{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_56469/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_56469","id":"gutenberg_56469","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/56469","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Category: Travel Writing","Iran -- Social life and customs","Yazd (Iran)"],"text":"Produced by The Online Distributed Proofreading Team at\nhttp://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images\ngenerously made available by The Internet Archive)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration: YEZDI TYPES.\n\nThe numbers are from the left.\n\n1. A _qan\u2019at_ maker. This is the man who digs the tunnels by which the\nwater is brought from the base of the hills to the towns in the plain.\nThe leather bag on his arm is a bucket.\n\n2. A Parsi _raiyat_, or agriculturist, with his spade.\n\n3. A porter.\n\n4. A _charvadar_ (muleteer) from L\u0101rist\u0101n. These very big men often come\nto Yezd with caravans.\n\n5. A Jew, who is divining from his book for the charvadar. The Jew has\nhis boy with him.\n\n6. An oil-seller. He carries the oil in gourds.\n\n7. A _darvish_, or religious mendicant.\n\n8. An Arab. These are sometimes seen in Yezd, but like the Lari\n_charvadar_ they do not really belong to the town.]\n\n\n\n\n                               FIVE YEARS\n                            IN A PERSIAN TOWN\n\n                            BY NAPIER MALCOLM\n\n                                NEW YORK\n                        E. P. DUTTON AND COMPANY\n                                  1905\n\n                       _Printed in Great Britain._\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE\n\n\nI feel that this short sketch of a Persian town needs an apology. It will\nnot improbably be mistaken for a book of travel. Stopping five years in\none place is not travelling, and the experience of such a stay is not\na traveller\u2019s experience. The descriptions that will be found in this\nvolume refer to a very small area, and consequently a good deal of minute\nwork has been attempted that would have been out of place in the painting\nof a larger sphere.\n\nThen, again, this is not a book upon mission work. There is comparatively\nlittle about the very interesting work which is being carried on in Yezd\nby the Church Missionary Society, but there is a great deal about the\ncircumstances under which missionaries work, for the book is really\na description of a Persian town from the missionary point of view.\nThis will explain why certain details, such as the dress and food of\nthe people, are left out altogether; for, although there may be some\nconnection between these things and the kind of way in which missionary\nwork ought to be conducted, it is not at present apparent to the writer.\nOn the other hand, the general effects of house, street, and desert,\nwhich meet the Yezdi\u2019s eye at every turn, have been rather elaborately\ndescribed, for scenery and scenic surroundings have much effect on\ncharacter, and the study of character is essential in missionary work.\n\nIn most of the descriptions I have taken special care to preserve the\ntrue proportion between good and evil, so far as I have been able to\nestimate it in the thing described. I have specially done this in the\nnecessarily incomplete sketches which I have drawn of the Yezdi\u2019s\ncharacter and religious beliefs. But in dealing with the Persian\nGovernment I have consciously deviated from this practice. Consequently,\nI must ask the reader to regard all references to the Government as going\nno further than the actual statements. I have also, as far as possible,\navoided alluding to political problems; for, in a country like Persia,\nfor a man engaged in serious missionary work abstention from politics is\nalmost a _sine qua non_.\n\nIt will, perhaps, be felt by some that more ought to be made of the\npoints in common between Islam and Christianity. The fact is that when\npeople come to the missionary they do not want to find agreement but\ndisagreement, and consequently the missionary gets to think not so much\nof what they know as of what they do not know. So a missionary writer is,\nperhaps, inclined to pass over common points, whatever religion he is\nwriting about. In the case of Islam there are really not many to note,\nand in support of this statement I may relate a story told by an officer\nof Indian troops. One day a Mohammedan, in the course of a conversation,\nsaid to him: \u201cOf course, Sahib, your religion and ours are very near\ntogether. Your Christ is one of our prophets.\u201d My friend replied: \u201cWhat\ndo you mean? Of course Christ is one of your prophets, but to us He is\nmore than a prophet; He is the Son of God and the pattern of our lives.\nBesides there is hardly a single practical point where Mohammedans and\nChristians are not entirely at issue.\u201d The man looked up and said:\n\u201cSahib, you have read the Quran, and you have read your Bible. I always\nmake that remark to Christians: I made it to a padre the other day: and\nthey almost always say, \u2018Very true; Mohammedanism has a great deal in\ncommon with Christianity.\u2019 Well, Sahib, when they say that, I know that\nthey have not read the Quran and they have not read their Bibles.\u201d\n\nMy best thanks are due to Miss MARY BIRD, whose name is well known\nboth in Persia and to all interested in that country, for the valuable\nassistance that she has given me out of the wide and unique experience\nthat she possesses on the subjects handled in my book. I am also very\ngrateful to the Rev. G. FURNESS SMITH for several valuable suggestions.\n\nI am indebted to the Rev. C. H. STILEMAN and to Mr PAUL PETER for some\nof the photographs illustrating the book. The coloured prints and the\npicture of the School are from drawings by a native artist, MIRZA ABU\u2019L\nQASIM.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\n                                                                    PAGE\n\n                                CHAPTER I\n\n    The Yezd district\u2014Desert\u2014Water supply\u2014Villages\u2014The town of\n    Yezd\u2014Gardens\u2014Streets\u2014Houses\u2014Furniture\u2014Cleanliness\u2014Undurability\n    of buildings\u2014Built for heat\u2014Hill villages\u2014Effect of\n    surroundings on intellect and character                         1-35\n\n                               CHAPTER II\n\n    Isolation and insularity\u2014The town the geographical\n    and political unit\u2014Extension of citizenship to\n    strangers\u2014Bigotry\u2014Oppression and persecution of\n    Parsis\u2014Improvement in their position\u2014Position of\n    Jews\u2014Fanaticism largely non-religious\u2014Position of European\n    colony                                                         36-59\n\n                               CHAPTER III\n\n    Persian Mohammedanism\u2014Mohammed\u2014Founding of Islam\u2014Shiahs\n    and Sunnis\u2014Laxity distinguished from infidelity\u2014Central\n    doctrines of Islam\u2014The Divine Unity\u2014The prophethood\u2014Beh\u0101i\n    view of the prophethood\u2014The B\u0101b\u2014The Beh\u0101ullah\u2014Beh\u0101\u012bism\u2014Its\n    prospects\u2014Islam\u2014Predestination\u2014Repentance\u2014Sav\u0101bs\u2014Eating with\n    unbelievers\u2014Charge of pantheism\u2014Effect of Islam on character  60-114\n\n                               CHAPTER IV\n\n    Results of Islam\u2014Untruthfulness\u2014Superstitions\u2014Pilgrimages\u2014\n    Divining\u2014Jins and D\u012bvs\u2014The evil eye\u2014Trivial commandments\u2014\n    Entertainments\u2014Islam includes rather than controls the\n    life\u2014Two purposes better than one\u2014Ceremonial uncleanness     115-135\n\n                                CHAPTER V\n\n    Character of the Yezdi\u2014Systematised inconsistency\u2014Loyalty\n    to causes and individuals\u2014Unreliability of\n    evidence\u2014Shame\u2014Humour\u2014Disregard of time\u2014Language\u2014Lack\n    of initiative\u2014Courage\u2014The Yezdi soldier\u2014Etiquette\n    and manners\u2014Triviality\u2014Pride\u2014Kindliness and\n    cruelty\u2014Dishonesty\u2014Difficulty in obtaining anything\u2014Tendency\n    to fatalism\u2014Latent strength of Persian character\u2014Family\n    ties\u2014The _jus paternum_\u2014Religious liberty\u2014Open-handedness\u2014\n    Summary                                                      136-187\n\n                               CHAPTER VI\n\n    Difficulties in dealing with enquirers\u2014Language\u2014Argument\u2014\n    Parabolic interpretations\u2014Distrust of evidence\u2014Ignorance\u2014\n    Attachment to Islam as representing whole scheme of\n    life\u2014The problem of converts\u2014Industrial missions\u2014Employment\n    by missionaries\u2014Helpful points\u2014Readiness for religious\n    discussion\u2014Quickness in grasping single points\u2014Yezdi\n    wants distinctive and systematic teaching\u2014And a concrete\n    example\u2014Difficulties in accepting converts\u2014Tests             188-216\n\n                               CHAPTER VII\n\n    Getting into touch with the natives\u2014The missionary\u2019s style of\n    life\u2014Visiting and receiving visitors\u2014Philanthropic work\u2014Poor\n    relief\u2014School work\u2014Medical work                              217-255\n\n    CONCLUSION                                                       256\n\n    GLOSSARY                                                         265\n\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS\n\n\n    YEZDI TYPES                                            _Frontispiece_\n\n    HUJJATABAD, THE FIRST STAGE FROM YEZD                 _To face p._ 6\n\n    SWEET EATING IN A TALAR                                    \u201d      26\n\n    DEHBALA                                                    \u201d      34\n\n    SMALL SQUARE IN YEZD                                       \u201d      76\n\n    CORPSES _EN ROUTE_ TO THE QUM CEMETERY                     \u201d     120\n\n    SANDY DESERT NEAR YEZD                                     \u201d     120\n\n    CARRYING THE NAKHL IN THE BIG SQUARE IN YEZD               \u201d     134\n\n    SQUARE OUTSIDE GOVERNOR\u2019S RESIDENCE IN YEZD                \u201d     184\n\n    A VIEW OF YEZD                                             \u201d     216\n\n    SCENES IN YEZDI LIFE                                       \u201d     226\n\n    THE SCHOOL                                                 \u201d     242\n\n    MAP                                                      _at the End_\n\n\n\n\nFIVE YEARS IN A PERSIAN TOWN\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I\n\n    The Yezd district\u2014Desert\u2014Water supply\u2014Villages\u2014The town of\n    Yezd\u2014Gardens\u2014Streets\u2014Houses\u2014Furniture\u2014Cleanliness\u2014Undurability\n    of buildings\u2014Built for heat\u2014Hill villages\u2014Effect of\n    surroundings on intellect and character.\n\n\nIn the very centre of central Persia there is a town called Yezd, which\nin some ways may be uninteresting, but ought for a student of Persia to\nhave the greatest interest, for it possesses all the regular attributes\nof a Persian town to an exaggerated degree. These Persian towns can be\nbetter understood after some consideration of the country in which they\nlie. Some one, I think, has said that Persia consists of two parts, the\nsalt desert, and the desert which is not salt; and though this is not\ntrue of all parts of Persia, with regard to most of the interior of\nPersia it is as nearly true as a reasonable man can expect an aphorism\nto be. In the vast district where Yezd lies you find an archipelago,\nwith sand for sea, and towns and villages for islands. If you want to\nknow how big that desert area is, I can only tell you that we went to\nYezd, which lies in the very centre of Persia, from the southern shore\nof the Caspian, which is the northern boundary of the country, and with\nthe exception of a belt of land at the extreme north about thirty miles\nbroad, and a patch round Teheran about twenty miles across, we literally\npassed through nothing but desert.\n\nBut desert in Persia is of many kinds: even the salt desert is not all\nthe same. There are places where the ground is absolutely bare, except\nfor the thick crusts of salt that lie like snowdrifts streaking the\nsurface in every direction. There are also places equally salt where the\nproximity of a certain amount of useless water produces a larger quantity\nof plant life than in most parts of the ordinary desert. The ordinary\ndesert is good soil, and wherever water can be brought to it, it is\nextremely fertile. Generally it has a hard but rather gravelly surface.\nSometimes it is flecked with dry brownish shrubs about the size of\nbedding-out plants, sometimes it is quite bare. There is in parts a good\ndeal of scattered growth, but two plants never touch one another. In the\nmore favourable places shrubs may be found at an average of not more than\ntwo yards apart, but, with one exception, I have never seen in the desert\nplains of central Persia a place away from the hills with sufficient\nnatural growth to modify the colour of the distance.\n\nThen there is the sandy desert. Here also, if the sand is scraped away\nand water brought, the soil is good, but in appearance the sandy desert\nis the most desolate of all. Absolutely nothing grows on it. It is like\nthe worst kind of salt desert, without the relief of the white patches.\nYezd lies in a big stretch of sandy desert. Sometimes the sand may be\nbroken by a large piece of gravelly plain, but such places are generally\nas bare as the sands themselves, and form no real break in the dull\nmonotony.\n\nOf course there are oases; but what is called an oasis is not really\nvery different in character from the desert that surrounds it. It is the\nsame desert artificially cultivated. In the plains the water is brought\nfrom a distance, and when it is applied the ground consents to nourish\nexactly those seeds that have been sown. There are hardly any weeds,\nno turf, no tangle, no hedges, and no waste green. Every blade in the\nartificial wheat-field is an isolated unit, that may be pulled up without\ndisturbing its neighbour. Even in the fresher-looking gardens, enclosed\nand concealed by high mud walls, there is the same meagre, bedded-out\nappearance on every side. In spite of the possibility of three artificial\nharvests in the year, one sees at a glance that the very roots will\ninevitably be annihilated when the water is cut off, and of course this\nhappens pretty frequently. There are no wild trees at all, and those\nthat are reared are very small, and scanty in leafage. Such oases as\nthese go by different names, according to the quantity of water. Those\nthat can support a fairly large population are towns, those that can\nsupport a smaller one are villages, those that can only support one or\ntwo households are called cultivations, or _mazra\u2019s_. But, however big or\nhowever small, they are no interruption to the continuity of the desert.\n\nIn the hills and round their bases there is a trifle more plant life,\nbut there is no strong contrast to the barrenness below. Only high up\nin the creases of the mountain sides, right above the cultivations and\nvillages, there are the narrowest strips of turf on either side of the\nsnow torrents. Here one may find small ferns nestling under the boulders,\nand quantities of soft flowers, or an occasional wild barberry bush.\nAway from the actual bed of the mountain streams one is again in desert\nof a kind, though here, too, the scattered dry shrubs will be found\nalternating with more succulent varieties of plants, and the landscape is\nby no means entirely bare.\n\nAs soon as these streams reach ground that it is possible to level into\nterraces, they are used for irrigation, and become the stalks of minute\n_mazra\u2019s_. Then come long hill villages with orchard trees and walnuts;\nand lastly, if there is any water left at the real mountain base, there\nwill be a round irrigated patch of rather larger extent on the edge of\nthe plain.\n\nIn the middle of the plains water may be found about sixty yards\nbeneath the surface, a depth from which it may be drawn through wells\nfor drinking purposes, but not in large quantities for irrigation.\nConsequently, if the snow torrents were the only source of water supply,\nthe centres of the Persian plains would be uninhabitable; for in\ndistricts like that of Yezd the rainfall is so trifling that nine or\nten not over large falls of rain or snow in the twelve months constitute\na wet year. But water that is found at sixty, or even a hundred, yards\ndown at the base of the hills is by no means useless. From this point\nto the centre of the plain there is a considerable, though very gradual\ndeclivity. So when the original shaft has been sunk, and water has been\nfound, perhaps at three hundred feet below the surface, a long line of\nsimilar shafts are sunk towards the centre of the desert, at distances\nvarying from twenty to forty yards, the line sometimes stretching for\nmore than thirty miles, until a point of desert has been reached that\nlies as deep down as the original water-level. Then all the shafts are\nconnected at the bottom by burrows, just big enough to afford passage to\na man; the water is let in, and appears in an open ditch in the centre\nof the desert. Of course conveyance of water by these _qan\u2019\u0101ts_ as they\nare called, which are often thirty or forty miles long, is by no means\ninexpensive, so as a rule the water is used immediately it can be brought\nto the surface. Consequently we find all through the barren Persian\nplains two strange phenomena: little cultivations, fed by artificial\nchannels, standing all by themselves, leagues away from anywhere, in the\nmiddle of a desolate and waterless expanse; and large towns such as Yezd,\nsituated far away from any natural water supply, in the barest spot to be\nfound in all the desert, the central hollow where the drifting sands have\ncollected and covered over even the faintest vestige of vegetable life.\n\n[Illustration: HUJJATABAD, THE FIRST STAGE FROM YEZD.\n\nSandy desert, with qan\u2019at pits in foreground.]\n\nThe typical Persian plain is very long, appearing to be comparatively\nnarrow, and certainly flat beyond conception. The plains through which\none approaches Yezd from Kashan or Kirman are probably on the average\nabout sixty miles broad. But the huge barren mountains, lying in long\njagged ranges to the right and left, show with such plainness of detail\nfrom every point, that the traveller unused to the clear atmosphere of\nthe East can hardly credit the full size and distance. Mountains, plains,\nforeground, and far perspective, everything, in the Yezd district at any\nrate, is one neutral tint of brown, except for the snow lying on the\nrocks of the mountain-top, the long flakes of salt scattered here and\nthere about the plain, or the continual moving mirage. Even at sunrise\nand sunset, when the sky and distant hills put on a colouring of glorious\nbrilliancy, there is an utter absence of those soft tones in the\nforeground which can only be given by sunlight in a humid atmosphere.\n\nNear Yezd there rise into sight brown villages, excrescences of the same\nmaterial as that on which they stand, isolated separate objects with\nsharp definite bounds. The scanty, hedgeless crops that surround them,\nusually arranged in oblong patches like small allotments, seldom show\nuntil the traveller is quite near; the few trees are wretchedly poor in\nsize and colour, and the walls and buildings are simply mud, of which\nthree parts are in ruins.\n\nAfter a few of these villages we come to Yezd itself, equally isolated\nfrom everything, and in other respects very much the same as the\nvillages. However, as we approach the town by most of the main roads,\nthere are no fields and no trees at all. Also there are sticking out\nfrom the town a lot of high square air-shafts, looking like short\nfactory chimneys. Yezd, like the villages, is brown, but there are a few\npatches of white. There are one or two very faintly tiled minarets and a\nnewer-looking green dome; but these things are not sufficiently striking\nto modify the general brown effect.\n\nNow we are among the _b\u0101ghs_.[1] A _b\u0101gh_ is an enclosure, generally\noblong, consisting of mud walls twelve feet high, surrounding a planted\narea. Very often a _bagh_ contains nothing but fields of farm crops.\nThe better class _baghs_, belonging to the richer Persians, have in the\ncentre a kind of summer dwelling-house with plenty of porticos, built on\na very open-air pattern. Such _baghs_ are well stocked with fruit trees\nand rose bushes; there may also be a few small elms, or short poplars,\nor perhaps some cypresses. There are not many flowers. Here, too, most\nof the area is given up to farm crops. Everything is laid out after the\nplan of a Dutch garden, but without the turf and thick foliage, and\nalso without the extreme trimness that we connect with such places. In\nthe better gardens there is always a small gutter of running water, and\ngenerally an artificial tank with a stone border. This is the part of the\n_bagh_ most highly prized by the natives. In Persia a small artificial\nchannel with a stream of water about two feet across seems to give that\nair of distinction to a house which we expect from a well-kept lawn\nwith good flower-beds. From the road nothing can be seen of all this\ngreenery except the tops of the highest trees. In Yezd indeed only the\n_baghs_ that lie some way out up the course of the _qan\u2019ats_ show as much\nas this. Just round the town nothing is to be seen but the bare walls\nand the gateways of the gardens. The gateways have some brickwork about\nthem, and are sometimes partially whitened. They stand back from the\nroad. The tops of the mud walls are generally in bad repair, and here\nand there we come across a jagged hole that has been made as a short cut\ninto the garden by the gardener. In such cases the pieces of mud and\nsun-dried bricks, when they have been taken out, lie in the street. Where\nthe surface of the thoroughfare has not been taken up for bricks, which\nby the way are left to bake in the sun in the middle of the road, it is\ngenerally used for drying manure that has been kneaded with a modicum\nof earth. The dyers also use the street for hanging up their cloths to\ndry, and also for arranging their skeins of silk, which they twist round\nwooden pegs stuck into the wall about forty yards apart. The road surface\nis a little irregular, and occasionally it is made more interesting by\na shaft leading into a _qan\u2019at_. As we approach the houses proper the\nroad narrows, for it is only the natural lane between enclosures, and\nthe house enclosures, which from the outside are exactly similar to the\n_baghs_, lie closer together.\n\nOccasionally, as we near the centre of the town, we come across open\nsquares with a small mosque on the one side. The wall of the mosque is\ndirty white, and there is a little black lettering over the doorway,\nbut very little tile or brick. In the middle there may be a dilapidated\noctagon with a flat top, about five feet high and six across, built of\nmud covered with tiles rather the worse for wear. Round such squares\nthere are generally arched recesses, filled in at the bottom, so as to\nmake a ledge three feet from the ground. The bazaars are just the old\nnarrow lanes, covered by a succession of mud domes forming a continuous\nbut untidy roof. The goods are displayed on tiers of mud ledges, and\nthere is a mud room behind. Quantities of the wares are mud. Firepans,\nbarrels for grain, several kinds of toys, bread receptacles, and some\nother household implements are simply clay, moulded into a rough\nform, and dried in the sun. Water-bottles, various kinds of pitchers,\nchildren\u2019s money-boxes, and hookah-bowls are baked with fire, but\nwithout the slightest glaze. The baker\u2019s ovens are made of mud, down\nto the very doors. Many of the Yezdis even eat mud, and develop an\nunwholesome muddy complexion.\n\nThe cleverness of the Yezdi in manipulating mud is beyond belief.\nSometimes you may see men in the streets making barrels for storing\ngrain. First of all a smooth round slab of mud about an inch and a half\nthick, is moulded on the ground. Then another piece of mud is kneaded\ninto a long sausage, and placed in a hoop upon the edge of the slab.\nSausage after sausage is added hoopwise, one on the top of the other,\nuntil a height of about four feet has been reached. Each hoop, as it is\nlaid in position, is worked with the hand into smooth connection with\nthe hoop below, and when the barrel is completed there is not the least\nvestige of a join. The whole is done without wheel or machinery of any\nkind. A mud lid is added which is soldered on with mud when the barrel is\nfilled.\n\nI have hardly yet succeeded in giving any adequate impression of the\nuntidiness of the streets. The central courtyard of the house is\ngenerally a fair-sized garden. For reasons connected with the water\nsupply the inhabitants of the houses are continually altering the level\nof these places, and large quantities of earth are emptied into the\nstreet or carried out of it every day as occasion may arise. All along\nthe sides of the streets there are shallow holes for rubbish heaps; here\nand there there are cesspools; and yet with all this the streets are so\nwell scavenged by dogs and children that, except in the Jewish quarter,\nthe thoroughfare is comparatively clean, while, thanks to the powerful\nsun and the absolute absence of moisture in the atmosphere, almost the\nonly obtrusive smells from one end of the town to the other are those\nthat hang round the public baths and the places used by the dyers.\n\nLet us now enter one of the doorways that leads into a better class\nhouse. We find ourselves first of all in a round or octagonal porch,\ncovered by a small dome, which is generally pierced in the centre to\nadmit light. From this porch we go through a passage into one of the\ncourt-yards. In a good house there are two, or even three court-yards.\nThe whole family live in the better compound, and the men receive their\nvisitors in the smaller one. Though this rule is not without exception,\nthe better class women in Yezd do not seem to have much to complain of\nin the matter of housing.\n\nIn the court-yard there will be found an open tank and some flower-beds;\nthe rest is generally paved. The flower-beds are below the level of\nthe pavement, and are irrigated from the tank. Watering-pots are used\nfor watering the pavement only. Sometimes the whole garden is sunk to\nthe level of the cellar floor, so as to get nearer to the _qan\u2019at_.\nThe house itself consists of two sets of buildings, chiefly one story,\nwith perhaps one or two upstairs rooms. The upper rooms, however, do\nnot really form a separate story, but are built over the lowest of the\nground-floor rooms, so as to bring the roof more or less to one level.\nThe roofs are generally paved with flat bricks of the shape of tiles, and\nare surrounded by a low mud wall, so as to form a more or less secluded\nand cool place, where the family may sleep in summer. Perhaps a dome may\npartially project above the level of the rest of the roof. Also there is\nthe inevitable _b\u0101d-g\u012br_, or square air-shaft, running down to the back\nof the big summer portico, or _t\u0101l\u0101r_, and furnished at the top with long\nslits on all four sides to catch any air that may be moving. This _talar_\nis the principal room on the summer side, which faces north. It is often\nbuilt in the form of a cross with very stumpy arms, or rather of an\noblong with the corners so taken off as to render it slightly cruciform.\nThe long side of the oblong faces the court-yard, and has no wall at all,\nbut there is a curtain of tent-cloth that moves up and down on pulleys.\nTo the right and left of this sun-blind are short walled-off passages,\nwhich are used as entrances. Corresponding to the projecting front part\nbetween the passages there is at the back a recess under the _bad-gir_,\ncompleting the cruciform design. The roof is arched into a high dome.\nThe whole _talar_ is raised three feet above the level of the garden, so\nas to give room for a two-foot upright grating, which is the window of\nthe cellar room underneath. For five months in the year these are the\nonly habitable rooms in a Persian house; and they are both furnished as\nliving-rooms. The rooms on either side of the _talar_ are so like the\nwinter rooms that it is unnecessary to describe them separately.\n\nThe whole structure of the place is quite different from that of an\nEnglish building. Except for enclosing a rough garden the Persian builder\nhardly ever makes a blank wall. Sometimes the walls of the compound,\ngenerally the walls of stables and outhouses, but always the sides of\nrooms, passages, and porticos consist of a series of arches more or less\ncarefully moulded. In the house, unless they are intended for doors,\nwindows, or cupboards, these arched recesses are filled in to a height of\nthree feet; so that round every Persian room there is a series of ledges,\ncalled _t\u0101qchas_, about the size of a small mantelpiece, generally a span\ndeep, but sometimes very much deeper, and running in instead of running\nout. If the height of the room will allow it, there is a line of straight\nmoulding above these arches, and above that a second row, usually much\nshorter than the lower ones. Above that comes a second series of lines of\nstraight moulding, shelving into the arch of the roof, for the ceilings\nare always constructed on the arch principle, although they are sometimes\nflattened on the top when it is intended to build an upper room. These\narches are built of brick and mud only, without any wood or wooden\nfoundation; and indeed no wood is used in a Yezd house at all, except for\ndoors and windows.\n\nYou will find three styles of wall in Persian houses. Sometimes the rough\nmud is coated over with a smoother surface, either clay and chopped\nstraw, or clay and sand, and the brown colour is left unchanged. In\nfairly good houses this style is often thought good enough for the summer\nportico. Very often the angles of the mouldings are pointed with white\ngypsum, and when ornamental designs in the same fashion are added, the\neffect is exceedingly pretty. But generally the living rooms in a Persian\nhouse are entirely whitened with gypsum, and a moulded design, about an\neighth of an inch thick, is made in the centre of the ceiling. These\ncomplicated and accurate geometrical designs are produced by the natives\nwith no better tools than a chisel and a bit of string. The formation\nof the arches and straight mouldings without instruments is equally\nwonderful, but though the appearance is geometrical two arches never\nexactly correspond with one another if one comes to measure. Still the\nconstruction of a Persian room, perhaps with a large dome, without any\nbetter materials than clay, gypsum, and a small modicum of baked brick,\nwithout any scaffolding or wooden basis, and with the help of none but\nthe very simplest tools, is a thing that may be accounted one of the most\nextraordinary marvels of the East.\n\nAs in the summer, so in the winter side, the best room is generally\nin the centre. The better rooms are almost invariably approached from\nthe side and not from the front, being separated from one another by\npassages that run to the whole depth of the buildings. This enables the\nentire frontage of the room to be given up to windows. Generally some of\nthe rooms have a large cupboard room at the back, which is frequently\nused for sleeping in. As the floor of the house is three feet above the\nlevel of the compound, the passages between the rooms are furnished with\nsteps, but they have no doors. Consequently, to shift one\u2019s quarters in\nsuch a house necessitates going into the open air. The smaller rooms are\ngenerally approached from the front, and in this case they sometimes have\nan _aiv\u0101n_, or mud verandah. The winter rooms always take up the north\nend of the compound, but are often built along the east or west side as\nwell.\n\nRooms are generally named by the number of their windows, which is\nusually three or five. A good five-windowed room will have a frontage of\nfive arches filled in with French windows. The semi-circular fanlight\nconsists of pieces of coloured glass fixed together in a wooden lattice.\nThe lattice at a distance resembles fret-work, but is really elaborately\npieced together. Some of the older windows contain exceedingly fine work,\nbut even when it is well done it is not very durable, and nowadays they\ncan only do very rough work. Some of the work that is forty or fifty\nyears old is marvellous, but could not be done at the present time for\nlove or money. The French window itself consists of two doors which\nare supposed to meet in the middle. There are no hinges, but each door\nhas a wooden foot which turns in a mud socket. The arrangement of the\ncoloured glasses which forms the panes is extremely artistic. The same\nsort of wooden lattice is used, but the pattern is rather larger than the\npattern of the fanlight. As may be supposed, it is extremely difficult to\nkeep these windows clean, for the panes, besides being very minute, are\nsimply caught into grooves in the wood; and, as the work is done without\nany great accuracy, they very seldom fit. The doors are made after the\nsame design as the windows, but they have wooden panels. They are often\nsurmounted by a glazed fanlight. The wood of the doors and windows is\ncovered with a yellowish-brown paint, and warps very badly, as it is used\nin an unseasoned state. Our cat could generally get in through a bolted\ndoor.\n\nOf course there is no form of door fastening which can be used\nfrom both sides, and in this way as in others a Persian house is\ndistinctly inconvenient. Still the style of building when fresh is\nvery pretty. These masses of French windows with their coloured panes\nartistically arranged, the lines of white arches all along the sides,\nand the high-arched ceiling with its curious mouldings give the room\nan ecclesiastical appearance. At the back of the room there is not\ninfrequently a corresponding line of door-windows, leading to one of\nthose cupboard-rooms which I have before mentioned. This arrangement\nincreases the regularity of the general design.\n\nBefore passing on to describe the furniture I must mention that there is\none other totally different style of window, which lifts up in a sash,\nwithout pulleys, and is supported when open by metal stays. Also it is\nvery common to find wooden lattices unglazed. Paper or calico is pasted\nover these in the winter.\n\nThere are one or two other forms of ornamentation that are not uncommon.\nPerhaps a line of painting, quaint but distinctly artistic, may run\nround the room just below the _taqchas_, giving the effect of a dado.\nSometimes the roof is much more elaborately moulded, and is spangled\nwith little bits of looking-glass; when this is not overdone the effect\nis pleasing. It is not uncommon to find very poor looking-glasses, about\ntwelve by six inches, let into the walls. There are in almost every room\nrings attached to staples, which are intended to support the baby\u2019s\nhammock. Fireplaces are a European importation, but they are generally\nto be found in at least one room of the better class houses. They are\nalmost always narrow, and comparatively high, so as to conform to the\narch design, and they are made in the wall without any metal. The metal\nfittings of the room, such as hammock-rings, staples, and door and window\nlatches, are made of whitened iron curiously engraved; and nails of the\nsame material with very large heads, from one inch to three or four\ninches across, are used freely by the Persians for ornamenting woodwork.\n\nThe movable furniture of a Persian room is very simple. Curtains are not\nused very freely, and those that are used are rather scanty. Generally\nthey are hung up by the corners without any string. In the men\u2019s\napartments they are used more for doors than for windows. The favourite\npattern is a very crude green or red with a large lozenge in the middle,\nlike the design on a watered silk.\n\nThe only really valuable things in a Persian room are the carpets. In\nsome cases these are laid right up to the walls, and a piece of drugget\nsomething less than a yard wide is also laid along the walls, usually\non three sides of the room. In other cases there is a border of very\nthick clumsy felts arranged round the carpet which occupies the centre\nof the floor. The felts are self-coloured, with a small amount of\nstamped pattern. They have not got cut edges, but are made in one piece,\nconsequently the shape is very inaccurate. They cost nearly as much as\ngood carpets, and are often protected with druggets in the same way.\nIn the place of honour, furthest from the door, is a mattress stuffed\nwith cotton, covered with some sort of chintz or cretonne, and furnished\nwith one or two very large round bolsters. In the winter there is also\noccasionally a _kurs\u012b_ in evidence, but they are less common in Yezd than\nin other Persian towns. The _kursi_ is a rough stool, about as high as a\nmilking-stool, and about eighteen inches square, completely covered with\ncotton quilts and rugs, which trail on the ground on every side. Beneath\nthis an iron brazier of lighted charcoal is placed, and the family tuck\ntheir legs underneath the wraps, and squat round the _kursi_ on the\nfloor. This, however, is not generally kept in the room except in the\ncoldest weeks. During the remaining seasons the brazier is often brought\nin on a large copper tray, either for heating the room, or for keeping\nthe teapot warm and for opium smoking. All copper and iron utensils in\nPersia, such as these trays and braziers, are carefully tinned.\n\nTables in Yezd are made in the roughest fashion, but the legs are nicely\nturned, the Yezd carpenters being greatly inferior to the turners, who\nare entirely distinct from them, and who produce very good work with\nthe simplest class of hand-lathe worked with a bow. The carpenter, on\nthe other hand, is incapable of putting up a shelf straight. He never\ndovetails, and he disguises the inaccuracy of his joints with plentiful\ndeposits of clay.\n\nMany of the Yezdis use little tables about three feet by two, and\nstanding about twelve inches high. These are used only for tea-things.\nBut tea is generally made by an inferior, standing at a tall table in\nthe corner of the room. These tables are rather larger, not less than\nfour feet by two. They stand as high as an English sideboard, and have a\nrough border of curved or dog-tooth pattern falling down from the slab,\nso that they very much suggest a rough dressing-table. They are often\nbrought in and out of the rooms as they are wanted. People who wish to be\nthoroughly European in their manners sometimes have a larger table of the\nsame kind permanently in the room, surrounded by a few bentwood chairs,\nwhich are brought up from Bombay, or folding-chairs with cane seats,\nwhich I think they bring from Isfah\u0101n, and about which the less said\nthe better. Such a table is always covered by a white cloth, the most\nfashionable variety being a Turkey bath-towel.\n\nThese chairs and larger tables are no real part of Persian plenishing,\nwhile the tea-tables are being continually carried backwards and\nforwards, and are not necessary to the equipment of the room.\nConsequently the room does not present a very filled appearance. The few\nutensils which it contains, other than those mentioned, are placed upon\nthe _taqchas_. On one of these _taqchas_ may be seen a pair of _l\u0101las_.\nThe _lala_ is a spring candlestick with a globe, and is, I believe, made\nin Europe. The candles are also imported. All lights in Persia have to\nbe carefully protected from the wind, as the house is not a continuous\nbuilding, but a series of outhouses. On another _taqcha_ will be found\na lamp, also of European manufacture. Persian lamps, which are simply\nsaucers of native vegetable oil with a floating wick, are used freely\nabout the house when a strong light is not required, but they have the\ndisadvantage of blackening the gypsum of the walls. With regard to the\nimported lamps it is a curious thing that, although the lamps used are\nof the cheapest variety, with stems and reservoirs of blue or white\nglass, lamps with short stems, which might be brought into the country\nat an infinitely less cost, do not seem to have come into fashion. On a\nthird _taqcha_ is sure to be found a specimen of the Persian hookah, or\n_qali\u0101n_. This is a most elaborate pipe, and is both made and bought in\nsections. The large bowls, however, when they are made of glass, are, I\nbelieve, imported; also some of the china heads.\n\nSometimes you will find on the _taqchas_ a pair of European vases. In\nYezd the pattern is almost always that of the hand rising up from a\nstand and grasping a tapered vessel. Sometimes also you will find cheap\nContinental oleographs, generally ladies\u2019 heads. These are bought by the\npair, and you will find two copies of the same picture standing side by\nside. Another European import to which the Yezdis are much attached is\na looking-glass. These are of the oblong shape, with varnished or gilt\nframes. Perhaps also one will see on the _taqchas_ a covered glass vessel\nwith a long spout, containing rose-water.\n\nIn the women\u2019s rooms there is occasionally a large wooden trunk for\nclothes, covered with gold and silver paper, and of a very clumsy design.\nThe _taqchas_ may be covered with plush cloths, and this is sometimes\nthe case in the men\u2019s apartments. The women are also fond of highly\nornamented trinket boxes.\n\n[Illustration: SWEET EATING IN A _TALAR_.\n\nThis is the principal part of the summer buildings in a Persian house,\nand the bottom of the picture is the level of the compound. The room\nunderneath is a living room, and is lighted by the grating under the\n_talar_. It is only used in the heat of the day. The door to the cellar\nstaircase is seen on the right of the picture. The passage is the\napproach to the _talar_ itself.\n\nThe three men are sitting in the ordinary Persian way round a tray of\nsweets. The Yezd sweets are remarkably good and have no coarse flavour.\nThey eat them as we do cakes, but in rather larger quantities. This\n_talar_ is a small one. The larger ones are generally cruciform in shape.\nIt has no _bad-gir_ (air-shaft) or front curtain.]\n\nThe better class Yezd houses are exceedingly clean, and so on the whole\nare the people who live in them. In this Yezd is distinctly superior\nto some other Persian towns. The houses of the rather poorer classes\nin Yezd are dirtier, but they would compare favourably with those of\na corresponding class in many parts of Europe. The very poor class are\ncrowded together, many families to one house, and live in a condition\nof filth as great as the dry atmosphere will permit. You must remember\nthat the native never removes his clothes for the night; indeed he only\nremoves his clothes or washes his body when he goes to the public bath.