christianity has no place in the Koran—the doctrine of the atonement of the vicarious sufferings and death of Christ.
It will, no doubt, strike the reader with astonishment, also, to learn from the same paper, that the Fatherhood of God, as understood by Christians, is not accepted by Mohammedans. With them the Lord is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, the Sovereign of the universe, Lord of all creatures. The description of God, in the Koran, is as follows:--
God! there is no god but He; the living, the subsisting; neither slumber seizeth Him, nor sleep; His, whatsoever is in the Heavens, and whatsoever is in the Earth! Who is he that can intercede with Him but by His own permission? He knoweth what is present with his creatures, and what is yet to befall them; yet naught of His knowledge do they comprehend, save what He willeth. His throne reacheth over the Heavens and the Earth, and the upholding of both burdeneth Him not, and He is the High, the Great!”[15]
The Muslim’s idea of God is that of a Being too exalted to have any relations with his creatures, even remotely resembling earthly relationship. Their system admits neither anthropomorphism nor circumlocutions of any kind. They would accept the unrivalled definition of God as given by the Westminster Assembly’s Shorter Catechism. But, notwithstanding this distance to which the God of the Mohammedan is removed, yet they act .far more fully than some who would condemn them upon the other idea, which is a result of the belief in the Fatherhood of God, viz., the Brotherhood of men. “Write me down,” said Abou ben Adhem, “as one who loves his fellow- men.” Many Christians who say “Our- Father,” reject the truth in practice. Recent American papers are full of illustrations of the extreme difficulty experienced in that eminently Christian country on the question of dealing with the Negro on the broad platform of Christian brotherhood. The Annual Council of the Diocese of Virginia has just adopted a Canon (May, 1886) which provides a separate organisation for the coloured Episcopalians, to be known as the “Coloured Missionary Jurisdiction” of the Diocese of Virginia. There were cast for the measure 114 votes out of 164. No doubt, these 114 voters said “Our Father” every morning and evening. The Bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, in their quadrennial address (May, 1886), held the following language:--
The attitude of the Negro toward all the institutions of the country is a problem, civil and spiritual, which becomes hourly more difficult of solution. Nor must wo, on the other hand, bo hurried forward by sentimental extravagance in the direction of the discoloured current of social equality, through the agency of the schoolroom, the congregation, or the conference; for there is no conceivable result that would compensate for the crime against Nature which this theory deliberately contemplates.16 But this is a reproduction of the doctrine of the late Bishop Pierce, formally announced on the occasion of his golden wedding, February 3,1884. He said:—The Negroes are entitled to elementary education, the same as the whites, from the hands of the State. It is the duty of the Church to improve the coloured ministry, but rather by theological training than by literary education. In my judgment, higher education, 80 called, would be a positive calamity to the Negroes. It would increase the friction between the races, produce endless strifes, elevate Negro aspirations far above the station he was created to fill, and resolve the whole race into a political faction, full of strife, mischief, and turbulence. Negroes ought to be taught that the respect of the white race can only be attained by good character and conduct. Their well-doing and well-being, all right-minded citizens desire, and would rejoice in. Agriculture and all the mechanical pursuits are open to them, and in them they might find lucrative employment. In these directions they may support their families, get property, and become valuable citizens. If Negroes wore educated, intermarriages in time would breed trouble; but of this I see no tendency now. My conviction is, that Negroes have no right on juries, in legislatures, or in public office. . . . The whites can never tamely, and without protest, submit to the intrusion of coloured men into places of trust and profit, and responsibility.[17]
The views which Southern bishops are enforcing by elaborateargument, Southern professors are putting in telling epigrams. “Poor Sambo!” exclaims Professor Noah K. Davis, “he asks for bread, and you build him a college; ho asks for a fish, and you send him a professor.” Dr. Curry calls this epigrammatic wit.[18]
But, with all this, the Negro is hopeful for the future. We wish we could share this hope; but we do not believe that what race-prejudice begrudges to the fathers will be conceded to the children. In spite of the barriers which argument and ridicule and outrage strive to put into the way of the education of the proscribed class, many will, no doubt, rise to heights of scholarship and become adepts in science, while the oppressors may grow in liberality; but the involuntary limits of their mental and social sympathies will always prevent them from according to their former chattels, of a distinct race, equal, or rather identical, privileges, with themselves. John F. Morgan, in the North American Review, July, 1884, says, in view of the future, “The same party which claims to have emancipated the Negro, will become the most active in his disfranchisement.”
In the same Review (November, 1884), Prof. E. W. Gillian, speaking of the efforts to elevate the freedmen, says:--
The final result must be race-antagonism, growing in intensity, and menacing malignant evils. One race must be above, the other below, with a struggle for position. Equality is impossible. The African must return or be 7’reurned to Africa.
The Christian Recorder (June 24, 1886) says that, “A few weeks ago, a distinguished man in the Methodist Episcopal Church, deferred the consideration of the question of social equality to the year 1986.” Let us hope that, in 1986, hundreds of thousands of Christian Negroes from the United States will be, in this hemisphere, successfully vying with their Mohammedan brethren in reclaiming the continent from Paganism, and introducing the reign of the Prince of Peace. Long before that time the “ colour line “will have been washed out by the broad Atlantic, and the white man, rejoicing in the homogeneousness of his great country, will wave in triumph across the briny deep, to the “brother in black,” the handkerchief of social recognition, and wonder at the former aberration of opinion on this subject. In the meanwhile, it seems to be expected that the Negro in America will “order himself lowly and reverently to all his betters,”
Moses and Jesus (Blessing and peace upon them), were prophets indeed, and in truth. Their excellence and superiority are not hidden, but they have no followers. I have not seen their followers, nor have I heard of them from the mouth of men. I have not seen among them, i.e., those to whom has been given the Bible, any opposition to the making of images and figures in their houses and churches, and on walls. I have even soon in the markets loaves of bread made into figures—some to resemble men, and some other things. Now, among things well understood by those to whom there is the slightest perception in this: that in the Holy Bible, God, through the prophets and their followers, forbade the making of images and the worship of them. He has explained that He is a jealous God, and said, “Thou shalt not make unto thyself any graven image, &c.” Is this abrogated? Why, then, is not the verse shown by which it is abrogated? And if you ask them concerning this, what is their answer? Do they not say that this is an old prohibition? Or they say, “When we make images and pictures it shows our intelligence;” or, “God has forbidden the worship of images, not the making of them. Verily this is the delusion of Satan to them. The house has neither foundation nor support. Know that the making of images, as well as the worshipping of them, after receiving the Divine revelation against it, is a work of the devil; who, through his envy of the believing followers of the prophets, whispers this wickedness into the hearts of the servants of God—from among those who have the books of Moses and Jesus and our Prophets, and deceives many, except those who believe and do the things that are right of the people of Mohammed. Some of those of whom we have heard, of the followers of Moses and Jesus, who bow down before images, say falsely that they are the images of those whom they love and honour, of the prophets, and great men who followed them—that they worship God (May He be glorified) by means of these images. But they do not perceive that such work is contrary to the command of God, and cannot be pleasing to Him. They are carried away by this mockery of Satan, who rejoiceth in their degradation through these deeds of theirs. May the curse of God rest upon the devil and his associates; and may God separate between the people of Mohammed and the accursed, as He separates between them and His Forgiveness and His Paradise. Ho is over all things mighty!
It must be interesting to every intelligent and earnest Christian, to get the glimpse which these papers which we have laid before them, give of the views and feelings of the Negro Mohammedans of Africa, on the questions discussed. It will be seen in No. 1, that one of the most precious doctrines of Christianity has no place in the Koran—the doctrine of the atonement of the vicarious sufferings and death of Christ.
