An Enquiry in To The Destruction of The Grand Alexanderian Library - Allama Shibli Nomani

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE
DESTRUCTION OF
THE ANCIENT
ALEXANDRIAN
LIBRARY
A definitive answer from
Allama Shibli Nomani

Translated by:
Muhammad Ghouse Sayeed
AN ENQUIRY
INTO THE
DESTRUCTION OF THE ANCIENT
ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY,
tuyc.)^
BY
MOULVI SHIBLI NOMANI,

Professor of Arabic,
M. A.
0. College,
AUgarh
FREE TRANSLATION (FROM THE ORIGINAL URDU.)
BY
MUHAMMAD GHOUSE
T}an$l<itcr.
City Civil
Comtt
t>
SAYEED,
Hyderabad,* Deccan.
Price, Govt. AvnaIs Eight.

j
PRINTED BY
VEST
AND
COMPANY,
MOUNT
ROAD,
AND
PUBLISHED BY THE TRANSLATOR, HYDERABAD, DECCAN.

1893.
[All Rights Reserved.]
%.^
m>
\ fa
^xLv.
)\\
Up,
17
DEDICATED
BY KIND PERMISSION
TO
NAWAB MOHSINUL-MULK, MOHSINUD-DOWLAB

MOULVI SYED MAHDI
ALI
KHAN BAHADUR
MUNIR NAVAZ JUNG,

Financial Secretary,
to
HIS HIGHNESS
THE NIZAM'S GOVERNMENT;
WHO, BY HIS EDUCATION, ATTAINMENTS, IMPRESSIVE

ELOQUENCE, POSITION AND PRINCIPLES,
HAS DESERVEDLY ATTAINED TO THE HIGH STATUS OF A
LEADING MEMBER OF
THE MUHAMMADAN COMMUNITY;

Who
AND
Takes a Deep Interest in the Spread
of Truth and the Diffusion
of
Knowledge
by
His Most Obedient Servant,
MUHAMMAD GHOUSE
Hyderabad, Deccan,
ist
March, 1893.
SAYEED.
TRANSLATOR'S NOTE.
The
Translator begs to state that while keeping to the sense of the original Urdu, he has tried
to give as free a rendering as circumstances
permitted.
He
takes this opportunity of expressing his best
thanks to Moulvi
Shibli INIomani, Professor of
Arabic, Aligarh College, and Author of the original,

in
Urdu,
for the readiness
with which he kindly
permitted the publication of the translation.
The Translator
is
Aziz Mirza, Esq.,

Secretary,
Muhammad
Assistant Home
highly grateful to
b.a.,
u.r.a.s.,
H. H. the Nizam's Government,
for
the literary help he has received from him, and
begs hereby to acknowledge the same.

In conclusion, he has also to thank the Printers,
Messrs. Vest and Co., for the neatness of the
printing
and the general get-up.
MUHAMMAD GHOUSE
Hyderabad, Deccan,
i
st
March,
893.
SAYEED.
AN ENQUIRY
INTO THE

ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY.
Of
the
arose in
and
many mistaken
Europe
still
notions that at one time
in relation to the history of Islam,
continue to possess the public mind, the
subject of this brochure
Though
is
one.
the Europeans had, from a long time
previous, ample
means
of acquainting themselves
with the true history of the Mussalmans, the foundation of their present
knowledge
of that history
only laid during the period of the Crusades.
was
The
impression, which the Europeans began to have of

the Mussalmans, at this period, when, in the words
of the historians, they
ness and to
politics,
began
emerge from dark-
to
make any progress
was mainly
in literature
and
that they were a fighting,
destructive and barbarous people, and, worst of

all,
they were the enemies of the Sacred Cross, as
also of Jerusalem,
the holy
place of Christian
worship.
About this time also, numerous strange stories

began to spread in Europe about the Mussalmans,
The erronewhich was of course but natural.
ous and unfounded notionsthat prevailed in Europe
regarding the religion, nationality and social manners and customs of the Mussalmans, by -and -bye
reached such a stage of notoriety that they came

to be quoted as proverbs
by high and low.
When
in course of time, books,
such as histories,
stories,
novels and philosophical works,
came
posed, these current ideas found their
To mention an
them.
into
in his essay
on
'
to be
way
Boldness,' writes
largely
Bacon,
instance.
:
com-
Muhammad
one day, trying to convince his audience that he
was the
true
present, to
sight,
asked
prophet,
go to a distant
and order
it
to
come
those that were
which was in
him whereupon
hill
to
But how
could a hill move ? When Muhammad saw that
this was the case, instead of feeling ashamed, with
men
the
carried the message to
great sauvity,
the
If
mad
hill will
will
said
"
not
come
go to the
Oh,
to
it
it.
does not matter
Muhammad, Muham-
hill."*
The
author's translation of Bacon's language is evidently