\nThe fee for admission is a mere trifle, but people do not go to the bath\nunless they have an absolutely clean set of clothes to change into when\nthey have bathed. A few of the poor people take off their clothes on\narriving at the bath and wash them, staying in the bath until they are\ndry enough to put on again. This, however, is exceptional, and generally\nspeaking the difference in the standard of cleanliness accepted by the\nricher and poorer Yezdis is very large.\n\nHouses that are not very new are always more or less tumble-down. The\nmud ceilings crack very easily, and the white gypsum flakes off at the\nslightest touch. The more essential parts of the structure are equally\nundurable. But you must remember that no Yezdi wants his house to last\nfor ever. When the house is first of all built, a large chamber is made\nbelow the surface to receive the drainage, and the size of this is\ndetermined by the length of time the owner wishes his house to last,\nwhich is generally forty to fifty years. When the chamber is full, the\nrich occupants move to another house, and the house gradually falls to\npieces. To the Yezdi an old house means a bad house, and this idea is so\ndeeply rooted, that even in his _bagh_ he seems to prefer young trees\nto those which have attained their full size. The idea of a residence\nwhich bears the marks of natural growth, and is not simply artificial,\nhas never entered into the Yezdi\u2019s mind; and the absence of this to us\nfamiliar idea, has to be reckoned with in dealing with his character.\nAlso it must be remembered that two-thirds of a Persian town, and\nthree-quarters of a Persian village, is from various causes invariably in\nruins. I suppose that in an English climate the best-built Yezd dwelling\nhouses would remain standing for about a fortnight. In spite of their\npalatial design they are really nothing but mud huts, and when you live\nin them, or rather about them, for you are in the open air as often as\nyou are inside, you learn their imperfections to your cost. Nobody can\nrealise the immense amount of damage that can be done in a town like\nYezd by a really wet day. Some while ago we had twenty-four hours of\nrain, which destroyed, I believe, about a couple of hundred roofs, and,\nwhat is worse, caused the older _qan\u2019at_ pits to fall in, blocking the\nwater supply in some parts of the town for three months. Is there any\nother town in the world where a little extra rain causes a three months\u2019\ndrought? There is a story in Tehran about a Dutch Ambassador, who was\nso afraid of the roof falling down that in wet weather he invariably\nslept under the table. However he was a very tall man, and, when the\ncatastrophe happened, he got his foot crushed.\n\nStill the summer buildings in a Yezd house are really not bad. Generally\nspeaking, the Persian builds well for heat and badly for cold. Yet the\nshort Yezdi winter is a very severe one; and we, who are accustomed\nto a longer cold season, are astonished to see the philosophic way in\nwhich the Yezdi sets himself to endure the cold while it lasts, without\ntaking any particular precautions to defend himself from it. The long\nwindow-front is a mass of spaces and cracks. Even when panes are not\nmissing, daylight is frequently to be seen between the glass and the\nlattice, between the window and its frame, and sometimes between the\nframe and the wall. This of course is not including the crack between the\ntwo doors, which is often half an inch wide. Remember that every door\nin the house is a front door, leading into the open air, and you will\nget some idea of the provision made against the winter cold. The fact\nis that the Persian only understands two kinds of winter requirements,\nthat of the hard living working-man who demands only the simplest shelter\nagainst the cold, and that of the man who on cold days can devote himself\nto keeping warm with a _kursi_ in an inner apartment. A man who wants to\ndo his work comfortably in any sort of weather is entirely beyond his\ncalculation. On the few days when snow falls the merchants\u2019 offices are\npractically deserted, and no one but the smaller tradesmen and artisans\ngoes to the bazaars.\n\nThe house, as I have said, is really built for a protection against heat.\nWhen I first went to Yezd I was surprised to find how tremendously the\nnatives were affected by the hot weather. The native is certainly less\naffected than the European by the direct rays of the sun; but although\nsomething in the climate seems to tell on Europeans after two or three\nyears\u2019 residence, I would back a fairly strong Englishman, furnished with\na sun-helmet, against the average town Yezdi, to get through a piece of\nwork on a hot day, or to keep up continuous hard work for a season or\ntwo. Consequently every Yezdi who can afford it tries to get away from\ntown for at least two months of the year. The hill villages, which the\nPersians call _yail\u0101q_, or summer quarters, lie about thirty miles away\nfrom the town. Every well-to-do Persian has a house in one or other of\nthese villages, and there is a fashion about them, some being resorts\nchiefly patronised by the artisans, and some by the big merchants.\n\nAs most of the richer Persians have more than one house in the villages,\nEuropeans generally have no great difficulty in hiring a place to stay\nat. The houses are left during the winter in charge of a villager, who\nuses the lower rooms only, the upper ones being then uninhabitable from\nthe intense cold. Indeed the cold is so great that we were told that one\nwinter the animals had been dying of thirst, as the water was frozen\nbeyond the possibility of breaking the ice, and they had not fuel enough\nto melt it. The whole building is much rougher than the town house,\nthough the roofs have to be made more carefully. The villages are very\nsmall and isolated, and the winter population is quite trifling. There\nis in these villages a little arable land, but the people depend chiefly\non root-crops, nuts, and dried fruit for their winter stores, and on\nthe produce of the sheep and goats. The animals are tended in summer by\nthe children. The little boys spend most of their time up the walnut\ntrees, throwing down leaves for them to eat, while the little ragged\nshepherdesses carry a twelve-foot staff for whacking the walnut trees,\nwhen they do not climb them in the same way as their brothers.\n\nThose who go to the villages in the summer take with them everything\nthey need in the way of carpets, furniture, and cooking utensils, also\nall groceries, and even wheat and charcoal; for the commonest things\nof this kind are often absolutely unprocurable. A rich Persian has\nstores frequently sent to him from Yezd during his stay. Even in Yezd\nsome necessary store or other is almost always running short, so that\nsomething is generally at famine prices. This, of course, is due to the\ngreat isolation of the town. But in the villages it is intensified.\nSometimes there will be no meat, at another time hardly any bread, and\nsome years ago we found it almost impossible to procure milk, and were\ntold by our Persian friends that they had the same difficulty. This\neighteen-hour journey, with all the paraphernalia of the home, is the\naverage Yezdi\u2019s only experience of foreign travel; and for this reason I\nhave thought it necessary to give some account of what he sees and finds.\n\nI have now done my best to describe in detail almost the whole of\nthe Yezdi\u2019s surroundings, the furniture of his room, the pattern of\nhis house, the streets of his town, and the vast deserts by which he\nis isolated from the world. When he gets up in the morning, he finds\nhimself in a room practically containing nothing but a carpet, the walls\nand ceiling an expanse of white gypsum, and the _taqchas_ provided\nwith solitary objects upon which his eye can rest in turn without the\nslightest diversion to anything else. There is no confusion, but at the\nsame time there is no arrangement. In such a room, with such furniture,\nthe necessity for arrangement never occurs to him. He goes out into his\ncourt-yard; certainly there are flower-beds, but they are not cut like\nEnglish flower-beds in the middle of necessarily existing growth and\ngreenery. The shape of the beds and the nature of their contents has not\nbeen chosen with the slightest view to their artistic surroundings; they\nare simply artificial constructions in a waste of pavement which itself\nconceals the desert which stands to the Persian in the place of the\nnatural world. Inside the beds each plant grows its own life, by itself,\nuntouched by its neighbour, and the eye unconsciously fixes itself upon\nit as on an isolated unit. The Yezdi leaves his house and passes through\nan absolutely dry and scentless atmosphere along streets which present\nvariety only in the matter of form. He goes for a journey across the\ndesert plains; to the right there is only one object to be seen, a range\nof distant mountains, with a slight variety of jags along the top; to\nthe left there is a similar range. Every now and again he comes across a\nshrub which attracts his eye by its hermit existence. Behind him is the\nsolitary city; every six miles, while he is in the neighbourhood of the\ntown, there is an equally solitary village, or perhaps a water-cistern\nwith a domed roof; for league after league he can see in front of him\nhis solitary _manzil_, where he intends to stay the night. Even when he\ngoes to the villages this sparseness of life and circumstance is scarcely\nmodified. Can you be surprised if this hourly contemplation of isolated\nunits produces a mind which it is impossible for the tangle-reared\nEuropean ever to fully understand? Can you be surprised if an intellect\nis produced accustomed to almost unbelievable concentration upon single\nand solitary ideas, but almost unreachable by minds that are accustomed\nto complicated trains of thought, to careful evasions of contradictions,\nand to systematic arrangements of their intellectual knowledge?\n\n[Illustration: Diagram illustrating the use of the qan\u2019at. Notice that\nall the cultivation about the hills is irrigated from the snow torrent.\nYezd is irrigated by qan\u2019at water, brought in some cases from a point 30\nmiles distant, for the qan\u2019ats do not go straight to the centre of the\nplain but make for a low part of the plain from wherever water is found.\nThe 300 ft. well in Yezd is useless for irrigation, there being no lower\npoint than Yezd.]\n\n[Illustration: DEHBALA.\n\nA hill village on one of the snow torrents.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II\n\n    Isolation and insularity\u2014The town the geographical\n    and political unit\u2014Extension of citizenship to\n    strangers\u2014Bigotry\u2014Oppression and persecution of\n    Parsis[2]\u2014Improvement in their position\u2014Position of\n    Jews\u2014Fanaticism largely non-religious\u2014Position of European\n    colony.\n\n\nThe population of Yezd can only be guessed at, but probably that of the\ntown proper is between thirty and forty thousand, and that of the town\nand surrounding villages between fifty and sixty thousand. This little\ncommunity is insular beyond the insularity of islands. Within two hundred\nmiles there are three sizable cities, Sh\u012br\u0101z, Kirm\u0101n, and Isfah\u0101n, of\nwhich Isfahan is slightly the nearest. When you send a letter to Isfahan\nfrom Yezd, if your friend writes by return of post you may get back your\nanswer in a month; although a runner, taking the slightly shorter road\nby the mountains, could go and return within the week. Travelling in the\nordinary way the journey takes eight days there, and eight back.\n\nIt is a great pity that within the last two years they have got rid\nof the native telegraph line. During my journey up six years ago this\ncontrivance was a source of never-failing interest and surprise to me.\nFirst of all there were the poles. They were rough sticks, exactly like\nwhat a washerwoman in England uses for propping up her clothes-line: I\nsuppose, taking the good line with the bad, there was on the average\nabout one insulator to every three poles; this is without counting the\ninsulators which were hung midway between the poles, apparently by way\nof ornament. The wire itself was at different levels: in a good many\nplaces it lay on the ground, but at others it crossed the road about the\nlevel of a horseman\u2019s chin. One day in Yezd one of the European residents\nwanted to send a telegram, and sent to the telegraph office to ask when\nthe line would be up. They sent back a very polite message to say that\nthe trouble was not that the line was down; it was always down: the\ndifficulty was that a camel had stepped upon it.\n\nOf course they do repair the line: we saw a man repairing it. He had\na forked stick about half the length of one of the poles on which the\nline was hung. With this he caught the wire and hitched it on to the\nnearest fork of the telegraph pole, a procedure which had at any rate the\nadvantage of economy. I think I may say that telegrams by this line never\nwent faster than the post goes in England. The slightest fall of snow or\nany other similar cause cut the communications altogether, sometimes for\na fortnight; and, on similar lines that were a little longer, if you sent\na telegram to your destination while you yourself were on a journey, it\nwas a quite common occurrence for the telegraph master at the next town\nto ask you to carry it yourself as the quickest way of hastening its\narrival.\n\nSuch an apparatus as this could hardly be expected to prove a great\nconnecting influence. As a matter of fact, the Yezdi regards the Isfahani\nas a foreigner. When I was leaving Yezd I remember the sensation amongst\nmy servants when they heard that my successor, who was going to take on\nmost of them, wanted to bring an Isfahani butler. Yezdis hardly recognise\nthe bond of a common country at all. There are three connecting links\nwhich appeal to them; the link of a common religion; the link of a common\nfamily or business, for the family tie is of a character that includes\nthe relation between employ\u00e9 and employer; and lastly, the link of the\ncommon town.[3] The bond of fellow-townsmanship is perhaps not considered\na very close one, but for all that it is a real link. However, if you\nwere to suggest to a Yezdi that he ought to have something in common with\na Bush\u012br\u012b, irrespective of the question of religion, simply because they\nboth paid taxes to a common king, I very much doubt whether he would\nunderstand what you meant, and, if he did, I am quite sure that he would\nthink that you were either joking or a lunatic.\n\nIn the vocabulary of the common people it is difficult to find an\nintelligible word for _country_. There is a word for _empire_, but the\nnatural equivalent in the Persian mind to our expression _country_,\nmeaning fatherland, is _shahr_, which denotes a town, or _vatan_, which\nis the home-district, and is used in very much the same way. \u201cWhat is\nyour town?\u201d is the Persian\u2019s way of saying, \u201cWhere do you come from?\u201d\nand although he has been taught to call an Englishman _Ingl\u012bs_, he almost\ninvariably calls England _Landan_; indeed it is this which we put as an\naddress on all our English letters.\n\nThe Yezdi\u2019s ideas on the regions beyond his very narrow horizon are\ndistinctly confused. If you begin to talk to him about other places, you\nare met not by mere ignorance of geography, but by a conception of the\nsurface of the earth that is ludicrously impossible. It is difficult for\na European to conceive of a number of towns and villages, containing\nseveral millions of people, bedded out over an enormous desert area\nconsiderably larger than the whole of France. It is equally difficult for\nthe Yezdi to conceive of a natural and continuous land. Even those who\nhave travelled a little outside Yezd, and have been obliged to modify\nslightly the Yezdi conception of the universe, have built up their\nnotions of the world\u2019s surface upon what seems to us a most peculiar\nfirst idea; and they have in most cases clung to far more of their\noriginal views than we should believe possible.\n\nThe Yezdi\u2019s idea of the town as the only geographical and political unit\nis simply a generalisation from the circumstances of his own city. Yezd\nis a solitary object rising abruptly out of a vast desert that is about\nthe nearest thing to a vacuum which Nature has yet produced. Then too,\nthe methods by which the Shah retains his half of the government of the\ncountry\u2014I say his half, for half of the real control of the people is\nin the hands of the Mussulman clergy\u2014is in some points similar to the\nold Roman system of provincial government. The local governor, and not\nthe supreme sovereign, is the real ruler, and he rather than his people\nis responsible to the head of the State. Of course he is only appointed\nfor a time, and is in constant expectation of recall. Still, while he\nremains, his power is limited more by the power of the Mohammedan mull\u0101s\non the one hand, and by the strength and number of his subordinate\nofficials and guards on the other, and much less by the orders and\nauthority that he receives from Tehran. But it is true that the Yezdi\nexaggerates the separateness of his town, for he hardly recognises the\nactual limitations to the Governor\u2019s power made and enforced by the\nShah. Of course it is thoroughly understood that the Governor only holds\nhis office by the Shah\u2019s appointment; but it is very difficult for the\nYezdi to realise that that appointment, while it lasts, is to anything\nshort of autocracy. So to him the local Government is _the_ Government,\nand the local Governor the real ruler of his country, that is to say of\nthe district surrounding his town; and it would puzzle him if you were\nto tell him that there were people in this world, living together in\none sphere of government, who were not resident in one town, or in the\ndistrict that belonged to it.\n\nIt may be urged that I am speaking of the uneducated and ignorant class,\nbut there are very few in a town like Yezd who are not uneducated\nand ignorant, and even those who have superadded a certain degree of\nknowledge, have, in almost all cases, retained the majority of their\npreconceptions. Persians are very slow in seeing a contradiction;\nconsequently, I believe that this conception of the universe, which is\ncertainly accepted by the ordinary Yezdi, is with small modifications\nvery general even among the slightly travelled or educated classes. Nor\nshould a student of the mental attitude of a people ignore the curious\nideas that are to be found amongst the women. One who had moved a\ngreat deal amongst the women of Yezd, assured me that they were almost\ninvariably under the impression that the less familiar words occurring\nin the Persian translation of the Scriptures were English, and that\nit was a common thing for a woman who was accustomed to the European\npronunciation of Persian, to be referred to as knowing the language\nof the Ferangis. Such people would, of course, fail to comprehend the\npossibility of a linguistic barrier very much greater than the somewhat\nconsiderable difference of dialect which separates them from their\nneighbours in Isfahan. That such a state of mind would be equally\npossible amongst the men I do not for a moment suppose, but if this\nis the view of the women, one may be sure that there is a view of the\nFerangi stranger, more or less approximating to it, amongst many of the\nignorant hobbledehoys and young fellows, who contribute the largest share\nto the character of a fanatical Persian crowd.\n\nNow the people of Yezd are quite ready after a due interval to extend\nthe citizenship to strangers from other towns, provided that the\nnewcomers intend to stay, and are ready to enter into the life of the\ncommunity. The K\u0101sh\u012bs from K\u0101sh\u0101n, the Sh\u012br\u0101z\u012bs from Sh\u012br\u0101z, the L\u0101r\u012bs\nfrom L\u0101rist\u0101n, and the Rasht\u012bs from Rasht, are all well-known Yezd\nfamilies, and are not by any means regarded as foreigners. Also the Yezd\ncommunity includes persons of three or four different religions. There\nare in the town fourteen hundred Parsi houses, the inhabitants of which\nare Zoroastrian. There is also a smaller colony of Jews. The remainder\nare Mohammedans; but a considerable number of these belong to the Beh\u0101\u012b\nsect, and are considered rank heretics. The Parsis, though greatly\noppressed in the past, and still liable to some disabilities, have of\nlate years become wealthy and prosperous. The Jews are in some ways less\nrestricted than the Parsis; but, as they are still wretchedly poor, they\nare really much more down-trodden. That religious bigotry still exists\namong the Mussulmans in Yezd has only lately been made perfectly plain by\nthe ghastly massacre of the Beh\u0101\u012bs in the summer of 1903; but Mohammedan\nbigotry in Persia is by no means without limitations. It is spasmodic in\nits action, nor does it entirely obliterate every other feeling.\n\nA few years ago Yezd had the reputation of being one of the most bigoted\nof the towns of Persia. The presence of the Zoroastrian remnant, who were\nsubject to the grossest persecution, served only to keep alive the fire\nof religious hatred; and the community of Jews in a lesser degree had\nthe same effect. The stories of the way in which the Parsis were bullied\nand persecuted are interesting, as showing, amongst other things, the\nintense childishness of the Persian Mussulman. The atmosphere of the\ntown seems to have resembled, as indeed it still resembles, that of a\npreparatory school for little boys. Up to 1895 no Parsi was allowed to\ncarry an umbrella. Even during the time that I was in Yezd they could\nnot carry one in town. Up to 1895 there was a strong prohibition upon\neye-glasses and spectacles; up to 1885 they were prevented from wearing\nrings; their girdles had to be made of rough canvas, but after 1885 any\nwhite material was permitted. Up to 1896 the Parsis were obliged to twist\ntheir turbans instead of folding them. Up to about 1898 only brown, grey,\nand yellow were allowed for the _qab\u0101_ or _arkh\u0101l\u016bq_ (body garments), but\nafter that all colours were permitted, except blue, black, bright red, or\ngreen. There was also a prohibition against white stockings, and up to\nabout 1880 the Parsis had to wear a special kind of peculiarly hideous\nshoe with a broad, turned-up toe. Up to 1885 they had to wear a torn\ncap. Up to about 1880 they had to wear tight knickers, self-coloured,\ninstead of trousers. Up to 1891 all Zoroastrians had to walk in town,\nand even in the desert they had to dismount if they met a Mussulman\nof any rank whatsoever. During the time that I was in Yezd they were\nallowed to ride in the desert, and only had to dismount if they met a big\nMussulman. There were other similar dress restrictions too numerous and\ntrifling to mention. Then the houses of both the Parsis and the Jews,\nwith the surrounding walls, had to be built so low that the top could\nbe reached by a Mussulman with his hand extended; they might, however,\ndig down below the level of the road. The walls had to be splashed with\nwhite round the door. Double doors, the common form of Persian door, were\nforbidden, also rooms containing three or more windows. _Bad-girs_ were\nstill forbidden to the Parsis while we were in Yezd, but in 1900 one of\nthe bigger Parsi merchants gave a large present to the Governor and to\nthe chief _mujtahid_ (Mohammedan priest) to be allowed to build one.\nUpper rooms were also forbidden.\n\nUp to about 1860 Parsis could not engage in trade. They used to hide\nthings in their cellar rooms, and sell them secretly. They can now trade\nin the caravanserais or hostelries, but not in the bazaars, nor may they\ntrade in linen drapery. Up to 1870 they were not permitted to have a\nschool for their children.\n\nThe amount of the _jaz\u012bya_, or tax upon infidels, differed according\nto the wealth of the individual Parsi, but it was never less than\ntwo _tom\u0101ns_. A _toman_ is now worth about three shillings and eight\npence, but it used to be worth much more. Even now, when money has\nmuch depreciated, it represents a labourer\u2019s wage for ten days. The\nmoney had to be paid on the spot, when the _farrash_, who was acting as\ncollector, met the man. The _farrash_ was at liberty to do what he liked\nwhen collecting _jaziya_. The man was not even allowed to go home and\nfetch the money, but was at once beaten until it was given. About 1865\na _farr\u0101sh_ collecting this tax tied a man to a dog, and gave a blow to\neach in turn.\n\nAbout 1891 a _mujtahid_ caught a Zoroastrian merchant wearing white\nstockings in one of the public squares of the town. He ordered the man to\nbe beaten and the stockings taken off. About 1860 a man of seventy went\nto the bazaars in white trousers of rough canvas. They hit him about a\ngood deal, took off his trousers, and sent him home with them under his\narm. Sometimes Parsis would be made to stand on one leg in a _mujtahid\u2019s_\nhouse until they consented to pay a considerable sum of money.\nOccasionally, however, the childish mockery that pervaded the persecuting\nordinances enabled the Zoroastrians to evade the disabilities proposed.\nFor instance, as the Jews had to wear a patch on the _qaba_, or coat, the\n_mujtahids_ in about 1880 tried to make the Parsis wear an obvious patch\non the shirt. Muhammad Hasan Khan was then Governor, and Mulla Bahr\u0101m of\nKhurramsh\u0101r, a Parsi, asked him to arrange that his people should have\nthree days\u2019 respite to get the patches ready. During these three days the\nParsi women set to work, and made a neat embroidered border round the\nneck and opening of the shirt. This the Parsis exhibited as the required\npatch; and as it was very obvious, and was certainly an insertion, there\nwas really nothing more to be said. In Yezd a small score like this\ncounts for more than does a firman of the Shah.\n\nIn the reign of the late Shah N\u0101siru\u2019d D\u012bn, M\u0101nukj\u012b Limj\u012b, a\nBritish Parsi from India, was for a long while in Tehran as Parsi\nrepresentative. Almost all the Parsi disabilities were withdrawn, the\n_jaziya_, the clothes restrictions, the riding restrictions, and those\nwith regard to houses, but the law of inheritance was not altered,\naccording to which a Parsi who has become a Mussulman takes precedence of\nhis Zoroastrian brothers and sisters. The _jaziya_ was actually remitted,\nand also some of the restrictions as to houses, but the rest of the\nfirman was a dead letter.\n\nIn 1898 the present Shah, Muzaffaru\u2019d D\u012bn, gave a firman to D\u012bny\u0101r, the\npresent _Qal\u0101ntar_ of the Parsi _Anjuman_, or Committee, revoking all the\nremaining Parsi disabilities, and also declaring it unlawful to use fraud\nor deception in making conversions of Parsis to Islam. This firman does\nnot appear to have had any effect at all.\n\nAbout 1883, after the firman of N\u0101siru\u2019d D\u012bn Shah had been promulgated,\none of the Parsis, Rustami Ardish\u012bri D\u012bny\u0101r, built in K\u016bcha Biyuk, one\nof the villages near Yezd, a house with an upper room, slightly above\nthe height to which the Parsis used to be limited. He heard that the\nMussulmans were going to kill him, so he fled by night to Tehran. They\nkilled another Parsi, T\u012brand\u0101z, in mistake for him, but did not destroy\nthe house.\n\nSo the great difficulty was not to get the law improved, but rather to\nget it enforced. When Manukji was at Yezd, about 1870, two Parsis were\nattacked by two Mussulmans outside the town, and one was killed, the\nother being terribly wounded, as they had tried to cut off his head. The\nGovernor brought the criminals to Yezd, but did nothing to them. Manukji\nthen got leave to take them to Tehran. The Prime Minister, however, told\nhim that no Mussulman would be killed for a _Zard\u016bsht\u012b_, or Zoroastrian,\nand that they would only be bastinadoed. About this time Manukji enquired\nwhether it was true that the blood-price of a _Zardushti_ was to be seven\n_tomans_. He got back the official reply that it was to be a little over.\n\nThe Yezd Parsis have been helped considerably by agents from Bombay, who\nare British subjects, and of late years things have slightly improved.\nAbout 1885, a _Seyid_, that is, a descendant of Muhammad, killed a\n_Zardushti_ woman in Yezd. Ibr\u0101h\u012bm Qal\u012bl Kh\u0101n took him, and, by order of\nthe Zillu\u2019s Sult\u0101n, Prince Governor of Isfahan, and elder brother of the\nShah, killed him before daybreak. When the Mohammedan mullas heard of it\nin the morning, they gave orders for a general slaughter of the Parsis.\nMany of the Parsis were injured, but none killed. Then in 1899 the\nSah\u0101mu\u2019l Mulk, at the commencement of his governorship of Yezd, killed a\nMussulman servant of the Mush\u012bru\u2019l Mam\u0101lik for a criminal assault upon a\nZoroastrian woman. This man was not a Seyid, which made the matter more\nsimple. Just before, when the Mush\u012bru\u2019l Mam\u0101lik was temporary Governor,\nIsfandi\u0101r, the Parsi schoolmaster at Taft, one of the large Yezd\nvillages, and Sal\u0101mat, another Parsi, were killed by two _l\u016bt\u012bs_ (roughs)\nwithout reason. One of these _lutis_ was a Seyid. Both were sent to\nTehran, and a _mujtahid_ went up with them to ask for their release. The\nShah ordered the Seyid\u2019s release, but the fate of the other is not known.\nThat the Seyid was not much intimidated is certain, as in the August of\n1901, when I was in Taft, he used to wander about with other _lutis_\nquite openly.\n\nDuring the last nine or ten years the governors in Yezd have been much\nstronger, and they have, generally speaking, been friendly to the Parsis.\nThe Parsis are an industrious and intelligent people, and they have\nbecome in Yezd a wealthy community. Also there is an extremely wealthy\nParsi in Tehran, Arb\u0101b Jamsh\u012bd, who is probably more able to influence\nthe Persian Government in favour of his countrymen than are the Indian\nParsis from Bombay. Nowadays no governor who wants to remain in Yezd\ncan afford to leave the Parsi community out of his calculations. The\nreal advance made by the Parsi colony seems to date from the second term\nof government of the Jal\u0101lu\u2019d Daula, eldest son of the Zillu\u2019s Sult\u0101n,\nGovernor of Isfahan. The Parsis themselves also put down a great deal of\nthe improvement in their circumstances to the spread of the Beh\u0101\u012b faith,\nand certainly, although a semi-secret sect, the Beh\u0101\u012bs individually\nplead openly for a general religious liberty and toleration. Naturally\nsuch a movement has been of considerable assistance to the Parsis. As an\nindication of the influence of the Parsis, it is interesting to notice\nthat during the late Beh\u0101\u012b massacres, immediately there was talk of an\nattack on the Parsi quarter, the Mussulman clergy applied themselves to\nsuppressing the movement.\n\nAlthough the Jews are very much weaker and poorer, they have their place\nin the social organisation of the town, and the contempt in which they\nare held does not prevent the Yezdis from recognising their right to a\nkind of citizenship. Their religion of course is held in much greater\nrespect than that of the Parsis, for they are people of the Book, and\nalthough the Persian Shiahs granted the Zoroastrians a certain share in\nthis status, when they allowed them to continue in the country on the\nsame terms as Jews and Christians, the ordinary Yezdi of to-day hesitates\nconsiderably before he allows that Zoroaster was in any sense a prophet.\n\nI myself have met Mussulmans serving in a menial capacity in Parsi\nhouses; I have entertained Parsis of standing and Mussulmans of standing\ntogether on public occasions; and I have no hesitation in saying that\neven the bigoted Mussulman recognises the bond of common citizenship,\nalthough it is certainly true that on most occasions he prefers the\nbond of religion. Still, a Persian\u2019s religious feeling, even when it\nseems to amount to fanatical bigotry, is generally so connected with\nself-interest, that, when it is disconnected from thoughts of profit, it\nis difficult to know how much influence it will possess with him.\n\nIt is certainly a fact that a year or two ago, when an Isfahani Seyid\ncame and preached in the Yezd mosques against painted trays, Manchester\ncottons, bank-notes, and Bibles, the Yezdi Mussulmans gave him the cold\nshoulder, and treated him as a foreigner who had intruded himself into\ntheir domestic concerns.\n\nPeople were surprised at this happening in the city which a few years\nbefore had been regarded as one of the most fanatical in the whole\nof Persia. As a matter of fact, the so-called fanaticism of Yezd was\ntwo-thirds of it non-religious in character. There was an element of\nturbulency, produced by a series of weak governors; there was a real\nreligious element; and there was an element of insularity, utterly\nunconnected with creed and doctrine. In spite of the smallness of the\nChristian colony, which even at present consists of only eighteen\nEuropeans, to which may be added twenty-two Armenians (the households of\nmen in European employment), the people of the town which is after all\nnot large, had soon become familiarised with this little settlement as a\nYezd institution. Then the insular spirit came to be enlisted on the side\nof the Ferangis, and, the turbulence produced by weak governorship being\neliminated, there was only the religious difficulty left.\n\nThere have only been Europeans in Yezd for some twelve years. The early\narrivals were a bank manager and a merchant\u2019s agent. The work of the\nChurch Missionary Society has been established there for some six years,\nand the English telegraph clerk has been there for about a year. Now all\nthe members of the colony have contributed something to the life of the\ntown, and all the Europeans have worked together with marked cordiality\nand harmony. Both of these things have certainly had a great effect in\nhastening the establishment of the colony in the town, and in winning\nfor it the support of the Yezdis\u2019 insular prejudices. The merchants are\ndistinctly glad of the bank, and of the resident agent from a responsible\nManchester firm. The people have learnt to value the Medical Mission;\nand the schools, though they appeal to a smaller class, appeal equally\nstrongly.\n\nEven the directly spiritual work of a Mission is granted an established\nposition in the town by the natives, if it is partially in connection\nwith the Christian community. Having granted a community right of\nresidence no Mohammedan would deny them the right of religious\nobservance. Indeed this would be expected to exist as a matter of course.\n\nIt is quite true that Christian missions in Persia do not possess the\ntreaty right to make converts from Mohammedanism. At the same time,\nit must be remembered that Persians are much more inclined to regard\ncustom than law, nor are they used to the accurate observance of a fine\ndistinction. All that can be said is that, at present, the right of\na Christian missionary to baptize a Mussulman is in Yezd by no means\nestablished, but that his right to live and work and preach in the\ntown as, primarily, the _mujtahid_ of the Ferangis, and secondarily,\nan accepted Yezd teacher, is practically recognised by all. This point\nseems to have been arrived at chiefly through the acceptance of the\nentire European colony as unitedly Christian and as a real part of the\ntown. Things that have helped us to arrive at it have been the usefulness\nof the various branches of work engaged in by the Europeans, their\ngeneral straightforwardness and honesty of life, combined with their\nready co-operation in Christian effort; also the extreme acceptability\nof the work of the medical missions, and the linking of the clerical\nwork with the life of the town through the medium of schools. To these\nmust be added the smallness of Yezd, which makes it impossible for the\npopulation consistently to ignore or refuse to assimilate any important\nband of workers that can maintain a residence at all prolonged within its\nwalls, and the insularity which makes it impossible to refuse altogether\nto champion what has become part of the town. Also we must not forget the\nnatural proneness of the Shiah to religious speculation, and the special\nferment of religious ideas at present prevailing throughout Persia. This,\nhowever, is a matter that will be dealt with at length, later on.\n\nA curious incident occurred in Yezd not long ago, that will perhaps serve\nto point to the extraordinary way in which the Europeans have in the mind\nof the Yezdi become an established part of the town population, with\nrights and privileges similar to those possessed by the native section of\nthe townsfolk. One of the European residents had received a threatening\nletter from a young Mussulman, whom he had dismissed from his employ;\nand he had paid as little attention to the matter as it deserved. It so\nhappened that the next day he came to our house for a week\u2019s visit, I\nbeing a clerical missionary; and the dismissed servant then spread the\nreport through the bazaars that his master was frightened, and had taken\nsanctuary with his _mujtahid_, this being a common Mussulman custom when\ndanger is apprehended either from _lutis_ or from the law. Not only was\nthe report believed, but one of the other Europeans was obliged to give\nup a visit which he had intended to pay us, as he was a business man, and\nhis credit might have been temporarily shaken.\n\nA similar story is told by Canon Bruce, of an experience in Isfahan.\nThough in some ways more curious, it is, however, less convincing with\nregard to the particular moral to which I am attempting to point, since\nthe Canon was then working largely amongst the Armenian Christians of\nJulfa, who are a considerable colony, and subjects of the Shah. The Roman\nCatholic Armenian priests, who were also working amongst the Armenian\nChristians, got the chief Mussulman _mujtahid_ of Isfahan, of which\nJulfa is a suburb, to summon Canon Bruce to his house. The _mujtahid_,\nthey said, was, after all, the chief religious authority in the place,\nand Canon Bruce was as much a heretic in Christianity as the Babis were\nin Islam. This quaint summons was actually issued, and the Mussulman\n_mujtahid_ required Canon Bruce to defend himself against the charge\nof preaching incorrect Christian doctrine. This, of course, was an\nacceptance of Canon Bruce\u2019s position; but the acceptance of the position\nof a clerical missionary in a place where there were only eight or\nnine households belonging to Christian races, European or Armenian, is\nstranger still.\n\nThe possibility of such a thing ought, however, to encourage us with\nregard to the future of missionary work in isolated and apparently\nbigoted Persian towns, and also to make missionaries realise the immense\nvalue of the co-operation of Christian residents, and the necessity of\nattending fully to their spiritual needs.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III\n\n    Persian Mohammedanism\u2014Mohammed\u2014Founding of Islam\u2014Shiahs\n    and Sunnis\u2014Laxity distinguished from infidelity\u2014Central\n    doctrines of Islam\u2014The Divine Unity\u2014The prophethood\u2014Beh\u0101\u012b\n    view of the prophethood\u2014The Bab\u2014The Beh\u0101u\u2019llah\u2014Beh\u0101\u012bism\u2014Its\n    prospects\u2014Islam\u2014Predestination\u2014Repentance\u2014Sav\u0101bs\u2014Eating with\n    unbelievers\u2014Charge of pantheism\u2014Effect of Islam on character.\n\n\nWe have seen that the Yezdis have long been accustomed to have in their\nmidst professors of three distinct religions, the Jewish, the Zoroastrian\nand the Mohammedan. But as the Jews are neither numerous nor influential,\nand the Zoroastrian Parsis, though more numerous than the Jews, are\nnevertheless not more than a tithe of the population, the religion that\nchiefly demands our attention is Mohammedanism, which is the established\nfaith of Persia. The Mohammedanism of Persia is not quite the same as\nthat of India or Turkey, and the Persians call themselves _Shiahs_ or\nnonconformists. In Persia there is one creed of nonconformity which is\nthere accepted as orthodox, so those professing this creed will for the\nfuture in these pages be called Shiahs without further qualification.\n\nIt must, however, be remembered that the name Shiah is not properly\nconfined to this one sect, and also that this sect itself, like other\nnonconformist bodies, has always shown a great tendency to subdivide. In\nPersia besides Shiahs, that is the more orthodox Shiahs, there has always\nbeen one other smaller sect of Mohammedans attracting general attention.\nAt present the dissenting doctrine most widely taught is that of the\nBeh\u0101\u012bs, who have laid hold of the popular imagination, partly because of\ntheir great steadfastness under the most terrible persecutions, partly\nbecause of the somewhat popular nature of their teaching, but chiefly\nbecause Persia is now being brought into rather closer touch with Europe,\nand the people as a whole feel that the teaching of the Shiah mullas\nneeds to be modified if Islam is to be preserved. I think one may go\nfurther, and say that there is at present in Persia a period of enquiry\nand spiritual awakening, which gives a special opportunity, not only\nto Mohammedan sectaries, but also to Christian missionaries. Later on\nfurther allusion will be made to these Beh\u0101\u012bs, but we must not forget\nthat our first task is not so much the study of the complex religious\nsystems of Persia, as the analysis of those religious influences to which\nthe Yezdi has been subjected.\n\nThe ordinary Yezdi Mussulman is descended partly from the original Aryan\ninhabitants of Persia, and partly from their Arabian conquerors: but the\nenormous difference in character that exists between him and the purely\nAryan Parsi is certainly due less to race and more to religion, for the\n_jad\u012bds_, or converts from Parsiism, often develop all the Mussulman\ncharacteristics in a few generations, without the slightest admixture of\nrace. So before attempting to describe the character of the people, it\nwill be necessary to pay as much attention to the religious ideas that\nhave been brought to bear upon them as we have already paid to the nature\nof their country and the seclusion of their town life. Some aspects of\nthe Yezdi\u2019s religion will be left to a future chapter, and we must at\npresent content ourselves with trying to understand the essential nature\nof Islam, particularly dwelling on those points of Mohammed\u2019s teaching\nand example which seem to have produced most impression on the Persian\nmind. To do this we must divest ourselves of all pre-judgments of the\nprophet\u2019s life and doctrine, and simply study the facts of history,\nremembering that the conception of Islam which is to be found amongst the\nSunnis of India and Turkey cannot be allowed to pass unchallenged, for\nthe Mohammedan world is by no means unanimous about it; and also that the\nwell-known European theory, that there was a difference in Mohammed\u2019s\naims and objects in Mecca and Medina, and that the Meccan period rather\nthan the Medinan indicates the essential idea of Mohammedanism, is one\nwhich no educated Mussulman would for a moment tolerate. As for the still\nmore favourable views that have been lately brought forward by European\nauthors, I can only pass on a story that was told me of an educated\nMussulman in India who had been shown such a treatise. \u201cThis gentleman,\nSahib,\u201d he said, as he handed back the volume, \u201cappears to know very\nlittle about his own religion, and absolutely nothing about ours.