It will, no doubt, strike the reader with astonishment, also, to learn from the same paper, that the Fatherhood of God, as understood by Christians, is not accepted by Mohammedans. With them the Lord is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, the Sovereign of the universe, Lord of all creatures. The description of God, in the Koran, is as follows:--
God! there is no god but He; the living, the subsisting; neither slumber seizeth Him, nor sleep; His, whatsoever is in the Heavens, and whatsoever is in the Earth! Who is he that can intercede with Him but by His own permission? He knoweth what is present with his creatures, and what is yet to befall them; yet naught of His knowledge do they comprehend, save what He willeth. His throne reacheth over the Heavens and the Earth, and the upholding of both burdeneth Him not, and He is the High, the Great!”[15]
The Muslim’s idea of God is that of a Being too exalted to have any relations with his creatures, even remotely resembling earthly relationship. Their system admits neither anthropomorphism nor circumlocutions of any kind. They would accept the unrivalled definition of God as given by the Westminster Assembly’s Shorter Catechism. But, notwithstanding this distance to which the God of the Mohammedan is removed, yet they act .far more fully than some who would condemn them upon the other idea, which is a result of the belief in the Fatherhood of God, viz., the Brotherhood of men. “Write me down,” said Abou ben Adhem, “as one who loves his fellow- men.” Many Christians who say “Our- Father,” reject the truth in practice. Recent American papers are full of illustrations of the extreme difficulty experienced in that eminently Christian country on the question of dealing with the Negro on the broad platform of Christian brotherhood. The Annual Council of the Diocese of Virginia has just adopted a Canon (May, 1886) which provides a separate organisation for the coloured Episcopalians, to be known as the “Coloured Missionary Jurisdiction” of the Diocese of Virginia. There were cast for the measure 114 votes out of 164. No doubt, these 114 voters said “Our Father” every morning and evening. The Bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South, in their quadrennial address (May, 1886), held the following language:--
The attitude of the Negro toward all the institutions of the country is a problem, civil and spiritual, which becomes hourly more difficult of solution. Nor must wo, on the other hand, bo hurried forward by sentimental extravagance in the direction of the discoloured current of social equality, through the agency of the schoolroom, the congregation, or the conference; for there is no conceivable result that would compensate for the crime against Nature which this theory deliberately contemplates.16 But this is a reproduction of the doctrine of the late Bishop Pierce, formally announced on the occasion of his golden wedding, February 3,1884. He said:—The Negroes are entitled to elementary education, the same as the whites, from the hands of the State. It is the duty of the Church to improve the coloured ministry, but rather by theological training than by literary education. In my judgment, higher education, 80 called, would be a positive calamity to the Negroes. It would increase the friction between the races, produce endless strifes, elevate Negro aspirations far above the station he was created to fill, and resolve the whole race into a political faction, full of strife, mischief, and turbulence. Negroes ought to be taught that the respect of the white race can only be attained by good character and conduct. Their well-doing and well-being, all right-minded citizens desire, and would rejoice in. Agriculture and all the mechanical pursuits are open to them, and in them they might find lucrative employment. In these directions they may support their families, get property, and become valuable citizens. If Negroes wore educated, intermarriages in time would breed trouble; but of this I see no tendency now. My conviction is, that Negroes have no right on juries, in legislatures, or in public office. . . . The whites can never tamely, and without protest, submit to the intrusion of coloured men into places of trust and profit, and responsibility.[17]
The views which Southern bishops are enforcing by elaborateargument, Southern professors are putting in telling epigrams. “Poor Sambo!” exclaims Professor Noah K. Davis, “he asks for bread, and you build him a college; ho asks for a fish, and you send him a professor.” Dr. Curry calls this epigrammatic wit.[18]
But, with all this, the Negro is hopeful for the future. We wish we could share this hope; but we do not believe that what race-prejudice begrudges to the fathers will be conceded to the children. In spite of the barriers which argument and ridicule and outrage strive to put into the way of the education of the proscribed class, many will, no doubt, rise to heights of scholarship and become adepts in science, while the oppressors may grow in liberality; but the involuntary limits of their mental and social sympathies will always prevent them from according to their former chattels, of a distinct race, equal, or rather identical, privileges, with themselves. John F. Morgan, in the North American Review, July, 1884, says, in view of the future, “The same party which claims to have emancipated the Negro, will become the most active in his disfranchisement.”
In the same Review (November, 1884), Prof. E. W. Gillian, speaking of the efforts to elevate the freedmen, says:--
The final result must be race-antagonism, growing in intensity, and menacing malignant evils. One race must be above, the other below, with a struggle for position. Equality is impossible. The African must return or be 7’reurned to Africa.
The Christian Recorder (June 24, 1886) says that, “A few weeks ago, a distinguished man in the Methodist Episcopal Church, deferred the consideration of the question of social equality to the year 1986.” Let us hope that, in 1986, hundreds of thousands of Christian Negroes from the United States will be, in this hemisphere, successfully vying with their Mohammedan brethren in reclaiming the continent from Paganism, and introducing the reign of the Prince of Peace. Long before that time the “ colour line “will have been washed out by the broad Atlantic, and the white man, rejoicing in the homogeneousness of his great country, will wave in triumph across the briny deep, to the “brother in black,” the handkerchief of social recognition, and wonder at the former aberration of opinion on this subject. In the meanwhile, it seems to be expected that the Negro in America will “order himself lowly and reverently to all his betters,”
Footnotes:
15 Sura ii, p, 256.
16 We copy these paragraphs from the correspondence of the New York Independent (May 13, 1886). The correspondence describes the address as “an able and comprehensive document, in plain and vigorous English.” The Editor makes no remark.
17 Methodist Review; May, 1886, p. 339.
18 Ibid.; July, 1886, p. 626.
15 Sura ii, p, 256.
16 We copy these paragraphs from the correspondence of the New York Independent (May 13, 1886). The correspondence describes the address as “an able and comprehensive document, in plain and vigorous English.” The Editor makes no remark.
17 Methodist Review; May, 1886, p. 339.
18 Ibid.; July, 1886, p. 626.
But the Christian Negro meets with trouble from his brethren of a different race in other quarters than the United States. The British Wesleyans of the “West Indies, on account of the preponderance of the coloured population, find it impossible, after one hundred years of labour in those islands, to organise a West Indian Conference.[19] The leading official organ of English Wesleyans, in an elaborate article on ‘Wesleyan Foreign Missions,’ which caused some stir at the time of its publication, thus describes the situation:--
Taking the Islands as a whole, the Colonial element is not strong. The coloured population greatly predominates. This is true of the West Indian Churches generally. It is barely fifty years ago since slavery was abolished in the West Indies. As a rule, every man who is over fifty years of ago was once a slave, redeemed by British justice, with British gold. With rare exceptions’ every man who is over thirty years of age is the child of parents who were born in slavery—a slavery which was the tradition of generations. The evils which that slavery had so cruelly inwrought into the enslaved race cannot all be remedied in the course of the first generation. Where freedom does not flourish, conscience must needs be exotic. Duplicity breeds distrust, The knowledge that notions of truth and honest’ are commonly lax, will necessarily hinder one from confiding in another. That the coloured men of the islands are, in many cases, able to assert their rights, and to hold themselves equal, in conscious integrity and business power, to the best among their whiter comrades, need not be denied. The truth remains that, in more islands than one, it is difficult to persuado one darkskinned man to trust another. Lay officers are few and hard to find. These things have been too often affirmed to be regarded as strange. They were known to the Missionary Committee three years ago as fully as they are known to- day; and it is an open secret that, because they were known, the Committee was in no haste for the constitution of the Conference.[20]
No wonder, after such a statement, we should find that at the Wesleyan May Meeting, in July, 1886, there was not a little discouragement. The English correspondent of the Sierra Leone Methodist Herald says, under date June 15, 1886:--
Sincere heart-searchings and closo self-examination, have been occasioned in many quarters by the falling-off in missionary contributions, as reported at the present Anniversary of the Wesleyan Missionary Society, as well as by the diminished attendance at the Exeter Hall and some other meetings, and the decrease of membership. Hence wo have had much correspondence in our religious papers, especially in the Christian World, on the question, ‘Is Methodism declining?’