The following is an extract from the 4( Essay "
itself
" Muhammad made the people believe that he would
call a hill to him, and from the top of it offer up his prayers
*
incorrect.
:
for the observers of his law.
mad
called the hill to
when
the
said
'
will
hill
stood
come
still,
If the hill will not
go to the
The people assembled Muhamto him again and again

and
:
he was never a whit abashed, but
come
to
Muhammad, Muhammad
hill.'
So these men, when they have promised great matters, and

most shamefully, yet, if they have the perfection of
boldness, they will but slight it over, and make a turn, and
no more ado."
failed
Thus the inference which

is
the author draws from the extract

consequently
erroneous
Translator.
also

Bacon was no
have cited
historian, nor does
any way derogatory to

but he only mentioned it as
this instance in
the great Prophet
an
he appear to
illustration, in the course of a dissertation
Boldness'
on
the reason being, that such traditions
had permeated the atmosphere of Europe, and the

public had accepted them as fundamental truths.
During the
Europe has
last century, or
inclined
century and a
more and more
half,
to a critical
enquiry into the truth of such traditions, which
has resulted in an ever-increasing exposure of their

groundlessness
historians of
fact, that
so
much
so,
that the celebrated
Europe have begun
to accept
they are a source of disgrace to Europe.
Carlyle in his lecture on Heroes and

said
"
as a
it,
Hero worship,
The
round
lies,
this
which well-meaning zeal has heaped
man, (Muhammad), are disgraceful
to
ourselves only."
As
the lecture
was on Muhammad, Carlyle had
to confine himself to the allegations against the pro-
phet; he might otherwise have dealt with the
many
current false traditions regarding Islam and
its
Though modern research has tended to

lessen the number of these erroneous beliefs, it has
not yet succeeded in demolishing them in toto.
The reason, however, is that these traditions,
history.
having obtained a very wide circulation among the
nations of Europe, their truth could only be fear-
by such critics, as did not find

themselves overwhelmed with the weight of public
lessly enquired into
And
opinion.
indeed
critics
of this
but few
class are
Again, in every nation, critical enquirers are
always
in the
minority.
deserve to be believed
Though only such

in,
as the
critics
facts
them-
selves have, after careful enquiry, accepted

their researches
yet
do not find their way beyond the
select few, to the sphere of the general public, or
into popular works.
Thus the celebrated
critics of
Europe, such as Gibbon, Carlyle, Godfrey Higgins,
Bosworth,* Renan, &c, have discarded
many
of
the current European traditions regarding Islam,

as
unfounded
entirely
notwithstanding which,
however, they continue to find a place in popular

works.
Of such
a nature is the tradition of the destruc-
tion of the Alexandrian Library.
The
pertinacity
with which the Europeans have insisted on the

tradition
surprising in the extreme.
is
Novels, Stories, Proverbs, Poems,

all refer
ature,
One
&c,
it.
Philosophy,
ten.
Fables,
Turning from the region of literwe proceed to works on Logic and
to
if
Histories,
we
find that the charge
is
not forgot-
of the questions set in Logic, for the
Evidently, Bosworth
Smith. Translator.
First in Arts
sity of 1882,
Examination
was "
of the Calcutta Univer-
Point out the fallacy in the
Book
following :- Writings which agree with the

of
it
God
are useless
and those that disagree with
ought to be destroyed."
Another question which strikes us

nection,
is
in this con-
why do the Europeans display so much
sympathy with the Alexandrian Library

acknowledged on
all
It is
hands that the Christians had
no connection with the library, the idolatrous
Kings of Egypt having founded

the advent of Christ.
sympathy
It
it, centuries
may be
said that this
the result of the appreciative and
is
philanthropic spirit of European society

this so,
we
selected
ask,
but were
why has Alexandria been
specially
Other large libraries have shared this
alleged fate, and no hue

raised.
before
Who
and cry has ever been
has lamented, or proclaimed to the
world, the destruction of the libraries of Persia
by Alexander the Great, or the destruction by the