\u201d\n\nI myself went to Persia with the intention of making the most of the\ngood points of the religious systems of the country. With regard to the\nParsis I was not disappointed. Like many other missionaries, I started\nwith the idea that I should find these people possessed of a great many\nradically wrong notions about the nature and power of God, which were\nessential to their religion. I now believe that I was wrong, and I have\nnever heard my right-hand man, Mihraban, who is himself a Parsi, and\nalso one of the most sincere and earnest Christians whom I have ever\nmet, speak one word against the real groundwork of Zoroastrianism. In\nthis religion it is not unteaching but teaching that is required to lead\nthe people to Christ; but, in Mohammedanism, in spite of its greater\npretensions, almost every apparent truth crumbles into mere truism or\nactual falsity the moment that you try to make it the basis of anything\npractical. Also the more I read of the life of Mohammed, the more\nconvinced I am that the radical rottenness of the system is due to his\noriginal teaching. Perhaps this may be a confession of narrowness, but\none cannot be broad all round. Unless we are going to deny the iniquity\nand wickedness of modern Islam, we shall have to believe that somebody\nis to blame; and, if it is not Mohammed, I suppose it must be either\nthe mullas or the Mussulman laity. I do not know why we should expend\nall our breadth on the big people: I myself have some sympathy with the\nlittle ones: and I firmly believe that the difficulties in the Islam of\nto-day are due rather to the essential wrongness of the system than to\nits corruption by the masses.\n\nMohammed was born in Mecca towards the end of the sixth century. He was\na member of the important family who had charge of the Ka\u2019aba, which\nwas a heathen temple that the Meccans had attempted to make a common\nmeeting-ground for the whole of Arabia, by including within its limits\nthe idols and symbols of worship that were respected by the different\ntribes. Some of these tribes had adopted Christianity and Judaism; so\npictures even of Jewish and Christian saints were to be found within the\nwalls of the Meccan temple.\n\nThe Mussulman historians of Mohammed\u2019s life tell us that there had\nbeen in Arabia, for some years before the prophet came forward, a set\nof reformers called _Han\u012bfs_, who seem to have been half political and\nhalf religious, but to have been all of them convinced that some form of\nreligion, purer than that represented by the Ka\u2019aba, was needed to unite\nArabia against its common foes. Some of these _Hanifs_ ended by adopting\nChristianity or Judaism; others were inclined to the adoption of a more\nessentially national form of monotheism, which should retain the Ka\u2019aba\nas its centre. The most notable of the latter party was Zaid ibn Amr,\na man so much admired by Mohammed that he declared him a prophet, and\nin other ways professed his complete acceptation of his principles and\nteaching.\n\nMohammed by his marriage with Khad\u012bja was certainly introduced into\nthis set of reformers. Waraka ibn Nawfal was one of the most prominent\n_Hanifs_, and we have indisputable evidence that he was one of Khadija\u2019s\nmost intimate friends, both at the time of her marriage, and also at the\ntime when her husband received his first revelation. Mohammed himself had\nbeen from childhood of a hysterical disposition, and was subject to fits,\nduring which he saw visions, which on recovering consciousness he was\nable to recollect; consequently while in this company he became convinced\nthat he was the expected prophet who was to bind Arabia together by a\npolitico-religious system.\n\nIn placing himself at the head of the _Hanif_ movement, Mohammed\nprobably gave more prominence to the political aspect than had most of\nthe former and less successful leaders. This is brought out by Koelle in\nhis life of Mohammed; and indeed it is obvious that the man who could\nallow an unbelieving friend, even though a close relation, to play the\nimportant part in the building of his church that Abb\u0101s played in the\nsecond meeting on the eminence, was primarily a politician rather than a\nreligious reformer: for it was Abbas who on that occasion first proposed\nthe oath that may almost be called the basis of Islam. A critical study\nof Mohammed\u2019s early dealings with the Arabians brings us to a similar\nconclusion.\n\nOf the other stories collected by Koelle from Mussulman sources to prove\nthis point, perhaps the most forcible is that of the discussion between\nthe prophet, his uncle, Abu T\u0101lib, under whose protection he was then\nliving, and Abu Jahl. Abu Talib called his nephew and said to him,\n\u201cThou seest the nobles of thy people are assembled here to concede to\nthee certain things, and, in return, to receive concessions from thee.\u201d\nMohammed made this reply: \u201cWell, then, give me a word whereby the Arabs\nmay be governed and the Persians subjugated.\u201d Abu Jahl responded to this\nrequest in the name of his fellow-elders by saying: \u201cThou shalt have ten\nwords.\u201d But Mohammed setting him right, and indicating what kind of word\nin his opinion could alone answer the purpose, rejoined: \u201cSay, \u2018There is\nno God except Allah!\u2019 and renounce what you worship besides Him.\u201d This\nstory Koelle quotes from Ibn Ish\u0101k, the earliest and most trustworthy\nbiographer.\n\nCertainly the movement from paganism to monotheism, which took place in\nArabia in those days, was in itself a fine thing; and it was accompanied\nby much sincerity and religious zeal. It is also obvious that Mohammed\npossessed a personality peculiarly attractive to the Arabian, and that\nthis, as well as his enthusiasm on the subject of his mission, had the\neffect of attracting many to the cause.\n\nBut not only did Mohammed pay much more regard to politics than can be\npossibly excused, he also accepted the religious and ethical teaching of\nthe _Hanifs_ only in the most superficial manner; and, under the cover\nof verbal conformity, retained as much as possible of the original pagan\nideas in which he had been reared. The result is that his followers\nare still to be found possessed of what seems at first sight to be\ncorrect doctrine upon fundamentals, and yet are unable to advance by its\nassistance along the path of light and progress.\n\nThe popular idea, that fanatical intolerance of all professors\nof other religions is an essential and fundamental principle in\nMohammedanism, cannot be maintained. The paganism of Mecca was distinctly\nlatitudinarian, so Mohammed accepted in full the sacred books of the\nJews and Christians, as would have seemed natural to an Arabian of that\nage, especially to a monotheistic teacher who was closely connected\nwith the Ka\u2019aba. This does not mean that he in any way apprehended the\nmeaning of Judaism and Christianity. The doctrine of the perpetuity of\nthe moral law never seems to have entered into his mind, even in the\nmost elementary form. He wished to say that he had himself received a\nrevelation superseding all former ones by the mandate of God, and he did\nnot wish to make trouble by pronouncing other religions to be false,\nwithout absolute necessity. His real object was to unite the Arabs by\na reformed religion, and at first he regarded his mission as a purely\nnational one. Whatever were his ultimate designs upon the Jews and\nChristians in Arabia, he intentionally conveyed to them the impression\nthat, if they recognised him as a prophet to others, he would be content\nwithout their accepting him themselves. Indeed, while he was still at\nMecca, he was even uncertain whether the idolaters who accepted him might\nnot be allowed to retain some of their idols as intermediaries between\nthemselves and Allah. He went so far on one occasion as to actually\neffect a reconciliation on this basis; but as such a concession must have\ngreatly damaged his influence with those who were favourably disposed\nto the _Hanif_ movement, he afterwards repudiated the transaction, and\ndeclared that he had acted under the influence of the devil. His work\nin Mecca was not very successful; and the opposition he encountered\nwas so strong that he had at last to begin to make attempts to start\nwork in some other place, and he was finally successful in making a\nfresh beginning in Medina. Here he was able to take advantage of a\nfamily connection with some of the principal citizens, and also of a\nlong-standing rivalry between Medina and Mecca. Although the movement\nin Mecca had not been widely successful, Mohammed had gathered amongst\nhis followers several really prominent men. Consequently, the people of\nMedina, although divided on the subject of his prophetic mission, were\nunanimous as to the advisability of receiving him and his followers into\ntheir town. Settled in Medina, Mohammed\u2019s fortunes underwent a change.\nThe chieftancy of the tribe to which his grandmother had belonged fell\nvacant, and, as most of the members of this tribe had become Mussulmans,\nMohammed had no difficulty in himself becoming their chief. Considering\nhimself restrained by no preconception or former revelation of the\nmoral law, he was able, without dropping for one moment his pretensions\nto prophethood, to use every means of fraud and violence which seemed\nconducive to his political end. As Koelle has pointed out, there is no\nreason to suppose that his principles in any way changed, but under the\naltered conditions and environment the utterly non-ethical theory of\nrevelation held by the prophet became more apparent. This is perhaps most\nclearly brought out by his utterly unscrupulous dealing with the Jews,\nand also by the story of Zaid and Zainab, in all which affairs Mohammed\nprofessed himself to be acting under Divine direction, nor is it at all\nobvious that he did not actually believe it. Finally, before his death,\nhe succeeded in establishing his religion and political system throughout\nthe whole of Arabia.\n\nOf course it was impossible for a movement like this to take place\nwithout rival prophets appearing in other parts of the country. Two of\nthese appeared during Mohammed\u2019s lifetime, and he thought it best to\nguard against future schisms of a similar kind by declaring himself the\nlast of the prophets. Exactly what he meant by this is not very clear: if\nthe almost universal voice of Islam is to be accepted, he did not mean\nthat he was the last divinely appointed teacher, for all Mussulmans look\nforward to the coming of a Mehdi or Mahdi, who, together with Jesus, the\nson of Mary, is to appear in the last days, and spread the doctrines of\nIslam throughout the world. Orthodox Mussulmans, however, always look\nupon Mohammed as the last great _s\u0101hibi kit\u0101b_, or book-bearer.\n\nThe ordinary Sunnis, who are the largest and best-known Mussulman\nsect, assert that, as a matter of fact, since the time of Mohammed, no\ndivinely-appointed teacher has as yet appeared. The Khal\u012bfs were in their\neyes simply appointed by the congregation, and the four great writers of\nthe _sunnat_, which is to them the only authoritative commentary upon the\ndoctrines of Islam, were only learned and saintly men. Now, they hold,\nthese doctrines can only be learnt from this book, and from the _Qur\u0101n_\nitself; for the _mujtahid_ or high mulla, capable of giving authoritative\ndecisions on moot points, no longer exists.\n\nThe Shiahs have very different tenets. Mohammed according to their\nteaching was the first of a hierarchic dynasty of thirteen, consisting\nof himself and the twelve great Im\u0101ms, of whom the first was Ali, the\nson-in-law of the prophet, and who were all as certainly divinely\nappointed as Mohammed himself. Mohammed is only the last great\nbook-bearer, and therefore the founder of the present era. The last of\nthe Imams was the Mehdi, who according to the Sunnis has not yet been\nborn, but according to the Shiahs appeared long ago. This man did not\ndie, but disappeared, remaining at first accessible to his followers\nthrough the medium of four successive B\u0101bs, or gates of knowledge, who\nwere in touch with him during his concealment. Like the Imams, the Babs\ncame to an end, for the last of them refused to appoint a successor. All\nthis of course is very ancient history.\n\nThe Shiahs have their own traditionists, for they reject the _sunnat_\naltogether. Between the traditions of the Shiahs and the Sunnis there is\nnot much to choose: there is a certain amount of historical fact embodied\nin both, and there is also a great deal of absolute nonsense. However,\nmany otherwise orthodox Shiahs either reject the traditions altogether,\nor interpret them allegorically. There is more freedom of interpretation\namongst the Shiahs than amongst the Sunnis: indeed many Shiahs believe\nthat some of the most objectionable chapters of the _Quran_ describing\nthe delights of heaven are entirely parabolic. Of course with _mujtahids_\n(supposed to be able to pronounce authoritatively on moot points)\nscattered all over Persia, the fixity of doctrine that prevails amongst\nMohammedans of Sunni countries would be impossible.\n\nThe tenets of the Shiahs are not derogatory to the mission of Mohammed,\nor to the position of the _Quran_, but they make the solitary figure\nof the prophet stand out much less prominently. For instance, if a\nPersian is told that his religion possesses nothing corresponding to the\nvicarious sacrifice of Christ, he will invariably reply by pointing to\nthe martyrdom of the Imam Husain. Also the Mehdi, or occult Imam, is not\nthe future, but the present ruler of Islam; and so he is in some ways as\nimportant a personage as the original prophet. Not very long ago the Shah\nof Persia used to pay rent for his palace to the Mehdi, the money going\nto the _mujtahids_ as the representatives of the Imam: I do not know\nwhether this practice is still continued, but the theory on which it was\nbased is certainly not extinct. Again there is a common saying that the\nImam Ali is present in the heart of the true believer, but I think it is\nonly regarded by the ordinary Yezdi as a poetical expression. The point\nto be noted is that the saying is always about Ali, not about Mohammed.\nShiahs invoke the Imams Ali and Husain very much more frequently than\nthey invoke Mohammed; and though the inscription over a Persian mosque\nshould be, \u201c_Y\u0101 Ali, Y\u0101 Muhammad_,\u201d that is, \u201cO Ali! O Mohammed!\u201d the\n\u201c_Y\u0101 Muhammad_\u201d is often omitted and the \u201c_Y\u0101 Ali_\u201d left to stand alone.\nThe excuse is sometimes brought forward that Mohammed is too great for\nconstant invocation. Considering the way in which the Shiah uses the\nname of God, this must, I think, be regarded as a mere excuse for a habit\ndue to wholly different causes.\n\nThis extreme attachment to the Imams is probably due to two things. In\nthe first place, there can be no doubt that the cause of Ali and his\nsons was taken up in Persia as an outlet to national jealousy, for the\nAryan converts were not sorry when a pretext occurred for differentiating\nthemselves from the majority of their Arab conquerors. In the Shiah\nreligion the early Khalifs, who ruled Islam while the holy Imams were\nstill alive, are held up to the bitterest execration, and Omar in\nparticular, who, by the way, was the conqueror of Persia, takes much the\nsame place in the Shiah system that Judas Iscariot does in the Christian.\n\n[Illustration: SMALL SQUARE IN YEZD.\n\nTo the left is a small Nakhl, and in the centre a mosque door with the\ninscription \u201cYa Ali.\u201d]\n\nSecondly, the influence of sects of mystics, professedly Mohammedan but\nhaving in their doctrines a distinctly pantheistic tendency, must be\nremembered. Ancient Persia was full of pantheism, and when it became\nMussulman the inclination towards such teaching still continued, for\nthe broader views held by the Shiahs as to freedom of interpretation\nin reading the _Quran_ gave a possible status in the country to very\nheretical sects. These Persian mystics often preferred to make the\nImams, especially Ali, at least as prominent in their systems as\nMohammed, whose teaching was more difficult to bend to their purposes;\nand although the ordinary Yezdi is certainly not a pantheist, they have\nundoubtedly intensified his enthusiasm for the personalities of the\nImams, and through their poetry they have familiarised him with religious\nexpressions of a somewhat unorthodox character. This is in some ways an\nadvantage to the missionary, but he must beware that it does not give him\na false view of the progress that he is making.\n\nAs to the theory of the divinely appointed Imamate it might be urged\nthat the retention of the whole glory of the early sainthood for the\nclose relations and descendants of the prophet is an excess of zeal that\nMohammed would have greatly approved. However this may be, the doctrine\nis not obviously opposed to Mohammedanism.\n\nThe Shiahs are certainly much laxer than the Sunnis with regard to\nsome of the commandments of the _Qur\u0101n_. Painting, and the making of\nfigures is considered by the Sunnis to be a violation of the law against\nidolatry. There is, however, a regular school of Persian painting; and\nclay models of men, animals and demons, as well as rag dolls, are given\nto the children as toys. The protests made by the mullas against these\nthings are very faint. They are rather louder in their denunciations of\nall forms of music, which amongst orthodox Mohammedans is supposed to\nhave no purpose but the exciting of the passions. As to the drinking\nof wine and spirits, the avoidance of the regular Mohammedan fast in\nthe month of Ramaz\u0101n, and the omission of the prescribed prayers, the\nShiah mullas take a view which is at least intelligible. To begin with,\nsuch things do not amount to infidelity unless they are done wilfully\nand consistently. A formal acceptation of the whole of the ordinances\nis demanded. There must be no drunkenness in the streets, no eating in\nRamazan when anybody is near unless a legitimate excuse can be brought\nforward, and if prayers have not been said men must say that they have\nsaid them. Further than this external government does not go; and as a\nmatter of fact many irreligious Persians secretly drink themselves drunk\nin their houses, forget to say their prayers regularly, and make up what\nwould, if true, be valid excuses for not keeping the fast in Ramazan.\nSuch people are well aware that they are liable to punishment, but they\nalso know that, unless they prove disloyal to Islam by accepting some\nother faith, they are not in any great danger. It is true that every now\nand again the mullas incite the people to join them in cleansing the land\nof infidelity, and on such occasions sectaries like the Babis, and those\nwho are supposed to sympathise with them, may greatly suffer, but those\nwho have been merely lax in their observance of Islam are apt to make up\nfor their past deficiencies by a peculiar show of zeal.\n\nIt may be asked whether the mullas in Persia are justified in making no\nmore persistent efforts to enforce Mohammedan law, and whether their\nwinking at such irregularities is not in itself disloyalty to the system\nof Islam. Probably it would be easy for them to show that they were\njustified by the example of Mohammed himself. If Mohammed enforced a much\nstricter discipline in the town where he was himself present\u2014a matter\nwhich I think is open to doubt\u2014it would be almost impossible to maintain\nthat he caused such discipline to be enforced among the Arab tribes.\nThese tribes were generally accepted through the medium of their chief,\nwho usually came to Mohammed in person, had a short interview with him,\npart of which was devoted to political subjects, and often went back to\nhis tribe on the same day. It is true that Mohammed made a distinction\nbetween hypocrites\u2014_mun\u0101fiq\u012bn_, and true believers, but he generally\nmeant by hypocrites people who were not really on his side against\nothers, and here the ordinary Shiah is unimpeachable.\n\nThe fact is that Islam contains much more than an assortment of\ncommandments. Otherwise it would never have impressed its adherents in\nso distinct and remarkable a manner with special characteristics. The\ncentral idea of the religion is that we are all under the dominion of\nan invisible and absolutely powerful God, Who has created all things,\nand has willed and ordained everything both good and evil that is to be\nfound in the universe. It is true that there is a Shiah dogma against the\nextreme predestinarianism which characterises the Sunni creed, but I do\nnot believe that it has in the least affected the fatalistic view of the\nordinary people. In Islam God may be called good because it is our duty\nto accept as good whatever He does, and He may also be called by other\nnames according to the character of His known actions towards us; but\nHis own nature is absolutely different from that of man; consequently\nnothing can be known of His moral character beyond the fact of certain\nexplicit actions. This God from time to time sends to the world prophets,\nwhose duty is to teach mankind the doctrine of His unity, the necessity\nof worship, and the necessity of doing what is for the time being His\nwill. According to the popular opinion there have been a hundred and\nforty-four thousand of these prophets, but of this number only a few have\nbeen authorised to publish a new code of human duty. Those so authorised\nare known as book-bearers, and Adam, Seth, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, David,\nJesus, and Mohammed were all of this class. The Beh\u0101\u012bs add the name of\nBeh\u0101u\u2019llah after that of Mohammed. These book-bearers are always marked\nby the possession of some sort of supernatural powers appealing to the\nintellect, and also, in the case of the latter ones, by the fulfilment of\nsigns mentioned by the former prophets. Obedience to them is rewarded by\nvarious degrees of bliss in Heaven, disobedience is punished by Hell. The\nprophet must conform to previous revelations in the assertion of God\u2019s\nunity, invisibility and omnipotence, but it is not necessary that there\nshould be any coherence between the directions about human action as set\nforth in successive dispensations, nor is any difference made between\nceremonial and moral commandments.\n\nThis central doctrine of Mohammedanism concerns God, the prophet, man\nand creation; so we come across it under four names, giving the four\npossible points of view. First of all there is the name of _tauh\u012bd_, or\nassertion of the Divine unity. The Mussulman means by this very much more\nthan the mere assertion that God is a single Being. He includes in it\nthe doctrine of the invisibility of God and of His absolutely separate\nnature, and it appears to clash with the Christian conception in two\nimportant particulars. There is an absolute denial of the statement,\nupon which most Christians more or less consciously base their belief\nin the perpetuity and absolute nature of the law of human morals, that\n\u201cin the image of God created He man.\u201d Consequently we shall afterwards\nfind that in Islam there is no belief in the permanency of the moral\nlaw, for nothing is thought by the Mussulman to be necessarily permanent\nexcept things connected with the nature of God; and as our nature\ndiffers entirely from that of the Creator the law given for it cannot\nbe necessarily permanent. There is also in reality a fundamental\ncontradiction of Christian doctrine in the Mohammedan\u2019s rendering of\nthe statement that God is a single Being. This is best explained by a\nsimple illustration. Supposing a man were to say, \u201cLondon is one place,\u201d\nit is conceivable that he might mean one of two things. Either he might\nmean that the City of London was the only true London, and that there\nwas no other part of the town in Middlesex or Surrey that ought to be\ncalled by the same name; or he might mean that the whole of those places\nwhich go by the name of the County of London are in reality only one\nplace; and these two statements are not similar statements with a slight\ndifference, but they are absolutely contradictory. So the Christian says\nthere is only one God, by which he means to assert the unity of the\nall-good Creator, the all-good Personality Who was revealed as the Son,\nand the all-good Spirit Who is the only source of good in the heart. As\nGod to the Christian means the All-good, what he needs is a doctrine\nthat asserts the essential unity of the All-good wherever he finds it.\nThe Christian is of course not a pantheist, but his conception of the\none God has to be sufficiently inclusive to cover those Three Who, as\nhe knows, certainly possess the attributes of Deity. The Mussulman on\nthe other hand does not pretend to know anything about the attributes of\nDeity, excepting that God is one, invisible and omnipotent. Consequently\nhe frames his definition of the Deity so as to purposely exclude what the\nChristian with his larger knowledge knows to be the manifestation of the\nsame essence.\n\nTo pass on to the Mussulman\u2019s conception of his religion as it relates\nto the prophet. The _paighambar\u012b_, or the bringing of messages from\nthe Deity, is in many ways a peculiar idea. Mohammed himself had very\nlittle notion of his message being an advance on what had been given\nbefore, and of the gradual growth of revelation he had no conception\nat all. He was content to assert that his teaching was the religion\nof Abraham, a phrase of which he frequently made use. It is true that\nMussulmans sometimes say that parts of God\u2019s Word were revealed to former\n_paighambars_, but that the complete commandment was given to Mohammed,\nand although this is very different from the Christian doctrine of the\ngrowth of revelation, it might possibly be regarded as a substitute for\nit; but the fact is that, though it may be traceable to the prophet, it\nis quite foreign to the essential system of Islam. We frequently find\nsuch foreign ideas which have been imported into Islam, occasionally by\nMohammed but more frequently by his followers, simply to answer some\nspecific objection, or to maintain the superiority of the system over\nall others. Such importations can as a rule be easily separated from the\nessential doctrines of Islam, and in most cases they have not affected\nthe general character of the religion. This is due to the religion as\nfirst conceived by Mohammed having been clear in its essential points,\nand it is these points rather than the accretions that have left such a\nstrong mark upon the body of Mussulmans. The _paighambari_, more than\nany other doctrine or expression of doctrine, brings out with intense\nplainness the fundamental distinction between the Mussulman and the\nChristian, that enormous divergence of view regarding the moral law which\nlies at the root of almost all their differences in subordinate theories\nand tenets. So when we are discussing the influence of Mohammedan ideas\nupon character, it is well to remember that sects which do not hold this\ntheory of the _paighambari_ ought to be regarded separately.\n\nThere are in Persia sects which are only nominally Mussulman, and\nwhich largely owe their origin to non-Mohammedan sources. The S\u016bfis,\nfor instance, are only half Mohammedan, and their philosophy is really\npantheistic. Sufis are to be found in Yezd, but there are not very many\nserious ones, and the sect has largely lost its direct influence in the\ncountry. But the Babis, of whom the Beh\u0101\u012b branch is rapidly spreading\neverywhere throughout the Persian towns, have been influenced by Sufi\nideas to a much greater extent than have the orthodox Shiahs, who, we\nagreed, are not pantheistic. Perhaps some professing Beh\u0101\u012bs are really\nvery near to the Sufis in ideas, but this is not the case with the more\northodox, who, though they have modified the fundamental doctrines of\nMohammedanism in such a way as to remove the gulf between God and the\nprophet, have not produced a theology which is free from the obvious\ndefects of that of Islam. The Beh\u0101\u012b appears to hold that the superior\nprophet, that is, the book-bearer, is in every case an incarnation of\nthe Deity, but he goes on to say that there is an absolute distinction\nbetween the prophet and his people; for the book-bearer is God, and the\npeople are not God; nor are they, so far as I can understand, capable of\nreceiving the Spirit of God, either from the prophet or directly from God\nHimself. They can only be impressed by the prophet as wax is impressed\nby a seal. Whether this doctrine is really Beh\u0101u\u2019llah\u2019s or not, it was\ncertainly given to me by men who ought to have known the truth about the\nBeh\u0101\u012b faith.\n\nThe adherents of this sect in Persia are now exceedingly numerous, and\nmany people believe that in the end the whole country will become Beh\u0101\u012b;\nso the question whether the Beh\u0101\u012bs are more reliable than the orthodox\nShiahs has become an important one. Certainly they teach a cleaner and\npurer doctrine on points of ethics; but what Persia needs is not so\nmuch a higher moral teaching, but rather a higher basis for morality. A\nreligion that puts the commandment not to steal on the same level as the\ndirection not to stew your dates but to fry them, will never produce the\nhigh characters that are to be found in such communities as the Parsi. It\nwould be irreverent to compare such a faith with the religion given to us\nby the Saviour.\n\nDuring the late Beh\u0101\u012b massacre, I had the opportunity of discussing\nwhat was going on with a Beh\u0101\u012b _muballigh_, that is, an authorised Beh\u0101\u012b\nteacher and missionary. I have no intention of unnecessarily dwelling on\nthe ghastly horrors that were then being perpetrated, but a few details\nare unavoidable. The Beh\u0101\u012b sectaries were not at that time being executed\nbefore the _mujtahids_, but were being torn in pieces by the crowd. What\nhad excited the people was not simply religious feeling, but it was very\nlargely the statement by the clerical authorities that the goods of\nthe Beh\u0101\u012bs were \u201clawful,\u201d that is, that any one might plunder them who\ncared to do so. The attacks were often made by men who had lived for a\nlong while in close companionship with the Beh\u0101\u012bs, knowing them all the\ntime to be members of the sect, and yet consorting and eating with them\nfreely. Holes were bored in the heads of some of these poor wretches\nwith awls, oil was then poured into the hole and lighted. Other forms\nof torture were used about which one cannot write. Women and children\nwere very seldom actually killed, but were fearfully ill-treated, and\nsometimes left to die of starvation. It was reported that in one of the\nvillages Babi children died within full sight of the villagers, after\nwaiting for days under the trees where their murdered parents had left\nthem.\n\nThe Beh\u0101\u012b _muballigh_ with whom I was talking was certainly well aware,\nin a general way, of what was going on; yet I could not get him to see\nthat these things, done in the name of religion to his own sect, were\nin themselves wrong, and that man\u2019s eyes had been opened, or could be\nopened, to their essential wrongness. Of course he maintained that the\naction of the Mussulmans was evil, but his reason was that, in the first\nplace, those persecuted were spiritually right, and, in the second\nplace, even had they not been so, the last book-bearer, the Beh\u0101u\u2019llah,\nhad promulgated a Divine commandment that there was to be no religious\npersecution. I then asked him if such persecution could again become\nlawful if another book-bearer appeared and promulgated a different\ncommandment. He answered that it was impossible for another book-bearer\nto appear for a long period. I then asked him if he would accept a new\nbook-bearer, who, besides satisfying the other conditions, exhibited a\ntext in one of the previously received Scriptures, stating that one day\nin God\u2019s sight is as a thousand years. He replied that, if such a verse\ncould be shown, and the other conditions were satisfied, such a man might\nbe accepted to-morrow, even although he taught a doctrine similar to that\nof Mohammed about religious persecution and other matters of the same\nsort.\n\nNow there are three points to be noted by those who expect great things\nof the Beh\u0101\u012b movement. First of all, the Beh\u0101\u012bs accept the whole of the\nJewish and Christian Scriptures, which, of course, include a verse of the\nkind above mentioned. Secondly, they have already had three book-bearers;\nthe Bab, who was the original founder of the Babi sects, and who not\nonly exhibited a Divine book, but also claimed to be the resurrection of\nMohammed in the same way that Mohammed was the resurrection of Jesus;\nSubhi Azal, whom for some years they recognised as the Bab\u2019s successor;\nand lastly, Beh\u0101u\u2019llah, whom the Beh\u0101\u012bs now hold to be the only major\nprophet of the three. Thirdly, the Beh\u0101\u012bs, in attempting to prove that\nthe Bab was a lesser prophet and a mere forerunner of the Beh\u0101u\u2019llah, and\nalso that Subhi Azal was never a really great personage, have seriously\nfalsified their records. The reader who desires further information\non this subject cannot do better than consult Professor E. G. Browne\u2019s\nadmirable introduction to his translation of the _T\u0101r\u012bkhi Jad\u012bd_.\n\nThe Bab, who came forward rather less than a century ago, was a young\nShirazi Persian, a Seyid of the merchant class, whose real name was Ali\nMohammed. The Shaikhi sect were at that time predicting the appearance of\na great religious leader, and the Bab came forward claiming to be this\nprophet. He called himself the Bab, or Gate of Knowledge, and was at\nfirst supposed by his followers to be the Gate of Access to the Mehdi;\nbut he seems to have used these terms in a very broad and allegorical\nfashion, and to have held the doctrine of the essential unity of all\nbook-bearers. He later declared himself to be the Mehdi, and also to be\nthe Gate of Access to One Whom God should manifest.\n\nThe movement caused a great deal of fighting in Persia, and though the\nBabis were acting on the defensive, there is very little doubt that they\nhad harboured political designs. The Bab, however, differs from Mohammed\nin having been, so far as we can judge, primarily a religious reformer,\nand having done his best to make the movement as spiritual as possible.\nHis followers were treated with the most barbarous severity, and he\nhimself was after a few years put to death. Before this he appointed\nSubhi Azal, one of his followers, to be his successor, and for a few\nyears this man was received as \u201cHe Whom God should manifest.\u201d Later\non, Subhi Azal\u2019s half-brother, the Beh\u0101u\u2019llah, managed to get himself\naccepted as head of the sect. Many of the followers of Subhi Azal\nwere assassinated, and the sect was re-organised with some important\ndifferences. It now purports to be absolutely non-political, and the\nteaching has become more simple and practical. The Beh\u0101\u012bs are anxious\nto retain the use of the _Quran_, so as to preserve their claim to\ntoleration, although they imagine that the law of the _Quran_ no longer\nstands, its place having been taken by a later revelation. Partially to\navoid inconsistency in this matter, and partially to keep before the\nminds of the Mussulmans the possibility of one really divine book being\nreplaced by another, they encourage the reading of all the Scripture\nconsidered divine by Mohammedans, that is, not only the _Quran_, but\nalso the whole of the Christian Bible, nor do they generally call the\nauthenticity of the extant version in question.\n\nBeh\u0101\u012bism is obviously an attempt to adapt Islam to the exigencies of\nmodern circumstances, taking advantage of the special tenets of the\nShiahs. The North of Persia is being at present rapidly overrun by\nRussia, and even in the South the Persian feels that he is on the eve\nof political changes. The Beh\u0101\u012bs consider that they have a creed which\nenables them to meet the foreigner without continual jar and offence.\nIn this they are right, for they do not veil their women, they do not\nconsider infidels unclean, and they go further than does the broadest\nShiah in the matter of respect to other forms of faith. Some orthodox\nShiahs accept the Jewish and Christian Scriptures as they stand, without\npressing the story that the Jews and Christians altered their books to\nsuit their own purposes. Almost all Persians are open to argument on this\npoint, though most will say that to those possessed of the _Quran_ the\nperusal of former Scriptures is unnecessary. But the Beh\u0101\u012bs hold that,\nunless started by a real prophet, no religion can possibly survive, and\nconsequently they allow to even the grossest forms of idolatry a divine\norigin, and the possession of a certain substratum of truth.\n\nIn Persia there can never have been that almost impenetrable wall of\ndogmatic assertion and self-assurance which seems to exist in many\nSunni lands, but something of the kind is to be found throughout Islam.\nAs the self-satisfaction of the Beh\u0101\u012b is almost as strong as that of\nthe Sunni, and infinitely stronger than that of the Shiah, it seems a\nparadox to say that Babiism has given us in Persia a prepared soil for\nmissionary work. The fact is that the field prepared is not amongst the\nBabis themselves, but amongst the Shiahs who have been in touch with\nBabis, and are nevertheless unconvinced. Consequently it is a field which\ncannot be expected to last for ever, but of which advantage ought to be\ntaken immediately, for it is very seldom that we find so exceptional an\nopportunity given to us for attacking Mohammedanism on its own ground.\n\nIn Yezd the Beh\u0101\u012bs have attached to themselves many of the most\nenlightened Mussulmans. The teaching of the sect about behaviour and\npractice is not bad, though, in matters connected with women, there is an\ninclination to adopt customs that are rather dangerous considering the\nlow moral atmosphere. The tendency to minimise the miraculous element\nin religion is not altogether wholesome, and some professing Babis are\ninclined to a rather crude rationalism, the end of which it is difficult\nto foresee. This tendency is perhaps fostered by the peculiar manner of\ninterpreting the sacred books, a method difficult to describe, as it\nfluctuates between the wildest flights of metaphor, and the lowest depths\nof puerile literalism, the balance between the two being decided by a\nvery determined preconception of what ought to be. To give a specimen of\nthis, it was seriously urged in a Beh\u0101\u012b pamphlet, reviewed and summarised\nby the Rev. W. A. Rice in the _Church Missionary Intelligencer_, that\nIsaiah xxv. 6-9, where God is described as making \u201cunto all people a\nfeast of fat things, a feast of wine on the lees, of fat things full of\nmarrow, of wines on the lees well refined,\u201d refers to the entertaining\nof visitors by Beh\u0101u\u2019llah during his banishment at Acre. The \u201cwines on\nthe lees well refined\u201d are the tea, which Persians generally pour through\na small strainer. The passage also refers to the fact that God \u201cwill\nswallow up death in victory,\u201d and will \u201cwipe away all tears from off all\nfaces; and the rebuke of His people shall He take away from off all the\nearth.\u201d To this part only a spiritual interpretation is given.\n\nI tried before I left Persia to find out the impression that the sect\nhad made upon other Europeans, so as not to give a one-sided opinion\nabout them. Personally, I came to the conclusion that, in matters\neven remotely connected with religion, they were less truthful than\nthe ordinary Shiah, but that in the ordinary affairs of life they\nwere a trifle more reliable. Some other missionaries had a lower\nopinion of their truthfulness, and most of those who had had business\ndealings with them considered that they were not more trustworthy than\nordinary Mussulmans. My conclusion is that, though they may succeed in\nestablishing their creed in Persia, and may even make the Persians more\neasy to deal with, they will not greatly alter the moral character of\nthe people. They have not done so hitherto, and an examination of their\nfaith shows that they cling, in the main, to the Mussulman theory of the\n_paighambari_, or at any rate have not changed it for a doctrine which\ngives a man more cogent reasons for adhering to an approved line of\nconduct in times of difficulty.\n\nThe name given in Mohammed\u2019s system to the state of the true believer\nis _Isl\u0101m_, which means \u201cResignation to God.\u201d By this the Mussulman\nseems to understand that he must not criticise the prophet, whatever\nhe may do or teach, and that in the same way he must accept everything\nthat happens as the will of God. A waiving of personal responsibility,\nand an acceptance of all occurrences as the Divine intention, is to the\nPersian an undoubted virtue. The steadfast pursuit of a purpose which has\nbeen thwarted will often appear to him actually vicious, although such\npersistency might be justified in his eyes by its success, which would\nprove it to have been in harmony with God\u2019s will.\n\nThe word which expresses the duty of the believer being _Islam_, or\nresignation, the corresponding word used by the Mussulman to describe\nhis theory of the course of events is _taqd\u012br_, or predestination. There\nis, as I have said, in Shiah dogma an attempt to modify the extreme\npredestinarian doctrines of the Sunni. But these doctrines are so much an\nintegral part of Mohammedanism that it is impossible for the Mussulman,\nShiah or otherwise, to be anything but a gross fatalist. This then\ncompletes the list of names under which the essential and fundamental\nconceptions of Islam are taught, _Tauhid_, _Paighambari_, _Islam_, and\n_Taqdir_.