By an interesting coincidence the writer of the letter from which we take this extract is no other than the veteran Wesleyan missionary—now retired— the Rev. William Moister, who has been in labours so abundant, both in Africa and in the West Indies When he read the startling sentences in the London Quarterly, he must have recalled his own statements, made twenty years ago, as to missionary success in the West Indies. In his History of Wesleyan Missions (p. 92), he says:--
In the West Indies, we can point to Christian ministers, physicians, lawyers, magistrates, legislators, philosophers, of African descent, who perform their duties with as much efficiency and dignity as persons of any other country, although some of them have had but slender means of raising themselves to their present honourable position.
If the statement of the London Quarterly is not the invention of prejudice, what a falling-off there must have been in the last two decades.
In the United States there are the Methodist Episcopal Church and the African Methodist Episcopal Church, having the same creed, polity and language. The separation is caused by the elemental differences of race and colour; evidently no fault of the Negro Church; for it displays on its banner, with almost pathetic distinctness and reiteration, the sentiment of which Mohammedans do not admit the first part, but practise the second, “God our Father; Man our brother.” The formal and continuous holding forth of this truth would be superfluous, if it were universally recognised. But its presentation by the weaker—by the so-called inferior and despised party— wears to us the aspect of a humiliating appeal for recognition and sympathy—the argumentum ad misericordiam. It is the “Am I not a Man and a Brother?” of the days of Slavery. The excellent device of the Christian Recorder would have weight, it seems to us—we mean, not inherent, but relative weight—if it were displayed by the stronger and superior, with a view of attracting the weaker. But corning from the weaker, it appears to us that the desired effect is destroyed. All force is withdrawn from the strongest phrases in the language when employed by those who cannot command, but only beg. The offer of liberality is effective only when made by those who have the means to be liberal. The offer of beneficence on the part of those who have no benefits to confer, is meaningless. We do not say that those who have adopted the motto have no justification for it. They have not only strong foot-hold in reason and common sense, but they have good ground in the Gospel of Christ. We do not believe that such a brotherhood is beyond the possibilities of Christianity. We believe that the purpose and tendency of the system is to make hearts divided by the distinctions of race, or rank, or intellect, clasp one another in the close embrace of a common faith. Was not this its effect in the primitive Church? Our Mohammedan friends are charmed by that beautiful picture drawn by Luke of the simple and loving life of the Apostolic Church—“And all that believed were together, and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods; and parted them to all men, as every man had need. . . . . And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul; neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.” The theory of the Church of Christ, as taught by the Divine Founder and his immediate successors, is a spiritual Kingdom whose citizens are all sons of God, and therefore brothers and sisters one of another. “ For this cause “ says St. Paul, “I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ of whom the whole family in earth and heaven is named.” But, alas, in a materialistic age, the noble device held forth by the Christian Recorder is simply “the voice of one crying in the wilderness.” Vox clamantis in deserto.
The views of our author on ‘Slavery’ (No. 2) are very different from those attributed to Muslims by the popular opinion of Christian countries. But they are the views held throughout the Mohammedan world. “Slavery, from the first to the last,” says Mr. Palgrave, “after the manner in which it is practised here (in Arabia) from timeimmemorial, has little but the name in common with the system, hell-branded by those atrocities of the Western hemisphere.”[21] Mohammed, at the beginning of his mission, caused such excitement among the slaves by the liberality of his teaching, that some of the large slaveholders found it necessary to remove their slaves from the vicinity of his labours, lest they should all turn converts. His system was a social, as well as a religious and political, revolution. Says an able reviewer:--
Under Mohammed there sprang up, ex necessitate rei, a form of democratic equality, more absolute than the world has elsewhere seen. Claims of birth and wealth could be of no value, or the presence of a master whoso favour implied the favour of the Deity. The proudest Arab could not murmur if God chose a slave like Zeid to be the leader of armies, and visibly confirmed his choice with the seal of victory. It is a principle, also, of the new sect, that Islam extinguished all relations. The slave, once a Muslim, was free; the foe, once a Muslim, was dearer than any kinsman; the Pagan, once a Muslim, might preach, if the Prophet bade, to attentive listeners. Mohammed was enabled, therefore, at all times to command the absolute aid of every man of capacity within his ranks. No officers of his throw up their commissions because they were superseded. If he selected a child, what then? Could not God give victory to a child? Moreover, all the latent forces which social order restrains wore instantly at his disposal. Every strong man, kept down by circumstances, had an instinctive desire to believe in the faith which removed at a stroke every obstacle to his career. To this hour, this principle is still of vital importance in all Mohammedan countries. A dozen times has a Sultan, utterly ruined, stooped among his people, found—in a water-carrier, a tobacconist, a slave, or a renegade—tho required man; raised him in a day to power, and supported him to save the empire. If the snuff-dealer can rule Egypt, why should ho not rule Egypt? Ho is as near to God as any other Mussulman, save only the heir of the Kalifate; and accordingly, Mohammed Ali finds birth, trade and want of education, no obstacles in his path. The pariah who, in Madras, turns Christian, is a pariah still; but if he turns Mohammedan, the proudest Muslim noble will, if he rises, give him his daughter, or serve him as a sovereign, without a thought of his descent.[22]
Taking the Islands as a whole, the Colonial element is not strong. The coloured population greatly predominates. This is true of the West Indian Churches generally. It is barely fifty years ago since slavery was abolished in the West Indies. As a rule, every man who is over fifty years of ago was once a slave, redeemed by British justice, with British gold. With rare exceptions’ every man who is over thirty years of age is the child of parents who were born in slavery—a slavery which was the tradition of generations. The evils which that slavery had so cruelly inwrought into the enslaved race cannot all be remedied in the course of the first generation. Where freedom does not flourish, conscience must needs be exotic. Duplicity breeds distrust, The knowledge that notions of truth and honest’ are commonly lax, will necessarily hinder one from confiding in another. That the coloured men of the islands are, in many cases, able to assert their rights, and to hold themselves equal, in conscious integrity and business power, to the best among their whiter comrades, need not be denied. The truth remains that, in more islands than one, it is difficult to persuado one darkskinned man to trust another. Lay officers are few and hard to find. These things have been too often affirmed to be regarded as strange. They were known to the Missionary Committee three years ago as fully as they are known to- day; and it is an open secret that, because they were known, the Committee was in no haste for the constitution of the Conference.[20]
No wonder, after such a statement, we should find that at the Wesleyan May Meeting, in July, 1886, there was not a little discouragement. The English correspondent of the Sierra Leone Methodist Herald says, under date June 15, 1886:--
Sincere heart-searchings and closo self-examination, have been occasioned in many quarters by the falling-off in missionary contributions, as reported at the present Anniversary of the Wesleyan Missionary Society, as well as by the diminished attendance at the Exeter Hall and some other meetings, and the decrease of membership. Hence wo have had much correspondence in our religious papers, especially in the Christian World, on the question, ‘Is Methodism declining?’
By an interesting coincidence the writer of the letter from which we take this extract is no other than the veteran Wesleyan missionary—now retired— the Rev. William Moister, who has been in labours so abundant, both in Africa and in the West Indies When he read the startling sentences in the London Quarterly, he must have recalled his own statements, made twenty years ago, as to missionary success in the West Indies. In his History of Wesleyan Missions (p. 92), he says:--
In the West Indies, we can point to Christian ministers, physicians, lawyers, magistrates, legislators, philosophers, of African descent, who perform their duties with as much efficiency and dignity as persons of any other country, although some of them have had but slender means of raising themselves to their present honourable position.
If the statement of the London Quarterly is not the invention of prejudice, what a falling-off there must have been in the last two decades.