Christians of Spain, of millions of books and other
monuments
centuries
is
this
of
learning collected
by the Mussalmans
special
Library due
sympathy
for
during
long
To what then
the Alexandrian
The fact, however,

that this library
is,
as
we
shall presently
show,
was destroyed by the Christians
themselves, led to do so by their religious leaders.
At the time, the act was gloried
in
but when, with
spread of
the
Europe found,
civilization
and enlightenment,
to its dismay, that the stain of this
was found that the only

effacing it, was to transfer
barbarous act clung to
it, it
means of
the blame to some other nation. When the Mussalmans conquered Egypt and took Alexandria,
there was not a trace of this library but prejupracticable
diced Christians attributed the alleged barbarian
As Europe was then blinded by
act to them.
prejudice and sunk in ignorance, no one cared

to enquire into the truth
false accusation
The
fate
in
been deplored by
language which leads one
that the library
however,
consequently spread far and wide.
of the library has
Europeans
is
and the
of the story,
was
their
own
the popular opinion
to believe
collection.
up
Such,
to the present
day, for no one has ever thought of attributing

the act to the
Christians themselves,
evident, that no nation
will ever
as, it
destroy
its
is
own
handiwork.
But what truth is there in this allegation, whose

echo, atone time, filled every part of Europe?
Alas It is entirely unfounded How then was it
!
such an
possible for
attain such publicity
length of time, in
The
is
question
is
and
it is
less allegations
and acceptance,
all
for
to
such a
the countries of Europe
apparently
not far to seek.
out
unfounded statement
difficult,
but the answer
As we have already pointed
not to be wondered at, such base-
and hundreds of similar unfounded
were very generally accepted as true,
during the middle ages, in Europe. As civilization
advanced, the matter came to be discussed and
traditions
many
a celebrated writer disputed its truth.
indeed astonishing to find that even

people
who
been once
Two
first
there are
believe in the truth of such an allega-
though
tion,
now
It is
to
have
considered proved.
for all
may be
reasons
ought, long ago,
falsity
its
assigned for
In the
this.
place, even in a progressive age, the spirit of
ignorance and barbarism does not become altogether extinct
do
so.
nor
is
it
possible that
it
should
In the next place, the European method
of conducting
enquiries
seldom leads to a
final
into
historical
The
decision.
events
original
and the discus-
object of research
is lost
sion digresses on
the intellectual and the conjec-
sight of,
many minor
undeserved importance. The
tural possibilities of its occurrence,
points thus acquiring
discussion
tions
gradually assumes enormous propor-
but the original point remains undecided.
The present
show.
is
an instance, as the sequel
will
This subject has been under discussion
in
Europe for a long time, and numerous standard

works have been written on it. In many of the general histories of the Mussalmans, the authors have,
after referring to
it,
opinions regarding
left
its
on record their personal
truth or falsity.
It
may
not
be out of place here to give a general idea of the

nature of the works bearing on the subject,
that

have been consulted by the author, as quotations

from them are given in their appropriate places.
among
Foremost
Gibbon's History
of
refer particularly to the
Conquest
we
them,
would
mention
Roman Empire, and
the
Chapter on the " Moslem
which contains a few
of Alexandria,"
short, but critical remarks.
^Egyptica, or observations on certain Antiquities
Egypt
of
by
J.
White, d.d. Professor of Arabic,
University of Oxford, 1801, in which the learned
author supports the tradition.

Successors
of
Muhammad
by Washington
Irving, page 113.
The Saracens; Story
of Nations Series, page
254-
History of Arabia, Ancient and Modern
Andrew
by
Crichton, page 393.
History of Conflict between Religion and Science,
by Draper, pages 103 and
The London
and
of,
Spectator
another
Spectator dated
104.
has an Essay
Histoire Generale
Tom,
support
tradition.
Vide
2nd and 23rd June, 1888.
Encyclopaedia Britannica
lot
the
against,
in
(article Alexandria).
Des Arabes Par L. A.

;
Sedil-
De
Professor
Sacy's Translation
and Note
of,
Abdul Latif Bagdadee's book, containing
on,
lengthened discussion.
Mr.
Krell's (of
read before
Germany) paper on the
the fourth
session
of the
subject,
Oriental
Congress, held at Florence in September, 1878.
The most important

regards this tradition
sion
in
European
matter, however,
is,
or
is
point to be discussed as
whether
Arabian
it
finds expres-
The
histories.
not disputed,
for,
favourable
and unfavourable authorities are both agreed on
The
it,
majority of European historians
who
it.
refer to
do not maintain that they rely on any indepen-
dent authority, but profess their indebtedness to
Arabic
shall
historians.
now
came
proceed to
this
may
be,
we
this baseless story
to be current in Europe.
The
first
man
to give publicity to
was Abulpharagius.
cian
However
trace how
The
it
in
Europe,
son of a Jewish physi-
named Aaron, he was born
in 1226 a.d., in
As his father was a convert to Christihe was brought up in the principles of that
Malatia.
anity,
religion.
Besides his knowledge in divinity, he
acquired an intimate acquaintance with the Arabic
and the Syrian languages.