\n\nThere are also in Mohammedanism certain other doctrines which seem to\nbe part of the system, but which are not quite so fundamental as those\nthat have been stated. Some of these are not quite plain: it is very\ndifficult, for instance, to understand what was Mohammed\u2019s teaching on\nthe forgiveness of sins, and there is great confusion of thought on this\npoint amongst his followers. Certainly an infidel becoming a Mussulman\nhas his sins forgiven, though he does not expect to receive any peculiar\nstrength for the future, but only a direction as to what God wants him to\ndo and to avoid. After this the motives of his actions will be _khauf u\njiz\u0101_, that is to say, the fear of Hell and the expectation of Heaven. He\nwill have to be punished in Hell for his sins according to their assessed\nvalue, unless he has previously wiped them out, either by _sav\u0101bs_, that\nis, by works of merit, or by repentance. Repentance of a real kind is\nsupposed to have a certain value, though it is hard to state exactly\nwhat that value is. Formal repentance, which does not in the mind of the\ncommon Persian necessarily involve the giving up of such fruits of sin as\nstolen articles, has also a certain value. But the most efficient way of\natoning for sin is by _savabs_. Finally no Mussulman, at any rate among\nthe Shiahs, would consider it justifiable to hold himself free from the\nfear of Hell.\n\nPunishment in Hell according to the Mussulman idea is not necessarily\neverlasting, for most of the Persians believe that, by the intercession\nof Mohammed, all his people will finally get to Heaven. But in Heaven\nthere are many grades, and the position of the individual will be\ndetermined by the relative weight of his _savabs_ and sins. Properly,\na _savab_ is a work of supererogation considered as possessing merit;\nbut the word is often used less exactly for any action which will be\nput to the account of a man as a good deed. I believe that Persian\nMohammedans when using this word almost universally accept the view that\nthe performance of a certain number of approved actions makes it less\nnecessary to adhere to the path of duty. Also, to put it crudely, the\ngood deed is not regarded as the gift of God to man, but as the gift\nof man to God; and I feel convinced that the word is bound up with the\nassumption that Heaven-seeking or the fear of Hell are the only possible\nmotives for right behaviour.\n\nThe ordinary Yezdi has no doubt that a non-Mussulman can do a _savab_,\nespecially if he benefits a Mussulman; and the belief that such a man if\nhe was a Jew or a Christian, could get to Heaven, would not be considered\nvery heretical.[4] Some Yezdis might allow that idolaters could get\nto Heaven by _savabs_, but this would be considered a more dangerous\ndoctrine. The fact is that there was in Mohammed\u2019s essential teaching a\nvery large amount of latitudinarianism, and this comes out in the common\nideas of Mussulmans who are not repressed by a system such as that of the\nSunnis.\n\nThe merit of an action is decided by the intention of the doer and not by\nits result. This is brought out by a native story, framed for the purpose.\n\n\u201cOne day a traveller came to a well, where he dismounted, fastened his\nanimal to a pin, and satisfied his thirst. As he returned to his animal\nit occurred to him that it would be a _savab_ to leave the pin behind,\nfor other travellers who might wish to tether their beasts. The next to\narrive at the well was a man on foot, who, being very thirsty and in a\nhurry, fell over the pin. This man threw the pin down the well, so as\nto prevent any one else from having a similar accident. A learned man in\nthe neighbourhood was asked which of the two did the _savab_, the man who\nleft the pin or the man who threw it away. He answered, \u2018Both, for their\nintentions were equally good.\u2019\u201d\n\nThat there is truth in this teaching is obvious, but the story ignores\nthe necessity of taking thought and pains, so that one\u2019s impulses may\nnot do more harm than good. This is always ignored in Persia, and I\nthink I am right in putting it down to the teaching connected with the\nuse of the word. Large sums of money are given for the poor, and yet the\nalleviation of poverty is very small; and the same sort of thing happens\nin other branches of philanthropy. The gift once given, the donor loses\nall interest in its bestowal; funds are squandered on the most paltry\nobjects, and the general effect seems to be that money given in this\nway becomes money wasted. Charity is also much vitiated in Persia by\nunpractical, and in many cases superstitious ideas. To give alms to a\nSeyid is a greater _savab_ than to help an ordinary beggar, so a large\nproportion of the philanthropy of Persia goes to support a begging class,\nwho are in every way a burden, and in some ways a danger to society. The\nSeyids are also more lightly punished, and consider themselves outside\nthe reach of the very small amount of justice that exists. Again, it is\nmore meritorious to give on a Thursday, as the eve of the Friday holiday,\nor on the eve of a feast, than on an ordinary day; and lastly, the people\nexpect that they will amass more merit by giving microscopic sums to all\ncomers than by giving more effective assistance to a limited number.\n\nAs I have said, the doctrine connected with _savabs_ acknowledges only\ntwo motives of action, the fear of punishment and the expectation\nof reward, and it is not allowed that any other motive can possibly\nexist. Persian women are very inquisitive, and one day some of them\nwere questioning the ladies of the Yezd mission as to what they ate for\nbreakfast. When it transpired that the others ate eggs and one did not,\nthe remark was immediately made, \u201cYou see she is trying to get a higher\nplace in Heaven.\u201d At another time when my wife was trying to explain to\nsome women that we do not look to works of merit to secure salvation, she\nwas met by the answer, \u201cBut the _Hak\u012bm Kh\u0101num_ (lady doctor) does; or\nwhy should she have taken all that trouble about the Seyid\u2019s wife when\nshe was ill?\u201d\n\nShiahs often consider that by letting others do a _savab_ for them\nthey confer a favour greater than they themselves receive. One might\nimagine that this would only apply to benefactors who agreed with their\nreligious notions; but even if you can convince a Shiah that you do not\nbelieve in the possibility of winning Heaven by _savabs_, he will reply,\nvery logically, that your want of faith does not prevent the fact being\ntrue, and that it is absurd to expect him to be grateful because of\nyour unbelief in facts. I remember trying to make a very badly-behaved\nyoungster, who was in the school under my charge, see that we had some\nreason to expect more gratitude from him, as we had really taken great\ntrouble with him, and Christians did not think it necessary to do such\nthings for the sake of their future welfare. His answer was that if we\ndid not consider that _savabs_ were necessary Mussulmans did.\n\n_Savabs_ are not necessarily good actions, but almost all actions which\nare directly kind are included in the term. So although the doctrine\nconnected with _savabs_ is not in every way a good thing, it still has\na certain value. Of course it is true that men who are anxious to do\nbig _savabs_ in order to wipe off the sins of very evil lives generally\nchoose non-ethical ones. During the late Babi massacre a soldier found a\nYezdi who was dragging about another man, and trying to make out whether\nhe was really a Beh\u0101\u012b. \u201cYou see,\u201d he said, \u201cI have been a wicked man all\nmy life, and have never said my prayers or done any other _savabs_, so,\nunless I can do a big _savab_, I shall certainly go to Hell. If this\nman is a Babi, I mustn\u2019t let him go, for if I kill an infidel of course\nI shall go straight to Heaven.\u201d Nevertheless the ordinary _savab_ is a\nkind action, and in the idea of their efficacy we get something almost\ncorresponding to a moral principle. Sometimes indeed the Persian\u2019s\nconception of a work of merit tends to correct and check the worse\ncommandments of his code. For instance, although the killing of a Babi\nas an infidel may be considered a _savab_, the saving of a life, even if\nit is the life of the same Babi, may also be held a meritorious act of a\ndifferent kind.\n\nThat the Persian\u2019s notions as to what constitutes an act of merit are a\nsaving clause in his religion I have no doubt at all. I am, however,\nnot quite certain whether this saving clause properly belongs to\nMohammedanism, for it bears on the face of it a family likeness to the\ndoctrines of superior systems, and it will not quite fit into the system\nof Islam. The rest of the Shiah ideas about Heaven, Hell, the efficacy of\n_savabs_, and repentance, seem to be really Mussulman, though everything\nis not quite coherent. Perhaps the fact is that in these points Mohammed\nwas an opportunist, and taught any doctrine which he thought would make\npeople obedient to his law. He was careful not to expect too much, and,\nwhile keeping his followers as long as possible in a state of uncertainty\nas to their salvation, he tried never to shut the door on hope. So it is\nquestionable whether either the teaching of the Quran, or the ideas of\nthe Persians on these subjects, could possibly be presented in a quite\nconsistent form.\n\nI have tried to enumerate in this chapter just those doctrines which form\nthe original philosophy or theology upon which everything in Islam rests,\nand to show that not only does the ordinary Shiah Yezdi accept them _in\ntoto_, but that, with the one small exception that has been stated, all\nhis fundamental beliefs are to be found in this category. Of course\nthese ideas are a much more serious part of a religion than is a code of\ncommandments that is not believed to be permanent. Indeed it is quite\npossible that greater laxity in the observance of such a code may be due\nto a juster appreciation of the notions with which it was promulgated. To\nsay that Persia has not been greatly influenced by Mohammedanism because\nthe Persians get drunk in their houses, is shallow criticism. It is still\nshallower to imagine that the fact that some of the Shiah ordinances are\nin themselves laxer than the Sunni makes it plain that Persians are less\nMussulman than Turks and Indians.\n\nFor instance, the Shiahs have a custom of temporary marriages, according\nto which it is lawful for a man, besides the four regular wives allowed\nby Islam, to have as many inferior wives as he likes, contracting these\nmarriages for any length of time he pleases, from a few days upwards.\nThere is, however, a legal fiction by which these women are supposed\nto be lowered to the rank of slaves, which ought to entirely remove\nthe Sunni objection; for, unless it can be proved that the temporary\nownership of a slave is impossible, it is very difficult to understand\nwhy this evasion should not be considered quite legitimate according to\nthe undoubted principles of Mohammedanism. That there is a certain amount\nof latitudinarianism in Shiah Islam is indisputable, but so there is in\nthe whole of Mohammed\u2019s teaching and practice.\n\nAs a matter of fact his attitude towards Jews and Christians, and even\ntowards the idolaters, was largely opportunist. At one time he made\nleagues with the Jews, promising that they should not be disturbed in\ntheir religion; at other times he picked quarrels with them, and put\nevery one who would not accept Islam to the sword. This latitudinarianism\nhas found its way into the Quran itself, where a verse is to be found\ntelling Mohammedans that they may eat the food of \u201cthe people of\nthe book,\u201d that is, of the people holding religions whose origin he\nrecognised as divine. The strict Shiahs in Yezd interpret this as meaning\ndry food. They make a great distinction between wet and dry; only a few\nyears ago it was dangerous for an Armenian Christian to leave his suburb\nand go into the bazaars in Isfahan on a wet day. \u201cA wet dog is worse than\na dry dog.\u201d Nevertheless, there are great differences of opinion on this\npoint, and most non-clerical Shiahs would take tea at any European\u2019s\nhouse. There was a Shiah woman who used to freely take tea at the house\nof a Christian lady, the lady herself making it and pouring it out, but\nshe refused to use the tea-glasses used in the same house by Babi women.\nAnother Shiah lent a donkey for a Christian lady, but told her that he\ncould not use it again if she allowed her Parsi nurse to ride upon it.\nAnd yet it is more easy to get the Mussulmans to eat food with the Parsis\nthan with the Jews, whose religion ranks higher than Zoroastrianism in\nthe popular regard, though they themselves are specially despised by\nthe Mohammedans. This curious mixture of breadth and bigotry is only\nexplicable on the assumption that the Shiah\u2019s main ideal is exactly that\nopportunist position which was taken up by Mohammed during his lifetime.\n\nPerhaps we ought not to leave this subject without discussing rather\nmore fully the assertion which has been made about the Persian Shiahs,\nthat they have changed the doctrine of the unity of God for a loose\npantheism, and have dethroned the Quran for the utterance of Sufi poets.\nThat the Persians as a race have an extreme veneration for Sufi poetry,\nwhich contains expressions of questionable orthodoxy, cannot well be\ncalled in question; but before discussing the more serious part of the\nallegation, it is necessary to thoroughly understand about whom it is\nstated; for there are small Shiah sects, of whom it is quite true that\nthey are only half Mussulman, but these are very different from the sect\nwhich is at present predominant in Persia, and which in Yezd at any rate\ndoes not appear to lack veneration for the Quran. One point, however,\nmust be granted, and that is, that all Persian Mussulmans, orthodox or\notherwise, are often led to express acquiescence in a statement which\nappears to be in itself correct, however opposed it may be to the general\ntenor of their other beliefs. The fact is that they do not easily see\na contradiction, and this has made it possible for the Shiah to accept\npoetry which he would otherwise have absolutely rejected. I do not myself\nknow a single Christian doctrine to which I could not get most Shiahs\nto agree, if I was careful to state it in language with which they were\nfamiliar, and not to dwell on its divergence from the Mussulman idea.\n\nBut doctrines so allowed to pass, whether Christian or Sufi, would have\nno strength against the system of Islam, which most Yezdis have grasped\nas an integral whole. The general plan of Mussulman doctrine, constructed\nas it was for inhabitants of a desert, is peculiarly comprehensible to\npeople like the Yezdis, who are accustomed to isolated objects and ideas,\nand are slow at grasping a too elaborately connected argument. For the\nsystem of Islam is not elaborately connected: that there is a general\nconsistency in it, is true, but the consistency is like that of a certain\nhousewife\u2019s accounts, in which a large number of items were entered\nunder the heading of \u201cforgets.\u201d The accounts were true and accurate, but\nthey were not highly instructive. Similarly in Islam a large variety\nof commandments have been labelled, \u201ccommandments for the age of\nMoses,\u201d or \u201ccommandments for the age of Mohammed,\u201d and the doctrine of\nthe _paighambari_ is so formulated as to make further systematisation\nunnecessary. This being a scheme of arrangement which a Persian can\nunderstand, it has laid hold of his mind to a peculiar degree. Phrases\nand expressions that are opposed to it, he will often accept, but their\ninfluence on his behaviour is exceedingly small. The thing which\ndominates him, and will, unless explicitly resisted and combated, always\ncontinue to dominate him, is Islam and Islam alone.\n\nBefore going on to discuss in another chapter some other important\naspects of the Yezdi\u2019s religion, it will be well to consider how the\nwhole Mussulman theory has affected his character. First of all, it has\nmade him even more disposed to unconnected and disjunctive views of life\nthan he would otherwise have been. This becomes plain when we compare him\nwith his fellow-townsmen who have been in touch with other religions.\nSecondly, we find that he possesses a very low view of the value of\nmorality, which in Mohammedanism has no unique place, but is only one\nof the ways of attaining salvation. Another way is through accuracy of\nreligious observance, and, when a Persian takes to this, he generally\nabandons any attempt to live straight. Residents in the country are well\naware of this, and are justly inclined to distrust a man who is very\nparticular about his prayers and ceremonial duties.\n\nI must ask the reader to pardon me if I have said in this chapter\nanything which appears disrespectful to Mohammedanism. In trying to\nrecord facts and to correctly weigh impressions, one cannot avoid frankly\nstating what has been forcibly brought before both mind and eyes, even\nthough the things stated may not be exactly what they are expected to\nbe. The fact is that Islam has ruined Persia; and it is not fair to the\nreal character of the people to underrate the effect that this religion\nhas produced on them. As to Mohammed, I believe that I have stated\nnothing about him which is not a matter of common knowledge. Doubtless\nthe author who starts with the determination to write an interesting and\nsympathetic book, will be able, by selecting his incidents, to convey a\nmore favourable impression, just as a criminal lawyer may be able to find\nmuch in favour of even a guilty client; but the historical critic who\nstarts on the examination of Mohammed\u2019s history without any pre-judgment\nmust necessarily find it difficult not to come to a very unfavourable\nconclusion. The Arabian prophet headed a monotheistic movement which\nhad started without him, and which would have probably succeeded to a\nvery large extent whether he had touched it or not, and to this movement\nhe did a great deal of damage without making any serious ethical\ncontribution. It may be readily admitted that Mohammed was an attractive\nperson, and that he possessed other great gifts, one of which was unusual\neloquence. He seems to have been an enthusiast who in his worst moments\nabsolutely believed in himself and in his mission, and there is no doubt\nthat he drew into his company, both by persuasion and violence, men who\nmight have looked askance at a more spiritual leader. But those who want\nto know what Islam does for a people who accept it had better compare\nthe Yezdi Mussulman with the Yezdi Parsi. The Parsis have a curious and\ninteresting religion, the main point of which seems to be the belief that\nGod has created all things of the four elements, and that He therefore\nexpects from all His creatures a reverential and sympathetic treatment\nof one another. The religion is Gospelless, it is coated over with gross\nsuperstitions, and it has the very great defect of being so elementary\nin its teaching that there is a strong tendency amongst its professors\nto deny revelation altogether, and to become simply rationalists. For\nall this the Zoroastrian Parsi possesses, as a rule, a strong moral\ncharacter, which, when he becomes a Mohammedan, is almost always lost\nin a few generations. Unfortunately, the Beh\u0101\u012b movement is just now\nattracting a large number of Zoroastrians, and is becoming a serious\ndanger; for the Beh\u0101\u012b, whatever he may say to the contrary, is really\na Mussulman, and his system, in which opportunism takes the place of\nthe doctrine of the growth of the moral law, retains most of the more\nserious defects of Islam. However, as the majority of the Yezdi Parsis\nare not likely to become Beh\u0101\u012bs, it is a matter for congratulation that\nany European power that may have to solve the problem of establishing\ngood government in Southern Persia will find ready to hand a considerable\ncommunity of this intelligent and interesting people in at least one of\nthe Persian towns.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV\n\n    Results of Islam\u2014Untruthfulness\u2014Superstitions\u2014Pilgrimages\u2014\n    Divining\u2014_Jins_ and _d\u012bvs_\u2014The evil eye\u2014Trivial\n    commandments\u2014Entertainments\u2014Islam includes rather than\n    controls the life\u2014Two purposes better than one\u2014Ceremonial\n    uncleanness.\n\n\nIt is now necessary for us to touch on some aspects of Mohammedanism\nin Yezd with which it was impossible to deal fully while sketching the\nessential system. In the last chapter we were primarily dealing with\nthe religious ideas that had been brought to bear upon the country as\ninfluences, but in this chapter we shall speak rather more of their\nresults. First of all, I should like to give two stories. I give the\ntwo, because one is the account of a conversation which I had with a\nman who was not an orthodox Shiah; and, although I fancy I have heard\nsimilar remarks made by men whose orthodoxy was unimpeachable, it is well\nto be on the safe side. I had been challenged to give my reasons for\npreferring Christianity to Mohammedanism, and in reply I gave an account\nof a conversation I had had with another Mohammedan only a day or two\nbefore. I had been trying to show him that lying was a sin, and he had\nreplied to me: \u201cIt\u2019s all very well for Ferangis to say that; but the fact\nis that they can\u2019t tell lies, and we can.\u201d I quoted this story simply\nas bringing out very forcibly a common Persian idea, for Persians trust\nFerangis implicitly, not because they respect them, but because they\nbelieve they have a constitutional difficulty in telling lies. Having\nquoted it, I went on to say that as we all acknowledged in theory that\ntruth-telling was right, it was reasonable to infer that a religion which\nhad produced a mental constitution supposed to be incapable of falsehood,\nwas better than a religion which had produced the exact contrary. The\nanswer of the Mohammedan was that truth-speaking and honesty had nothing\nto do with religion, but were purely a matter of climate. \u201cIn that case,\u201d\nI said, \u201cthe people of Persia ought to speak the truth very well, for\none of the Greek historians who lived before the Mohammedan era declared\nthat the Persians were famous for speaking the truth.\u201d \u201cBut who does\nnot know,\u201d said the Mohammedan, \u201cthat the climate of a country changes\nentirely every two thousand years?\u201d\n\nAt another time a Mohammedan of undoubted orthodoxy was answering a\nsimilar position, only he was trying to explain away not only the\ndifference in honesty, but also in other matters. He said: \u201cThese facts\ncannot be denied, but they prove the truth of Islam, and not its falsity.\nIf you find that thieves have broken the doors and windows of a house, do\nyou not conclude that there is something worth stealing inside?\u201d I have\nreason to believe that this is a well-known retort, for other Europeans\nin other parts of Persia have been met by it. It is therefore well worth\nexamination. I myself find in it two assumptions which seem to me to\nbe peculiar features of Islam. First there is the assumption that the\npossession of the treasure gives no safety to the doors and windows:\nthat is to say that the possession of true religion does not in any way\nassist the keeping of God\u2019s commandments. The fact is that Mohammed\u2019s\ncommandment is not expected to be a source of spiritual strength, but\nonly a set of orders. Then there is the equally un-Christian assumption\nthat the keeping of the moral commandments of God is in no sense the\ntreasure, but something entirely extraneous to it, which is not essential\nto the state of the treasure-holder. These two assumptions are to be\nfound running through the whole of Persian Islam, and producing the most\nextraordinary results. Very few Mohammedans will hesitate to acknowledge\nthe low state of Mussulman morality as opposed to that of the Armenians,\nor even of the Parsis, whom they regard as little better than idolaters.\nIf a Mussulman of the teacher class has anything to gain by confessing\nor making it plain to an infidel that he has been guilty of gross sin,\nhe will not consider that he has in the least forfeited his claim to a\nsuperior position by doing so.\n\nOf course being non-ethical the religion becomes superstitious. The\nMohammedan considers that there is no known principle by which the\ncommands of the Deity can be connected and understood, consequently\nhe admits actions in his religious code which we should regard as\nridiculous. The whole theory of Mussulman pilgrimages is absurd, and\nthe practice is even more so. What can be more intrinsically foolish,\nas well as heartless and cruel, than the custom of sending off the old\nwomen, when they are past work, to some holy shrine, under the impression\nthat, if they die on the very difficult journey, as in a certain class of\ncases they generally do, they will go straight to Heaven? It is rather\na ghastly custom to send vast quantities of bodies for interment in the\nexceedingly inadequate space at Qum, over a country where there is no\nvehicular transport. But the natural demand for a more easy set of roads\nto Heaven has caused a multiplication of such practices as these far\nbeyond anything that was originally taught in the mosques. Things have\ngone so far in this respect, that the most popular edition of the Quran\nin Persia is a very minute round one in two parts, absolutely illegible,\nand only suitable for wearing in a sewn-up case.\n\nAs in most superstitious countries, we find a number of superstitions\nconnected with divining; and these are largely sanctioned by the mullas,\nwho will divine with the Quran in a mosque for a fee. The commoner form\nof divining is with a rosary, rather on the plan of \u201cTwo, four, six,\neight, Mary at the cottage gate.\u201d Persians use this to an extent that is\nhardly believable. They will consult the beads as to whether to send for\nthe doctor, and again, after he has come, to see whether they should buy\nthe medicine he prescribes, and finally, after buying it, they consult\nthem once more before deciding whether the patient shall take a dose.\nAt the same time it is quite permissible to \u201ccall threes.\u201d A woman with\nraging toothache got permission from the beads to send for a European\nlady to extract the tooth, but on taking the beads for the extraction\nafter her arrival they were unfavourable, so arrangements were at once\nmade for divining with the Quran at a mosque, which would of course\noverrule any result with the beads. A Persian will consider himself quite\njustified in breaking a business engagement if the beads tell him he had\nbetter avoid the interview; indeed very often he will not so much as fix\na date for the payment of a bill before he has consulted his almanac, and\ndiscovered which are the lucky and which are the unlucky days.\n\n[Illustration: CORPSES _EN ROUTE_ TO THE QUM CEMETERY.]\n\n[Illustration: SANDY DESERT NEAR YEZD.]\n\nThe vast empty deserts which surround Yezd, and the huge mountain ridges\nwhich form the horizon are to the Yezdi by no means empty. It is an\naxiom of science that Nature abhors a vacuum, and it is a corresponding\npsychological law that the human imagination cannot tolerate absolute\nemptiness. So the Yezdi, like the Arabian, peoples his deserts with\n_jins_ and _d\u012bvs_ and devils, and wherever there is a space not filled\nin he imagines strange forms of animal life. At the risk of being\nconsidered superstitious myself I must own that I should like to see\nsome of the travellers\u2019 tales of Persia more carefully investigated,\nparticularly those relating to the existence of very large lizards which\nare dangerous to human life. One is familiar with the defences that are\nbeing constantly brought forward for the fable of the sea-serpent; how\nthat the sea is after all an almost unknown waste, only crossed in a\nvery few places by well established water-roads that can be most easily\navoided; and although the desert cannot be said to afford as much cover\nas the ocean, for it is not possible to plunge below the surface at any\npoint at any time, still its vast expanses are almost as untraversed and\nunknown as the ocean wastes, and there are not a few places, especially\nin the mountains, honeycombed with caves and clefts. This however is\na digression. In such a country as I have described, with its vast\nand barren solitudes, it would be difficult for a people to exist and\nmaintain their reason, if they did not believe in something corresponding\nto the _jins_ and _divs_. Consequently we find _jins_ in the keyholes,\n_jins_ in the _qan\u2019ats_, _divs_ in the mountains, _divs_ in the rocks,\nanywhere, everywhere, a vast population filling up the huge interstices\nleft by Nature. Most of this population is malevolent; so naturally the\nordinary Persian is a mass of charms: nobody goes about without cold iron\nin his pocket, and a large number of people wear either the sacred book\nin its entirety, or large portions of it somewhere about their person.\nAlso they are terribly afraid of the evil eye; and numbers of their\ncharms, especially for the children, are directed against it. It is not\nthat they think the evil eye common: any Persian will tell you that very\nfew people have it, but they all know of at least one case, and they are\nterribly afraid of it, sometimes refusing to admit strangers to their\nhouse until they are satisfied they have not got it. If a mother sees\na dead body before the birth of her child, then, unless she takes the\nprecaution of placing some salt on the corpse, and afterwards putting a\nlittle of it in the child\u2019s eye, her child will inevitably have the evil\neye, and everything that is pleasing to its eye will be cursed. The evil\neye is likely to kill children of tender years, so very young children\nare always hidden under the _ch\u0101dar_ when carried in the street.\n\nThese superstitions are exceedingly general, and sometimes co-exist with\na certain amount of intelligence and education. I remember a man who\nhad obviously been in touch with some of the Persian mystics, and was\nquite capable of discussing and more or less understanding complicated\nideas, telling me that he considered that the silkworm owners in the Yezd\ndistrict were exceedingly wise in refusing to admit strangers to see\nthe worms. He explained to me that they were creatures of such extreme\nharmlessness and guilelessness that they were peculiarly susceptible to\nmalevolent influences from the outside world.\n\nSuperstitions of this kind will be found in all countries, and in most\nlands there are in addition superstitions that seem to be more intimately\nconnected with the religion. The nature of the country fosters the\ntendency in Persia, and the Parsis are nearly as superstitious as the\nMussulmans. But in Mohammedanism the peculiar difficulty is that there\nis nothing to guide a man in separating the superstitious practices from\nany connected with a central true idea. The whole religion is a medley\nof trivialities. The history of Mohammed and his early admiration for\nthe Jews, with whom he must have been constantly in touch, explains\nthis. He saw the result of their ceremonial law and their national\nreligious customs, binding them together and making them a peculiar\npeople in every action of their household life; but of the parabolic\nsignificance of this law, of the doctrinal system which governed it,\nhe saw and was taught very little or nothing. Nor did he want it: he\nwanted simply the political result, and in getting this he was eminently\nsuccessful. He copied the system, but he gave to Islam a maximum of\nordinances containing a minimum of teaching. After his death the minuti\u00e6\nwent on accumulating, until everything in the life of a Mussulman took\na religious colour. In Persia the very dress is supposed to be more or\nless modelled on that worn by the prophet. The people not only kill\ntheir animals and eat their food according to the precepts of the Quran,\nbut relying on their very extensive traditions they follow a prescribed\nreligious practice in attitude and language. Shiahs are particularly\nscrupulous about certain of their washings, and think almost as much\nabout them as they do about the regularity of their prayers. \u201cIf I\nbecome a Christian, when and how am I to wash myself?\u201d This is one of the\ncommonest questions for an enquirer to put to a missionary. Another very\ncommon one is, \u201cHow am I to dress?\u201d The Mussulman hardly understands you\nif you tell him that such points are left to the individual judgment.\nI remember a Persian trying to prove to me that I could not possibly\nconsider all meats lawful and ceremonially clean, or I should eat cat.\nIt is very difficult to explain to the Yezdi that the drinking of wine\nat meals is not a necessary Christian institution, and for this reason\nthe consideration of the necessity of maintaining Christian liberty is\nin Persia rather an argument for total abstinence than against it. In\nYezd we are continually being asked whether the commonest peculiarities\nof European custom, such as eating with a knife and fork, were ordained\nby Christ. In one house they had to make away with some kittens, and the\nservant was directed to dig a hole in the compound for their reception.\nWhile he was doing so he asked his mistress, \u201cDid your prophet direct\nyou to bury kittens?\u201d But the extreme point of triviality was reached by\na man who had seemed a most intelligent enquirer, and had asked me to\nexplain the essential points of Christianity, to which he listened most\nattentively, appearing to weigh them in his mind. When I had finished, he\npaused to consider the whole position: \u201c_Sahib_,\u201d he said very slowly,\n\u201c_man mas\u2019ala d\u0101ram_.\u201d\u2014\u201cSir, I have a religious question to bring before\nyou.\u201d I said, \u201c_Bifarm\u0101y\u012bd_.\u201d\u2014\u201cPlease proceed.\u201d \u201c_\u0100y\u0101 Mas\u012bh_,\u201d he said\nvery deliberately, \u201c_\u0101v\u0101z i s\u016btr\u0101 hal\u0101l d\u0101nist?_\u201d\u2014\u201cDid Christ consider\nhumming lawful?\u201d I reassured him on the point, and tried to explain the\nspiritual nature of Christ\u2019s teaching. I then left the room to get a\nbook, and, when I came back, he was humming to himself contentedly.\n\nReligion also provides the Yezdi with his entertainments and excitements;\nthe place of the theatre is taken by the Muharram miracle play, and that\nof the ordinary concert by the _r\u016bza kh\u0101n\u012b_ or religious recitation,\nwhile even street rioting is generally connected with the persecution\nof people who do not agree with the religious opinions of the rioters.\nAll this serves to strengthen the attachment of the common people to\nthe religious system, which stands to them in the place of country,\nstandard of etiquette, habits of life and code of cleanliness. As a\nmatter of fact religion is not quite the right term for the Mohammedan\nsystem, for religion means restraint, and the object of almost all of\nthe other systems called religions has been to present a predominant\nidea which is to govern and restrain all other ideas and aspects of\nlife. In Mohammedanism there is the predominant idea of the _tauhid_\nand _paighambari_, but this conception more resembles the central\ndoctrine of a philosophy than the governing principle of a religion.\nTo put it in other words, Mohammed sought by his theological teaching\nrather to include everything than to control everything. Consequently\nthe Mussulman, who reflects the spirit of his master much more than is\ngenerally allowed, is never satisfied with himself unless he is using\nreligious language. What he does matters comparatively little, but the\nway in which he regards his action matters a great deal. If he forgets\nto mention God\u2019s name, he corrects himself; but to his mind there is\nlittle or no blasphemy in connecting God\u2019s name with any action of life,\nimportant or trivial, good or bad. The result of this is that those who\nare accustomed to religions possessing more influence over moral action\nare amazed at the religiosity of the Mohammedan: but although this\nreligiosity is a fact, the whole wonder of it ceases when the religion is\ncarefully examined. Others are equally astounded at what they consider\nthe hypocrisy of the Mussulman; but this also is a misnomer: a Mussulman\nis not hypocritical: rather he has taken up a position towards affairs\nwhich renders hypocrisy unnecessary.\n\nIn Persia, at any rate, there is a further mistake which ought to be\nguarded against. Islam is not mere worldliness sanctified by the use of\nreligious terms: it includes a great deal of unworldly thought, although\nit combines all considerations, worldly or unworldly, with little if any\ndistinction. Still it must be owned that the worldly considerations are\napt to predominate, for the Persian Shiah seems to be a reflection of\nMohammed, who suggested that pilgrimages should be used for purposes of\ntrade, invited people to become Mussulmans for political reasons, and not\nonly winked at the making of converts by threats and terrorism, but laid\nthis down as one of the essential means for spreading the religion. It is\nnot sufficient to call such a system politico-religious, for it not only\nincludes matters of public expediency in the religious idea, but it also\nsanctifies considerations of expediency that are purely personal. Yet\nthere is one thing that the missionary in such a land as Persia cannot\ntoo fully realise; and that is that he is dealing with people who are not\nin the least ashamed of doubleness of motive. In their view, two purposes\nare better than one; and when it has been proved that their purposes are\nworldly, it has still to be considered whether there is not an unworldly\npurpose as well.\n\nMen frequently come to enquire about Christianity, drawn by what seems\nto us a strange mixture of motives. They naturally enough put their\nmore spiritual purposes first, for they realise that these are most\nappreciated by those to whom they talk, and they also consider that\nthings like this ought to have a theoretical priority. Temporal needs\nare, however, much more pressing, and these have just as much claim to\nbe satisfied by a new religion. Of course such a position is likely to\nbe fruitful, not only of the gravest difficulties, but also of the most\nlamentable misunderstandings.\n\nIt will be readily understood that a system like this can easily be made\nto cover ideas which appear inconsistent, and as a matter of fact, it is\nvery difficult to define some of the notions which Persian Shiahs hold\nto a point of fanaticism. For instance, there is room for considerable\ndifference of opinion as to how far the Yezdi regards the foreigner as\nunclean. The Mohammedan is taught to regard as unclean the eating of\ncertain kinds of food, contact with certain animals, and also contact\nwith the persons of people who have not been ceremonially cleansed. There\nseem, however, to be degrees of uncleanness. Mohammed in one verse of\nthe Quran declared the food of the Christians and Jews, as well as all\nfood that had been properly prepared by a Mussulman, to be lawful; but\nwe cannot suppose that he regarded these different classes of food as\nequally clean. Bigoted Persians sometimes ignore this permission of their\nprophet\u2019s, and declare that it refers only to dry food prepared by Jews\nor Christians; but in this they are not consistent, for they eat dry food\nprepared by pagans also.\n\nThe truth is that the attitude of the Persian towards the infidel is not\naltogether decided by Mohammed\u2019s direct teaching, but to a very large\nextent it is based upon an elementary human feeling which can be found\nin almost every country under the sun. Most people in England have a\nphysical shrinking from undue contact with other persons. We do not\ncare to drink out of a cup that other people have used, until it has\nbeen washed; we should, very few of us, care to take alternate bites at\nan apple with somebody else, and most Englishmen have a very similar\nobjection to kissing. We are much less particular about contact with the\nhand, though here also we feel that a line has got to be drawn somewhere.\nWithin the family we are less particular. Of course in connection with\nthese things there is in England a great deal of talk about infection and\nthe laws of hygiene, but the instinct exists apart from any notion of\nhygiene at all. Now in Persia you have got to remember that everything\ntakes a religious colour, and this has tended to slightly modify the\nnatural instinct, breaking down the wall of reserve within the boundaries\nof Islam, and giving the feeling the colour of a religious prejudice\nwhen applied to the outside world. Of course there are hundreds of Yezdi\nMussulmans who will eat freely with a European without the slightest\nscruple, and a still larger number who do not allow their scruples to\nmake any practical difference: at the same time people who wish to get\ninto close touch with the natives should remember that the feeling of\n_nij\u0101sat_, or ceremonial uncleanness, is a somewhat complex one, and that\nit will be more easy to overcome it if a certain discretion is observed.\nPersians eating the food of a European are on the look out for anything\nwhich is strange and peculiar, and if such peculiarities are observed\nthey naturally feel more strongly the difference between themselves and\ntheir host. This not only renders them less approachable, but it also\nmakes them much more shy of adopting Christian ideas, and in the case\nof enquirers, who, as I have said before, find it very difficult to\nunderstand that our customs are not all regulated by religion, a feeling\nmay grow up that the state of Christianity is not possible to a native\nPersian.\n\nAs this book is not about Mohammedanism but about the Yezdi, I have\nperhaps devoted as much space to the religion of Islam in Yezd as is\nwarranted by my choice of subject matter. At the same time there is\nno doubt that I have left out a great deal that might have been said,\neven without going into those details of doctrine and practice which\nit has been my intention to avoid. I have tried to give some idea of\nwhat Islam means to ordinary people in an ordinary Persian town, and\nI have had to dwell rather more at length on points where there was\ndanger of misconception either through too precise a study of the\naccurate doctrines of Islam, or through a too superficial view of the\nresult. In doing this I fear that I may have passed over too rapidly\nthe more familiar aspects of the religion, the intense excitement of\nthe spectators and actors at the Muharram games, the mourning for Hasan\nand Husain, the frenzied fanaticism of the mob after a rousing sermon\nat the mosques, and the close adherence of many Mussulmans to washing\nand prayers. This is one side of Shiah Islam, but as it is better\nknown I have attempted to give the other. I cannot, however, leave the\nsubject without reminding those who have to do with Persians of two most\nimportant things; first, that there is a real spiritual seeking amongst\nMussulmans, and that the presence of worldly motives does not preclude\nit; secondly, that there is real enthusiasm for their religion in spite\nof latitudinarian ideas. To the Mussulman, as has been before stated, the\nsystem of Islam is everything, and he clings to it as dearly as to life\nitself, for it represents to him every habit that he has formed, and its\ncause is the cause of every motive that he acknowledges to be possible.