In the United States there are the Methodist Episcopal Church and the African Methodist Episcopal Church, having the same creed, polity and language. The separation is caused by the elemental differences of race and colour; evidently no fault of the Negro Church; for it displays on its banner, with almost pathetic distinctness and reiteration, the sentiment of which Mohammedans do not admit the first part, but practise the second, “God our Father; Man our brother.” The formal and continuous holding forth of this truth would be superfluous, if it were universally recognised. But its presentation by the weaker—by the so-called inferior and despised party— wears to us the aspect of a humiliating appeal for recognition and sympathy—the argumentum ad misericordiam. It is the “Am I not a Man and a Brother?” of the days of Slavery. The excellent device of the Christian Recorder would have weight, it seems to us—we mean, not inherent, but relative weight—if it were displayed by the stronger and superior, with a view of attracting the weaker. But corning from the weaker, it appears to us that the desired effect is destroyed. All force is withdrawn from the strongest phrases in the language when employed by those who cannot command, but only beg. The offer of liberality is effective only when made by those who have the means to be liberal. The offer of beneficence on the part of those who have no benefits to confer, is meaningless. We do not say that those who have adopted the motto have no justification for it. They have not only strong foot-hold in reason and common sense, but they have good ground in the Gospel of Christ. We do not believe that such a brotherhood is beyond the possibilities of Christianity. We believe that the purpose and tendency of the system is to make hearts divided by the distinctions of race, or rank, or intellect, clasp one another in the close embrace of a common faith. Was not this its effect in the primitive Church? Our Mohammedan friends are charmed by that beautiful picture drawn by Luke of the simple and loving life of the Apostolic Church—“And all that believed were together, and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods; and parted them to all men, as every man had need. . . . . And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul; neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.” The theory of the Church of Christ, as taught by the Divine Founder and his immediate successors, is a spiritual Kingdom whose citizens are all sons of God, and therefore brothers and sisters one of another. “ For this cause “ says St. Paul, “I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ of whom the whole family in earth and heaven is named.” But, alas, in a materialistic age, the noble device held forth by the Christian Recorder is simply “the voice of one crying in the wilderness.” Vox clamantis in deserto.
The views of our author on ‘Slavery’ (No. 2) are very different from those attributed to Muslims by the popular opinion of Christian countries. But they are the views held throughout the Mohammedan world. “Slavery, from the first to the last,” says Mr. Palgrave, “after the manner in which it is practised here (in Arabia) from timeimmemorial, has little but the name in common with the system, hell-branded by those atrocities of the Western hemisphere.”[21] Mohammed, at the beginning of his mission, caused such excitement among the slaves by the liberality of his teaching, that some of the large slaveholders found it necessary to remove their slaves from the vicinity of his labours, lest they should all turn converts. His system was a social, as well as a religious and political, revolution. Says an able reviewer:--
Under Mohammed there sprang up, ex necessitate rei, a form of democratic equality, more absolute than the world has elsewhere seen. Claims of birth and wealth could be of no value, or the presence of a master whoso favour implied the favour of the Deity. The proudest Arab could not murmur if God chose a slave like Zeid to be the leader of armies, and visibly confirmed his choice with the seal of victory. It is a principle, also, of the new sect, that Islam extinguished all relations. The slave, once a Muslim, was free; the foe, once a Muslim, was dearer than any kinsman; the Pagan, once a Muslim, might preach, if the Prophet bade, to attentive listeners. Mohammed was enabled, therefore, at all times to command the absolute aid of every man of capacity within his ranks. No officers of his throw up their commissions because they were superseded. If he selected a child, what then? Could not God give victory to a child? Moreover, all the latent forces which social order restrains wore instantly at his disposal. Every strong man, kept down by circumstances, had an instinctive desire to believe in the faith which removed at a stroke every obstacle to his career. To this hour, this principle is still of vital importance in all Mohammedan countries. A dozen times has a Sultan, utterly ruined, stooped among his people, found—in a water-carrier, a tobacconist, a slave, or a renegade—tho required man; raised him in a day to power, and supported him to save the empire. If the snuff-dealer can rule Egypt, why should ho not rule Egypt? Ho is as near to God as any other Mussulman, save only the heir of the Kalifate; and accordingly, Mohammed Ali finds birth, trade and want of education, no obstacles in his path. The pariah who, in Madras, turns Christian, is a pariah still; but if he turns Mohammedan, the proudest Muslim noble will, if he rises, give him his daughter, or serve him as a sovereign, without a thought of his descent.[22]
Footnotes:
19 We learn that since this was written the West Indian Conference has been organised.
20 London Quarterly Review; July, 1885.
21 Eastern and Central Arabia; vol. ii, p. 271.
22 National Review, October, 1861.
19 We learn that since this was written the West Indian Conference has been organised.
20 London Quarterly Review; July, 1885.
21 Eastern and Central Arabia; vol. ii, p. 271.
22 National Review, October, 1861.
Mohammed appointed a Negro slave, Bilal, to call the faithful to prayer at the stated times. And from those Negro lips the beautiful sentiment first found utterance—” Prayer is better than sleep: Prayer is better than sleep.” It is repeated every day throughout the Mohammedan world; and the most distinguished European of which history can boast is, in Asia and Africa, an unknown personage by the side of the slave, Bilal. Mohammed gave this man precedence to himself in Paradise. On one occasion the Prophet said to Bilal, at the time of the morning prayer, “O Bilal, tell me an act of yours from which you had the greatest hopes; because, I heard the noise of your shoes in front of me in Paradise, in the night of my ascension.” [23]
It is said that the intellectual part of Christendom is in revolt against the received forms of Christianity; that there is a growing alienation from the recognised standard of belief; but among African Mohammedans, the Church of the people is identical with the intellect of the people. The possibilities of every individual in the nation, whatever his race or previous condition, give social stability and spiritual power to the system. Frederick Douglass, as a Mohammedan, would have been a waleess—a saint of the religion, an athlete of the faith; as a Christian, his orthodoxy is suspected, and his very presence is deprecated in a church in the capital of the nation; and further south, his domestic relations would probably earn him a home in the penitentiary.
In No. 3, on ‘Pictures,’ &c., our author says, “Jesus and Moses have no followers.” The intelligent Mohammedan from the interior who visits the Christian settlements on the sea-board, is struck with the discrepancy between what he has read in the Bible and what he sees in the customs of the people. He knows nothing of the argument, from necessity or expediency, by which, in Christian countries, much of the letter and spirit of the Word is set aside and neutralised.24 In a conversation with our learned friend, he expressed his surprise at what he regarded as the sinful taste for pictures displayed in the houses of Christians whom he had visited, and quoted the Second Commandment to support his view. We said, “They have them simply as a part of house furniture, as ornaments, and not as objects of worship.” He replied, “Why are they not satisfied with the ornaments which Nature has furnished in such lavish profusion around them—the blue sky, the white clouds, the beautiful flowers, the living birds, the real horses, sheep, and goats, the prolific cow?” &c. We then asked him to put his opinion on the subject in writing, when he wrote at once No. 3.
Besides the passage in the Koran which forbids the making of images, Mohammed, in private instructions, constantly impressed upon his followers the evil of such practices. The Prophet said, “Those will be punished the most severely, at the day of resurrection, who draw likenesses of God’s creation.” “If you must make pictures, make them of trees, and things without life.”[25]
This prohibition has not been without its advantages to the Negro convert to Islam. His Arab teacher, having no pictures by which to aid his instruction, was obliged to confine him to the book. In this way, his thinking and reasoning powers were developed rather by what ho read and heard than by what he saw. He saw neither busts nor pictures, but men. He did not study books, but character. And among the first lessons he learned was, that a man of his own race, a Negro, assisted at the birth of the religion he was invited to accept; and, in his subsequent training, his imagination never for one moment endowed the great men of whom he heard or read with physical attributes’ essentially different from his own. When—in 1873, at the court of the Mohammedan King of Futah Jallo, three hundred miles north-east of Sierra Leone, we saw him, surrounded by his venerable chiefs and sheikhs, all men of fine forms, who looked to us more like the old prophets and kings than any other group we ever saw—we asked him what was his conception of the personal appearance of Mohammed and the first Khalifs, he replied: “They looked just like the men you see here.” This man had never seen a picture, and his imagination reproduced the great men of Islam in the forms with which he was familiar. So, the boys who are being educated in the Nigritian schools are not subject, like their Negro brethren in Christian lands, to those intermittent exertions of the faculty of insight which, sometimes make them look upon themselves as full men, with all the possibilities of men; but at other times, forced by the only pictorial examples they see of greatness, to doubt their capacity to attain to the excellence they admire. The white boy who looks at the glories of the canvas, or the exquisite forms brought out in the marble, feels an elevation of sentiment, a rush of inspiration and aspiration. He grasps some fragment of the beauty of the marble, or gathers some flying whisper from the magnificence of the canvas, and echoes it back in the language of his own consciousness, and feels, “I, too, am a white man!” The Negro youth sees only the surface—it is all obscure allegory to him, and his feeling is frozen into language subtler than the marble he looks upon, as he asks himself, “What part or lot have I in this?” While, therefore, he stands in art galleries amid admiring crowds, there never was a man to whom a yellow primrose is, in so true a sense, nothing more than a primrose.
