per

Christ's flock. Mahomet's revengefulness of temdoes not seem to have been if it were greater, not less, than that of the average specimen of an Arab; neither do the annals of his early years present any feature which is morally reprehensible. But the remaining objection, that Mahomet produced fresh chapters of the Koran to justify his own acts, is certainly more serious, and needs some fuller consideration.

The circumstances were as follows:-Zayd, son of Haritha (not to be confounded with the Zayd already named, who was son of Amr), had been adopted as a son by Mahomet. The prophet himself had given one of his cousins to Zayd in marriage, a lady who united much elegance of mind to great personal beauty-Zeynab, the daughter of Djahch. On a visit to Zayd's house, Mahomet was deeply struck with the charms of Zeynab, and uttered words of admiration, which were probably involuntary. But Zayd being informed of this, insisted on resigning his wife to one from whom he had received great benefits; and Zeynab certainly appears to have displayed no reluctance to make the exchange. Murmurs, however, were heard from some, it being contrary to Arabian usage, that any man should take the wife of an adopted son, however formally she might have been divorced. These murmurs were disregarded: the marriage was celebrated with greater magnificence than any of his former nuptials; and in the Koran (chap. xxxiii.) came forth a general permission to the Mussulmans to marry henceforth the divorced wives of adopted sons. The other occasion of this kind is far more lowering to his character. In March A.D. 630, his Coptic slave, Maria, gave birth to a son. In joy of the event,

-for he had no male issue-he enfranchised her. The son died at the end of the year, and according to Arabian usage, Maria having ceased to be a slave, was likewise obliged to resign a position which had been similar to that of Hagar in Holy Scripture. Mahomet's unwillingness thus to part led to quarrels with Hafsa, one of his wives, and subsequently with the rest. Hafsa he divorced, and the rest he kept separate for a month; but on the intercession of his fathers-in-law, Omar and Abu Beker, reinstated all into their old positions. He had first, however, by a fresh addition to the Koran (chap. lxvi.) freed himself from the oath he had made to Hafsa to resign Maria; and, in the same chapter, lectured his wives for their revolt.

Those who believe Mahomet to have been in the main sincere, may yet consider that on these, and some other occasions, he was inconsistent. Those who denounce him as wholly hypocritical, have, of course, not failed to make the most of such an extraordinary course of procedure. The former of these conclusions is the one hinted at by Gibbon and Mr. Carlyle; and followed in the main by Dr. Weil, Mr. Irving, M. Renan, and others: the latter is that of men so different as Dean Prideaux and Voltaire. There is, however, a third line of argument, that, namely, in palliation of Mahomet's conduct, which is vigorously urged by Dr. Möhler. And it is only fair that it should be set forth; which we proceed to do, without committing ourselves either to the acceptance or rejection of the professor's views upon what appears to us a very curious and difficult question of psychology.

Möhler, then, after narrating, almost as we have

done, the above transactions, asks what judgment we are to form upon them? do they not indicate the most thoroughly conscious deceit? Such, he observes, was the opinion of Voltaire, who supported his view of Mahomet by reference to the affair of Zayd. But I,' he replies, hold such a 'view to be unhistorical; and maintain that if one admits the possibility of his own individual im'pressions, ideas, and thoughts passing, without sus'picion, for divine inspirations, I cannot perceive 'the impossibility of his considering God to be the 'Author of all his other inward impulses." He

2

then refers to the Herodotean account of the practice of the daughters of Babylon at the temple of Mylitta, and similar disgraceful customs in Carthage, Malta, Cyprus, Phoenicia, Syria, and India, (he might have added Nicaragua and Peru,) as a proof how men may come to regard the basest rites as allowable, and even divinely authorized. Mahomet, he proceeds to say, was in the above transactions inspired by the same spirit as theseto wit, an earthly spirit (Erdgeiste). It was certainly a relapse into sheer paganism; but it is likewise,' adds Möhler, at the same time clear, 'that he might be convinced of the divinity of that 'inspiration, and act upon it in good faith. The 'bona fides of Mahomet is especially evident from this, that the two events in question were the 'occasion of two Suras (i. e. chapters) of the