\n\n    The religious ceremonies which in Persia arouse the greatest\n    enthusiasm and fervour are essentially Shiah. The yearly\n    miracle play in the month of Muharram depicts the death of the\n    Imam Husain, son of Ali and F\u0101tima, and grandson of Mohammed.\n    This is the occasion of the most violent exhibitions of emotion\n    on the part of both players and spectators. Men lash their\n    naked bodies with chains in an ecstasy of frenzy, and the whole\n    crowd bursts into groans and tears of grief. Feeling runs so\n    high, and becomes so unmanageable on these occasions, that\n    the secular authorities have tried to keep the performances\n    out of the larger towns. But the atmosphere which is created\n    is not by any means anti-foreign in a general sense. The Imam\n    Husain was done to death by his co-religionists, and tradition\n    reports that a Ferangi ambassador interceded with Yaz\u012bd for\n    the martyr\u2019s life. This ambassador appears in the play, and\n    Persians often try to borrow an English saddle for his horse\n    from the European residents. At the performance at the big\n    village of Taft, which is near Yezd, I think the ambassador\n    was often dressed as a modern Englishman, but I cannot vouch\n    for this. At Yezd itself, the miracle play was not acted; but\n    the carrying of the Nakhl, a ceremony supposed to be fraught\n    with the same kind of danger, took place yearly. The Nakhl is\n    a huge wooden erection hung on one side with daggers, and on\n    the other side with looking-glasses. There are several Nakhls\n    in Yezd, and two are very large. This custom also is connected\n    with the death of the Shiah martyrs. The Nakhl is supposed to\n    be moved from its place in the square by the miraculous agency\n    of Fatima; but a good many people take it on themselves to\n    assist her. Lastly, there is a night set apart for the burning\n    of Omar, the usurping Khalif, and the carrying of the effigy\n    through the town is the occasion of extreme excitement. One\n    cannot help being strongly reminded of Guy Fawkes\u2019 day in\n    England. Omar, it must be remembered, is a Sunni saint.\n\n[Illustration: CARRYING THE NAKHL IN THE BIG SQUARE IN YEZD.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V\n\n    Character of the Yezdi\u2014Systematised inconsistency\u2014Loyalty\n    to causes and individuals\u2014Unreliability of\n    evidence\u2014Shame\u2014Humour\u2014Disregard of time\u2014Language\u2014Lack\n    of initiative\u2014Courage\u2014The Yezdi soldier\u2014Etiquette\n    and manners\u2014Triviality\u2014Pride\u2014Kindliness and\n    cruelty\u2014Dishonesty\u2014Difficulty in obtaining anything\u2014Tendency to\n    fatalism\u2014Latent strength of Persian character\u2014Family ties\u2014The\n    Jus Paternum\u2014Religious liberty\u2014Open-handedness\u2014Summary.\n\n\nIf it were not absolutely essential to the purpose of a book like this\nthat there should be a more or less detailed analysis of the character of\nthe Yezdi, I should certainly shirk making such an analysis. The Yezdi\u2019s\nfaults are numerous, glaring, and interesting. His virtues are not only\nfewer, but there is much less to be said about them. In the concrete man,\nthese virtues show fairly prominently, the vices have their peculiar\nhumour, and the whole is not unlovable. On paper, while discussing the\ndifferent points of the Yezdi\u2019s character one by one, it will be almost\nimpossible to convey the general effect made by the entire human being.\n\nWhen one first becomes acquainted with the Yezdi, one is inclined to\nregard him as so inconsistent in matters of morals as to be utterly\ndevoid of all principle, bad or good. There is the same uncertainty about\nhis actions that there is about the fall of an unloaded die. But just as\nthe fall of the die is regulated by the law of averages, so the actions\nof the Yezdi are more or less consciously decided by what can only be\ntermed systematised inconsistency, a kind of law of balance which seems\nto him to possess the merit of a principle. When he has done a certain\nnumber of good actions, which it must be confessed is frequently the\ncase, then it is time for him to do some bad ones; and _vice vers\u00e2_,\nwhen he has done enough bad ones, he comes back for a time to good ones.\nThis is partially the result of the theory of _savabs_; and the painful\nthing about it is that it makes moral trustworthiness impossible. If\na man holds this pernicious theory as it was sketched in a previous\nchapter, then the more he has done right in the past the more he will\nfeel justified in doing wrong in the future; and this in Yezd is no mere\nnightmare, but the literal fact. A good many of the Yezdis are frequently\nfair and straight in their dealings, but I do not know a single Mussulman\namong them, with regard to whom it would be fairly safe to depend on his\ndoing the right thing on any particular occasion simply because he knew\nit to be right. There are men whose ordinary habits are fairly good, but\nto a man who considers that derelictions of duty can be absolutely paid\nfor by past or future acts of merit not necessarily involving very much\ntrouble, the temptation to yield to slightly increased pressure is very\nstrong, and is likely to frequently overcome the bias of habit.\n\nOn the other hand, Persians have very strong notions of loyalty both to\ncauses and to individuals. Nothing has brought this out more than the\nhistory of the Babi movement, which has certainly exhibited the strength\nof Persian character. Boys and young men have in this movement willingly\nundergone the most terrible tortures in the service of their spiritual\nteachers and the common cause. It ought to be understood that the motives\nof the Babi martyr are not quite the same as those which have generally\ninfluenced the Christians who have died for their faith. The Christian\nmartyrs have generally died rather than do some act which they felt to\nbe sinful, or leave undone something which they regarded as essential.\nA large number of the Babi martyrs on the other hand have died because\nthey chose not to deny their faith, which according to their tenets was\nperfectly permissible to do. Now I know of at least one man, a Persian\nof high position, who was killed as a Babi, but who would have preferred\nembracing Christianity. What was his connection with Babiism I cannot\nsay: he would, I believe, have embraced Christianity had it not been\nthat he shrank from a religion where a direct denial of one\u2019s faith must\nalways be accounted sinful. Whatever he was, he certainly did not shrink\nfrom making his divergence from orthodox Islam dangerously plain, and in\nthis way he met his death. My purpose in mentioning the fact is to show\nthat it is most difficult to induce a Mussulman to accept a very hard and\nfast line. Of course the story is only an illustration and does not prove\nthe point, because there must have been other considerations which made\nBabiism, or a degree of unorthodoxy which passed for Babiism, easier to\nsuch a man than Christianity. It is not necessary to suppose that he was\nonly influenced by a dislike to unbending rules; for the inability to\never deny his faith might have exposed him to petty insults, which would\nhave been to him worse than death. Also his position as a Christian would\nhave been, humanly speaking, a more solitary one. Still, when all has\nbeen said, I am convinced that the constitutional dislike to a hard and\nfast rule played at least some part in bringing the man to his decision,\nand also that this dislike is more pronounced in the Mussulman Yezdi than\nin the Yezdi Parsi.\n\nA Persian who attaches himself to an individual will often prove himself\nvery trustworthy in all matters affecting that individual\u2019s interest; and\ngenerally speaking, attachment to a European would be likely to produce a\nmore dependable loyalty than attachment to another Persian. The feeling\nthat a European friend would always himself act in a certain manner\nfrequently leads a Persian to try and act in the same way towards him. I\nremember a Persian servant once replying to my wife, who had expostulated\nwith him on the subject of some egregious falsehood that he had just told\nin the bazaars, \u201cOf course, Khanum, I don\u2019t tell lies to you, for you\ndon\u2019t like it; but these people expect me to lie, and one couldn\u2019t tell\nthe truth to them.\u201d\n\nPerhaps one might go further, and say that the Yezdi Mussulman frequently\nquestions the virtue of keeping to an abstract principle, particularly\nwhen by abandoning it one might do a good turn to a friend. Impartiality\nis a thing which he absolutely fails to understand: indeed he considers\nit simply another name for disloyalty, and here it is probable that most\nother Easterns would agree with him.\n\nIt is impossible to treat the inconsistency of Yezdi Mussulmans as\nsimple weakness. It is rather the absence of such principles as Westerns\ngenerally possess than the inability to keep to them; and indeed it is\noften the result of other principles of a peculiar kind, diametrically\nopposed to those to which we are accustomed. The Yezdis are a free-handed\nfolk, and they despise a man who does not spend freely. They like to\nappear to live up to their incomes, and I think that some of them have a\nfeeling of the same kind about their debit and credit account with their\nCreator. Also we must not forget that Persian inconsistency is not always\na deviation towards wrong, but equally often a deviation towards right.\nThough in Persia it is never well to trust to a man\u2019s character, it is\nalways advisable to appeal to high principles, even when dealing with\napparently the most abandoned. While we were in Yezd we were brought into\ncontact with three men in high position, whose names it is not necessary\nto mention, but whom I would put down as the three worst prominent men\nin Yezd. The first was an aristocratic official, the second a cleric,\nand the third an official and a _nouveau riche_. Now each of these three\nat some time or other made himself conspicuous by conduct that one was\nbound to commend and approve. It is impossible to always analyse motives,\nbut in at least one case the action seemed to have been due to nothing\nbut a disinterested and unselfish impulse. In the other cases it is more\nprobable that expediency, or a conscious intention of paying for sins by\n_savabs_, entered into the matter.\n\nTo trace this peculiarity of the Yezdi\u2019s character to its source is not\neasy. Sometimes it appears to be a species of hedging, for it is very\ndifficult to find out the truth in Persia, and a general disbelief in\neverything may have led the Persian to feel that it is unsafe to stake\nhis all on one theory of the universe. The amount of lying that is done\nin a town like Yezd baffles description. An Englishman when in doubt\ntells the truth. A Persian when in doubt tells a lie. This would be more\ntolerable were it not that a Persian is always in doubt. In Yezd security\nis a thing unknown, and telling lies becomes part of the instinct of\nself-preservation. Then again the lies are of a new kind. Lies in England\nare generally told to deceive people in some particular; in Yezd they\nare just as frequently told in order to make the very search for truth\nimpossible. When I have had to examine into cases of petty theft amongst\nschoolboys, I have found that to get at the truth is an almost superhuman\ntask. English boys, if they do not tell the truth, will at least tell as\nfew falsehoods as possible, if for no other reason, to avoid being found\nout. Persian boys will not only lie on the subject they wish to conceal,\nbut they will tell as many untruths as they can cram into the story, so\nas to render any attempt at investigation futile. Of course you know that\nthey are lying, but, as they never imagine that you will suspect them of\ntelling the truth, they are not much deterred.\n\nThe result of this practice is that in the Yezd bazaars, taking together\nall statements, even the most trivial, that are made by Mussulmans,\nprobably not less than one-third of the speeches made are falsehoods. I\ndo not think that the Persian beggar ever expects to be believed. A woman\nonce came to the house, asking for a quilt because she had none, and her\nson was ill. To have no quilt, that is, to have no bed-clothes, is by\nno means an unbelievable state of poverty, and there is no doubt that\nthe woman expected to have her words taken literally. It transpired that\nher son was quite well, but was taking sanctuary to avoid being molested\nfor a debt. The woman had a perfectly possible quilt, but it was old and\npatched. She actually brought it to us the next morning, not to prove\nthat after all they were very poor, but to show that in saying she had\nnone she had spoken the truth. Another woman once told me in the street,\nthat she had six orphan children and her husband was sick.\n\nIn a country like this it is not surprising that evidence is at a\ndiscount, and that there are intelligent people absolutely convinced that\ntruth is unknowable. A man who is accustomed to act upon this theory in\nthe ordinary affairs of life, is naturally inclined to apply the same\nprinciple to whatever religion or philosophy he possesses. So we get\nmen who are unwilling to stake everything on anything in particular. If\nthey have previously assumed that it is most advantageous to do what is\nright, then it is well to perform just a few actions on the assumption\nthat it is more advantageous to do wrong. If they have hitherto acted on\nthe principle that it is better to do what is wrong, then it is well not\nto put all their eggs into that basket either. And indeed I am inclined\nto think that many of the Yezdis would apply the same philosophy to\ntheir non-ethical ideas. If they have based most of their opinions on\nthe assumption that something is true, it is well to base others on the\nassumption that the same thing is false. This, of course, sounds to us\nmere nonsense, but once grant with many of the Yezdis that evidence is\nvalueless, and truth absolutely unknowable, and it at once becomes an\napproximation to sense.\n\nIt is quite possible that some of my readers may ask whether this last\nattempt to explain the inconsistency of the Yezdis is to be taken\nseriously. To say that I do not know is rather a weak confession, but at\nthe same time it is true. I certainly do not pin my faith to it, yet it\nseems to be the way in which the bewildering topsy-turvydom of Persia\nis working. Never forget that the jokes of W. S. Gilbert are the facts\nof Persia. For instance, in an isolated place like Yezd, the laws of\nsupply and demand operate so peculiarly that the ordinary custom of\ndiscount on quantity is inverted; you will be able to get things usually\nsold at three for a penny at perhaps thirty for a shilling. There was a\ngovernor in Yezd, certainly not more than twenty years ago, who had men\nbastinadoed for walking in the bazaars without treading down the heels of\ntheir slippers. In such a country it is very difficult to say what is in\nitself ridiculous and impossible. One can only judge from evidence, which\nis, I think, in favour of the theory I have just suggested as a possible\nexplanation of undoubted facts. At the same time the unreliability of the\nYezdi is probably due to several causes, and there is one of these causes\nabout which one may speak with less uncertainty. This is the piecemeal\nappreciation of ideas and circumstances, which I have already mentioned\nas the result of the impression made on the Yezdi\u2019s mind by the isolated\nobjects which continually surround him, and which is probably heightened\nby a religion which was constructed under circumstances very similar to\nthose of the Persian deserts.\n\nShame is the feeling of vexation consequent upon the consciousness of\nhaving fallen below an accepted standard of conduct, and where such a\nstandard is not to be found, shame does not exist. Consequently the\nYezdi, who has only the faintest idea of a moral standard that ought to\ngovern his whole life, is not susceptible to shame in this particular.\nHe has, however, a rather stronger idea of a general standard of\nintelligence up to which he ought to live, so it is often a greater\ndeterrent to him to point out that a certain action will be regarded as\nignorant or silly than to show that it is less moral than his ordinary\nbehaviour. He also possesses a very keen appreciation of what he\nconsiders to be the ethical proprieties of a particular occasion. We must\nremember that what he lacks in breadth of view he makes up for in power\nof concentration on the comparatively small field of ideas that can come\nsimultaneously within the range of his mental vision. For example, when\nEuropean missionaries have been in vain attempting to simplify a most\nabstruse and metaphysical doctrine by spreading it over several easy\nsteps, they sometimes find that the Persian mind, though it utterly fails\nto grasp the simpler train of reasoning, can without any assistance take\nin the more difficult idea, so long as it is expressed with sufficient\nbrevity. In the same way the Yezdi, who seems to have little or no sense\nof the proprieties of a lifetime, will have an appreciation of what is\nright and fitting on a particular occasion stronger than that of the\nEuropean. This is what makes him so dignified at times and seasons, and\nso undignified in his life. Although his sense of propriety does not\nalways work, where it does work it is so far from being weak that to\nviolate it seems to give him a sensation that is near akin to physical\npain. You cannot make a Yezdi apologise: if he has done an injury, he is\nquite content to ignore it, or to assert that it has not taken place,\nwhich is the ordinary substitute for an apology in Persia: but the man\u2019s\nsense of shame is too great to allow him to confess to such an action\nbefore the man he has wronged. He has no objection to the man knowing\nwhat has happened; but at the interview his denial must be accepted or\nthe injury ignored. This is the only way in which he can submit to the\nmeeting.\n\nThe Yezdi has not a very fine sense of humour, but he is easily amused.\nPerhaps it is worth while to instance an occasion which occurred during\nour stay in Yezd when the natives seemed really tickled. A certain\nRussian doctor resident in the town, who had not a very complete and\naccurate knowledge of Persian, wanted to use bad language to his servant,\nwho had in some way offended him. As he knew no suitable expressions he\nseized the dictionary and kept looking them out one after another, and\nhurled them at the unfortunate man\u2019s head as fast as this process would\npermit. This story was retailed with very great appreciation by some of\nthe better class natives. I rather think it seemed to them very much more\nfunny than it does to us, and this for two reasons. Persians have a great\nrespect for literature, including dictionaries, and they would hardly\nunderstand their being frivolously handled; also they are very particular\nin adapting their language to the occasion, and it would strike them\nas the height of absurdity to abuse a servant in book language, as the\ndoctor must have done, unless indeed the Russian publication he consulted\ncontained real specimens of colloquial abuse, which would have struck the\nPersians as even more funny.\n\nThe story of Mulla N\u0101siru\u2019d D\u012bn and his mule is a very fair instance of\nPersian humour at its best. The Mulla, who was a notorious wit, had\nsent a mule to the market-place where such beasts were sold. People were\nsuspicious owing to the Mulla\u2019s reputation, but nobody supposed that he\nwould let himself down by sending an unsaleable animal to the bazaars.\nSo first of all someone examined its forelegs, and got badly pawed;\nthen someone went to its hind-legs and got kicked; next they looked\nat its mouth and got bitten; finally they tried to put saddle-bags on\nto its back, and it threw them off immediately. Consequently when the\nMulla strolled down everyone laughed at him, and asked him if he really\nexpected anybody to buy it. \u201cNo, my friends,\u201d said the Mulla, \u201cI never\nexpected any of you to buy it; but I wanted you to know what I have to\nput up with at home.\u201d\n\nOne of the things that is most difficult for a European to tolerate in a\nYezdi is his extraordinary disregard of time. It is not only that he does\nnot care how long he takes over a thing, one might tell story after story\non this point, but this is a malady common in the East. What I was not\nprepared for was that he should have no idea what time means. In Persia\na clergyman\u2019s work consists more of seeing people in his own house, and\nless of visiting; but the great difficulty in receiving visitors is that,\nif one wants to see parties separately, a single reception is all one can\nsatisfactorily arrange in an afternoon. This is what happens. Two parties\nsend to ask when they can see you, and you reply by asking when it will\nbe convenient for them to come. Both messengers state with the most\nabsolute politeness that it makes no difference to their masters when you\nsay, and that they wish you to choose the time. If you are wise you will\ntell one party to come two hours after noon, and the other to come at one\nhour to sunset, which, supposing the sun to be setting at six, will be\nfive o\u2019clock. They will both acquiesce, but you will have to be ready to\nreceive the party due at two at one o\u2019clock, and you must not consider\nthem late if they arrive at three. Similarly you will prepare for the\nsecond party at four, and not consider them late before six. But the\nprobabilities are that both parties will arrive at four, the favourite\nvisiting hour, having both decided on that time before sending to ask\nyou.[5]\n\nAnother great difficulty is the Persian language. Persian is a pretty\nlanguage with an extremely large vocabulary. What is more, every class\nof Yezdi, that is, of the men, uses a very large number of words.\nFor all this it is almost impossible to accurately define an idea,\nfor the language largely consists of synonyms, which cannot be used\nindiscriminately, but must be carefully selected according to the\noccasion. Some of these synonyms really possess accurate meanings, but\nif you choose your word according to the sense you wish to convey, you\ntalk bad Persian. To give an illustration of this, suppose in dealing\nwith the Incarnation you desired to bring out the Christian doctrine\nthat God is not only the Friend of man but also his close Companion. I\nam quite certain that in ordinary Yezdi Persian there is no sufficiently\nappropriate term for \u201ccompanion,\u201d that could be applied to God in such\na way as to bring out your meaning, without exposing you to a charge of\nirreverence. As a matter of fact I once tried to convey this idea in a\nPersian sermon, and was met with this difficulty. I afterwards tried\nto get three or four native Christians, one of whom was a teacher of\nPersian, to suggest a possible word, but the only expression they could\npropose was the word I had used.\n\nThe words one uses in a letter in Persian, even for the commonest\nobjects, are almost entirely distinct from the words one uses\nconversationally, and the words which one would use in an ordinary\nprose history book are again different. Then it is almost impossible to\ndistinguish the tenses; the true future is hardly ever used, consequently\nthe present and the future are indistinguishable; and the preterite is\nfrequently used of action which was begun in the past but which is still\ncontinuing. Lastly, the adjective is generally indistinguishable from\nthe substantive, and the link between an adjective and the term which it\nqualifies is the same as the sign of the genitive. For instance the text,\n\u201cThis is My beloved Son,\u201d may be read in the Persian Bible, \u201cThis is the\nson of My beloved\u201d without the slightest violence to the grammar; nor,\nindeed, is there any obvious way out of the difficulty. I have mentioned\nthese peculiarities of language because I think they are greatly\nconnected with the Yezdi\u2019s inaccuracy of ideas, though which is the cause\nand which is the effect is sometimes difficult to say.\n\nThere is no situation in which the Yezdi is so incalculable as that which\nseems to demand a certain amount of daring. Sometimes the people seem\nabsolutely wanting in the power of taking the initiative, and expect\nto be directed like children. They have an aversion to killing animals\nexcept for food, even when there is danger to human life in allowing them\nto live. One day an English lady asked why a dangerous dog which had\nbitten several people was not killed. The answer was, \u201cIf you tell us\nto kill it we will do so, but not otherwise.\u201d The fact is no one minded\nkilling the dog, but they fancied the curse might lie with the initiator\nof the movement. They will go on letting things be, or allowing them to\nget more and more dangerous, until they have accustomed themselves to\nan amount of risk to incur which would be accounted by a European mere\nfoolhardiness. In this they are largely influenced by predestinarian\nnotions. An English lady was one day standing by an open tank in a\nPersian compound, into which one of the children had fallen that morning,\nand she remarked on its extreme danger. \u201cYes,\u201d said the mother, \u201cI have\nlost three children in that tank.\u201d To build a small wall round such a\ntank would be in Persia exceedingly easy. Perhaps the little power of\ninitiative that is left them by their predestinarianism is destroyed by\nthe insecurity of the country. People get in the way of making as few\nimprovements as possible, and of never exposing their capital more than\nthey can help. In fraudulent business, however, there is a great deal\nof audacity, sometimes combined with a good deal of ingenuity. They are\nexporting at present to China a quality of so-called opium in which there\nis absolutely no morphia. The stuff is really an entirely different\nsubstance, and very cheap, and it is tied up in bags steeped in a\nsolution of opium. It is, I believe, more harmful to smoke than the real\narticle.\n\nPassive courage the Yezdi possesses to a very high degree, but he must\nhave a cause for which he cares sufficiently, if this courage is to be\ncalled out. If the terrible Babi massacres that have taken place from\ntime to time in Persia have proved nothing else, they have at least shown\nthat there is grit somewhere in Persian character. The way in which mere\nlads in Yezd went to their death in that ghastly summer of 1903 was\nwonderful. There was one boy whom they tried very hard to spare, for\nsometimes the mob were moved by something akin to pity. They took him\nto the _mujtahid_ first, and told him to recant, and he would not. Then\nthey took him to the open square, and held him up to give him one more\nchance, if he would curse the Beh\u0101u\u2019llah and the Beh\u0101\u012bs. \u201cThe curse be on\nyourselves,\u201d was all he said; and then they tore him in pieces. The early\nBabis showed good fighting qualities in the north of Persia, as well as\npassive courage, and, as they were chiefly townsmen, we may presume that\nthere are military possibilities in the Persian people, even amongst\nthose who dwell in cities. But to look for military feeling in the kind\nof soldier that we get in Yezd is not fair. He is, I believe, collected\nby a sort of conscription from certain localities. When collected he is\ntaught about as much of the ordinary elements of drill as is considered\nnecessary in England for the national schoolboy. He is also assigned a\nwage of a _toman_ a month, which if punctually paid would be insufficient\nto cover anything but the barest food expenses. This mistake is, however,\ngenerally remedied by his superior officers, who usually intercept so\nmuch of his wages that he is bound to look for other means of support.\nIn this he is not discouraged. If he has a little ready cash he usually\nsets up as a money-lender, his official position and possession of a\nbayonet assisting him to collect his debts. Otherwise he steals shoes,\nor takes up some other similar form of employment which does not demand\nan extensive capital; sometimes he even makes shoes. Once a year he\nis supposed to be supplied with a uniform, but, though the uniforms\nare probably not worth more than a few shillings, they are very seldom\nregularly supplied. He is, however, free to add to his uniform as well\nas to his pay, and at certain times of the year there is very little\nleft of the original outfit except an old cap with a metal badge, and\npossibly a belt. When on sentry duty he amuses himself by planting a\nsmall garden, four inches by two, in front of his station, and he keeps a\nheap of rose-heads to press into the hands of passers-by on the chance of\nextracting odd halfpence.\n\nDuring the latter days of the Babi massacres, a guard of four men, a\nsergeant and three privates, was placed at the doors of the European\nhouses by the Governor. Every soldier came to us with a thing that looked\nlike a gun and certainly had a bayonet attached to it; but we heard that\nat one house it became necessary to send down an extra weapon which\nwould shoot for the common use of the party. Of course the gun that would\nshoot was withdrawn at the earliest possible opportunity. The higher\nofficers of this extraordinary force are surprisingly numerous, but as\nthere are among them, I believe, boys of about twelve who hold the title\nof Field-Marshal, there is some excuse for a reduplication of officers.\nIt is only justice to add that some of these soldiers are in their way\nvery good fellows: the guard sent to our house were by no means a bad\nlot; and I shortly afterwards met a military officer whom I would class\nwith the best Persians I know.\n\nNor does the courage of Persia come out very strongly in the high\nofficial class, though here too there are honourable exceptions. Still,\nas a general rule, amongst those who claim nobility there is very little\napprehension of the maxim \u201c_noblesse oblige_.\u201d\n\nOf course there is in Yezdi manners and customs much that strikes the\noutsider as intensely funny. For instance, the etiquette is distinctly\npeculiar, and although very ceremonious, it does not always appear to\nthe European to be characterised by great politeness. When you come\ninto the room the first two minutes will be spent in phrases intended\nto convey an exaggerated respectfulness. In upper middle-class houses\nyour host will take upon himself the menial offices of service, not only\nmaking your tea himself, but going out of the room every two minutes\nto supplement the crockery, or to fetch another lump of sugar. If you\nhave a servant with you, your host or his other visitors will discourse\nfreely with this man before your face as to your most trivial personal\naffairs, and if there is a pause in the conversation they will make side\nremarks to one another on the number of your virtues, and when they have\ndiscovered a certain consensus of opinion, they will turn to you and give\nyou the benefit of it directly, by telling you that you are a very good\nman. From this you must not infer that Persian friendliness is hollow:\nall that can be said is that the etiquette is artificial. Even so it\nmeans something; for when a man is anxious to pay you proper respect he\nadheres to it closely, unless he has reason to suppose that you would\nlike him to adopt something of European manners, which some Persians\ndealing with Europeans try to do. However the etiquette is too elaborate\nand artificial for universal use, and generally speaking it is not much\nused except in matters relating to visits and to letter-writing. On other\noccasions Persians who have no intention of impoliteness are often a\nlittle off-hand as compared with other Easterns, and those who intend to\nbe rude find plenty of opportunities for being so.\n\nThere is, I suppose, between the Persian and the European a difference\nof opinion as to what constitutes puerility. One of the Governors of\nYezd once boasted to an English resident that it was no good trying to\nhide things from him, as he knew what every European in the town had\nfor dinner. Then there is the custom of making absolutely worthless\npresents with the most superb _empressement_. Once when I was in a big\nvillage near Yezd with my wife and baby and mirza, a woman whom my wife\nknew came in, and after greeting us presented us with four very crumpled\nlettuce leaves, selecting the leaves according to her ideas of our exact\nprecedence with the utmost care and circumspection, and having in the\nwhole transaction very much the air of a maiden aunt giving a tip to\na schoolboy. Nor must it be supposed that these customs only obtain\namongst the women. A European banker once told me that if one of his\nbrokers gave him anything, the others always followed his example; and\nthat once at the bank one of them presented him with a rose-head, the\nsecond at once plunged his hand into his pocket and produced an old\nsweet, the third fumbled among his treasures, and at last found something\nwhich looked like a lump of gum. He could not quite remember what the\nfourth presentation was, but he fancied it was another sweet. Sometimes,\nparticularly in Parsi houses, presents of this sort will be elaborately\nhanded about, somewhat after the fashion of a round game, everybody\ngiving something to everybody, and finishing with exactly the same amount\nas they had at the beginning. This game, however, is generally played\non a special occasion, and the presents of fruit and sprigs of myrtle\nhave a certain symbolical significance which gives grace and dignity to\nthe performance. Of course the interchange of presents which although\ntrifling have a positive value is one of the most striking features of\nthe social intercourse of Persia. This is a custom which needs to be\nunderstood, and which soon degenerates into extravagance, but essentially\nit is a good custom. A higher value is always placed on what are called\n_saugh\u0101ts_ or travellers\u2019 presents, and Europeans either travelling or\nresiding in Persia should remember that a certain number of these will\nbe expected of them. When a Persian has done you a real civility, he\nfeels that to a certain extent he has introduced you to his home, and\nany little European thing which you may give him he takes as a graceful\nintroduction to your separate life, and he values it from this point of\nview much more than would be otherwise possible. The custom, however, has\nits drawbacks; for it is the fashion in Persia always to present anything\nwhich a visitor has admired, and this becomes a peculiarly hollow piece\nof etiquette. Occasionally big Persians in dealing with inferiors use\nthis custom as a means of enriching themselves, but this of course is\nexceptional.\n\nWhen all has been said I think that we must admit that for some reason\nor other the Persian is willing to expend his energies upon things\nwhich seem to us to be absolute trifles. This was curiously illustrated\non one occasion by one of the Yezdi gentlemen who is supposed to have\nadvanced most in civilisation and culture. I was calling at his house\nat the time, and he handed me a most elaborate atlas with charts and\ndiagrams illustrating all sorts of out-of-the-way things. Some of these\nI did not feel myself competent to explain, but everything that I could\nexplain he understood at once, and he had obviously before my arrival\ndiscovered the meaning of many of the diagrams. We passed on from\nthis to discuss several of the great inventions of the age, including\nwireless telegraphy. In everything he showed a most intelligent interest,\nand great quickness of perception. Finally, he produced a photograph\nof a man who had been shown at an exhibition, I think at Paris. The\nman had an enormous beard, some twelve feet long. My Persian friend\nmade no difference at all in his manner, but discussed this peculiar\nphenomenon in exactly the same way. I cannot remember all the details\nof this interview, or the exact amount of smile which my host allowed\nhimself when we were discussing the photograph, but I have attempted to\nfaithfully convey the general impression left on me by his manner. I\nthink I am right in saying that it all points to the fact that the great\ndifference between Persia and Europe is that the Persian tends to take\nthings piecemeal, and the European to regard ideas in their relation to\nothers. At the same time this is not always at once obvious. A European\nis firmly convinced of the value of scientific knowledge, and will\ndecorate a man who has discovered all that is to be discovered about a\nblack beetle. Here the Persian will laugh at the European, as he also\nwill when the European rewards highly extreme excellence in the practical\ntrivialities of life. But it is obvious that these exceptions are more\napparent than real. The Persian is like a man who has got a pair of\nglasses that give him a very clear view of a very small field of vision.\nHe does not view things absolutely piecemeal, but he generally regards\nonly a very small area at a time. A man who picks up shells with an idea\nof adding to the general store of human knowledge is to him an imbecile;\nbut he is only willing to pay the same attention to an invention like\nMarconi\u2019s that he would to an improved hair-wash. The consequence is that\nthe Yezdi very soon adapts himself superficially to circumstances, and\nit is very easy to veneer him, but he does not easily assimilate fresh\nprinciples of action. In dealing with Persians it is well to realise\nthis, and not to build too much on their adaptability.\n\nA Persian visitor, when he is behaving according to strict etiquette,\ndepreciates not only himself but all his belongings. It has been\nsuggested that the admiration which is frequently expressed for foreign\ncustoms and ideas is really due to this etiquette, and similarly that\nthe belittling of Persia as a country that has gone to pieces is due to\nthe same cause. This suggestion is, I believe, entirely incorrect. A\nYezdi will belittle himself, his house, his relations, and the country\nof Persia, because he regards the first three as purely personal, and\ndoes not care the least bit about the fourth; but if he belittles his\ntown, his etiquette, or the foundations of his creed, he will make it\nvery plain that he expects you to understand that he simply does it out\nof civility. There is one thing that a Yezdi puts before everything,\nand that is the water-supply of his town. I personally got on very well\nwith the Yezdis, although I had to own that I did not admire Mohammed\nor his religion. But another European, who openly stated that he did\nnot approve of their water, succeeded in absolutely alienating their\naffections. These exceptions show that Yezdis are willing to exhibit\ntheir pride in what they really love. They are also very proud of their\nliterature, their language, and their intelligence. As a matter of fact,\nconsidering their extreme ignorance, they are not a conceited people, and\ntheir willingness to adopt foreign things more or less points to the same\nconclusion. Some of them, and these are generally the most ignorant, are\ninsufferably conceited, but as a rule their comparative freedom from this\nvice makes them peculiarly likeable.\n\nThe nearest approach to a moral principle that I can find amongst the\nPersians is their commendation of simple acts of kindness. As I have\nbefore mentioned the idea of _savabs_ covers many actions which have no\nethical point, and it fails to cover in the Persian mind many actions\nof a moral character where the benefit is not at once apparent. But\nYezdis are brought up to admire simple and direct acts of kindness, and\nto enjoy doing them. Generally speaking, they are very good-natured,\nand in nothing is this so obvious as in their conduct towards children.\nOf course cases of gross cruelty to children come to one\u2019s notice\noccasionally, but they are after all the exception and not the rule,\nand the children are more often spoilt by weak indulgence. The Yezdi\u2019s\nconduct towards animals very well illustrates his character. I believe\nthat there is less wanton cruelty, particularly towards wild animals,\nthan you would find in a European town. On the other hand, the cruelty\ntowards working beasts is beyond description, there being in this case\nan ulterior object. Again, the dogs in the street, which are more or\nless under the ban of the Mussulman religion, are treated in the most\nextraordinary way. They are made the recipients of little acts of\ngood-natured kindness, perhaps under the impression that a _savab_, even\nto a dog, cannot do any harm, perhaps because a Yezdi is often better\nthan his ideas. They are also treated on occasions with the most fearful\ncruelty, and the cruelty in this case has no point but the satisfaction\nof a religious prejudice. This is, after all, exactly the way in which\nthe Yezdi Mussulman treats the human being whom he considers unclean. He\nhas alternative principles which he chooses according to his mood and\ncircumstances. Sometimes the prejudice against killing animals gives rise\nto very great cruelty. It is generally considered a sin to kill an animal\nexcept in self defence or for food, but you may do anything to it short\nof extinguishing life with your own hand.