Oa account of his
learning, he was appointed Bishop of Guba in the
twenty-first year of his age.
Gradually he reached
the dignity of Primate of the Jacobites, next only to

that of Patriarch.
Abulpharagius wrote an ex-

io
haustive history in the Syrian language compiled
from Syrian, Arabic, Persian and Greek sources.
He
work in Arabic,
called Mukhthasarud-Dawal, which was published
with a Latin version in 1664 by Dr. Pocock, Professor, Oxford College. There are several editions
also wrote an Abstract of this
of this work, all of which, however, are imperfect.
In some parts, the Abstract goes beyond the original Syrian.
It is
uncertain, whether the additions
were made by Abulpharagius himself, or are

polations, due to
some one
else.
inter-
In this Abstract,
the destruction of the Alexandrian Library by

has; for the
through
its
and
time, found mention,
first
fire
is
it
Latin version that this tradition reached
every part of Europe. Gibbon in his history writes
" Since
the Dynasties of Abulpharagius have
been given to the world
in
Latin version, the tale
has been repeatedly transcribed."

Irving, Arthur Gleen, M.A.,Mr.
tions against the
its
Washington
Crichtonand many
other authors have also admitted
false,
it.
All tradi-
Mussalmans, whether true or
were, about the time the Latin version
appearance, greedily accepted as true
made
in con-
sequence of which, feelings of detestation and hatred
began
it
was
to
that the tradition
began
to
permeate every
kind of European literature with great
The
Thus
be entertained against that nation.
following
is
force.
the literal translation of what
Abulpharagius wrote:
(vide
Mukhthasarud-Daw al
by Abulpharagius, London, 1663, pages 180
181).
" At this time, John,
name
who had
derived the sur-
of Philoponus (from his laborious studies in
grammar and
the Arabs.
was w ell known among

native of Alexandria and a
philosophy,)
He was
When,
Jacobite Christian.
subsequently, he reject-
ed the Christian doctrine of Trinity, the priests of
Egypt assembled together and

retract his heresy
called
upon him
but he did not listen to them.
The priests thereupon degraded him from
He
to
lived to a very old age
his rank.
when Amr
for,
Ibnul-
A'as took Alexandria, he presented himself before
Amr had
him.
heard of the ability of Philoponus
and he therefore received him with great respect,

and listened
to his
discourses on philosophical
subjects, such as the
Arabs had never known. As
Amr
himself was a clever and intelligent man, he
was
greatly struck
He
therefore found John's
and became charmed with him.
and never allowed him
"
One
company indispensable
to leave his side.
day, John said to Amr,
<
You have taken
possession of every thing in Alexandria.

object to your keeping that which
but
think that
we people
are
is
do not
useful to you,
more
entitled to
the possession of those things that are not useful

to you.'
Amr
replied
that he
asked him what he wanted.
works contained
wanted as a
gift,
John
the philosophical
in the royal libraries.
Amr
replied

12
that he could do nothing in the matter without
the sanction of the Caliph,
who was
communicated with in reply

ing order was received
;
accordingly
which the
to
follow-
" If the writings, you refer
to,
with the Book of God, there
them,
are in accordance
is
no necessity
But
in the face of its existence.
if
for
they are
God, you better commence

destroying them."
Amr distributed the books
among the numerous baths of Alexandria, and
against the
Book
of
ordered that they should be burnt.
In short,
took six months for them to be consumed.
and wonder
The
for
Read
!"
tradition in this form,
a long time
-enquire into
it
its
but
truth.
it
went on spreading
occurred to no one, to
The
first
man who
criti-
was the celebrated historian