16 Ich halte eine solche Betrachtungsweise für unhistorich und gestehe, dass ich, wenn man die Möglichkeit zugibt, seine individuellen religiösen Empfindungen, Vorstellungen und Gedanken für Gottliche Inspirationen ganz arglos auszugeben, die Unmöglichkeit nicht begreife, Gottauch als Urheber seiner übrigen inneren Bewegungen zu betrachten.'-P. 368 (note).

2 Herod. book i. c. 199. He calls it, i aixoTOS TŴY VÓμWY.

'Koran. Surely he would never have immortal'ised them in this manner if he had been conscious of evil." He further demands, how it came to pass that these events caused no diminution of the respect paid to Mahomet, as a prophet, by his followers; and were not adduced until modern times, to raise any doubt concerning his sincerity. Such is the defence of Möhler. We leave it to do its work, simply observing, that while the phrase of an earthly spirit' seems somewhat lenient in such cases, and suggests the other epithets which an inspired writer has on one occasion added, yet that learned men (we give an instance in a foot-note) corroborate this view of Babylonian rites, and that the subsequent arguments are certainly deserving of the fullest consideration. But whatever be the reader's conclusion on these points, there remains an amount of positive evidence for the general sincerity of Mahomet, the force of which it is most difficult to gainsay. It may be, that the power of allurement which spiritual conquest over other hearts possesses for a mind like his, is somewhat overlooked by

Es leuchtet aber auch zugleich ein, dass er von der Göttlichkeit jener Inspiration überzeugt seyn und bonâ fide handeln konnte. Die bona fides Mahommeds ist aber besonders daraus ersichtlich, dass ihm die beiden beigebrachten Thatsachen Veranlassung zu zwei Suren gaben. Gewiss aber würde er das Andenken an die selben nicht in dieser Weise verewigt haben wenn er sich des Bösen bewusst gewesen wäre.'-P. 369.

2 S. James, iii. 15.

3Neque omninò è corruptis Babyloniorum moribus hunc morem explicari posse aut origines cepisse, quivis, me vel non animadvertente, sentiet. Ad ipsam enim religionem pravasque de diis conceptas opiniones respiciendum esse, ubi hæc et talia legimus, vix dubitandum,' &c.-Bähr in Herod. lib. i. cap. 199; (tom. i. p. 445. Lipsiæ, 1830.)

Irving, Caussin, and even by Möhler. But, taking into account the natural workings of an ardent imagination (exalted by meditation and solitude) on one who appeared at a season when many of his countrymen were looking for fresh light, and some even expecting the advent of a prophet; the late period of life at which he announced his mission; the conviction of Kadijah and of others most dear to him, who had known him from his earliest youth; the endurance for twelve years of every species of raillery, insult, and persecution; the utter rejection of all offers of wealth and chieftainship, when made on the condition of his discontinuing his efforts; the simplicity of his mode of life to the very last (dates and water frequently the only food of himself and his household, and sometimes no fire in the house for a whole month;) the thorough confidence in-wrought into the minds of such men as Omar and Abu Beker; we cannot, we repeat, see in this man the merely ambitious conqueror, or the deceiver, without faith in himself or his own mission.1 And then, again, the Koran: poor and monotonous as it may well appear besides the pages of the inspired seers of Israel; wearisome as its perusal must soon prove to us, who read it divested by translation of all charms of diction and of rhythm; yet does it, after all, look like the production of a mere impostor? Möhler recognises in it 'a very original piety, a moving devotion, a thoroughly 'individual religious poetry, which cannot possibly "be forced or artificial.' And how is it possible, he eloquently asks, that a religious fire, wild

1 See Möhler, p. 370; Caussin (Preface); Irving; Carlyle, &c.