\n\nTo sum up, in the case of offences against the person Yezdis have an\ninkling of an ethical principle, which is frequently at issue with the\nmore explicit teaching of their religion. This seems to me to be one\nof the most hopeful points in Persian character, and one which the\nmissionary ought to most carefully study, trying to make it in many cases\nthe basis of his appeals. But we have to beware of trading too much\nupon this very rudimentary principle. When we come to offences against\nproperty, we shall find it applied much less frequently, and working with\nmuch less force. There is no inclination to honesty in a Mussulman\u2019s\ncharacter to correspond with the inclination to kindly action. If you\nwant to find anything of this kind you must go to the Parsis. On the\ncontrary, there is nothing that gives the Yezdi Mussulman such intense\nsatisfaction as the feeling that he has scored by his wits. He would\nmuch rather steal one _kran_ than earn two by the same expenditure of\neffort. A certain amount of dishonesty is recognised, and is not in any\nway resented. The servants, for instance, expect to make a certain profit\nupon all transactions. The extent of their profit is by custom left\nentirely to the conscience of the servant, but everybody would confess\nthat taking more than a certain amount was wrong. You will frequently\ncatch less trustworthy servants trying to make over fifty per cent., and\nsometimes over a hundred. As to the morality of this custom when the\nlowest possible percentage is drawn I can only say that I am not wholly\nconvinced, as it appears to me that servants who are trying to live a\nstraight life never ask for it to be sanctioned, and sometimes certainly\ngive it up, at any rate in its direct form. But the point is that wages\nare generally arranged on a scale that allows for a man taking very much\nmore than the minimum percentage. Nor is this sort of allowance for\ndishonesty only made in servants\u2019 wages. One day the cook of one of the\nEuropeans went to the bazaars for meat, and after the usual haggling the\nprice was fixed at twelve _krans_ a _man\u2019_ (thirteen pounds), \u201cBut,\u201d said\nthe cook, \u201cyou have got your thumb on the scale.\u201d \u201cAnd do you think,\u201d\nretorted the butcher, \u201cthat I am going to give you meat at twelve _krans_\na _man\u2019_, unless I keep my thumb on the scale?\u201d This shows you something\nof Persian business principles, and indeed trickery is regarded by all\nPersians as part of the ordinary routine of life. Our servant once asked\nthe milkman if he could sell us some cream, and the man replied quite\ngravely, \u201cNo, if I take off the cream they will complain of the milk.\u201d He\nobviously thought that the natural way to supply us with cream would be\nto skim the milk he sold us.\n\nPassing to the merchant class the opium trade affords a good instance\nof the most barefaced type of wholesale fraud. Indeed, the fraud of a\nPersian town is beyond conception. We had a neighbour in Yezd who was\nconsidered a fairly respectable man, and whose sole business was the\nforging of seals. But the fact is that every class, from the highest to\nthe lowest, is thoroughly permeated by the leaven of dishonesty.\n\nThere is so little security for property in Persia that men do not\nconsider it worth their while to amass wealth by ordinary means.\nEverybody in a town like Yezd is trying to effect a _coup_, either a big\none or a small one, and one of the results is the most extraordinarily\nrapid shifting of social positions. In Persia the road from beggary to\nprincedom is a very short one, and the road from princedom to beggary is\nnot very lengthy; only in this return journey it is somewhat difficult to\nprevent being assassinated, for when a big man is disgraced his life is\nin extreme danger.\n\nThis inattention to ordinary and petty business enterprise has curious\nresults. When I first went to Yezd I found it almost an impossibility\nto get the things I wanted from the bazaars. The European has to deal\nwith the bazaar through his servants, and it took my men about three\ndays to get the commonest articles other than necessary provisions.\nArticles which I knew would need a little hunting for were sometimes,\nif I insisted, procured within the month. This is absolutely without\nexaggeration; and, although I believe I was unfortunate, other residents\nand travellers in Persia have confessed to similar difficulties. You may\ngo into a town where the chief occupation is weaving, and declare that\nyou want some of the woven articles which it is their principal business\nto make, and it is very possible that you may be unable to procure them,\nor only able to get the most inferior specimens, if you are passing\nthrough quickly. This is rather less true of the larger places on the\nmain roads, like Tehran and Isfahan, but in towns like Yezd there is the\ngreatest difficulty in getting what you want.\n\nIn an emergency it is frequently almost impossible for a European to\nget what is needed, if the things required are not such as he has been\naccustomed to buy at other times. To offer rather more than the price one\nusually gives is not of much use, and frequently has the very reverse\neffect to what is intended; for the seller in such a case may decide to\nforego the profits of legitimate trading for the chances of effecting a\n_coup_. But the real difficulty is rather that the retail trading of Yezd\nis totally devoid of ordinary enterprise. When the trader moves out of\nthe ordinary rut of his every-day commerce he prefers to be fraudulent.\nIn his customary business the shop-keeper makes a fair profit, and\nalthough his dealings may not be very extensive, there is always the\nchance of something really good coming his way. Meanwhile he has a\nposition very much more dignified than that of the English shop-keeper.\nIn Yezd the seller, not the buyer, is the conferrer of the benefit, and\nso far as the relation is concerned, the superior. When he sells very\nsmall quantities, he often charges less than the usual price. When he\nsells large quantities, he frequently charges something extra. Europeans\nin an ordinary way have not much difficulty in getting regular supplies\nwhen they become well known, though they have to pay more for them than\nthe natives do. An Armenian also has to pay more than a Yezdi, but less\nthan a European. I am inclined to think that the poorer natives suffer\nfrom the difficulty of procuring on emergencies things which they do not\nordinarily buy quite as much as ourselves, though probably the richer\nPersians have more facilities. This is just one specimen of the inertia\nof Yezd. In matters of transport one is even more in the hands of other\npeople. It is extremely difficult to find transport at less than three\ndays\u2019 notice, and one can seldom get off on a journey within two hours\nof the time arranged. During the journey there is the same difficulty\nin controlling affairs. Under such circumstances people naturally get a\ntendency towards fatalism, and undue persistence even gets to be regarded\nas a sin. Probably this has some effect on the religious conceptions of\nthe people, for, if a man who sticks to his point is not to be admired,\nit is difficult to understand why we should consider unchangeableness\nof purpose a necessary attribute of the Deity. Whatever may be the\northodox doctrine of Islam upon the subject, there is no doubt that the\nYezdi fails utterly to understand why there should be any persistence or\nconsistency in the view taken by the Deity of human sin, for the Yezdi\nhimself would hardly feel justified as a father, or person in authority,\nin taking a similar firm stand. One of the consequences of this doctrine\nis that weakness is hardly accounted a sin at all. I remember two\nconversations with Babi mullas in which this came out very forcibly.\nThey tried to argue that _taq\u012bya_, that is, the custom of denying one\u2019s\nfaith under the stress of danger, was sanctioned in the gospels by the\nstory of Peter\u2019s denial. I have also found other Persians who have\ndisputed the sinfulness of Peter\u2019s action, on the ground that he was the\nvictim of compulsion. But the most curious suggestion with regard to the\ndefensibility of weak conduct was made by another party of Babi mullas,\nwho considered that the difference between the forbearance of Christ\ntowards His enemies and the impatience exhibited by Mohammed was fully\naccounted for by the respective lengths of their ministries.\n\nOne finds the marks of this want of persistence everywhere. I have seldom\nseen a tombstone in Yezd that has been finished accurately, and there\nis scarcely a building that has not got a rough, unfinished corner.\nSimilarly every one who has seen a Persian carpet knows that the design\nis almost always broken in at least one place.\n\nI suppose the _prima facie_ conclusion is that the Yezdi is the weakest\nof weak beings, but I am very doubtful whether this conclusion is true.\nRepose and weakness are two different things, and although we seldom\nfind the Yezdi putting out his strength, the condition of the country\nis hardly such as to rouse him. Certainly in the sphere of morals the\nYezdi\u2019s religion gives him very little inducement to a consistent life.\n\u201cThe Light That lighteth every man that cometh into the world\u201d is not\nwanting in Persia. Sometimes it makes Mussulmans superior to their creed,\nbut, if I may be allowed to express an opinion, I think this Light\noperates more in calling men out of Islam than in guiding them in it.[6]\nI should hesitate to make a similar statement about the Parsis. It is not\nmy intention to discuss Zoroastrianism at length, but although it is a\nreligion without a gospel, almost all the essential ideas about God, and\nright and wrong, and the bases of human action are undoubtedly true so\nfar as they go.\n\nIf one wants to know whether the Yezdi Mussulman is strong or weak, one\nmust examine his conduct when he is sure of his cause. I think he is\nworthy of some praise for the self-restraint he habitually shows when he\nis conforming to the by no means easy restrictions of an established and\nelaborate etiquette. But, as I have previously said, the thing which has\nopened people\u2019s eyes to the enormous strength of Persian character under\npartially favourable moral conditions, is the way in which the Babis have\nexposed themselves to martyrdom, and have stood firm to their beliefs and\ncause under tortures too horrible for description. It has been mentioned\nthat, although Yezdis, while they remain Mussulmans, do not show any\ngreat enthusiasm for a distinction between right and wrong, they still\npossess the greatest powers of loyalty both to causes and to individuals.\nIn their affection for those for whom they care they are anything but\nweak, and when they really attach themselves to Christianity and realise\nthe personal presence of Christ, they develop an unexpected strength of\ncharacter. We must, however, beware of expecting an utter change of\nconstitution to take place at the time of conversion.\n\nA Yezdi\u2019s personal attachments do not run so closely along the lines of\nduty and relationship as might be expected by people coming to Persia\nfrom other Eastern countries. The family tie is not always a very strong\none, though it is sometimes exceedingly strong. Perhaps one reason for\nthis is the extreme looseness of matrimonial relations. A Shiah may\nhave four regular and permanent wives. When he marries, a settlement is\nmade on the woman, who may be divorced at any time if he cares to pay\nthe settlement. The woman may also divorce her husband, if she cares\nto forfeit the settlement, that is if she is sufficiently mistress of\nher own movements to be able to make the necessary arrangements. There\nis no limit to the number of divorces and re-marriages, so long as no\nman possesses at any time more than four wives. Besides these he may\nhave as many temporary wives as he likes. It is true that these wives\nare theoretically only slaves, but this, after all, is simply a legal\nquibble. They can be married either for a few days or for a few years.\nBabis may only have one wife, and divorce is discouraged, though amongst\nthe less respectable Babis in Yezd divorce is as common as anywhere.\nSome of the more respectable Mussulmans in Yezd openly profess a belief\nthat monogamy is the more respectable state, and among the better Yezdi\nmerchants it is very common. Girls are sometimes married extremely young,\nfor instance at nine or ten, but there is a growing feeling that to marry\na very young child is not altogether respectable, and some of the better\nclass merchants prefer not to let their girls be married before fourteen.\nOf course this is an unsatisfactory state of things, but one must not fly\nto the conclusion that there is no affection in Persian marriages. One of\nthe missionaries had a lad of about eighteen in his employment, and there\nhad been talk of a marriage between him and a child of ten or twelve.\nGoing home one evening for his night off, he found that he had landed in\nthe middle of his own marriage ceremony, which took place that night. He\nwas a good-natured lad, fond of children, and the little wife was devoted\nto him and was terribly distressed at his not coming home the next night,\nfor she had got everything ready for him, and would not believe he was\nnot coming. When one of the ladies from the missionary\u2019s house went to\ncall on her some days after she came very close up and whispered that she\nwanted her husband to come home every night.\n\nThe women of the highest official class are kept very close in Yezd,\nperhaps only going out once in six months, except to the bath; but the\nmerchants\u2019 wives have considerably more liberty, and the commoner women\ngo about freely. Sometimes there is a great deal of real affection in\nthe home, at other times exceedingly little, especially when there is\nmore than one wife, and sometimes there is the grossest cruelty. The\nfact is that Persians are led by impulse in these matters. They are very\nslightly constrained by any feeling of principle. As a class perhaps\nthe old mothers are the worst treated, and an old woman generally\nprefers going to her daughter rather than to her son. One of the richest\nmerchants in Yezd had an old mother who was very ill, and he refused\neven to buy a chicken to make the broth the doctor had ordered. At last\na favourite black slave wheedled one out of him, and made the broth for\nthe old woman. Slaves in Persia are very valuable and are generally well\ntreated. On the other hand, another well-known merchant and landowner,\nwhose old mother-in-law was very ill, thought nothing too good for her;\nhe insisted on her having all she wanted promptly, and came himself to\nher room at least once a day to enquire after her health. The same man\ntook a personal interest in seeing that every provision was made for\nthe comfort of his old cook when she was past work, and the general\ntone of the household was one of affection and consideration. Another\nbig merchant, whose old mother had fallen off a roof, showed the very\ngreatest solicitude for her comfort in every possible way, spending hours\nwith her, and himself lifting her most carefully. At the same time the\nold women as a class are not well treated, and in the better class houses\nit is often difficult to distinguish them from the servants. The poorer\nclasses are generally no better. I remember that at one time my wife was\ntrying to explain to one of my servants\u2019 wives what ingratitude meant.\nThe woman was very fond of her children, so my wife asked, \u201cWould you\nnot think it very ungrateful, if, when you were old and poor, your boy\nrefused to do anything for you?\u201d \u201cNo,\u201d she said, \u201cof course that is what\nI expect. Our boys are always like that. We only say, \u2018It is the will of\nGod.\u2019\u201d Several women present joined in the laugh at my wife\u2019s ignorance.\n\nOf course a great deal of cruelty goes on in the less respectable Persian\nhouseholds, and the use of poison is not uncommon. It should be explained\nthat in Persia people who are not even professedly respectable are to\nbe found in every class, and in a commercial town like Yezd status goes\nlargely by wealth, and carries with it no obligation to keep up even a\nsuperficial reputation. The organisation of the household is very largely\noutside the operation of the ordinary law. I do not know what is the\nexact legal limit of the _jus paternum_, but I am quite sure that it is\nvery difficult to bring to book the head of a household for murdering\nany member of his family. Also in the case of a member of the family\nleaving Islam, the matter would probably be primarily left to the head of\nthe household, although if the case was flagrant the matter might also\nbe taken up by outsiders. It is very necessary to understand this when\ndiscussing the possibility of religious liberty in Persia. Religious\nliberty, proclaimed by a firman of the Shah, would not have the enormous\nvalue which is sometimes supposed. Indeed it would be almost entirely\nwithout immediate value, unless the Persian government were considerably\nstrengthened, and a limitation put on the _jus paternum_. A decision by\nleading _mujtahids_ that it was expedient to give such liberty either\nto the individual or to the family, would probably have more immediate\neffect, but, even were such a thing possible, it would be difficult to\nsay how long such a decision would remain unchanged if advantage was\nreally taken of it, and the precedent of the decision would on the whole\nbe rather a bad one.\n\nAnother conceivable form of religious liberty is that the right of\nmaking converts from Islam should be secured by treaty to the European\nmissionary. This, however, would not put a stop to the persecution of\nconverts. There is so much injustice that is done in Persia as a matter\nof course, that it would be very difficult to prove that Persian subjects\nwho were converts had been interfered with for religious reasons. One\nof the difficulties that missionaries experience at present, is that\nconverts are always bringing forward instances of injustice which they\nthemselves believe to be due to their profession of Christianity, whereas\nthe missionary, who has considerable doubts on the subject, is often\nafraid of calling down real persecution by using his influence on their\nbehalf.\n\nThe subject of religious liberty is a very difficult one, and although\nsome people feel that an extension of treaty rights would be a good\nthing, and others, that a firman of the Shah giving religious liberty to\nhis subjects would help the growth of sound and civilised ideas in his\ndomain, there can be no doubt that the primary want is strong and good\ngovernment. I have tried in this chapter not to discuss the government\nof Persia more than is absolutely necessary. It is of course far from\nperfect. At the same time, during my stay in Yezd, the governors of the\ntown, and notably the Jal\u0101lu\u2019d Daula, showed great friendliness to the\nwhole European colony, and great fairness in their attitude towards the\nmission. The strengthening of the Persian government is a clear gain\nto the missionary, and seeing that strong government without religious\nliberty could certainly do for us infinitely more than religious liberty\nwithout strong government, I personally feel that the strengthening\nof the Persian government, central and local, is at present the main\ndesideratum. At the same time, with God all things are possible, and I\nshould hesitate to press this view on other people.\n\nOne or two instances of the lengths to which crime can go in Persian\nhouses without arousing much notice from the authorities might be\nrecorded. There was in Yezd one man who stabbed his own child in\nits mother\u2019s arms, and remained absolutely unpunished. He was still\nflagrantly ill-treating his wife and children while we were in the\ntown. In the Isfahan district, a man murdered his child-wife by pouring\nparaffin over her and lighting it. The child died in the Julfa hospital.\nIf any punishment was inflicted it was a very light one. There was\nanother woman in Yezd dangerously stabbed by her son-in-law, but as she\ndid not die, even her family took very little notice of the matter. These\nare a few typical specimens of the way in which the family is allowed to\nmanage, or mismanage, its own affairs.\n\n[Illustration: SQUARE OUTSIDE GOVERNOR\u2019S RESIDENCE IN YEZD.]\n\nGenerally speaking, Yezdis are open-handed. They have not the least shame\nabout begging, and will show the greatest meanness in money-getting, but\nthis does not prevent their being themselves generous at times. The fact\nis, that they regard beggary as a bargain; one man gets a coin, and the\nother a _savab_. They accept kindnesses of any sort in this manner, and\nconsider that they give as good as they get, particularly if they are\nSeyids; but for all this, they are frequently ready to take the other\nside in the game. Probably not less than ten per cent of the population\nare professional beggars, and as they do not starve, we may conclude\nthat a great deal of money is given away. But the open-handedness of the\nYezdi takes other forms besides the mere giving of money to those who ask\nfor it. He spends money freely upon his own pleasures: considering his\npoverty he lives well: this is true of all classes: finally, he really\nenjoys showing hospitality.\n\nThere is in Persian hospitality a great deal more than the observance of\netiquette. Even the inquisitiveness of the Yezdi is a kind of attempt\nto get into real touch with his guest. In a word, he is essentially\nhuman. Most Europeans who have lived in Persia find it rather difficult\nto explain why they like the people. In the Yezdi there is certainly\nmuch to lament, but there is something to admire, and very much more\nto like. A people who are open-handed, good-natured, affectionate, not\nalways extravagantly conceited, and above all, intensely human, are\na people one cannot help getting to like when one lives among them\nfor any time. At the same time, their inquisitiveness, unpunctuality,\nintense dishonesty, frequent ingratitude, and absolute want of principle\nin everything, are, to say the least of it, very trying. As to their\nexact position in the scale of civilisation, my personal opinion of\nthem greatly changed after living through the Babi massacre of 1903. To\nfind men, and women too, who had been to a certain extent influenced by\ncontact with Western ideas and standards, and who prided themselves on\nrepresenting the section of Persian Society most advanced in civilisation\nand refinement, openly gloating over horrors that would pollute these\npages if I were to write them, seemed to us to be an indication of a more\nradical difficulty than was evidenced by the horrors themselves. At the\nsame time, the behaviour of the Babis under persecution was sufficient\nto convince any one that there is plenty of strength in the Persian\ncharacter, if only it can be called out.\n\nMy conclusion is that it is unfair to the Yezdi\u2019s character to in any way\ndepreciate the evil effects of the circumstances among which he lives.\nHis want of principle, his ferocity, and other similar points in his\ncharacter can most of them be traced to a religious system which was\nforced upon him by the sword; for we must remember that he is four-fifths\na Parsi, and only one-fifth an Arab. The good points in his character\nare much less easy to trace to his religion. He is not indisposed to\nreform, a fact which is proved by the success of the Babi movement, the\npossibilities of which have been discussed already.\n\nUnder these circumstances one can hardly imagine a country where the\ncall to Christian missionary work was so peremptory, both because of the\nneed and because of the peculiar opening afforded. Missionary work must,\nof course, be based rather upon the direct commandment of the Saviour\nthan upon human judgment. However, there is no doubt that God sometimes\naccentuates His written commands by placing peculiar circumstances before\nour eyes, and I cannot conceive places appealing more strongly to the\nintelligent student of the missionary field than these isolated towns of\nPersia, one of which I have attempted to describe.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI\n\n    Difficulties in dealing with enquirers\u2014Language\u2014Argument\u2014Parabolic\n    interpretation\u2014Distrust of evidence\u2014Ignorance\u2014Attachment to\n    Islam as representing whole scheme of life\u2014The problem of\n    converts\u2014Industrial missions\u2014Employment by missionaries\u2014Helpful\n    points\u2014Readiness for religious discussion\u2014Quickness in\n    grasping single points\u2014Yezdi wants distinctive and systematic\n    teaching\u2014And a concrete example\u2014Difficulties in accepting\n    converts\u2014Tests.\n\n\nFrom what has been previously said it will be understood that from the\nmissionary point of view there are, when dealing with the Persian,\ncertain peculiar difficulties, and also certain things which tend to\nmake missionary work more easy. We have to deal with a people whose\nfundamental notions of God and of His dealings with men are absolutely\ndifferent from our own. I am not now so much speaking of those tenets on\nwhich the Mussulman loves to dwell, but rather of those tenets of which\nhe does not think it necessary to speak, which are not so much the\nobjects of his faith, but rather indisputable facts which stand outside\nthe sphere of faith. The difficulty is not so much that the Persian\nis repelled by our holding contrary ideas; he cannot believe that we\nhold them; and indeed it is a serious difficulty that in accepting the\nPersian language we often unconsciously admit the very Mussulman ideas\nwhich we intend to attack, and give to the Persian premises upon which\nhe can build his whole argument. To give an illustration; a Persian\nenquirer will say to the missionary, \u201cOf course you allow that Moses\nand David were prophets?\u201d The missionary will probably admit this. Now\nif the Persian has used the most ordinary term for such prophets, that\nis, the term _paighambar_, he will naturally suppose that the missionary\nhas admitted the following: first of all, that God sends from time to\ntime men who are appointed by Him to reveal a new law of human action,\nwhich, so far as the moral commandments are concerned, has no necessary\nconnection with previous revelation; secondly, that Moses and David gave\neach of them a sufficient direction to the peoples of their day to enable\nthem to apprehend salvation. In all probability your Mussulman friend\nwill assume that you have granted even more; for instance, that Moses and\nDavid were both of them commissioned to invite everyone they came across\nto accept their religion; and I should be sorry to say that you would not\nhave been supposed to have made other still more impossible admissions.\n\nI do not think that it would be possible to avoid this difficulty by\nextreme scrupulosity in accepting terms. The result of such hesitation\nwould probably be to puzzle and perplex the sincere enquirer who was\ngenuinely anxious to find out what Christianity really meant. A more\npossible way out of the difficulty is to take the first opportunity\nof stating the difference between Mussulman and Christian belief upon\nthese subjects, and I shall perhaps be pardoned for suggesting that such\nmatters ought to be thoroughly thought out beforehand. There are a good\nmany terms that we use in the present day, such as \u201cperpetuity of the\nmoral law,\u201d and \u201ccontinuity and growth of revelation,\u201d which require very\ncareful analysis before they can be presented to minds which have not\nbeen accustomed to the ideas they represent. I have previously compared\nthe mind of the Yezdi to a field-glass of very small range and high\npower, and have pointed out that the man possessing such a glass sees\nvery clearly within a limited area. The Yezdi is utterly different from\nthe European. The latter looks for a generally consistent system, and,\nknowing how difficult it is to get such a thing, he is content to find\ncertain points where the agreement has not been thoroughly worked out.\nThe typical Yezdi expects a much more clearly worked out conception of\nthat small number of points which are at one time presented to his range\nof vision. But when he has turned his glasses in another direction the\nfirst set of ideas is blotted out, and the second group as a whole may\nbe absolutely contradictory to the first, so long as it is consistent\nin itself. The result is that he is absolutely untouched by criticism\nwhich appears to the European crushing and final. Then the missionary\ngets to regard him as an imbecile, and presents to him an idea which he\nhas not clearly thought out himself. The Persian turns the tables on\nhim in a moment, and frequently the missionary is greatly surprised.\nThe only way to meet this difficulty is both to prepare and select\nyour arguments carefully, and, generally speaking, you can never use\nwith the ordinary Shiah Mussulman an argument that contains more than\nthree steps. As to the difficulties of the language, some have been\npreviously mentioned, and to these must be added the entire absence of\nwords conveying certain important conceptions. Perhaps we are not quite\nso badly off as the missionary to the Esquimaux, who has to explain our\nLord\u2019s parables to people who know of hardly any domestic animals at\nall, and who have never seen a tree; nor is the Persian so intensely\ndull as the inhabitants of the Indian district where the mirzas declared\nthat the meaning of the \u201cfield to bury strangers in\u201d could not possibly\nbe understood unless the strangers were described as dead; but to find\na people who are sufficiently advanced to have an elaborate system of\npsychology, and yet have no term for conscience is a difficulty of almost\na new kind. Between this sort of deficiency on the one hand, and on the\nother the impossibility of forming a sentence with an accurate meaning,\nor of making the meaning understood when it is formed, the missionary is\nsometimes inclined to wish the Persian language at the bottom of the sea.\n\nA very similar difficulty is to be found in the absolute denial,\nespecially by the Babis, of any limitations to the use of parabolic\nlanguage. I can best explain this by instancing a very common Babi\nargument, by which it is attempted to minimise the extraordinary nature\nof Christ\u2019s ministry, this being a preparatory step to the advancement of\nthe claims of Beh\u0101u\u2019llah. Christ on one occasion said, \u201cLet the dead bury\ntheir dead.\u201d In this text it is obvious that the word \u201cdead\u201d refers in\none case rather to spiritual than to physical death. Consequently, they\nsay, the miracles of raising the dead to life which are recounted in the\nGospels are not to be taken as referring to physical death either. The\nobvious answer, that parabolic language, when used without any warning\nand under circumstances that make it certain to be interpreted as literal\nstatement, is simply another name for falsehood, entirely fails to appeal\nto the Persian mind, even though it is pointed out in addition that,\nin the stories of the raising of the dead, local colour and special\ncircumstances are added in such a way that the details of the stories do\nnot admit of any intelligible allegoric interpretation.\n\nIn meeting this kind of position the difficulty is occasionally\nincreased by the Babi controversialist being aware that certain European\nobjectors hold a very similar opinion about our Lord\u2019s ministry. I\nthink, however, that I am right in saying that no European critic has\never attempted to take up what seems to us the impossible position of\naccepting the absolute truth and inspiration of the New Testament, which\nthe Babi fully admits, while at the same time trying to explain away the\nplain statements of the Gospels.\n\nAnother difficulty is that some, and those not always the least\nintelligent, of the Yezdi enquirers mistrust absolutely all reported\nevidence. This is after all only the logical result of life in a Persian\ntown. To say that a certain point, even the most elementary, such as\nthe fact of our Lord\u2019s appearance in Palestine nineteen hundred years\nago, is a matter of history, or is universally acknowledged, means to\nthe Yezdi absolutely nothing. Sometimes, however, when you are able to\nexplain that historical criticism is not an impossibility in Europe, this\nextreme scepticism partially subsides, particularly when you are able to\nshow that the demand for direct evidence is not altogether impossible to\nsatisfy.\n\nOf course, too, there are difficulties in argument arising from the\nintense ignorance of the Yezdi, and more particularly from his extremely\nlimited ideas of the size of the world. For instance, when he is\nrepeating the story that the text of the Bible was changed in the time\nof Mohammed, the verses referring to the prophet being eliminated, it\nis almost impossible to explain the enormous difficulty that would have\nattended such a proceeding. This must of course be the case in other\nplaces, but I venture to think that the peculiar nature of the Persian\ndesert towns makes this state of mind compatible with a greater degree of\nintelligence than one would have believed possible.\n\nWhen everything has been said, the strong attachment felt by the Yezdi\nto Islam remains the greatest difficulty of all. It has been previously\nshown that Islam is much more than a creed, and much more than a set\nof commandments. Behind these things are a number of more or less\nconnected ideas upon the relations of God and man, which have not only\nbeen accepted without question for generations, but are considered by\nthe Mussulman to be axiomatic and impossible to call in question. Also\naround Islam there has grown up a system of domestic and social life\nand of personal habit, which fills up every moment of the day. Habits of\npersonal cleanliness, the system of cooking food, the fashion of dress,\nand the method of speech are all more or less connected with Islam. The\nsame thing is true of the more normal amusements of the Yezdi. There is\na certain amount of singing and playing which is in direct contravention\nof Mohammedan law; but the things which in the life of the people take\nthe place of the concert-hall and of the theatre are the _ruza-khani_,\nwhich is the recitation of religious poems by the Mohammedan mulla,\nand the Muharram festival, which is entirely religious, being a\nmiracle-play depicting the martyrdom of the Imam Husain. Even the more\nusual street shows, which are presented by story-telling dervishes, are\nthe property of a class possessing a peculiar religious status. Under\nthese circumstances who can wonder that to separate himself from Islam\nwithout leaving the country seems to the enquirer almost impossible?\nFurther, he is inclined to say that, if it is possible, it is only to\nbe done by joining himself to the life of the Ferangi household. It is\nvery difficult to explain to the Mussulman that Christianity is not a\npolitico-religious system like Islam, but it is still more difficult to\nmake him understand that a certain amount of the Islamic system can in\nany way remain lawful to him when he becomes a Christian.\n\nThe difficulty is really an enormous one. Men who would be ready to face\ndeath, if death was in the air, are not always ready to face boycott\nand petty persecution, their neighbours regarding them as unclean, and\ntheir new co-religionists, though not refusing to associate with them,\nhaving apparently no idea of providing them with a new home atmosphere.\nThose, too, who are dependent on their professions or trades feel that as\nChristians the friction with Islam will be so great that, even if they\nare not treated as infidels and at once turned adrift, their seeking of\ntheir livelihood will be a daily martyrdom, often extremely distressing\nto their newly-awakened religious feelings.\n\nAll of the obvious solutions of this problem are almost as difficult as\nthe difficulty itself. First of all, it might be possible to create an\nindustrial mission, and to provide new employment and new circumstances\nof life for the converts. Such a move would attract so much attention\nin a town like Yezd that it might very possibly provoke a serious riot;\nand, even if it did not do this, it would involve an enormous financial\nloss. It would be impossible to get for such an enterprise the sympathy\nof the Persian authorities. The undertaking would be attacked by a\ncontinual succession of intrigues, and even without these disadvantages\nit is doubtful whether Europeans who had to deal with Persians in matters\nof trade without being primarily traders could possibly avoid bankruptcy\nafter a very short period. Besides this if any such plan was started, the\npossibilities of the situation from the employ\u00e9\u2019s point of view would so\nappeal to the Persian that numbers would come and profess conversion in\norder to reap their share in the benefits. It cannot be too fully pointed\nout that in Yezd the man who is not in earnest, and who is willing to\ndeny sincerity of motive, risks absolutely nothing, even though he may\nconsent to public or semi-public ceremonies.\n\nAnother solution of the difficulty is to employ converts in the\nmissionaries\u2019 households, but after all this only provides for a certain\nnumber, and those only of certain classes. If the less satisfactory\nservants and employ\u00e9s were continually ousted to make room for converts,\na further very serious difficulty would be created, as there would be a\nnumber of people in the town doing their best to stir up trouble. The\nposition is further complicated by the number of servants in a Persian\nhousehold being very much fewer than the usual number in an Indian one.\nAt the same time this solution of the difficulty, when it is possible,\nis certainly the best one. Converts who are employed by Christians are\nin South Persia a far from unsatisfactory class, particularly when they\nhave given up more remunerative work. When the converts are left too much\nto fend for themselves the results are not always satisfactory, for even\nwhen they pull through, a feeling of not having been properly treated\nis sometimes left behind, which is not helpful to their Christian life.\nConsequently, I feel that, at the present stage, converts should, when\npossible, be drawn carefully into the organisation of the mission or the\nmission households, which would also have the effect of increasing the\nmissionary staff. If it is due to our faith in Christ, as it most surely\nis, to send out every European man or woman who comes forward for mission\nwork, and after prayerful and careful examination or training still\nseems to be set apart for that work by God, surely in the Persian mission\nunder present circumstances we might receive as fellow-workers those who\nafter accepting the Gospel are thrown upon our hands by the same God.\nLater on it may become possible to connect the Persian mission stations\nwith an industrial organisation at Bombay, or God may show some other\nsimilar way out of the apparent _cul-de-sac_. But the whole difficulty\nis so great, that perhaps it would be well to keep it in mind when we\nare determining the organisation of missions, for some methods of work\ntend to absorb natives of various classes, while others show no tendency\nto do so. In spite of the immense difficulties in the way of regular\nindustrial missions, some Persian missionaries hold that they ought to\nbe started, under the charge of thoroughly competent men sent out for\nthe purpose. My personal opinion is that, if it was the main intention\nthat such work should lead to the formation of an industrial community of\nconverts earning their own living and paying their own expenses, there\nwould probably be a great deal of disappointment about the results.\nIf, however, such work was attempted it would have to be done in very\nclose conjunction with the strongest of the medical missions, and a\nresponsibility for backing it up would have to rest with the doctors\nin charge. On the other hand, the establishment of industrial training\nclasses under competent teachers, not necessarily European, would not\nbe open to the same objections. It would really be a development of\nschool work, and the primary object would be the assistance of the native\npopulation and the spreading of the Gospel message amongst them. Like\nother branches of mission work it would be worked at as small a loss\nas possible. But it would not be a settlement of the great difficulty,\nthough we might reasonably expect it to prove a step towards such a\nsettlement, for it would obviously put us in a position to consider\nfurther steps as occasion offered. After all, missionary work is the\nattempting of the impossible in dependence on the Almighty, and under\nsuch circumstances to attempt to look too far ahead is absurd.\n\nIn the face of these difficulties it is really wonderful that missionary\nwork in Yezd should have gone so far forward. There are, of course,\ncertain elements in Yezdi character and ideas that have proved a\nvery great assistance to the missionary. Yezdis are always ready to\ntalk about religion, and they are thoroughly sociable. Then they are\nalways interested in new ideas, and are quick to adapt themselves to\ncircumstances. Further, the ordinary Shiah\u2019s ideas about the Bible,\nthat is, the Law of Moses and the Gospel, are somewhat uncertain. He\ngenerally regards it as the Word of God, for he does not consider that\nthe alterations which he believes to have been made in the text are\nsufficient to rob the Book of its whole value. Altogether, his ideas are\nmuch less stereotyped than those of the Sunni, and it is often possible\nto convince him that the Book is correct throughout.\n\nThen there is the extreme intelligence of the Shiah in grasping single\npoints. Some missionaries work upon this, and also on his essential\nweakness, by teaching him Christian ideas, and not pointing out their\ncontradiction to those contained in Islam until he has had time to grasp\ntheir value. I am inclined to think that although this method of teaching\nmay be possible with people who do not come primarily as enquirers, it\nis not so suitable for the Yezdi who comes to you for discussion or\nteaching on the Christian religion. If you want to gain a particular\npoint with a Persian, for instance if you wish to dissuade him from some\nparticular act of cruelty, do not use too long an argument, but put what\nyou want to say and your reasons for saying it as shortly as possible.\nEven if he does not recognise your principle generally, he may very\npossibly accept it for the particular occasion, if your argument is a\nplain and short one; but when an enquirer after Christianity comes to\nyou, he comes to you as to a follower of Christ. He does not want your\nadvice about any particular part of his conduct; he wants to know why\nyou follow Christ rather than Mohammed. As a matter of fact you have to\nteach him more, but the attempt to teach him less generally produces a\nstrange state of bewilderment, in which the man is not very likely to\nobey any explicit direction you may have given him. The man wants, not\nnecessarily controversy, but teaching of a controversial nature, opposed\nto Mohammedanism, that is to the doctrine of the supremacy of Mohammed\u2019s\nreligion, and he generally wants such teaching to be based on some kind\nof argument, and not on mere assertion. I think this last statement is\nless true of the women. But in our early days at Yezd, when Dr White and\nI were both struggling with the Persian language, and all of the teaching\nhad to be done by Armenian hospital assistants, who, although admirable\nfellows, had perhaps not wholly grasped exactly what was wanted, we had\nstrong evidence of what I am now saying. For the moment I could speak the\nlanguage and began to see something of the people, man after man would\ncome to me, all with the same question, \u201cWe have heard a great deal; a\ngreat deal of Christian teaching, and a great deal about Jesus Christ;\nbut Sahib, _matlab ch\u012bst?