Gibbon, the founder of the modern style of history,
who wrote " For my own part, I am strongly
tempted to deny both the fact and the consequences." Gibbon adduced several reasons for
this rejection
among which are that Abulpharagius was born five" hundred years after the event,
and that no writer before him, even among ChrisHow, then, can the
tian historians, mentions it.
cally
examined
it,
evidence of Abulpharagius be considered reliable?
When
Gibbon rejected the
tradition as untrue,
Evidently a mistake for six hundred.
Translator.
Europe awoke from its slumber
numerous learned men devoted
13
of ignorance
and
their time to criti-
on the subject.
After Gibbon, two
classes of critics arose, one of
which upheld, while
cal researches
As
the other rejected the tradition.
it
an ac-
is
fact that in the first century after the
knowledged
Hegira, no contemporary History of Islam was

written in Europe,
follows that
it
that have been compiled
compiled
in
up
the histories
to date, or are being
Europe, regarding the Prophet and the
four Caliphs, are based
first
all
upon Moslem works.
We therefore find that those who wanted to
prove
the truth of this tradition, also had to refer to Ara-
bian historians for confirmation of their theories.
Mr. Crichton, (who

rejection) in his
writes:
If this
is
angry with Gibbon
work on the " History
for his
of Islam,"
circumstance were entirely depen-
dent upon the evidence of a stranger (Abulphara-
who wrote six hundred

then we must pause before
gius)
ment
But
of the
this
Armenian
statement
is
alone, for, Makreezi
written histories of
his
not based upon his writings
and Abdul
He
who have
earliest times,
Mr. Krell has openly
writes that, to the best of
mentioned primathe history compiled by Abdul Latif, who
was born
event.
Latif,
Egypt from the
knowledge, the tradition
rily in
accepting the state-
historian (Abulpharagius).
also mention this tradition.
accepted this view.
years after the event,
five
is
hundred years
after the
alleged

14
The
tradition being thus solely based on Arabic
histories,
it is
very easy to come to a conclusion as

In the matter of acquaintance
to its authenticity.
we have
with Arabic writings,
than the Europeans,
man
the proverb goes, " a
house knows more of
in the
The European
an outsider."
quote Abdul
it,
for, as
a greater claim
its
condition than
writers
who uphold
Makreezi and
Latif Bagdadi,
Haji Khalifa as authorities, ad nauseam, and add

that these historians are very reliable and their
One English
evidence cannot be rejected.
writer,
evidently unacquainted with the subject, has even
gone the length of quoting Ibn-i-Khaldoun as his

authority
and, with characteristic
ness, wrote
Ibn-i-Khaldoun
shamefaced-
has, in his history of
Caliph Omar, mentioned this tradition. Ibn-i-Khaldoun
history
is
a well-known work, but in no part
of the chapter on
Omar
about this
Having thus disposed
fiction.
is
there a single word

of Ibn-i-
Khaldoun, there remain only the three above men-
tioned authors upon whose writings the tradition
is
apparently based.
We
now turn
our attention to the critical ex-
amination of this tradition from the historical point

of view, in the course of
the
authority,
which we
shall
which the European
show
historians
derive from these authors, does not exist.

critical
examination
methods may be adopted

and
(2) the
historical
of
" probable."
(i)
By
that
In the
events,
two
the " authoritative";

'
authority'
we mean
15
some
the basis of an event on the testimony of
person
who was
present at
All the
occurrence.
its
standard Arabic histories are based upon this

principle, and, in
them, the authority
is
generally
traced back to the original person, by the state-
ments " heard from, or learned from, so and so;"

after
which the names of
whom
persons are given, through
traced to the original person,

the time of
lowed up
since
less
the
is
present at
This system was
occurrence.
fol-
after the Hegira,
however,
time,
the tradition
who was
to the fourth century
which
become
By
its
the intermediate
all
the practice
has
we mean
the
common.
method of
probability,'
consideration of an event in
lowing circumstances,
viz
its
relation to the
the dictates of
fol-
human
nature, the peculiarities of the times, the possibilities of its
occurrence and other similar circum-
If the
stances.
event does not stand this
grave doubts arise as to
its
truth
and there
its
arises
undergone a
a suspicion that the tradition has
change in assuming
test,
present aspect.
In the critical examination of this tradition also,
we
Whereas
adopt these methods.
shall
in this
discussion there are two parties, one of which

denies
and the other claims
it
to
have proved
and, as in such cases, the onus of proof

party that claims to have proved
the
first
it
lies
it
on that
we have
in
place to discuss the proof that has been
adduced.
16
As
far as
we
cally declare that
dence
in the discussion), the
forward by
r~~
this,
we can emphatino body can adduce better evi-
are aware, (and
argument brought
the European writers, amounts to

that the alleged fact is mentioned by Abdul
all
Latif Bagdadi, Makreezi and Haji Khalifa.
The
points at issue are (i) whether these writers have
made any
statements in this connection, which
can be accepted as evidence
and
(2)
whether
their evidence is conclusive.
The European
tion
historians
this tradi-
erroneously quote, again and again, these
Those who deny the
three as authorities.
tion
who uphold
consider that their evidence
is
tradi-
unreliable.
drawn a
curtain over the fraudulent manoeuvres of the
European historians, for it became confined to the
consideration of whether the authority of Abdul
Latif and others, was reliable or not, though the
Thus the
discussion has, so to speak,
and foremost point to be decided is, whether