Bishop Turner complains that, in the United States, even in the estimate of the generality of Negroes, “White is God, and black is the Devil.” What wonder that it is so? The Negro imbibes this lesson through every avenue of his soul. For him, then, there would have been no loss if the Second Commandment had been rigidly enforced: “Thou shall not make unto thyself any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” [26] This verse is omitted in the shorter catechism, both of the Lutherans and of the Bom an Catholics. One can hardly see why since it is given, in full, in Luther’s Bible and in the Vulgate. Dogmatic motives, probably, caused the omission by the Roman Catholics, as one of the chief methods of instructing the masses in the Middle Ages was supplied by art. “The only teaching of the people,” says Dean Milman, “was the ritual.” Artists were employed to execute on the walls of churches, picture histories. Church, chapel, corridor, were completely transformed into one great and harmonious picture. Such paintings were the books of the unlettered people. “Illiterati, quod, per Scripturam non possunt intueri, hoc per quaedam picturae lineamenta contemplantur”—was the Declaration of the Synod of Arras, in 1205. One of the popular artists of that day is made to say, “We painters give attention to naught, but to make male or female saints on the walls and on our panels, thereby, to the great despite of the demons, to render men more devout and better.”
Happily for the development of the Negro in Africa, a different method has been adopted in his training. No art can represent him. The “rich black and richer bronze “ of his complexion has never yet been reproduced in marble or on canvas; and neither brush nor chisel can give his peculiar expression. Any representation made of him must be untrue to Nature. He can, therefore, dispense with plastic or pictorial art as a means of perpetuating his memory, and we see that, as a means of his education, it is worse than useless.[27]
It is said that the intellectual part of Christendom is in revolt against the received forms of Christianity; that there is a growing alienation from the recognised standard of belief; but among African Mohammedans, the Church of the people is identical with the intellect of the people. The possibilities of every individual in the nation, whatever his race or previous condition, give social stability and spiritual power to the system. Frederick Douglass, as a Mohammedan, would have been a waleess—a saint of the religion, an athlete of the faith; as a Christian, his orthodoxy is suspected, and his very presence is deprecated in a church in the capital of the nation; and further south, his domestic relations would probably earn him a home in the penitentiary.
In No. 3, on ‘Pictures,’ &c., our author says, “Jesus and Moses have no followers.” The intelligent Mohammedan from the interior who visits the Christian settlements on the sea-board, is struck with the discrepancy between what he has read in the Bible and what he sees in the customs of the people. He knows nothing of the argument, from necessity or expediency, by which, in Christian countries, much of the letter and spirit of the Word is set aside and neutralised.24 In a conversation with our learned friend, he expressed his surprise at what he regarded as the sinful taste for pictures displayed in the houses of Christians whom he had visited, and quoted the Second Commandment to support his view. We said, “They have them simply as a part of house furniture, as ornaments, and not as objects of worship.” He replied, “Why are they not satisfied with the ornaments which Nature has furnished in such lavish profusion around them—the blue sky, the white clouds, the beautiful flowers, the living birds, the real horses, sheep, and goats, the prolific cow?” &c. We then asked him to put his opinion on the subject in writing, when he wrote at once No. 3.
Besides the passage in the Koran which forbids the making of images, Mohammed, in private instructions, constantly impressed upon his followers the evil of such practices. The Prophet said, “Those will be punished the most severely, at the day of resurrection, who draw likenesses of God’s creation.” “If you must make pictures, make them of trees, and things without life.”[25]
This prohibition has not been without its advantages to the Negro convert to Islam. His Arab teacher, having no pictures by which to aid his instruction, was obliged to confine him to the book. In this way, his thinking and reasoning powers were developed rather by what ho read and heard than by what he saw. He saw neither busts nor pictures, but men. He did not study books, but character. And among the first lessons he learned was, that a man of his own race, a Negro, assisted at the birth of the religion he was invited to accept; and, in his subsequent training, his imagination never for one moment endowed the great men of whom he heard or read with physical attributes’ essentially different from his own. When—in 1873, at the court of the Mohammedan King of Futah Jallo, three hundred miles north-east of Sierra Leone, we saw him, surrounded by his venerable chiefs and sheikhs, all men of fine forms, who looked to us more like the old prophets and kings than any other group we ever saw—we asked him what was his conception of the personal appearance of Mohammed and the first Khalifs, he replied: “They looked just like the men you see here.” This man had never seen a picture, and his imagination reproduced the great men of Islam in the forms with which he was familiar. So, the boys who are being educated in the Nigritian schools are not subject, like their Negro brethren in Christian lands, to those intermittent exertions of the faculty of insight which, sometimes make them look upon themselves as full men, with all the possibilities of men; but at other times, forced by the only pictorial examples they see of greatness, to doubt their capacity to attain to the excellence they admire. The white boy who looks at the glories of the canvas, or the exquisite forms brought out in the marble, feels an elevation of sentiment, a rush of inspiration and aspiration. He grasps some fragment of the beauty of the marble, or gathers some flying whisper from the magnificence of the canvas, and echoes it back in the language of his own consciousness, and feels, “I, too, am a white man!” The Negro youth sees only the surface—it is all obscure allegory to him, and his feeling is frozen into language subtler than the marble he looks upon, as he asks himself, “What part or lot have I in this?” While, therefore, he stands in art galleries amid admiring crowds, there never was a man to whom a yellow primrose is, in so true a sense, nothing more than a primrose.
Bishop Turner complains that, in the United States, even in the estimate of the generality of Negroes, “White is God, and black is the Devil.” What wonder that it is so? The Negro imbibes this lesson through every avenue of his soul. For him, then, there would have been no loss if the Second Commandment had been rigidly enforced: “Thou shall not make unto thyself any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” [26] This verse is omitted in the shorter catechism, both of the Lutherans and of the Bom an Catholics. One can hardly see why since it is given, in full, in Luther’s Bible and in the Vulgate. Dogmatic motives, probably, caused the omission by the Roman Catholics, as one of the chief methods of instructing the masses in the Middle Ages was supplied by art. “The only teaching of the people,” says Dean Milman, “was the ritual.” Artists were employed to execute on the walls of churches, picture histories. Church, chapel, corridor, were completely transformed into one great and harmonious picture. Such paintings were the books of the unlettered people. “Illiterati, quod, per Scripturam non possunt intueri, hoc per quaedam picturae lineamenta contemplantur”—was the Declaration of the Synod of Arras, in 1205. One of the popular artists of that day is made to say, “We painters give attention to naught, but to make male or female saints on the walls and on our panels, thereby, to the great despite of the demons, to render men more devout and better.”
Happily for the development of the Negro in Africa, a different method has been adopted in his training. No art can represent him. The “rich black and richer bronze “ of his complexion has never yet been reproduced in marble or on canvas; and neither brush nor chisel can give his peculiar expression. Any representation made of him must be untrue to Nature. He can, therefore, dispense with plastic or pictorial art as a means of perpetuating his memory, and we see that, as a means of his education, it is worse than useless.[27]
Footnotes:
23 Mischat-ul-Masabih; vol. i, p. 285.
24 Some things there may be in the structure of society to-day, as in the days of Moses—as in all the days since Moses—which must be tolerated temporarily, because of the hardness of men’s hearts.
—Methodist Review ; July, 1886, p. 598.