_\u201d which may be translated, \u201cWhat is the point\nof it all?\u201d\n\nFrom what has been written it will be obvious that one of the most\nessential points in dealing with Persian visitors is to understand\nthoroughly who are enquirers and who are not. Those who are not primarily\nenquirers may often be brought to Christianity almost as easily as those\nwho come as searchers after truth, for when you get to know Persians,\nyou can do much with them through personal influence, and indeed, when\nall has been written about ways and methods, the thing most used of God\nin Persia is the personality of particular missionaries. Curiously\nenough, it is not always the popular personality by which the Persian is\nmost affected in big matters, but he is enormously affected by what we\ncall character. As to enquirers, it seems to me that no harm is done by\nbeing very careful whom we accept as such. I must own that I have not\nalways worked on that principle, and there was a time when I was under\nthe impression that to refuse to see a visitor, or to keep him waiting\na quarter of an hour, would be to derogate from the importance of the\nmessage that I had to give, and when I would plunge without hesitation\ninto the arguments for the Christian position with any one who asked me\nto do so. Possibly at the time it was the best thing to do, for it was\nnot until I had pursued this plan that I gained any experience to enable\nme to discriminate; but I should certainly hesitate to advise anybody\nto follow my example. Unless a man professes some serious and practical\nreason for wanting to know why he ought to become a Christian it is\nnot always advisable to tell him. Latterly, when I was approached on\nthe subject of Christianity, I always replied by asking the enquirer\u2019s\nreasons for searching, and also by asking of what he was in search, and,\nif from his answer it was obvious that he was in search of something\nwhich could be found outside Christianity, I always told him so. You\nmust remember that such a man naturally continues talking with you,\ngenerally on religious subjects, and indeed you have then the opportunity\nof explaining what Christianity really is, without the necessity of\ncontroversially proving its truth. He is also just as likely to return\nto your house as a man with whom you have entered into regular argument,\nand I am quite convinced that he is not less likely to appreciate\nChristianity at its true value than if you had allowed him to consider\nthat any one was a proper applicant for admission into the Christian\nChurch.\n\nAs a general rule, the thing which seems to me to succeed best with\nYezdi enquirers is controversial teaching of a systematic kind. Pure\ncontroversy is sometimes necessary to remove particular objections to the\nGospel message, but it has to be followed by regular instruction. On the\nother hand, instruction that does not bring out very clearly the contrast\nbetween Islam and Christianity is liable not to be understood. Persian\nenquirers seem as a rule to want help in understanding the meaning of\nScripture. Several Persian converts have been brought in through the\ninstrumentality of the Bible without the help of the missionary; but such\ncases are not common.\n\nThen one of the most important points that the missionary has to bear\nin mind is that the Persian expects a concrete example of the Christian\nlife. He is much more able to understand what he sees than what he simply\nreads, and he is anxious to know how the whole scheme works out, for he\nwishes to understand how much of the practical teaching of Christianity\nis really intended for everyday use. He is aware that in his own religion\na good deal can be explained away by the mulla, and also that rather\ndifferent conduct is expected from the clerical and non-clerical classes\nrespectively. It is true that in Islam this difference is not so great as\none would expect, but the Mussulman clerics as a class are certainly more\nparticular than the laity about prayers, fasts, and attendance at the\nmosques. When a Persian sees the Christian colony entirely at variance\nwith the missionary households as to religious customs and ideas, he\nnaturally comes to the conclusion that as a Christian layman he will\nhave to conform much more to the practice of the laity than to the\npractice of the clerical class, under which heading he will include all\nmissionaries. For this reason it seems to me that it is lamentable for\nmissionaries, clerical or otherwise, to separate themselves too much from\nthe social life of the European colony. Work in such towns as Yezd ought\nto be primarily church extension, and when both missionaries and other\nEuropeans realise this fact, and do their best to show the native that\nChrist is a real force in the concrete European life of the present day,\nthe hopefulness of mission prospects becomes increased a thousandfold.\nBut the task before the missionary is a rather more complex one, for his\nduty is not only to present Christ as a living force in his everyday\nlife, but he ought also to try and avoid all conduct which he learns by\nexperience will seem to the native not to tally with the teaching of\nScripture. In other words, he must be ready to give up lawful things\nwhich he is unable to justify to those whom he is striving to teach.\nSuch a determination will demand not only strength of purpose, but also\ncareful and prayerful Bible study; but unless the determination is made,\nthe work will inevitably suffer.\n\nOne unusually intelligent Beh\u0101\u012b, who, I am glad to say, afterwards became\na Christian, once brought forward an objection to Christianity, which I\nthink is worth closely noting. He said, \u201cYou point to the comparative\nprosperity of Europe as an evidence of the truth of Christianity. I,\nwho have been in India, do not doubt that Europeans have accomplished\nsomething. But it seems to me that what has been done has been done by\nthe State organisation, which rests upon the law of retaliation, and\nis therefore in direct opposition to the law of Christ. Consequently\nthese successes prove not the truth of Christianity, but rather the\npower of work done on exactly opposite principles.\u201d My answer, which was\naccepted, was to point out that although Christ in the Sermon on the\nMount showed that the principle of retaliation was not to govern the\nactions of individual Christians, Christ\u2019s religion both as expounded by\nHimself before Pilate, and as presented by His apostles in the Epistles,\nrecognises the power of the force-using governor as that of God\u2019s\nminister. I also pointed out that the best European State organisations\nhad only been made possible by the Church. However, the objection was\ncertainly one which a serious enquirer might be pardoned for advancing,\nand it is interesting as showing the trend of the Persian\u2019s mind when he\ncomes into contact with European customs and Christian ideas.\n\nThere remain several difficulties, connected rather with the acceptance\nof converts than with the making of them. The Persian is exceedingly\nimpulsive, and a great many enquirers who are really in earnest ask to be\nbaptized without realising all that it will mean. This, I suppose, is a\ndifficulty one finds everywhere. A difficulty more peculiar to Persia has\nalready been mentioned in a previous chapter, namely, the feeling that\ntwo motives are better than one, and that the desire for earthly as well\nas spiritual gain only makes a man a more earnest applicant. In Yezd it\nis impossible to treat people who have this feeling as radically unsound,\nbut of course they have to be taught that it is impossible to become a\nChristian from the two points of view, and that if they intend to make\nChristianity pay from the earthly point of view, they will lose the\nspiritual benefit. The question may perhaps be asked, how is it that in\na Mohammedan country there can be supposed to be any temporal advantage\nin becoming a Christian? The answer to this is that the Yezdi Persian\nis accustomed not so much to religious as to politico-religious systems:\nso he regards the whole European colony with their native servants,\nParsi and Mussulman, as all belonging to Christianity and under the\nprotection of the Christian authorities, and this idea is very largely\nkept up by the servants themselves. Servants in a Christian household\nwill almost invariably join in any form of Christian worship, and it\nwould be impossible to explain to them that they did not to some extent\nparticipate in the spiritual advantages of Christianity. They recognise,\nhowever, a distinct difference between taking service and accepting\nbaptism. Probably in their heart of hearts they believe that taking\nservice is temporary, and accepting baptism permanent. Amongst people\nwho are accustomed to a view of the household largely corresponding to\nthe patriarchal view, such notions cannot be altogether eradicated. So\nenquirers, when they first ask for baptism, do not necessarily see the\nenormous danger, but only realise that they will be brought into close\ntouch with a community that seems to them to include other natives who\nwear the same dress as themselves. Of course when the enquirers are\njunior members of strict Mussulman households, or in other equally\nunfavourable circumstances, they realise that their peril will be\nextreme; but heads of households sometimes expect much less danger. Then\nagain, the Mussulman is accustomed to secret religions, for _taqiya_, the\ndenial of faith in times of danger, has always been considered lawful by\nShiahs, and it is used by the Babis. Although the enquirer learns at a\nvery early date that such conduct is regarded by the Christian as sin, it\ntakes him some time to realise the exact degree to which his Christianity\nis likely to be public. Lastly, although he may be told that converts are\nnot under consular protection, in a country where law means so little and\ncustom so much he is not likely to understand how real are the boundaries\nof treaty rights. This will perhaps give some idea of the amount of\nmisapprehension, both as to the meaning of Christianity and also as to\nthe danger of accepting it, which may possibly exist after a considerable\namount of talk and enquiry; nor would the dangers of embracing\nChristianity be made altogether obvious by a single riot or martyrdom;\nfor the whole operation of Persian law, or want of law, is irregular and\nspasmodic, and in a town like Yezd things which are foolhardy in January\nare often attended with no more than ordinary risk in June.\n\nUnder these circumstances the question of the admission of professing\nconverts to baptism must necessarily be extremely difficult. In towns\nwhere the mission work is in a pioneering stage it has to be primarily\nsettled by the European missionary; and not until the difficulty has\nbeen by him sufficiently solved to admit of the foundation of a church,\ncan much of this burden be placed upon other shoulders. Sometimes he\nmay have the good fortune to have among his earlier converts a wholly\ntrustworthy man, who, from his greater experience of native character and\nknowledge of what is going on in the town, can advise and counsel him,\nbut even then the main responsibility must rest with the European. The\ndifficulty is greatly enhanced by the fact that the missionary in Persia\ndoes not really live amongst the people, and that the clerical missionary\nusually sees enquirers only in his own house. Under these circumstances\nit is perhaps well not to apply too many tests, for it is not easy to\nget a test which is really sound. One test which is sometimes advocated\nis the practice of keeping the catechumen waiting for a long period;\nbut the result of this is frequently to deter those who are weakly in\nearnest, whereas a Persian who has a worldly end to serve is capable of\nextraordinary patience. It is sometimes urged that an unsound convert\nbrings the whole band of native Christians and enquirers into extreme\ndanger; but I am inclined to think that, in the circumstances of our\npioneer missions as they at present exist, a totally unsound catechumen\nmay do almost as much harm as even an unsound convert. It is hard to\navoid the conclusion that the only way to deal with the situation is\nto baptize all persons who after full instruction, not too hurriedly\ngiven, profess conversion and demand baptism, and even after baptism\nto observe a certain degree of caution towards the newly baptized. If\nit is absolutely proved that such converts are behaving in a manner\nthat is not only weak but actively hostile towards Christ\u2019s cause, they\nmust be excommunicated; but the most necessary point of all is that as\nmuch attention should be paid to the instruction of converts as to the\ninstruction of catechumens. It is of course impossible to expect that\nall points of character should be absolutely changed after baptism, and\nnobody ought to be cut loose from the Church in a place like Yezd,\nunless he is actively hostile; and, even when actual hostility has been\nproved, an opportunity ought to be given for the man\u2019s return.\n\nAs to the advisability of giving converts material help, a great deal may\nbe said against it in theory, but in practice it is at times absolutely\nnecessary. After all, it is impossible to avoid mistakes, and the attempt\nto avoid all mistakes in detail is only too likely to lead to the more\ngeneral one of entirely failing to present Christ in any form whatsoever.\n\nThe conclusions which have been stated in this chapter are not intended\nto be taken as the fully thought out summing up of an extremely complex\nand difficult problem. They are the result of rather less than six\nyears\u2019 experience of the mission-field. But just as there is a value in\nfirst impressions of country, so there is a value in first impressions\nof difficulties in work. At five and a half years first impressions of\ncountry have passed away, and consequently the contents of the earlier\nchapters of this book, which deal with country and surroundings, can\nhardly be so characterised; but at this period the difficulties of\nmission work are only just beginning to spread themselves out before\none\u2019s eyes. So when we pass from country to character, from character to\nopportunity, and from opportunity to suggestion, we pass from subjects\nwith which it is comparatively easy to become familiar to subjects which\nneed life-long and careful study. I have tried in writing this chapter\nto eliminate from the style that consciousness of uncertainty which\nis frequently so irritating to the reader; but in doing this I should\nexplain that I am fully conscious of the superficial nature of much\nthat I have written. At the same time, the view that I have gained of\nmission work in Yezd is a full one compared with that which is possible\nfor people at a distance, and for that reason it may be considered worth\nstating.\n\n[Illustration: A VIEW OF YEZD.]\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII\n\n    Getting into touch with the natives\u2014The missionary\u2019s style of\n    life\u2014Visiting and receiving visitors\u2014Philanthropic work\u2014Poor\n    relief\u2014School work\u2014Medical work.\n\n\nIn Persia the missionary has no right to teach and preach in public\nplaces. He cannot take up his stand in the bazaars and proclaim the\nGospel. He can talk to the people who come to his house, and to a certain\nextent he can talk with crowds in open caravanserais or in the villages,\nbut anything approximating to public teaching is only done on sufferance,\nand without any established licence. So the ordinary evangelistic\nmissionary\u2019s first task is to get on terms of social intercourse with\na sufficiently large number of natives to afford him a field for work.\nAfterwards he may arrange for services, either in his own house or\nin the house of some other European, and so his visitors will become\ncongregations and his talks sermons.\n\nNow, although it is obvious that such work can only be carried on when it\nis acceptable to the natives, the work may be accepted for very various\nreasons. If the missionary knows enough of the Persian language, of\nnative ideas, and above all of the message he has come to deliver, he\nwill, in a town like Yezd, without the help of school or medical work,\nattract a large number of people to his house. In Persia there is just\nnow a great seeking after truth, which, though due in part to traceable\ncauses, seems in its entirety to be simply one of those mysterious\nmovements which God evokes at certain seasons in all lands for the\nfurtherance of His Kingdom. One class attracted by such a man as I have\ndescribed would therefore be real enquirers, and with them would be mixed\na second class of people who have been called religious sightseers. These\nmen though not apparently so good a field for work as the first class,\nwould still, if properly handled and directed, prove a perfectly possible\nsphere for serious missionary operations. So also would the third class\nof callers, who would be men not primarily interested in religious\nquestions at all, but who would nevertheless follow the fashion of\ncalling on the newly-arrived foreigner, and would be generally willing\nto follow any line of conversation that was agreeable to their host.\nOf course a man who did not intend to engage in school or medical work\nwould naturally be careful to take full advantage of such contacts as\nthese, and of others that he would naturally make from time to time; he\nwould order his life in such a way as to get day by day into close touch\nwith the people of the town; and he would equip himself with a material\noutfit that would enable him to exchange courtesies with natives of\nvarious classes. I am not speaking of a man who elected to spend most of\nhis time itinerating in the villages: of such work as this I have little\nexperience: but I am convinced that a stationary missionary, fairly well\nequipped at all points, does not in a town like Yezd absolutely need the\nhelp of more elaborate aids to enable him to get into touch with his\nwork. To suppose this is to ignore the extraordinary preparation which\nGod has made in Persia for the preaching of the Gospel.\n\nBefore passing on to the very real demand for missionaries of a somewhat\ndifferent kind, it will be well to mention some points connected with\nthe life of the European missionary in the country. There are probably\nvery few men or women at present working in Persia, who have not at the\noutset of their work felt doubtful whether the details of their household\nlife could not be simplified, so as to bring them into closer touch with\nthe poorer part of the population. It is hardly possible to write a\nserious book on missionary conditions without expressing an opinion on\nthis question. There is, I think, no doubt that it is a great mistake for\na missionary in Persia to be known as one who is leading the life of a\nwealthy man. It is considered by many of the enquirers to be absolutely\ninconsistent with Christianity, and I am not sure that this judgment\nis incorrect. Temporary advantages might sometimes be gained by such a\nreputation, but in the end the work would suffer.\n\nGenerally speaking, however, it is the habit of missionaries in the\nPersian stations to live as economically as is compatible with European\nstyle, so far as their strictly personal expenses are concerned. Many\nthings which appear at first sight to be luxurious prove on closer\nacquaintance to be mere substitutes for the ordinary necessaries of the\nsimplest English life. Other things prove to be absolutely essential\nto health in a hot climate, while yet another class are not exactly\nnecessary, but they are comforts of the cheapest kind. People who are\neconomising seriously in Eastern lands have to put up with so much that\nis really difficult that they make a great mistake if they unnecessarily\ndeny themselves small things which can be had for the asking, simply\nbecause they have regarded such things as luxuries in England. But\nalthough the existence of careful economies on European lines may be\nsufficient to prevent an intelligent enquirer from thinking that the\nmissionary is untrue to his creed, such economies can never bring the\nmissionary into touch with the poor of the East in the same way that\nliving in a model lodging-house might under some circumstances bring a\nhome clergyman into close touch with the English poor. The real analogy\nwould be for the missionary to live as an Eastern dervish, or as a native\nof the artisan class, and although this might be sometimes helpful\nand advisable, the principle of its general advisability could not be\naccepted. To begin with, it would be only possible for a bachelor, and,\nin a country where no man can possibly give individual instruction to\nwomen, the bachelor is at a great disadvantage. Secondly, it must not be\nforgotten that, although the missionary living the life of an European\nhas been accepted in Persia, the missionary wearing Persian dress and\nliving like a native has not yet been accepted, and would probably find\nhimself not only at variance with the consular authorities but also\nregarded with a great deal of suspicion by the natives themselves. In\na matter of this kind it is impossible to ignore apostolic precedent,\nand one thing that cannot but strike the student of the missionary\nmethods of the period covered by the Acts of the Apostles is that the\napostles generally, and notably St Paul, seem never to have adopted a\nmethod of missionary work which would have seemed to the inhabitants of\nthe district to be _outr\u00e9_, when some more natural method of work was\nequally possible. Nothing would strike the Persian as more _outr\u00e9_ than\nfor the ordinary European to drop the form of life which is expected\nof the Ferangi, and to adopt the manners and customs of the native of\nPersia, particularly as he would probably have to periodically re-assume\nEuropean clothes. If he was going to work among the Mussulmans as a\nChristian missionary, I suppose he would have to choose between life as\nan Armenian and life as a Mussulman. Life as an Armenian would have this\nadvantage over the other, that he would not be supposed to be hiding his\nreligion. But the life of the Armenian in a town like Yezd is the life\nof a stranger in a foreign town, and would not bring the missionary into\nvery much closer touch with the Mussulmans than life as a European. By\nassuming the dress and manners of an Armenian of any class whatsoever,\none would simply forfeit the respect that is usually paid by the Persian\nto the Ferangi, without gaining anything that could not have been\ngained by other and more ordinary methods. On the other hand, life as a\nMussulman would be attended with serious difficulties. In a town where\nthere was a Ferangi colony wearing European dress, such a man would very\npossibly be regarded as a soldier is regarded who attempts to mix with\nthe enemy without his uniform. I can conceive circumstances which might\nmake an experiment of this kind worth trying, but it would be madness for\nany one to attempt it for missionary purposes, who had not extraordinary\nexperience of the country and a full mastery over the language.\n\nI think then we must take it for granted that the kind of life which\nmissionaries are living in Persia at the present time will have to\nbe accepted, with such modifications as future events and further\nexperience may suggest, as the normal method for Europeans who wish to\ncarry on missionary work in the country. There are one or two tasks which\nlie before the pioneer missionary which seem to be made more easy by the\npossession of an ordinary European household. First of all, he has to be\nprepared to work amongst the European colony. Secondly, it is well for\nhim to possess sufficient influence and standing in the town to be able\nto help the converts or enquirers in time of trouble. Thirdly, he wants\nto be in touch with all classes of natives, and this would probably only\nbe possible for a man who stood in the highest rank as a native, or for\none who stood outside native rank altogether.\n\nEvery missionary has to do a good deal of visiting. All visits have not\ngot to be returned, but a certain number must be. It is well not to\nreturn all visits, for otherwise it is difficult to get secret enquirers\nto come to your house, or people who are too poor to receive you in their\nown houses. The usual Persian habit is never to pay a visit without\nfirst of all asking leave, but though this rule has to be observed\ntowards others, it is best to make it clear that your own house is an\noffice, and only to insist on notice for visits of civility when they\nare made by people who are likely to prove awkward. Paying visits to\nPersian houses has a certain value to the missionary, as it introduces\nhim to Persian life and manners, and puts him on easier terms with the\nnatives, but it seldom affords the evangelistic missionary who is working\namongst men his best opportunity for direct missionary work. There is\ntoo much publicity, and too many interruptions. The best missionary\nwork is usually done on one\u2019s own premises; and in Yezd I have known\nenquirers and visitors begin coming at six o\u2019clock in the morning, and\ngo on almost without intermission till ten o\u2019clock at night; but at that\ntime I was connected with scholastic work, which, although requiring only\nsuperintendence, advertised my presence in the town to a considerable\ndegree. One of the things that is therefore most necessary in a place\nlike Yezd for the evangelistic missionary is an absolutely well-ordered\nhousehold. Everything ought to go by clockwork. Almost every visitor has\nto be treated as an ordinary social guest, and unless the arrangements\nare nearly perfect, either his attention or the missionary\u2019s will be\ncalled away from the conversation. A missionary in such a position\nought to pay close attention to the number and description of his\ntea-cups and pipes. One class of visitors ought to be properly served\nwith silver-mounted hookahs and three tiny cups of very hot tea, brought\nin at intervals of ten minutes, and this without any previous notice to\nthe servant. Another class of visitor ought to have a European cup of\ntea holding about three times as much as the Persian cup, and a box of\ncigarettes, so that he and his host may be able to talk without further\ninterruption till the end of the interview. A third class of visitor,\nwho has given notice, ought to be prepared for beforehand, and served\nwith iced sherbet. Then again, a decision has to be made according to the\nstatus of the guest as to whether the missionary shall be served with tea\nat the same time or not. All this requires the most careful training of\nservants, and any inattention to detail may produce an atmosphere which\nmakes teaching exceedingly difficult. Further, the servants have to know\nwho should be shown into a private room, and who can be allowed to mix\nwith other guests. These are just a few of the minor points which are\nnevertheless of real importance. To come to points which are obviously\nmore serious. Servants have to be procured who can act with firmness when\npeople attempt to take liberties, and who are at the same time absolutely\ncivil. Servants in a Christian household have to be good-tempered; and\nin order to effect this they have to be kept well occupied without being\noverworked, in a house where the chief work is meeting emergencies. They\nhave to be taught some consistent and systematic line that is to be\nobserved in dealing with the countless beggars who every day come to your\nhouse. They have to be rendered as truthful as possible in every matter\nconnected with the missionary\u2019s business. They have to be paid a rate of\nwages which will make honesty and contentment possible, and which will\nneither spoil the market, nor be incompatible with reasonable economy.\nIt is needless to say very much more about these matters; sufficient\nhas already been said to make it plain that the problem of household\narrangement is an exceedingly difficult one, particularly as the servants\nsleep in their own houses at a distance, all but one, who stays for the\nnight; and they generally expect to go home for their mid-day meal. My\nown impression is that as the evangelistic missionary\u2019s house is almost\nhis parish, he may be excused if he thinks right to expend a very great\ndeal of time over its arrangements, and to consider this just as much\nmissionary work as the teaching of enquirers. If the missionary intends\nto aim at anything that is likely to be satisfactory in this matter, he\ncertainly needs an enormous degree of faith, and will do well to make his\nefforts in this direction the subject of very earnest prayer.\n\n[Illustration: SCENES OF YEZDI LIFE.\n\nThe centre of these three pictures represents two men smoking opium.\nBehind them is a _qalian_, or hookah, for tobacco; in front is a sherbet\nbowl, and also a small tea-table with sweets underneath.\n\nThe picture on the left represents two men; one holding a rosary, and the\nother holding a hookah.\n\nThe single figure on the right is a Jew, with his book for divining. The\nPersians use the Jews as diviners a good deal.]\n\nAnother difficulty in seeing enquirers in the house is the arrangement of\ntimes. Missionaries are sometimes blamed for not sufficiently consorting\nwith Europeans in the ordinary amusements of the colony, but there is one\ngreat difficulty about this. The times when you naturally take exercise\nin the East are the times when the native artisan or shopkeeper is off\nwork. Supposing that the evangelistic missionary is seldom at home at\nsuch times as these, the more industrious Persians get to regard him as\ninaccessible, and his enquirers begin to consist of people who for some\nreason or other have very little to do. It is hardly necessary to enter\ninto the difficulties that may follow.\n\nWe have been hitherto speaking only of directly evangelistic methods\nof missionary work; but almost all missionaries have something to do\nwith philanthropic work also. These philanthropic efforts are not solely\nundertaken as means to an end. In most cases they are treated as an end\nin themselves by the missionary, and generally speaking they are things\nwhich could not well be left undone. Medical missionaries will tell you\nthat their standing orders are to heal the sick and preach the Gospel;\nbut I think we may say very much more generally that the presentation\nof the Gospel without adequate and proportionate care for the minds and\nbodies of those surrounding us, would be impossible. For the Gospel is\nthe message of our Saviour, and any message that was so delivered would\nentirely fail to represent that Saviour\u2019s attitude. I doubt whether any\none would call in question this aspect of the case, but when we come to\ndiscuss how much philanthropic work is really necessary, we are face to\nface with a difficult problem. In matters like this the decision must\ndepend not only upon the needs of the people with whom the missionaries\nare brought in contact, but also upon the nature of the church or\ncongregation of Christians that supports them, and whose material as\nwell as spiritual force they are appointed to convey to the mission\nfield. There is a great difference between the position of a band of men\nsent out by an infinitesimal body of earnest Christians who have the\ngreatest difficulty in subscribing the means of their support, and that\nof a band sent out by an exceedingly wealthy Christian church.\n\nPresent-day missionaries sent out by the Church Missionary Society\nhave passed outside the conditions of the first class, but they cannot\nbe said to fully belong to the second. They are supported by a large\nnumber of people, but those who give most are generally those whose\npurses are least elastic. In the countries to which they go they are\ntreated with the greatest courtesy by British officials, and accepted as\nrepresentatives of the religion of England by their fellow-countrymen.\nNaturally the native expects more from them than they are really able\nto give, and this increases the difficulty when they have to decide\nwhat they are bound to do as ministers of Christ and as representatives\nof those who send them, for the people committed to their charge.\nNaturally, and I think rightly, they do not wholly shut their eyes to\nthe attitude and expectations of the natives. But, unfortunately, the\nPersians think that there ought to be no difficulty about anything. The\naverage native cannot get out of his head the idea that we are sent by\nthe Government, or, if not by the Government, by the whole nation under\nits religious authorities. Those who know anything of English thought\nand feeling realise that foreign missions are now well established in\nthe popular regard in England, and many Yezdis have a confused notion\nthat in our country education, medical attendance, and support in old\nage are free to everybody, irrespective of class, and that as Christians\nwe are all anxious to extend this system as far as we can to other\nnations. Of course views like this are variable, but it may be seen after\na moment\u2019s consideration that in a country where the need for schools,\nfor hospitals, and sometimes for relief is very real, and where the\nnative is capable of believing such absurdities about the European as\nhave been stated, if the missionary does not to a large extent take up\nthe white man\u2019s burden, he is likely to lose any influence which God may\nhave given him. Consequently I think we may say that the philanthropic\nwork of missionaries in Persia must not only be regarded as a means to\nevangelisation, although this is an aspect which must largely determine\nits importance. Primarily it is a spiritual necessity created by three\nthings, the comparative wealth of the Christians who send out the\nmissionaries, the comparative poverty of the natives who are ready to be\nrelieved, and the obvious commandment of Almighty God.\n\nPhilanthropic work in Yezd is of three kinds; medical work, school work,\nand the work of poor relief. The last is of course not recognised or\nsupported by the Church Missionary Society. It is not within the scope of\nthis book to deal with either of these three provinces of work in detail.\nAll that I wish at present to explain is the way in which they seem to\nstrike the Persian mind, and contribute to the general campaign of the\nmission.\n\nRelief work is of all the three most absolutely necessitated by the\nessential difference between the circumstances of the missionary and\nhis supporters on the one hand, and those of a certain section of the\nnatives on the other. But from an evangelistic standpoint it is the least\ndirectly productive in effect; so we have never in Yezd used for this\npurpose any funds not specially subscribed for it, and such money has\nbeen collected almost entirely from the resident Europeans. There is a\nvery great deal of terrible poverty in Persia which is not touched by\nthe native charities. In Yezd, particularly towards the end of our stay\nin the town, things were in a very bad way. Yezd is really an industrial\ntown, and not less than half of the grain supply comes from outside,\nchiefly from the Shiraz district. Most of the people are silk weavers.\nThe silkworms used to be reared in the Yezd district, but the extreme\ndroughts rendered this source of supply very insecure, and after the\ngreat famine that occurred some years ago there were not sufficient\ntrees left for the business to be continued in this way. Cocoons were\nthen brought from Rasht, and this system proved more satisfactory till\nlately, when the Rasht cocoons were diverted to France and Italy. The\nnatural result was a great deal of poverty in Yezd, which was most felt\namong the poor Jews, who since the famine year have had no looms but have\ndevoted themselves to winding and spinning the silk. Then again, after\nthe Babi massacre of 1903, something had to be done for the large number\nof widows and orphans. In this work the Europeans were by no means alone,\nfor the sufferers were helped both by the Babi merchants and also by a\nlarge number of the Parsis. The Parsis are generally very good in looking\nafter their own poor, but the Mussulmans give money so indiscriminately\nthat their charities cause more poverty than they relieve. Although the\nwork of poor relief is not as a rule the direct means of bringing in\nconverts, it helps the evangelistic work enormously by saving valuable\ntime. Before it could be organised the number of begging enquirers who\nhad the very smallest interest, if any, in the Gospel message, was so\nlarge as to seriously impede more important work. It is much easier\nand better to keep the two things more separate, and to be able to say\nto a man, \u201cIf you want to read with me, well and good, but if you want\nmaterial help, then you must do so and so.\u201d This does not necessarily\nmean that the man who is relieved gets no chance of hearing the Gospel.\nThe Jews, who came in a body, used always to have a chapter of the Gospel\nread to them by my mirza, and any man who showed a disposition to come\nas a real enquirer after his case had been looked into and relieved\nwas thoroughly welcomed. But the practice of trying to earn a _kran_ by\nwasting hours of the missionary\u2019s time was effectually discouraged.\n\nI think also that the practice of separating poor relief as much as\npossible from the work with enquirers helps to explain to the native\nour view of the Christian Church. That some explanation is necessary\nis undoubted. During a severe famine in Kirman, over two hundred\nrespectable Mussulmans, chiefly shopkeepers, came into the courtyard of\nthe Consulate, and wanted to take protection under the British flag.\nMajor Phillott was then Consul, and they explained to him that the price\nof bread was so prohibitive that they could not live any longer under\nthe regulations of the Persian officials. Their leader was a Seyid.\nMajor Phillott tried to explain that, although he sympathised with\nthem greatly, he could do nothing for them unless it was to give them\npecuniary help. He offered them a hundred _krans_, but they explained\nthat they were not beggars. They further said that they were quite ready\nto become Christians if they could only get cheap bread. The end of the\nwhole business was that the Consul paid an unofficial visit to the\nGovernor, and got him to promise that bread should be lowered to a more\nor less normal price by gradual reductions spread over a period of ten\ndays. It is easy to understand that people who could go to a Consul in a\nfamine and ask to be accepted as Christians in order to be able to buy\nbread at a fair price, thinking I suppose that Consular pressure would\nthen be brought to bear upon the Governor on their behalf, might easily\nget an absolutely wrong notion of what was going on, if circumstances\nforced the missionary whose general business was seeing enquirers to use\nfunds for poor relief without carefully separating these two branches\nof work. Even the practice of giving occasional relief to very poor\nenquirers from one\u2019s own purse is liable to great misinterpretation and\nabuse. Men will frequently come to you and ask for support, so as to\nenable them to leave their ordinary trades and listen to your teaching.\nMyself, I think that there are occasions when poor people have come from\na distance and are certainly interested, where something of this kind\nhas to be done, the man if possible being made to work for his money;\nbut it is easy to see how extremely dangerous it would be to encourage\nexpectations, and how easily natives might get the idea that enquiry, and\nstill more Christianity, entitled them to payment. Consequently, even if\nit could not be demonstrated that an actual saving of time was effected\nby making of poor relief a distinct organisation, there would be still a\nvery great deal to be said for the practice.\n\nTo administer poor relief in a town like Yezd on anything approaching\nto a sound system necessitates a great deal of reliance upon native\ninformation, and also a certain amount of high-handed dealing. Any food\nor clothing given must be of a class only acceptable to the very poorest,\nfor otherwise the candidates for relief would be too numerous to deal\nwith in even the roughest fashion. These considerations will explain two\nthings; first of all it will be readily understood that it is much easier\nto give systematic relief to members of a native community which is more\nor less down-trodden, such as the Jews or Babis; for although a certain\nnumber of mistakes will be made in dealing with these peoples, they will\nbe much less resented, and will militate much less against the success\nof the whole effort. Secondly, it will be obvious that such relief will\nnot call forth very much gratitude from the recipients. The very fact of\ninvestigation gives the idea to the Persian mind that charity is given\ngrudgingly. Also it is impossible to handle a hundred screaming women in\na small compound without a certain amount of what appears to be stern\ndealing, and after all in most instances the relief given is not as much\nas we ourselves would like it to be. Added to this, most of the people\nreceiving relief are under the impression that we are simply dispensing a\nsmall part of the large supplies sent to us for the purpose from abroad;\nand the Jews, of whom nearly a hundred families were receiving relief\nin Yezd last winter, believed that all that was given to them came from\ntheir co-religionists in Europe. The Babis of course looked upon the\nmatter rather differently, but people who hold the theory of _savabs_\nin the way in which Persians do, have always a feeling that anything\ngiven to them means one for them and two for the giver. At the same time\nPersians who are interested in Christianity, and who are not themselves\ncandidates for poor relief, see a great deal more in the system than do\nthose who are more intimately concerned with it. They often understand\nthat the willingness to take trouble in localising need, and the absolute\nrecklessness with which we incur as many curses as blessings in the\nperformance of our work, points to an utterly different ideal from that\nwhich is accepted in Islam; and whether they are prepared to approve\nit or not, anything which shows the native part of the fundamental\ndistinction between Islam and Christianity must in the end be of enormous\nassistance in missionary work.