the statements of Abdul Latif and others constitute any evidence at all.
first
The most important
point therefore to be dis-
whether the statements of the three

above noted authors constitute three independent
cussed
is
pieces of evidence.
Makreezi's History printed in
page 151, the

author describes the Minaret of Savari, one of the
most celebrated in Alexandria, under the heading
Egypt
is
before us.
In volume
I,
" Minaret of Savavi," and under
word
description
of
it.
it,
transcribes
language of Abdul Latifs
word, the
for
*7
Abdul Latifs work,
In
Alexandrian library
an
only
finds
the
incidental
mention, and as Makreezi has quoted Abdul Latif
word
also
for
word, the description of the library has
been similarly transcribed.
of this, that
Savant,
is
scription
is
on account
M. Langles, the celebrated French
compelled to admit that Makreezi's denot independent evidence, but on the
is
other hand,
words
It
Professor
(vide
translation
only a transcript of Abdul Latifs
is
of
page 240, Paris
Abdul
1810).
contrary to ours,
but
De
Latif
Sacy's note
on the
Bagdadi's history,
M. Langles holds views

lie
has
been compelled
Those European historians, who

have not seen Makreezi's book in original, like
to
admit
those
this.
who
believe in a thing without seeing
often refer to him.
them,
it,
But M. Langles was unlike
as he had read Makreezi in original,
in
which though he describes with great minuteness]

of detail, the conquest of Alexandria, he has not/
written a single word about the library, from
which
it
can reasonably be inferred that
above mentioned event can
be
the)
placed in the
category of authentic historical occurrences.
Having thus eliminated Makreezi's name, there

remain only two, viz., Abdul Latif and Haji Khalifa.
The European historians often refer to the latter
but they do not quote his words
for,
had they

18
done
so, their
weakened.
De
argument would have probably been
We
are greatly indebted to Professor
who very
Sacy, the celebrated French author,
emphatically tries to establish this tradition

it
was
he,
who exposed
for,
the secret, by quoting
Haji Khalifa's words (which translated are as

follows):
" In the early days of Islam, the Arabs confined
themselves to the study of the Revealed Law, and

the sciences of Lexicography and Medicine.
such knowledge was of every day use,

studied by a few.
As
it
As
was
the tenets of Islam had not
obtained a firm hold on the minds of the people,

it
was feared that the ancient sciences would
interfere with popular beliefs, so

is
much
so that
it
alleged that the books they found in the con-
quest of different cities were burnt."
name
In the above extract, the

is
not even mentioned.
in a
general way,
ment
is
prefaced
is
From
Only the burning of books,

and even
stated,
with "
evidently shows that
of Alexandria
it
is
it
was
this state-
alleged
"
which
a vulgar tradition.
the style of the passage,
it
does not at
all
appear that the author wanted it to be believed

Haji Khalifa only desas a genuine occurrence.
cribes the lack of attention
towards knowledge
that prevailed in the early days of Islam, and in
the course of
such.
The
it,
mentions a
common
tradition as
incident reminds us of the following.

ig
upon as the Commander of the Faithful in Egypt, had recourse to

many subterfuges, among which it is alleged that
Napoleon wishing
he uttered the
Mosque
the
to be looked
Muhammadan
article of
and said
at Azhar,
Faith*
his prayers along
with the community. This style of writing
common, and an author
very
is
or speaker is thus enabled
utterance to even the most unfounded
to give
The
traditions.
burning
of the
Khalifa,
that
in
fathering of the mention of the
Library
Alexandrian
on Haji
such an astonishing piece of audacity,
is
could not have emanated from any but
it
European
writers.
The testimony
Abdul Latif Bagdadi alone

remains to be considered, which is in reality the
Abdul Latif
last refuge of European historians.
wrote a history of Egypt which he finished on the
ioth
of
Shaban 603 Hegira.
It
contains a descrip-
tion only of those circumstances
Abdul Latif himself witnessed
and events which
in
Egypt.
He
has
a chapter on the Minaret of Savari, where he, after
describing
it
fully,
writes that around the tower
there are four hundred small pillars.