25 Mischat-ul-Masabih; vol. ii, p. 369.
26 Exodua, xx, 4.
27 We have discussed this subject more fully elsewhere.—See Fraser’s Magazine, Nov., 1875; and
Edinburgh Review, January, 1878.
23 Mischat-ul-Masabih; vol. i, p. 285.
24 Some things there may be in the structure of society to-day, as in the days of Moses—as in all the days since Moses—which must be tolerated temporarily, because of the hardness of men’s hearts.
—Methodist Review ; July, 1886, p. 598.
25 Mischat-ul-Masabih; vol. ii, p. 369.
26 Exodua, xx, 4.
27 We have discussed this subject more fully elsewhere.—See Fraser’s Magazine, Nov., 1875; and
Edinburgh Review, January, 1878.
Let Negro readers of this paper ponder the views of one of their learned brethren from the heart of Nigritia, innocent of race-oppression and race- prejudices, and know that there are millions like him, on this continent, who hold these views.[28] In their eyes, Michael Angelo, Raphael, Leonardo, Georgione, Titian, were all sinners of the deepest dye, working, in their sublimest performances, under an afflatus, not from above, but from below. The Moses of Michael Angelo, rising before us in all its commanding sternness, as the figure before which Pharaoh trembled, would be pronounced a falsehood, as the artist never saw Moses—amal Shaitan—the work of Satan.
The question of the future of Islam in Africa is one which is claiming the attention of the thinkers in Europe. The opinion seems to prevail that it has lost its power to influence the nations of Europe and Asia, and this is owing to decadence of the race among which it had its rise. A vigorous German writer in Die Nation (May 29, 1886), in a review of a recent work on Zanzibar, thus speaks of the Arab:--
The Arab of to-day, gifted as he is, if he learns, it is little more than to read, to write, and the Koran; all other knowledge is gone to sleep. Even its medical science, which gave to Europe its first physicians, has dwindled into domestic medicines and magical art; and industry, in the general absence of needs, has declined from the construction of the Alhambra to the manufacture of the most primitive implements. The spirit has lost its impulse to an all-embracing activity; the body does not need it. The nobles buy European products. Our own science shows itself incapable of making any impression on their peculiar mental organisation.
But, whatever may be the case in Arabia, there is an irrepressible activity—intellectual, commercial, political and religious —among the adherents of the creed in Nigritia. They pursue an extensive agriculture; they spin, weave, sew, work in the metals, engage in the craft of the potter and of the tanner. Dr. Barth (1849-1855) travelled through a large portion of this country. He describes certain districts as abounding in rich pastures, in valleys of very fertile land, and in mountains clothed to their summits with noble trees. The towns and cities were walled, and respectably built; the markets were numerously attended, and a considerable trade carried on. He found commerce radiating in every direction from Kano, the great emporium of Central Africa, and spreading the manufactures and the productions of an industrious region over the whole of Western Africa. The fixed population of this city he estimated at 30,000; but, on the occasion of the great fairs, at 60,000.
The principal commerce of Kano consists in native produce; namely, the cotton cloth woven and dyed here, or in neighbouring towns, in the form of tobes; turkedi, or the oblong piece of dress of dark-blue colour worn by the women; the zenne, or plaid of various colours. There is also a large trade in sandals and tanned hides, and in the cloth fabrics manufactured at Nupe. Throughout these districts a large variety of European goods may be seen. Arabic books, printed at Morocco and Fez, in red morocco binding, form an important article of traffic. The Koran, the Traditions of Bochari, the Commentaries, &c., are exchanged by Moorish traders for the fine cloth manufactured by the Nigritians, and for gold dust and gold trinkets.
There is in this country an activity not suspected by the outside world. Boys, who go from remote districts to the great centres of trade, wonder at the crowds and the different wares, as country youth in England and America wonder when they visit such centres as London or Liverpool, Boston or New York. And they have not the remotest idea that in any other portion of the globe—if, indeed, the knowledge of the existence of any other portion of the globe has dawned upon them—there exists so populous, so industrious, so wealthy a community.
And all this industry and activity is controlled by the Mohammedan tribes. In Central Africa, Islam is an aggressive, conquering force; and it is, of course, infinitely superior to the Paganism which is has abolished. It has established in the minds of its adherents the sense of responsibility beyond this life, and the fear of God; and this sentiment—which is the condition of all other progress—it is not only diffusing, but transmitting to posterity. This is the element which has given stability and upward impulse to the social and political forces of advanced countries, and it will have the same effect in the dark corners of this continent. And what is an interesting fact is, that in this vast region—as large as the whole of Europe—no such question can arise as Bishop Foster solemnly put the other day: “What shall be done with Rum?” This problem has never yet arisen, and will never arise. There is no necessity for Dr. Talmage’s proclamation of a “universal strike against strong drink,” We can count upon at least, sixty millions of water drinkers.
It is said that General Gordon had an idea of utilising the Muslim power, with Khartoum as a centre, for carrying on the work of civilising the millions of equatorial Africa. He believed that Mohammedanism possessed enough truth for this regenerating work. In his Journal, under date September 12, 1884, he says:--
I am sure it is unknown to the generality of our missionaries in Muslim countries, that, in the Koran, no imputation of sin is made to our Lord; neither is it hinted that He had need of pardon; and further, no Muslim can deny that the Father of our Lord was God (vide chap, iii of Koran), and that Ho was incarnated by a miracle. Our bishops content themselves with its being a false religion; but it is a false religion possessed by millions on millions of our fellow creatures. The Muslims do not say Mohammed was without sin; the Koran often acknowledges that ho erred; but no Muslim will say “Jesus sinned” As far as self-sacrifice of the body, they are far above the Roman Catholics, and consequently above Protestants. . . . . The God of the Muslims is our God.[29]
We do not envy the man who deems himself sufficiently enlightened to be able to smile at the beliefs and proceedings of this people; and dissenting, as we very decidedly do, from many of their doctrines, we dissent still more emphatically from the bigotry which refuses to recognise in their teachings and methods, many of the elements of goodness, of truth and righteousness. Now, what prospect is there of the spread of the Gospel among these people? We have purposely reserved for the close of our discussion the question which must chiefly excite the interest of the Christian world, viz.: What is the disposition of the African Mohammedan in relation to the religion of Jesus, and how far are they accessible to its influence? Let the following fact answer.
Sometime ago, through the benevolence of an English lady, we were able to send a large number of Arabic Bibles and Testaments to different countries which lie behind Liberia and Sierra Leone. Among acknowledgments which have come to us of their receipt and circulation from parties to whom we sent them, is the enclosed Arabic letter, marked No. 4, of which the following is a translation:--
Praise and glory to the Creator of the earth and the heaven. This letter comes from the youth, native of the Futah country, to the possessor of honour and knowledge, namely, the learned Abd-ul-Karim, called among the Christians Mr. Blyden, Peace to you, and to your family. How are you? I am in good health. I have received the books which you sent me. I distributed them among the people, and I distributed them as you directed me—I sent one copy to Mohammed Akibu, in the town of Dinkerawi. I gave two copies to Almanie Sanusi; one to Murri Ishmael; one to Almanio Amara Silla; one to Baraka, a stranger from Sego. I sent six copies to our country, Futah Jallo. I gave several to the little boys at Fulah town. When the news spread, the people asked me, “Where have you procured books like these?” I told them that a Christian man, who loves the Muslims, gave them to mo, that I might give them to you to read, that we might all be one. They wondered. I then took a passage from the Koran (sura ii, verses 2nd and 3rd), which is as follows:--
“The God-fearing are those who believe in the unseen, and observe prayer, and out of what we have bestowed upon them, expend for God; and who believe in [the Koran] what hath been sent down to thee; and what hath been sent down before thee [the Bible].” It was their opinion that the Koran superseded the Tourat (Old Testament) and Injil (New Testament): that God revoked the Tourat and Injil when he revealed the Koran. I told them, “No! this book is the Tourat and Injil.” They then rejoiced very much and said, “A deed like this is better than sending liquor.” Many believe that there is no other book, and no other religion leading to Heaven, except that of Mohammed. Ho is their intercessor and guide to Heaven. When I first saw the Holy Bible in the Arabic tongue, a learned man informed me that the original tongues were Hebrew and Greek. I wondered, and I entered upon the reading of it, and I saw things different to what I had seen in the Koran, the great (John xiv, 6, and x—), “Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me.” “I am the door; by me, if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out and find pasture.” I took these two verses and wrote them on the back of each one of the books and gave it to them, and they promised me to read it. And after some days there came to me a man named Alfa, and sojourned with me fifteen days, that I might explain to him some of the verses in the Gospel. The words wore Matt, xx, 30. He said, “How does the Koran promise us hour is in Heaven?” I said to him, “Be patient; only read on and your burden will be lightened.” Ho wondered. The sending of religious books to the people is a beautiful work. Therefore, I send this letter to you to inform you of what has taken place among us. One of them to whom I gave the books, said, “The words which I read in this book, do the Christians have words like these?” I said, “Yes,” and he contradicted me twice. Ho said, “Those who have books like this, never get drunk.” There are left with me now ten copies of the Psalms, and three of the whole Bible. I never give a copy to any except to those who know the Arabic language. When the time for the caravans comes, I will send the remainder as you have directed mo. May the Lord your God bless you and keep you. Peace from your friend, . . . . MOMODO WAKA.