\n\nSchool work in Yezd is very greatly appreciated by a somewhat limited\nclass, but it means continual friction. The whole Mussulman clerical\nclass as a body are keenly opposed to it. More curiously it aroused the\ngreatest opposition from a small but not unimportant section of the\nParsis. The Parsis are a puzzling people. For though they are strong,\nintelligent, thrifty, industrious, grateful, and comparatively honest,\nthey seem to have a tendency to produce in their community a sufficient\nnumber of exceptionally disagreeable specimens of humanity to greatly\ncheck their natural progress. I myself believe that this is due to\nthe prevalence of agnosticism amongst them, but, however that may be,\nthe result is that the Yezd community is always pestered by internal\nintrigues. I do not think that the opposition to my school was religious,\nfor the _dast\u016brs_, that is the Zoroastrian priests, were always very\nfriendly. I have always put it down rather to internal intrigue.\n\nMy school work was originally undertaken at the explicit request of\nthe natives, and the boys came chiefly, but not wholly, from the upper\nclasses. It would be difficult, and very questionably advisable, to\nstart school work in a town like Yezd except under pressure from the\nnatives. Even when the work has been forced on one, it is very difficult\nto maintain it. Not only is there still opposition from such quarters\nas I have mentioned, but it is only with the greatest difficulty that\ncompetent native assistance can be secured. If native assistance cannot\nbe secured, the missionary who has work with enquirers will have\ndifficulty in finding time even for short classes. Short classes may be\nthe best thing under certain circumstances, but in a town like Yezd they\ndo not meet the whole need. Boys are brought to you in Persia in most\ncases primarily to be taught English, but this demand for English is\nnot the only requirement, nor is it the only need that is felt by the\nPersians. Persians will frequently tell you that they bring their boys\nto you for education in the largest sense; but we made it a practice in\nYezd only to accept boys who wished to learn English, and whose parents\ncould show that the knowledge of English was likely to be of some use to\nthem. Very frequently poor lads would come, under the impression that the\ntown was going to be occupied by Europeans, and that all who had learnt\nEnglish would get remunerative employment in Yezd. The only thing to do\nunder such circumstances was to explain the true state of affairs, and\nthen to insist on payment being made in advance for all books, and also\nupon the payment of a six months\u2019 fee. The first argument was generally\nrather ineffectual, but supported by the second it always had the desired\nresult. If it could be shown that a poor boy was likely to reap advantage\nfrom a knowledge of English, fees were always remitted, and in some cases\nbooks were provided.\n\nThe ordinary fees were very small, but had to be paid in advance\nfor the half year. The education given comprised Persian subjects,\narithmetic, English, and elementary geography. The Bible was read in\nPersian, night and morning, and the boys were expected to be present\nduring the Bible reading and prayers. Latterly the whole routine work\nwas put into the hands of natives, but I paid as much attention not\nonly to superintendence but also to conversational classes as my other\nengagements would allow. Naturally there was a great difference in the\nefficiency of the school at different times. At first it was with the\ngreatest difficulty that the work could be carried on at all, and what I\nwas able to do was of the most trivial character. In the end, owing to\nthe excellent work done by my Armenian assistants, and by Mihraban, my\nParsi mirza, the results were really excellent. On the whole, I think I\nmay say that the confidence reposed in the school system by the natives,\nwas greater than I could have expected, and in many things both boys and\nparents proved excessively forbearing.\n\n[Illustration: THE SCHOOL.\n\nThis was drawn when the school was quite small.\n\nThe figure on the left sitting in a chair is Mesak, my first Armenian\nschoolmaster. I am on the right leaning against a desk. The thing in my\nhand is a pointer and not an instrument of punishment. There is a wall in\nfront of me on which was hung the thing to which I was pointing. I should\nperhaps mention that the square fire-place coming forward into the room\nis not of a usual shape: fire-places are generally let into the wall. All\nthe boys in this picture are Mussulmans.]\n\nIn the matter of gratitude they showed discrimination, but the gratitude\nthat was shown me by the pupils who stuck to the school for any time,\nand by their parents, was extraordinary. The lads themselves, both Parsi\nand Mussulman, were on the whole intelligent and teachable. I had,\nhowever, very much greater success in dealing with them when I had not\nmyself to undertake the routine work of the schoolmaster. Possibly this\nwas due partially to my not being suited for such work, but I am inclined\nto think that in most cases elementary school work is not quite the\nproper field for the European missionary in Persia. There is perhaps no\nharm in the evangelistic missionary who has not yet perfected himself\nin the language devoting more of his time to it; but, considering the\nenormous value of the work from a spiritual point of view, there should\nbe no difficulty in getting funds to employ extra native assistants\nwhere the European missionary feels himself in a position to organise\nand superintend a school for native boys. These remarks do not apply to\nschools for girls, for which properly qualified native teachers can only\nbe found with the greatest difficulty. My feeling is that not only can\nthe fully qualified European missionary be more usefully employed if\nhis time is not too largely given up to school work, but also much of\nthe actual work of the school is better done by natives under European\nmanagement, and the influence of the missionary with the boys may be\nrather increased than checked by his not having to teach them their\nordinary lessons. It is, however, very difficult to separate what may\nbe taken as a general principle in Persia from what was true of our\nparticular circumstances in Yezd. I have before mentioned that I do not\nconsider myself very fitted for ordinary school work.\n\nIn the boys\u2019 school in Yezd we had at first a custom of never admitting\na child until his father had been seen, and had thoroughly understood to\nwhat extent he would receive religious teaching. I used to pledge myself\nto teach nothing to the boy of Christian tradition apart from what could\nbe found in the _Kal\u0101mu\u2019llah_, that is, the Word of God accepted by the\nMohammedans, an expression which was thoroughly understood to include\nthe whole of the Christian Bible. This may seem at first sight to have\nbeen merely a quibble, but it must not be forgotten in dealing with\nthe Mussulman, that he is afraid of something like Romanism which will\nstand out in political as well as religious rivalry to Islam, and that\nhe knows very little of the special tenets of Protestants. My assurance\nwould at least have satisfied him that no attempt would be made to draw\nthe boy into a foreign politico-religious system. The fathers were\nalso told that the boys would be expected to attend prayers. Latterly,\nas the school and its methods got better known, the necessity for these\nprecautions disappeared. However, when boys at the school came to me,\nas they frequently did, and told me that they wished to know more about\nChristianity, I invariably insisted that their fathers or guardians\nshould be informed before they received special instruction. Of course\nthey were always free to come to the Sunday School, which was held for\nthem by my Armenian assistant, and which was attended by a few boys from\nother schools as well, and occasionally by one or two men. Many of the\nboys also were extremely regular in their attendance at the services,\nwhich we held at first in our houses, and afterwards in a chapel which\nwas built in the hospital.\n\nOur school work in Yezd was in every way a thoroughly effective\nevangelistic agency. It brought me into touch with scores of adults who\nwithout it would never have entered my house. By increasing the general\nbusiness with which I was surrounded, it also greatly facilitated my\ncontact with those who came to me as regular enquirers. All this was\nadditional to the direct effects of the school work, which I have reason\nto believe were exceedingly satisfactory. Altogether school work proved\nin Yezd to be one of the most effective forms of missionary effort.\n\nAt the same time one or two things have to be borne in mind about it.\nFirst of all, it is extremely difficult for the evangelistic missionary\nto organise school work for the teaching of Persian subjects only that\nwill successfully compete with the native schools. Further, the need\nfor such work is not greatly felt by the natives. But the teaching of\nEnglish is one of those things which missionaries are distinctly asked to\nundertake, and which they are able to undertake with great advantage. In\na short time I have no doubt that industrial education will be an even\nmore pressing need. The argument for schools as against classes is that\ntheir effect upon the moral character of the boys is much greater, and\nthat the qualified missionary has by himself time for neither, unless\nindeed the classes are to be very short ones, and the staff that would be\nneeded to properly undertake classes might just as well manage a school.\n\nWith regard to fees, it seems to me that when assistants are employed\nfees should be charged; but to get fees that would really cover the\nexpenses would be impossible, and I personally think that the lower\nthe fee the more easy it is to enforce its payment, and to keep the\narrangements of the school entirely in one\u2019s own hands. This, however,\nis a matter over which there is plenty of room for difference of\nopinion. Of one thing I am certain, and that is that in the up-country\ntowns educational work must begin amongst classes who can support the\nmissionary against Persian intrigues and the direct opposition of the\nMulla class. In starting a school in a Mussulman country the object\nof the missionary must always be to get the establishment regarded as\na settled fact, consequently certain things which would otherwise be\nunimportant become matters of extreme moment. For instance, if anything\nshould happen to the teaching staff, the school must be kept running,\neven if the pupils cannot under the circumstances make great progress.\nAt one time I had to keep the school going when I was myself laid up in\na sick room, and had no assistant capable of teaching much more than the\nprimers. The day\u2019s work for the first class was written out by my wife,\nand sent into the school by a servant. However, the school survived,\nand some while later, when it was again properly staffed, we saw the\neffects of our persistence, for while the town was absolutely under mob\nlaw, the school was never without a certain number of boys attending at\nthe regular hours. Again, when the position of the school is temporarily\nassured, nothing can be better than some sort of public Speech Day,\nwhich both advertises its existence, and makes people understand that\nyou regard its permanence as a matter of course. The fact is that in\nPersia all opposition and persecution is spasmodic, and if you can manage\nto go your own way for a sufficient time and then take your position\nfor granted, you will be allowed to do things which vastly exceed your\nrecognised rights and liberties.\n\nMedical mission work in Persia has been described by those who have been\nactively engaged in it. Under these circumstances I intend to speak very\nmuch less about it than I have done about other methods of work, though\nit is at least as important as any. It would be possible to divide the\nprovinces of medical work in several ways, but it seems to me to be best\ntreated under three heads: hospital work, dispensary work, and medical\nvisiting. The branch of medical work which is most obviously necessary,\nand also perhaps least productive of direct spiritual results is the\nwork of the dispensary. A doctor settled in a Persian town is primarily\nexpected to see all comers and to provide them with medicines. Indeed the\nPersian will come to the European for treatment whether he is a doctor\nor not. The business of the dispensary affords an excellent opportunity\nfor giving an address on religious subjects, but comparatively little for\nsystematic teaching of individuals, though contacts may be made during\ndispensary hours that may lead to further enquiry, and of course even\nsystematic teaching can be given during dispensary hours by a determined\nworker.\n\nMedical visiting is just what the missionary is able to make it. The\nover-worked doctor with more visits than he can pay in the day has to\nbe content with a very occasional reading and a word here and there\nas opportunity offers; but there is no doubt that the opportunity is\nunique, and if time can be made during medical visits for more systematic\nspiritual teaching, such teaching is likely for several reasons to carry\nexceptional weight. Although perhaps medical visits give a better\nopportunity to the doctor who wishes to himself follow up the work with\nreligious teaching, dispensary work affords a much better opportunity\nfor the bringing of other evangelists into such touch with the patients\nas will make it possible to find out any serious enquirers and to rouse\nothers to further interest. The great difficulty in dispensary work\nand medical visiting, regarded as evangelistic agencies in Persia, is\nthat the number of contacts is almost too large to handle. To begin\nwith, the staff of missionaries is inadequate, and the difficulty is\nfurther increased by the peculiarities of the Persian, who in most\ncases is almost untouched by any teaching that is not systematic, and\nthat does not go somewhat deeply into fundamentals. Of course these\nkinds of medical work produce more contacts than does anything else,\nbut the difficulty in Persia is not to bring people within the hearing\nof the Gospels, but to convey to them something of the meaning of the\nGospel. What makes the medical mission of the present time in Persia\nall-important is not that it is absolutely necessary for the purpose of\nbringing the evangelist into touch with the native, though in certain\ntimes and places it may be still greatly needed for this purpose; but\nthe great point is that it has often explained the meaning of Christ\ncrucified to men and women who without it seemed unable to grasp the\nChristian idea. This I believe to be true of all branches of medical\nmission work that I have mentioned, but at the same time it must be\nowned that the branch which has hitherto proved most satisfactory as a\ndirect evangelistic agency is that connected with the hospital. Nobody\ncan speak too highly of the potentialities of hospital work in Persia. It\nis almost inconceivable what misunderstanding of the doctor\u2019s attitude\nis possible in out-patient work in a Mussulman country. He is a bad man\ntrying to work off his sins. He is sent out by the English Government at\na high salary. He is making a very good profit out of the work. He is an\ninstance of the subjection of the infidel to the Mussulman by the power\nof God. All these notions gradually die away under the systematic life\nand discipline of the hospital, with its atmosphere of trust and repose.\nDay by day men meet the doctor and his assistants and learn to know them;\nthey see the quiet persistence of their kindness, and its penetration\ninto the smallest detail; best of all, they hear the Word of God day\nby day brought into a connected story and an intelligible system of\nsalvation. In the best conducted hospitals the only misconception that is\nlikely to remain is the belief that the missionaries as a body are trying\nto win a high place in Heaven by _savabs_. This dies very hard, and\nall we can say is that the hospital system, perhaps partly by its more\ndefinite discipline, tends to eradicate it. It is true that some workers\nhave produced similar results by importing the atmosphere of Christian\nhospital work into the medical visit or the dispensary; but the point to\nbe noted is that what is natural in the Christian hospital has in other\nforms of medical work to be deliberately and persistently fostered.\nIn these if the highest spiritual results are to be obtained, there\nmust be on the part of the worker a determination rather to guide the\norganisation towards them, than to depend on its essential qualities as a\nmissionary force. It is not that hospital equipment is an essential for\na doctor who wants to preach the Gospel, but no matter what a missionary\nmay be, clergyman, lay evangelist, or medical, it is only by getting into\nclose touch with the native, and by systematic and persevering teaching,\nthat he can expect to extend Christ\u2019s Kingdom in Persian towns.\n\nOf course the position of the medical missionary who is invited to the\ntown by those in authority, as is frequently the case, is very different\nfrom that of most other missionaries. There may be a real demand for\nschool teaching, but even when school work has been started and placed\non a satisfactory footing, it never appeals so generally to the interest\nof all classes as to be superior to any intrigue that may arise, or to\nbursts of fanatical bigotry. At the same time the medical missionary who\nhas gone to a new station finds that even when invited he is on trial.\nWhen free medicines are given, as on some occasions they have been for\na short period, two-thirds of the people throw them away without using\nthem. Even those who have invited him are quite ready to turn against\nhim, at any rate behind his back. These difficulties, although real, are\nminor ones, and there are very few European doctors, possessed of an\nordinary amount of common-sense and a good material equipment, who cannot\nget over them in a short while. The real danger is lest the missionary by\nregarding these difficulties as more serious than they really are should\nbecome too absorbed in his efforts to overcome them. Medical work is\nreally an enormous power. It may make possible, under God\u2019s providence,\nsteps and measures which would otherwise be utterly impossible. But if\nit is to be fully used to God\u2019s glory, these God-given powers must be\nrealised, and put forth to their full extent.\n\nMedical and school work have one other advantage besides those that have\nbeen mentioned, for they enable a class of men to participate in mission\nwork who as ordinary evangelistic missionaries would be useless. In\nthe first place, there is the newly-arrived European, who imperfectly\nunderstands the language, and who yet may do more or less effective\nwork while he is still studying, if he is connected with a medical or\neducational organisation. Secondly, if it were not for schools and\nmedical work it would be exceedingly difficult for the Persian missions\nto employ natives, except in menial capacities or in positions attended\nwith the gravest peril. Here to my mind we have one of the greatest\narguments for medical and school work, and this from the directly\nevangelistic standpoint.\n\nThis brings the subject of methods of work in Persian towns like Yezd to\na conclusion. It is not impossible to work as a simple evangelist, but\nit needs certain qualifications and abilities. Generally speaking, the\nordinary missionary must be prepared to use both hands and both feet, and\nto enter in whatever way seems most expedient into the life of the town.\nThere is no room for university work, and technical instruction has not\nyet been tried, but elementary school work and medical work are both much\nneeded and much appreciated, and they further afford an abundant field\nfor directly evangelistic labour.\n\n\n\n\nCONCLUSION.\n\n\nWe have now seen something not only of the Yezdi\u2019s life, of his\ncharacter, and of his mental attitude towards the missionary, but also\nsomething of the way in which the modern missionary attempts to meet this\nattitude. Of course it cannot be claimed that the estimate of the Yezdi\u2019s\nposition that has been made in these pages is in any way final, or that\nit is one with which all acquainted with the subject would certainly\nconcur. To have limited myself to the greatest common measure of opinion\non such a matter would have prevented me altogether from touching on\nmany questions, and would have left me very little to say on others. As\nthe book stands, I can claim that it is truthful in matters of fact, and\nin other things sufficiently sound to form a basis for other people\u2019s\ncorrections; and as many find it less easy to state their own views than\nto combat those of other persons, I am not without hopes that it may be\nuseful, even if my conclusions should prove altogether unacceptable. Also\nit may be pointed out that, though I have throughout spoken of the Yezdi\nand of Yezd, these have been taken as special instances of a Persian and\nhis town. Other places in central Persia may differ in particulars, but\nthere will in most cases be a general similarity.\n\nPerhaps a short summary of the points which have been noted in the\npreceding pages may not be without value. We have seen first of all the\nstrange staccato effect of Persian scenery, particularly of that which\nmeets the eye of the Yezdi, and have noticed how this has influenced the\nYezdi\u2019s mind. Then we have seen the extreme insularity of the town, and\nhow this has given rise to symptoms which resemble intense fanatical\nbigotry, but on the other hand how this insularity may be utilised by\nthe foreigner when it is once understood. Then we have tried to discover\nthe essential system of Islam, and to decide whether or not the Persian\nShiah has been greatly influenced by the prophet\u2019s life and teaching.\nMy own opinion is that Persia is most strongly Mohammedan, but seeing\nthat the point of this book is not so much to express opinions as to\ngive the facts that have led to their formation, I must not complain if\nmany of my readers do not agree with me. An attempt has also been made\nto explain the religiosity of the Mohammedan, and to show that it is\nneither hypocrisy, nor yet religion in the Western sense. Then there was\na chapter on the Yezdi\u2019s character, and I think that in this my main\npoint was to show how superficial is the judgment that pronounces the\nPersian thoroughly weak and effete. He really shows great strength of\npurpose when he has a purpose, he has some peculiar abilities, and is at\nbottom thoroughly likeable and loveable, but he is spoilt by the unhappy\ncircumstances of his existence and very specially by his creed.\n\nAfter that there was an attempt to show the peculiar nature of the search\nafter truth that is just now going on in Persia, and very particularly in\nYezd. That this is God\u2019s doing, intended to prepare the way for Christian\nteaching, I have in my own mind no doubt at all; but I have tried to\ndescribe it as a phenomenon, and sometimes to trace it to immediate\ncauses where such causes are easily discoverable. Lastly, I have tried\nto show that towns like Yezd present a field, not only workable by one\nclass of missionary organisation, but approachable in many different ways.\n\nI sincerely trust that those who have followed the argument of these\nchapters will have come to my own conclusion, that, although there are\nenormous difficulties in missionary work in Persia, there are also\nenormous opportunities, and that there is great reason to expect that\nin such a country things will one day come with a rush: further, that\nwhen the barrier of Mohammedanism is removed, there are grounds for\nhoping that Persian character will recover its equilibrium and the\nnation prove by no means decadent. If in addition the spiritual force\nof Christianity be brought to bear upon the people, Persia may prove in\nthe future the missionary power of the near East. Persia at this moment\nis full of religious enquirers, willing to make immense sacrifices for\ntheir convictions; and behind these there is a mass of simple people,\nreligiously minded and yet utterly dissatisfied with their present creed.\nThere are of course great prejudices still existing against Christianity,\nbut these prejudices have been by God\u2019s blessing broken down in\nindividual instances, and when their nature is better realised they may\nmore generally disappear. It is not necessary to give actual statistics\nwith reference to converts: it is enough to say that the number of those\nwho have come forward in Yezd is sufficient to prove two things; firstly,\nthat God is willing to bless the work very fully, and secondly, that we\nare not quite ready for His blessing.[7]\n\nIf any further proof were needed of God\u2019s willingness to forward the work\nof the Yezd mission, it would be found in the history of the Christian\ninstitutions in the town. The medical work was founded by Dr Henry\nWhite about six years and a half back, he having been in the Isfahan\ndistrict for about twelve months previous to his arrival in Yezd. There\nis now not only a men\u2019s hospital and dispensary in the town, but also\ntwo dispensaries in the outlying villages, and a women\u2019s hospital and\ndispensary under Dr Elsie Taylor. In connection with the medical work one\ncan hardly help mentioning the name of Miss Bird, who really founded the\nwork amongst the women, and that of Dr Griffith, who did most valuable\nwork during the furlough of Dr White.\n\nThe site for the men\u2019s hospital was given to the Society shortly after\nDr White\u2019s arrival, by the late Mr Gudarz, a prominent Parsi merchant in\nthe town. The medical mission in Yezd may be said to be quite as firmly\nestablished as the Government.\n\nI myself came to Yezd six months later than Dr White, without any\nprevious experience of Persia. My successor, Mr Boyland, has now under\nhis charge a school of about sixty boys, Mussulmans, Babis and Parsis,\nwith a staff of native masters. The boys in spite of their religious\ndifferences play football together. The religious teaching in the school\nis given without the slightest concealment. There is also a school for\nParsi girls more lately established by Miss Brighty. In this school\nreligious instruction is also given. When I left Yezd the number of the\npupils was about forty.\n\nI may also mention that in the chapel which we have built in the hospital\nwe often have congregations of over a hundred Persians. The chapel cost\nsomething under a hundred pounds, and the funds were subscribed, all but\ntwenty-five pounds, by the members of the European colony.\n\nIt is a great mistake to regard such work as we have in Yezd as primarily\nof a preparatory nature in view of some future opportunity. Babiism,\nwhich is in some ways more opposed to Christianity than the religion\nof the average Persian Mussulman, is fast gaining ground, and the\nexceptional opportunity, which is occasioned by the preparation of the\nsoil by Babi missionaries who have not yet been successful in planting\ntheir ideas, is fast passing away. It has been already pointed out that\nthere is not much hope of real religious liberty under native rule.\n\nSome people think that there are shortly going to be changes in Persia\nwhich will entirely deprive the British missionary of his opportunity.\nIf we take this view we ought to act quickly. Taking a second and more\nhopeful view of the future, other political developments which might make\nreligious liberty in any sense a reality, would find us by no means in\na position to make the best use of them, unless we had a native church\ngathered in time of stress and strain upon whose judgment to rely.\n\nConsequently mission work in Persia is a matter which demands most\ncareful consideration, most unsparing effort, and most earnest prayer.\nWe ought not to lack recruits. That there are difficulties to be solved\nis true, but when all has been said the overwhelming horror of modern\nMohammedanism, the intense hopefulness of Persian character, and last but\nnot least, the obvious preparation made by God in this country for human\nevangelistic labours, all together present a situation which cannot but\nappeal to the Christian Englishman.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n\n[1] The author has, with a few exceptions, accentuated native words\n_only_ where they first occur in the book.\n\n[2] The dates given with regard to this persecution are approximately\ncorrect; but, although reasonable care has been taken to find the exact\nyear in which the changes of restriction were made, the absolute accuracy\nof some of these dates cannot be guaranteed.\n\n[3] The Yezdi realises the link of a common language, but by this he\nmeans a common dialect. Consequently I have included this idea in\nfellow-townsmanship; it in no way takes the place of the bond of country.\n\n[4] I was informed, however, by Dr Griffith that the Mussulmans of Kirman\nwelcomed his coming and the work of the medical mission on the ground\nthat his _savabs_, being the _savabs_ of an infidel, would be credited\nnot to him but to the account of the Mohammedans of the town, who stood\nrather sorely in need of them.\n\n[5] This only refers to visits of ceremony. When people found that they\ncould come to my house without notice, I often had a continual succession\nof visitors throughout the day.\n\n[6] Certainly the Light also operates inside Islam. During the Babi\nmassacre a number of women who had been horrified by the sights in the\nstreets said to my wife, \u201cThey say that we can\u2019t be Mussulmans if we mind\nthese things, but cannot these things sicken even Mohammedans?\u201d\n\n[7] The opinion that Persia is changing its religion, or at least its\nform of Mohammedanism, is not confined to missionary circles.\n\n\n\n\nGLOSSARY\n\n\n  _Aiv\u0101n_               A kind of portico, or roofed recess.\n\n  _Anjuman_             Assembly, committee.\n\n  _Arkh\u0101l\u016bq_            Under-coat.\n\n  _B\u0101b\u012b_                Follower of the B\u0101b.\n\n  _B\u0101d-g\u012br_             Air-shaft.\n\n  _B\u0101gh_                Enclosed cultivation.\n\n  _Beh\u0101\u012b_               Follower of Beh\u0101u\u2019llah.\n\n  _Ch\u0101dar_              Sheet; especially the cotton shawl worn over the\n                          head and whole body by the women.\n\n  _Ch\u0101rv\u0101d\u0101r_           Muleteer, or donkey caravan driver.\n\n  _Dast\u016br_              Parsi priest.\n\n  _D\u012bv_                 Demon.\n\n  _Farr\u0101sh_             Literally a carpet-sweeper. Really a servant,\n                          chiefly outdoor.\n\n  _Ferang\u012b_             Frank, European.\n\n  _Firm\u0101n_              Government order.\n\n  _Isl\u0101m_               Resignation to God. The name given by Mohammed to\n                          his religion.\n\n  _Jaz\u012bya_              Poll tax levied by Mohammedans on non-Mohammedan\n                          monotheists living in their country.\n\n  _Jin_                 Genius; a being composed of fire.\n\n  _Kaj\u0101va_              A kind of wooden pannier with a hood.\n\n  _Kh\u0101n_                A hereditary title.\n\n  _Kr\u0101n_                A coin worth about 4\u00bdd., the tenth part of a tom\u0101n.\n\n  _Kurs\u012b_               Wooden stool. Especially one used over a pan of\n                          charcoal to support a quilt.\n\n  _L\u0101la_                A spring candlestick with a globe.\n\n  _L\u016bt\u012b_                A rough; a bad character.\n\n  _Man\u2019_                A weight varying in different towns. In Yezd it is\n                          about 13 lbs.\n\n  _Manzil_              Halting-place.\n\n  _Mazra\u2019_              A piece of cultivated land.\n\n  _Mirz\u0101_               Clerk, secretary.\n\n  _Muballigh_           A missionary. The word is generally used of the\n                          Beh\u0101\u012b missionaries in Yezd.\n\n  _Mujtahid_            The highest class of the Mohammedan clergy.\n\n  _Mull\u0101_               A word very like our term \u201cclerk.\u201d It is generally\n                          used of the clergy, but it is sometimes a mere\n                          courtesy title, and sometimes means a man who\n                          can read.\n\n  _Mussulm\u0101n_, _Muslim_ A believer in Islam. One who is resigned to God.\n\n  _Nakhl_               A religious implement.\n\n  _Nij\u0101sat_             Ceremonial uncleanness.\n\n  _Paighambar_          Message bearer, prophet.\n\n  _Paighambar\u012b_         Prophethood.\n\n  _Qab\u0101_                Outer coat.\n\n  _Qal\u0101ntar_            Head-man. The title is used in Yezd for the\n                          head-man of the Parsis.\n\n  _Qali\u0101n_              Persian hookah.\n\n  _Qan\u2019\u0101t_              Underground water-channel.\n\n  _Raiyat_              Agriculturist, a tenant farmer who pays rent in\n                          kind. It also means a subject.\n\n  _R\u016bza kh\u0101n\u012b_          Religious recitation.\n\n  _Saugh\u0101t_             A traveller\u2019s present.\n\n  _Sav\u0101b_               Work of merit.\n\n  _Seyid_               A descendant of Mohammed.\n\n  _Shiah_               Nonconformist. However, there is a Shiah sect held\n                          orthodox in Persia.\n\n  _Sunnat_              Ancient traditions and Commentary on the Quran\n                          accepted by the Sunnis.\n\n  _Sunn\u012b_               A member of the Mohammedan sect accepting the\n                          Sunnat, who are considered orthodox in Turkey,\n                          India, and Africa, as opposed to the Shiahs of\n                          Persia and elsewhere.\n\n  _Taqd\u012br_              Predestination.\n\n  _Taq\u012bya_              Concealment of faith by denial in times of danger.\n\n  _Tauh\u012bd_              Assertion of the Divine Unity.\n\n  _Tom\u0101n_               A sum of money, 10,000 dinars, equivalent to about\n                          3s. 8d.\n\n  _Yail\u0101q_              Summer quarters, generally a village in the hills.\n\n  _Zard\u016bsht\u012b_           Follower of Zard\u016bsht or Zoroaster, the Parsi\n                          prophet.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\n\n  Abb\u0101s, 67\n\n  Abu Jahl, 67\n\n  Abu T\u0101lib, Mohammed\u2019s uncle, 67\n\n  _A\u012bvan_, 18\n\n  Ali, Imam, 75-77\n\n  Ali Mohammed (Bab), 90, 91\n\n  _Anjuman_, 49\n\n  Arb\u0101b Jamsh\u012bd, a wealthy Parsi at Tehran, 51\n\n  Arches, 16\n\n  _Arkh\u0101l\u016bq_, 45\n\n  Armenian Christians, 58, 107\n\n  Aryan Parsis, 62\n\n  Atmosphere, absence of moisture in, 13\n\n\n  B\u0101b, gate of knowledge, 73\n\n  \u2014\u2014, first book-bearer of the Beh\u0101\u012bs, founder of the Babi sect, 90, 91\n\n  Babis, the, 79, 86, 88, 91, 94, 108, 177, 187, 193, 212;\n    massacre of, 104, 155-157, 186;\n    martyrs, 138, 139\n\n  _B\u0101d-g\u012br_, 14, 15, 46\n\n  _B\u0101gh_, 9-11\n\n  Bazaars, 11\n\n  Beh\u0101\u012bs, the, 61, 81;\n    massacre of, 44, 52, 87-89, 104;\n    tenets of, 86, 90, 92-96, 104, 114\n\n  Beha\u016b\u2019llah, first book-bearer of the Beh\u0101\u012bs, 81, 87, 89, 90, 92, 95, 193\n\n  Bigotry, in Yezd, 44\n\n  Bird, Miss, 260\n\n  Boyland, Mr, 261\n\n  Brighty, Miss, 261\n\n  Browne, Professor E. G., translator of the _T\u0101r\u012bkhi Jad\u012bd_, 91\n\n  Bruce, Canon, 58, 59\n\n\n  Carpenters, of Yezd, 23\n\n  Carpets, 22\n\n  Caspian Sea, 2\n\n  _Ch\u0101dar_, 122\n\n  Chairs, 24\n\n  _Church Missionary Intelligencer_, 95\n\n  Church Missionary Society, 55, 230, 232\n\n  Cleanliness, of Yezdis, 26\n\n  Converts, problem of, 196-198, 212-215\n\n  Crime, indifference to, 184\n\n  Curtains, 21\n\n\n  Deserts, salt and sandy, 2, 3\n\n  D\u012bny\u0101r, _Qal\u0101ntar_ of the Parsi Committee, 49\n\n  Divorce, 178\n\n  _D\u012bvs_, 121, 122\n\n  Doors, 19, 20\n\n\n  Etiquette and Manners, of the Yezdis, 158\n\n  European colony, in Yezd, 55\n\n  Evil Eye, 122\n\n\n  Fanaticism, of Yezdis, 54\n\n  _Farr\u0101sh_, 47\n\n  Fireplaces, 21\n\n  Fittings of houses, 21\n\n  Flower-beds, 33, 34\n\n  Forgiveness of sins, Mohammed\u2019s teaching on the, 98\n\n  Furniture, 21-26\n\n\n  Gardens, 9\n\n  Griffith, Dr, 100, 260\n\n  Gudarz, Mr, a prominent Parsi merchant of Yezd, 261\n\n  Gypsum, 17\n\n\n  _Hakim Kh\u0101num_, lady doctor, 102\n\n  _Hanifs_, reformers, 65, 66, 68, 70\n\n  Hasan, Imam, 133, 134\n\n  Heaven and Hell, Mussulman idea of, 98, 99\n\n  Hill villages, 31, 32\n\n  Hookahs, Persian, 25\n\n  Houses, 13-33; built for heat, 29, 30\n\n  Husain, Imam, 133, 134\n\n  Huts, mud, 28\n\n\n  Ibn Ish\u0101k, the biographer, 68\n\n  Ibr\u0101h\u012bm Qal\u012bl Kh\u0101n, 50\n\n  Imam Ali, 75-77\n\n  \u2014\u2014 Hasan, 133, 134\n\n  \u2014\u2014 Husain, 133, 134\n\n  Imams, the, 73, 76, 77\n\n  Industrial missions\u2014a suggestion, 197-201\n\n  Infidels, Persian attitude towards, 130\n\n  Insularity, of Yezd, 36\n\n  Isaiah, quoted, 95\n\n  Isfahan, 36\n\n  Isfahanis, and Yezdis, 38\n\n  Isfandi\u0101r, a Parsi schoolmaster at Taft, 51\n\n  Isl\u0101m, doctrine of, 64, 65, 80-82, 96, 97, 110, 132, 133;\n    has ruined Persia, 112\n\n  Isolation, of Yezd, 36\n\n\n  _Jad\u012bd_, a convert from Parsiism, 62\n\n  Jal\u0101lu\u2019d Daula, the, 52, 183\n\n  _Jaz\u012bya_, 47, 49\n\n  Jews, in Yezd, 44, 52;\n    Mohammed\u2019s dealings with, 71\n\n  _Jins_, 121, 122\n\n  Julfa, a suburb of Isfahan, 58\n\n  _Jus Paternum_, in Yezd, 181\n\n\n  Ka\u2019aba, a heathen temple of the Meccans, 65\n\n  K\u0101sh\u0101n, 7, 43\n\n  Khad\u012bja, wife of Mohammed, 66\n\n  Khal\u012bfs, the, 72, 76\n\n  _Khauf u jiz\u0101_, fear of hell and expectation of heaven, 98\n\n  Kirm\u0101n, 7, 36\n\n  Koelle, _Life of Mohammed_, 67, 68, 71\n\n  K\u016bcha Biyuk, village, 49\n\n  _Kurs\u012b_, 22, 30\n\n\n  _L\u0101la_, 25\n\n  Lamps, 25\n\n  Language, Persian, 152\n\n  L\u0101rist\u0101n, 43\n\n  Lattices, 19\n\n  Ledges, 16\n\n  Looking-glasses, 21\n\n  _L\u016bt\u012bs_, 51, 58\n\n\n  Mahdi, or Mehdi, the last of the Imams, 72, 73, 75\n\n  M\u0101nukj\u012b Limj\u012b, Parsi representative in Tehran, 48, 50\n\n  _Manzil_, 34\n\n  Marriages, Persian, 178\n\n  _Mazra\u2019_, 4, 5\n\n  Mecca, 63, 65, 69, 70\n\n  Medical Missions, in Yezd, 55, 229, 248-254\n\n  Medina, 63, 70, 71\n\n  Mihraban, a Parsi, 64\n\n  Miracle play, Muharram, 126, 134\n\n  Missionary in Persia, the, his difficulties, 188-216;\n    the problem of converts, 196-198, 212-215;\n    his tasks and duties, 217-255;\n    philanthropic work, 229-232;\n    poor relief, 232-239;\n    school and medical work, 239-254\n\n  Missions, Christian, tolerated in Yezd, 55, 56;\n    industrial, 197-201\n\n  Mohammed, 63-72, 84, 85, 90, 91, 96, 97, 112, 113, 128, 130;\n    his birth, 65;\n    his wife, 66;\n    head of the _Hanif_ movement, 67;\n    his admiration of the Jews, 124\n\n  Mohammedanism, Persian, 60, 64-114;\n    aspects in Yezd of, 115-135\n\n  Monogamy, 177, 178\n\n  Mountain streams, 5\n\n  _Muballigh_, teacher and missionary, 88, 89\n\n  Mud, use of, 12;\n    huts of, 28\n\n  Muhammad Hasan Khan, Governor of Yezd, 48\n\n  Muharram, 133\n\n  _Mujtahid_, 46-48, 56, 58, 73-75, 88\n\n  Mulla Bahr\u0101m of Khuramsh\u0101r, a Parsi, 48\n\n  _Mun\u0101fiq\u012bn_, hypocrites, 80\n\n  Mush\u012bru\u2019l Mam\u0101lik, the, 51\n\n  Mussulman _v._ Armenian morality, 118\n\n  Muzaffaru\u2019d D\u012bn, Shah, 49\n\n\n  _Nakhl_, 134\n\n  N\u0101siru\u2019d D\u012bn, Shah, 48\n\n  N\u0101siru\u2019d D\u012bn, Mulla, and his mule, story of, 149\n\n  _Nij\u0101sat_, 132\n\n  Non-conformity in Persia, 61\n\n\n  Oasis, 3, 4\n\n  Omar, Khal\u012bf, 76, 135\n\n  Opium trade, 170\n\n  Ornamentation, of houses, 17\n\n\n  _Paighambar\u012b_, 84, 85, 96, 110, 127\n\n  Parsis in Yezd, oppression and persecution of, 44-52\n\n  Pilgrimages, Mussulman, 118, 128\n\n  Plain, a typical Persian, 7\n\n  Polygamy, 177\n\n  Poor relief, 232-239\n\n  Postal arrangements, in Yezd, 36\n\n\n  _Qab\u0101_, 45, 48\n\n  _Qal\u0101ntar_, 49\n\n  _Qali\u0101n_, 25\n\n  Qum, 119\n\n  _Qur\u0101n_, the, 73, 74, 76, 77, 92, 93, 105, 107-109, 119, 120, 124, 130\n\n\n  Rainfall, 6, 29\n\n  Ramaz\u0101n, Mohammedan Fast, 78\n\n  Rasht, 43, 233\n\n  Rice, Rev. W. A., 95\n\n  Rustami Ardish\u012bri D\u012bny\u0101r, a Parsi, 49\n\n  _R\u016bza kh\u0101n\u012b_, 126, 196\n\n\n  Sah\u0101mu\u2019l Mulk, 51\n\n  _S\u0101hibi kit\u0101b_, a book-bearer, Mohammed regarded as the last, 72\n\n  Sal\u0101mat, a Parsi, 51\n\n  Salt and sandy deserts, 2, 3\n\n  _Saugh\u0101ts_, 162\n\n  _Sav\u0101bs_, 98-105\n\n  School work, in Yezd, 239-248\n\n  _Seyid_, a descendant of Mohammed, 50, 101, 102\n\n  Shaikhi sect, the, 91\n\n  _Shahr_, a town, 39\n\n  Shiahs, or nonconformists, 60, 73-78, 86, 87, 93-98, 103, 105-109, 124,\n    128, 134, 177, 212\n\n  Sh\u012br\u0101z, 36, 43\n\n  Silkworms, 233\n\n  Soldiers, Persian, 156\n\n  Streams, mountain, 5\n\n  Subhi Azal, second book-bearer of the Beh\u0101\u012bs, 90, 92\n\n  Sufis, sect of the, 86, 108\n\n  Summer buildings, 15, 29\n\n  _Sunnat_, 73, 74\n\n  Sunnis, and their creed, 63, 72, 74, 77, 80, 94, 106\n\n  Superstition, 121-123\n\n\n  Tables, 23, 24\n\n  Taft village, 51, 134\n\n  _T\u0101l\u0101r_, summer portico, 14, 15\n\n  _T\u0101qchas_, ledges, 16, 24-26\n\n  _Taqd\u012br_, 97\n\n  _Taqiya_, 212\n\n  _T\u0101r\u012bkhi Jad\u012bd_, 91\n\n  _Tauhid_, 127\n\n  Taylor, Dr Elsie, 260\n\n  Teheran, 2\n\n  Telegraph line, native, 37\n\n  T\u012brand\u0101z, a Parsi, 49\n\n  _Tom\u0101n_, 47\n\n  Trinket boxes, 26\n\n  Turners, of Yezd, 23\n\n\n  Uncleanness, degrees of, 130-132\n\n  Untruthfulness of Persians, 116, 142\n\n\n  _Vatan_, home-district, 39\n\n  Villages, 8;\n    hill-, 31, 32\n\n\n  Walls, house-, 16\n\n  Waraka ibn Nawfal, a prominent _Hanif_, 66\n\n  Water system, 6\n\n  White, Dr Henry, 204, 260, 261\n\n  Windows, 19, 20\n\n  Winter rooms, 18\n\n\n  _Yail\u0101q_, 31\n\n  Yaz\u012bd, 134\n\n  Yezd district, houses in, 1-35;\n    its isolation and insularity, 36\n\n  Yezdis, and Isfahanis, 38;\n    their religion, 111, 120-126;\n    character of the, 136-187;\n    systematised inconsistency, 137;\n    loyalty, 138;\n    sense of shame, 147;\n    humour, 148;\n    their disregard of time, 150;\n    difficulties of their language, 152;\n    lack of initiative, 154;\n    their courage, 155;\n    etiquette and manners of, 158;\n    their triviality, 160;\n    pride, 165, 166;\n    kindliness, cruelty, 166;\n    dishonesty, 142, 168;\n    lack of business habits, 171;\n    fatalism, 173;\n    latent strength, 176;\n    their family ties, 177;\n    _jus paternum_, 181;\n    religious liberty, 181-183;\n    indifference to crime, 184;\n    open-handness, 184\n\n\n  Zaid, 71\n\n  Zaid ibn Amr, 66\n\n  Zainab, 71\n\n  Zard\u016bsht\u012b (Zoroastrian), 50\n\n  Zillu\u2019s Sult\u0101n, 50, 52\n\n  Zoroastrians, in Yezd, 46-53, 113\n\nPRINTED AT THE EDINBURGH PRESS, 9 AND 11 YOUNG STREET.\n\n[Illustration: CENTRAL PERSIA illustrating FIVE YEARS IN A PERSIAN TOWN.\n\nBy the Rev. Napier Malcolm.]","title":"Five Years in a Persian Town","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":58063}