of this Chapter, he writes as follows
"
And
which
that
Aristotle,
taught, and
*There
find
is
it
was
and
the
it
is
his
the
In the course
:
same
disciples
portico in
after
him,
Academy which Alexander
no God but God, and
Muhammad is
his prophet.
20
had established when he founded the city, and

that in it was located the library which Amy
Ibmtl-A 'as burnt under the orders of Caliph Omar."
From
any one can understand the
this,
spirit in
which Abdul Latif refers to this circumstance,

Mr. Krell, the German author, after quoting the
It does not
above passage in his paper, writes
appear to have been mentioned with any particular
:
object, nor is
it
intended to remind us of any real
occurrence.
well-known tradition
is,
however,
mentioned, which, the pilgrims of that time had

given wide currency to
class
of irresponsible
and
it
belongs to that
and unreasonable
stories
which were current during the middle ages among

the pilgrims with respect to Jerusalem.
diverting incident in this connection
not only
Abdul Latif s mention
is
is,
that
of this circum-
stance unfounded, but
all
the events he describes
happen
to
be untrue. Neither was
in this sentence
this
place Aristotle's portico, not did he
deliver lectures there.

Spectator
of the
ever
correspondent in The
13th June, commenting on the
Abdul Latifs statement humorously asks, what truth is there in the other events
which Abdul Latif mentions, even leaving out of
inaccuracy
of
consideration the description of the burning of

the library
This
is
tions on
rely.
the basis of those authorities and tradi-
which the European historians
solely
The weak grounds on which they have
21
based their discussions are indeed very remarkable.
will
It
be
from
evident,
the
original
passages from Abdul Latif and the other authors

that
we have
quoted, that Makreezi himself never
mentioned this circumstance, but
in the extract
which he made from Abdul Latif s writing on the

Minaret of Savari, the library
incidental
finds
Haji Khalifa does not mention Alex-
mention.
Of course, he refers to
libraries in general, and such reference is only
under the head of hearsay,' wherefrom it is
evident, that it is by no means an accepted tradition.
But the European historians have always
referred to the names of Abdul Latif and the
andria even by name.
others in such a manner, as to leave the impression

that these authors claimed truth for this tradition
and wrote particularly on the

Professor
De Sacy
the objections raised
Abulpharagius,
the
in his
subject.
Note thus wrote Of

statement of
against the
strongest
the
that
is,
historians of Arabia are silent with respect

this
important occurrence.
De Sacy
thus meets
After this,
is
Professor
But the
weakened by the
this objection
strength of this objection
'
evidence of Abdul Latif and Makreezi.

absurdity of this contention
lies in
'
it
may be
'
Al-
urged, with sufficient cause,
that Makreezi only copied his passage from
Latif/
The
the fact that
the said Professor himself says further on
though
to
Abdul
22
Mr. Crichton writes

derive
its
This occurrence does not
authority solely from the statement of
Abulpharagius
but on the other hand, Mak-
and Abdul Latif who have written books on
reezi
the ancient history of Egypt, also mention
it.
White with great emphasis writes

Against the negative arguments of Gibbon, we
Professor
make
bold to adduce the positive evidence of two
Arabic Historians,
rities
who
are such accepted autho-
no objection can be taken to them.
that
They are very enthusiastic followers of Islam.

They are Abdul Latif and Makreezi who, not
;
only agree in recording this circumstance,
i.e.,
the
burning of the library, but accurately describe
its
whereabouts.
How
this
skilfully
matter
has Professor White
Abdul Latif
in
argued
in
his description of
the minaret, incidentally, mentions the circumstance.
Professor
White
clothes
it
such a garb
in
as to lead a person ignorant of facts, to believe

that
Abdul Latif wanted not only
the
truth of this event,
but
to
to establish
fix
the exact
position of the library.
Although
to
European historians
in
attempting
prove the accuracy of this tradition, have always
quoted the names of these three authorities only,
Abdul
we have in
viz.,
Latif,
Makreezi and Haji Khalifa, (and
this connection
of these authors),
yet
discussed the writings
some European authors

23
have even gone further and have, without any

foundation in
dependent
fact,
testimony
Mr. Crichton
De
stated that there
in
corroborating this
remarks
footnote
much
is
in-
event.
*
Baron
Sacy, in his lengthy note on the translation of
Abdul Latif (Description
of
Egypt page
collected evidence from various
Arabic
whose works
exist in the Paris
From them,
it is
Abulpharagius
is
authors,
Royal Library.
proved that the

reliable
has
240),
statement
of
but conceited Gibbon
had never seen those works.'