Written on the sixth day of the month of Ramadhan, in the year of the Hijra, 1201 (June 18, 1885).
The question of the future of Islam in Africa is one which is claiming the attention of the thinkers in Europe. The opinion seems to prevail that it has lost its power to influence the nations of Europe and Asia, and this is owing to decadence of the race among which it had its rise. A vigorous German writer in Die Nation (May 29, 1886), in a review of a recent work on Zanzibar, thus speaks of the Arab:--
The Arab of to-day, gifted as he is, if he learns, it is little more than to read, to write, and the Koran; all other knowledge is gone to sleep. Even its medical science, which gave to Europe its first physicians, has dwindled into domestic medicines and magical art; and industry, in the general absence of needs, has declined from the construction of the Alhambra to the manufacture of the most primitive implements. The spirit has lost its impulse to an all-embracing activity; the body does not need it. The nobles buy European products. Our own science shows itself incapable of making any impression on their peculiar mental organisation.
But, whatever may be the case in Arabia, there is an irrepressible activity—intellectual, commercial, political and religious —among the adherents of the creed in Nigritia. They pursue an extensive agriculture; they spin, weave, sew, work in the metals, engage in the craft of the potter and of the tanner. Dr. Barth (1849-1855) travelled through a large portion of this country. He describes certain districts as abounding in rich pastures, in valleys of very fertile land, and in mountains clothed to their summits with noble trees. The towns and cities were walled, and respectably built; the markets were numerously attended, and a considerable trade carried on. He found commerce radiating in every direction from Kano, the great emporium of Central Africa, and spreading the manufactures and the productions of an industrious region over the whole of Western Africa. The fixed population of this city he estimated at 30,000; but, on the occasion of the great fairs, at 60,000.
The principal commerce of Kano consists in native produce; namely, the cotton cloth woven and dyed here, or in neighbouring towns, in the form of tobes; turkedi, or the oblong piece of dress of dark-blue colour worn by the women; the zenne, or plaid of various colours. There is also a large trade in sandals and tanned hides, and in the cloth fabrics manufactured at Nupe. Throughout these districts a large variety of European goods may be seen. Arabic books, printed at Morocco and Fez, in red morocco binding, form an important article of traffic. The Koran, the Traditions of Bochari, the Commentaries, &c., are exchanged by Moorish traders for the fine cloth manufactured by the Nigritians, and for gold dust and gold trinkets.
There is in this country an activity not suspected by the outside world. Boys, who go from remote districts to the great centres of trade, wonder at the crowds and the different wares, as country youth in England and America wonder when they visit such centres as London or Liverpool, Boston or New York. And they have not the remotest idea that in any other portion of the globe—if, indeed, the knowledge of the existence of any other portion of the globe has dawned upon them—there exists so populous, so industrious, so wealthy a community.
And all this industry and activity is controlled by the Mohammedan tribes. In Central Africa, Islam is an aggressive, conquering force; and it is, of course, infinitely superior to the Paganism which is has abolished. It has established in the minds of its adherents the sense of responsibility beyond this life, and the fear of God; and this sentiment—which is the condition of all other progress—it is not only diffusing, but transmitting to posterity. This is the element which has given stability and upward impulse to the social and political forces of advanced countries, and it will have the same effect in the dark corners of this continent. And what is an interesting fact is, that in this vast region—as large as the whole of Europe—no such question can arise as Bishop Foster solemnly put the other day: “What shall be done with Rum?” This problem has never yet arisen, and will never arise. There is no necessity for Dr. Talmage’s proclamation of a “universal strike against strong drink,” We can count upon at least, sixty millions of water drinkers.
It is said that General Gordon had an idea of utilising the Muslim power, with Khartoum as a centre, for carrying on the work of civilising the millions of equatorial Africa. He believed that Mohammedanism possessed enough truth for this regenerating work. In his Journal, under date September 12, 1884, he says:--
I am sure it is unknown to the generality of our missionaries in Muslim countries, that, in the Koran, no imputation of sin is made to our Lord; neither is it hinted that He had need of pardon; and further, no Muslim can deny that the Father of our Lord was God (vide chap, iii of Koran), and that Ho was incarnated by a miracle. Our bishops content themselves with its being a false religion; but it is a false religion possessed by millions on millions of our fellow creatures. The Muslims do not say Mohammed was without sin; the Koran often acknowledges that ho erred; but no Muslim will say “Jesus sinned” As far as self-sacrifice of the body, they are far above the Roman Catholics, and consequently above Protestants. . . . . The God of the Muslims is our God.[29]
We do not envy the man who deems himself sufficiently enlightened to be able to smile at the beliefs and proceedings of this people; and dissenting, as we very decidedly do, from many of their doctrines, we dissent still more emphatically from the bigotry which refuses to recognise in their teachings and methods, many of the elements of goodness, of truth and righteousness. Now, what prospect is there of the spread of the Gospel among these people? We have purposely reserved for the close of our discussion the question which must chiefly excite the interest of the Christian world, viz.: What is the disposition of the African Mohammedan in relation to the religion of Jesus, and how far are they accessible to its influence? Let the following fact answer.
Sometime ago, through the benevolence of an English lady, we were able to send a large number of Arabic Bibles and Testaments to different countries which lie behind Liberia and Sierra Leone. Among acknowledgments which have come to us of their receipt and circulation from parties to whom we sent them, is the enclosed Arabic letter, marked No. 4, of which the following is a translation:--
Praise and glory to the Creator of the earth and the heaven. This letter comes from the youth, native of the Futah country, to the possessor of honour and knowledge, namely, the learned Abd-ul-Karim, called among the Christians Mr. Blyden, Peace to you, and to your family. How are you? I am in good health. I have received the books which you sent me. I distributed them among the people, and I distributed them as you directed me—I sent one copy to Mohammed Akibu, in the town of Dinkerawi. I gave two copies to Almanie Sanusi; one to Murri Ishmael; one to Almanio Amara Silla; one to Baraka, a stranger from Sego. I sent six copies to our country, Futah Jallo. I gave several to the little boys at Fulah town. When the news spread, the people asked me, “Where have you procured books like these?” I told them that a Christian man, who loves the Muslims, gave them to mo, that I might give them to you to read, that we might all be one. They wondered. I then took a passage from the Koran (sura ii, verses 2nd and 3rd), which is as follows:--
“The God-fearing are those who believe in the unseen, and observe prayer, and out of what we have bestowed upon them, expend for God; and who believe in [the Koran] what hath been sent down to thee; and what hath been sent down before thee [the Bible].” It was their opinion that the Koran superseded the Tourat (Old Testament) and Injil (New Testament): that God revoked the Tourat and Injil when he revealed the Koran. I told them, “No! this book is the Tourat and Injil.” They then rejoiced very much and said, “A deed like this is better than sending liquor.” Many believe that there is no other book, and no other religion leading to Heaven, except that of Mohammed. Ho is their intercessor and guide to Heaven. When I first saw the Holy Bible in the Arabic tongue, a learned man informed me that the original tongues were Hebrew and Greek. I wondered, and I entered upon the reading of it, and I saw things different to what I had seen in the Koran, the great (John xiv, 6, and x—), “Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me.” “I am the door; by me, if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out and find pasture.” I took these two verses and wrote them on the back of each one of the books and gave it to them, and they promised me to read it. And after some days there came to me a man named Alfa, and sojourned with me fifteen days, that I might explain to him some of the verses in the Gospel. The words wore Matt, xx, 30. He said, “How does the Koran promise us hour is in Heaven?” I said to him, “Be patient; only read on and your burden will be lightened.” Ho wondered. The sending of religious books to the people is a beautiful work. Therefore, I send this letter to you to inform you of what has taken place among us. One of them to whom I gave the books, said, “The words which I read in this book, do the Christians have words like these?” I said, “Yes,” and he contradicted me twice. Ho said, “Those who have books like this, never get drunk.” There are left with me now ten copies of the Psalms, and three of the whole Bible. I never give a copy to any except to those who know the Arabic language. When the time for the caravans comes, I will send the remainder as you have directed mo. May the Lord your God bless you and keep you. Peace from your friend, . . . . MOMODO WAKA.
Written on the sixth day of the month of Ramadhan, in the year of the Hijra, 1201 (June 18, 1885).
Footnotes:
28 Cardinal Lavigerie, of Algiers, who is said to be the best living authority in regard to the extent and influence of Mohammedanism in Africa, says that, “There are at present, from the Soudan to the Niger and Senegal, more than sixty millions of Mussulmans.” We are glad to see it announced (Christian Recorder, June 17,1886) that a Negro—Rev J. C Ayler—who has just graduated in a full course of Theology at the Reformed Theological Seminary, New Brunswick, N.J., has finished a special two-years course in Arabic. This is the first case, as far as we know, of any Negro in the United States devoting himself to the study of this language; and yet, for effective missionary work, in the most important part of Africa, a knowledge of Arabic, is indispensable More Negroes read and write this language than any other.
29 The Journal of Major-General Gordon at Khartoum.
28 Cardinal Lavigerie, of Algiers, who is said to be the best living authority in regard to the extent and influence of Mohammedanism in Africa, says that, “There are at present, from the Soudan to the Niger and Senegal, more than sixty millions of Mussulmans.” We are glad to see it announced (Christian Recorder, June 17,1886) that a Negro—Rev J. C Ayler—who has just graduated in a full course of Theology at the Reformed Theological Seminary, New Brunswick, N.J., has finished a special two-years course in Arabic. This is the first case, as far as we know, of any Negro in the United States devoting himself to the study of this language; and yet, for effective missionary work, in the most important part of Africa, a knowledge of Arabic, is indispensable More Negroes read and write this language than any other.
29 The Journal of Major-General Gordon at Khartoum.
It will appear that the Mohammedans do not object to reading the Christian Scriptures, and that they pay close attention to their contents. Many of those who visit Sierra Leone for trade, purchase Arabic Bibles at the bookstore there. It is a great thing to know that they read the Bible. Now, where is the living evangelical teacher to propound to them, and follow up with Gospel teaching, the question of Philip to the Eunuch, “Understandest thou what thou readest?”
The Christian world seems slow to understand who the instruments in this work must be. Just as Africa has been, and is being, conquered for Islam, not by Arabs, but by Negro converts to the system, so will she be conquered for Christianity by the Negro converts to the religion. No others can do it. The American war furnished the symbol of the method of Africa’s regeneration. The war, in the Divine purpose (whatever man’s plans and intentions may have been), was evidently for the freedom of the Negro;[30] and no success could crown its arms until the Negro himself was called to the front. “We thought, first,” says Frederick Douglass, “ we could carry on the war politely. It was to be done by gentlemen— by white men. We fought with our soft, white hands, while we kept our hard, black hand chained behind us. But, after a while, we learned wisdom; and we put an eagle on the Negro’s button, a musket on his shoulder, and a knapsack on his back, and told him to help, and he did help. He responded full two hundred thousand strong.[31]
So, for the spiritual war which is being carried into Africa, the Church must utilise the African. No cheering news will come from the front until some of those millions who assisted in procuring the temporal emancipation of the race are allowed and assisted to take part in the great work of the spiritual redemption of their Fatherland. Providence has already prepared the political and ecclesiastical organisations. Liberia is the pioneer in the political movement, founded by far-seeing Christians, philanthropists and statesmen, in America. Let her be generously assisted and supported in her advance into the continent. The African Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States (soon to be joined by the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, and similar organisations), in machinery and appliances, and in physical adaptation, leads the way. The Negro Baptists of the South are already in the field. There are Negro Presbyterians and Negro Episcopalians. These will all be utilised when a few more years, and a little more experience, have satisfactorily demonstrated to the American Church the utter impracticability of the present methods. “Arm the Negroes! Arm the Negroes! “will again ring through the American nation. Arm the Negroes, in the name of Christ, if Africa is to be conquered for Christ. “The solution of Africa in America,” said the late Bishop Haven, with true Christian insight, after visiting this vast country, “is America in Africa;” and there can be no other solution. Bishop Taylor is calling for Negro recruits from America, for his great inward march from Liberia. May the response be large, generous, multitudinous!
The Christian world seems slow to understand who the instruments in this work must be. Just as Africa has been, and is being, conquered for Islam, not by Arabs, but by Negro converts to the system, so will she be conquered for Christianity by the Negro converts to the religion. No others can do it. The American war furnished the symbol of the method of Africa’s regeneration. The war, in the Divine purpose (whatever man’s plans and intentions may have been), was evidently for the freedom of the Negro;[30] and no success could crown its arms until the Negro himself was called to the front. “We thought, first,” says Frederick Douglass, “ we could carry on the war politely. It was to be done by gentlemen— by white men. We fought with our soft, white hands, while we kept our hard, black hand chained behind us. But, after a while, we learned wisdom; and we put an eagle on the Negro’s button, a musket on his shoulder, and a knapsack on his back, and told him to help, and he did help. He responded full two hundred thousand strong.[31]
So, for the spiritual war which is being carried into Africa, the Church must utilise the African. No cheering news will come from the front until some of those millions who assisted in procuring the temporal emancipation of the race are allowed and assisted to take part in the great work of the spiritual redemption of their Fatherland. Providence has already prepared the political and ecclesiastical organisations. Liberia is the pioneer in the political movement, founded by far-seeing Christians, philanthropists and statesmen, in America. Let her be generously assisted and supported in her advance into the continent. The African Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States (soon to be joined by the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church, and similar organisations), in machinery and appliances, and in physical adaptation, leads the way. The Negro Baptists of the South are already in the field. There are Negro Presbyterians and Negro Episcopalians. These will all be utilised when a few more years, and a little more experience, have satisfactorily demonstrated to the American Church the utter impracticability of the present methods. “Arm the Negroes! Arm the Negroes! “will again ring through the American nation. Arm the Negroes, in the name of Christ, if Africa is to be conquered for Christ. “The solution of Africa in America,” said the late Bishop Haven, with true Christian insight, after visiting this vast country, “is America in Africa;” and there can be no other solution. Bishop Taylor is calling for Negro recruits from America, for his great inward march from Liberia. May the response be large, generous, multitudinous!
Footnotes:
30 Colonel McClure, of the Philadelphia Times, in his great lecture on ‘The Lessons of the War,’ delivered at Lexington, Va., June 16, ignores this issue.
31 Lectures on John Brown.
30 Colonel McClure, of the Philadelphia Times, in his great lecture on ‘The Lessons of the War,’ delivered at Lexington, Va., June 16, ignores this issue.
31 Lectures on John Brown.
Have a discussion about the content above