This passage
will easily mislead
person, and particularly a person
an ignorant
who has an
in-
nocent belief in the veracity of European authors

for,
cent
he will accept
library
of
it
as true, that, in the magnifithere
Paris,
materials to prove this tradition
could such a false tradition
certainly
;
for,
receive
publication throughout Europe
if
not,
exist
how
such wide
But our readers should not be awed by the

grand name of Paris. De Sacy's note, as well as
the works to which he refers, are before us. Undoubtedly De Sacy with great emphasis and zeal
wanted to prove this circumstance. It is a pity,
however, that his praiseworthy zeal
out by his arguments.
not borne
In this connection
a literal translation of his
"The
is
Note
we
give
truth of the reference to the destruction
of the Alexandrian Library
by order of the Caliph
24
Omar, by Abulpharagius,
in his history
the
of
Dynasties of Arabia, has been doubted by numer-
Whatever has been

and the amount of reliance
authors.
celebrated
ous
written on this subject
be placed thereon, require lengthened
to
dis-
cussion.
"
The arguments adduced
this tradition
against the truth of
have been published
in a collected
German by Inch Rainhard at Gottingen

They are also contained in the remarks
in 1792.
made by M. de Saint Croix in his article in the
form
in
M. Langles and Professor
Encyclopedia V, 433.
White support the general
belief,
but do not accept
the exaggerated description of Abulpharagius.
"
Of the
objections raised against the description
Abulpharagius,
of
the
Arabic historians are
strongest
on
silent
that
is
this
subject.
But the strength
certainly
weakened by the evidence
Latif and Makreezi
evident that
it
of this
may be
the
important
objection
of
is
Abdul
urged, that
it
is
Makreezi has, as pointed out by
M. Langles, only copied the words
of
Abdul
Latif.
"
do not mean, by the remarks
shall
make,
to
with such a learned author (as M.
enter the
lists
Langles),
whom
of regard
and veneration.
some
heartily look
authorities and
am
But
upon with
I
certain,
feelings
have discovered
though
entirely agree with Abulpharagius,
do not
who mentions
"
such details as
will
hardly stand the test of a
examination, that
tical
25
it is
so far true that
criit is
based upon a historic truth, and that when the
Arabs conquered
this
Amr
city y
Ibnul-A'as
in
carrying out the behests of Caliph Omar, ordered

the burning of a large collection of books which
existed in Alexandria.
Professor
De Sacy
then quotes the words of Haji
Khalifa and Ibn-i-Khaldoun, and thereby proves

the destruction of the Alexandrian Library.
We
were very anxious
authorities
ed.
to
have a look at the
which Professor De Sacy had discover-
But we are sorry that they have turned out
to be
of
no value.
By hunting up
ficent Paris Library, the Professor
able to discover two authorities
the magni-
has only been
one of
the same Haji Khalifa, from whose work
already quoted, and the other
Ibn-i-Khaldoun,
in
is
which there
whom
is
we have
a paragraph from
is
a mention of the
Persian library, and even that finds expression in
an incidental and summary manner.

ful logic
It is
wonder-
indeed to bring forward the fact of the
burning of the Persian library as an argument to

support the burning of the Alexandrian Library.
Although Ibn-i-Khaldoun's statement is untrue

and contrary to the writings of all true and
we do not discuss that point

for, we are here concerned^only
accepted historians,
in this connection,
with the AlexandrianJLibrary, and not with the

Persian one.
26
Perhaps
it
may be
said, that Professor
De Sacy
has only adduced Ibn-i-Khaldoun's evidence as
But
corroborative.
any conclusion
from
it,
only this, that the Alexandrian occurrence
is
for, if
it is
valueless even as such,
it is
at all is derivable
unfounded for, some one or other of the

numerous Arabic historians would have referred
entirely
to
it
manner
at least in a
similar to that in
which
Ibn-i-Khaldoun has referred to that of Persia.
But not
in
one of the hundreds and thousands
of Arabic histories, can
any trace be obtained of
this alleged event.
The beauty
of the thing lies in
the fact that
even Abulpharagius, who himself happens to be

the respondent in this discussion, does not give
expression to the statement in a manner from which
it
may
be evident that he himself accepted
true or believed in
it
as
it.
In the original history of Abulpharagius which

exists in Syrian,
Conquest of Alexandria,
lars of the
rence
is
and which contains
not mentioned at
all.
a place in the form in which

it
It,
full particu-
this occur-
however, finds
we have
extracted
above, in the Abstract of the work in the Arabic
language.
But there
is
no satisfactory evidence
show that the additions in the Arabic Abstract,'

which are not found in the original Syrian, were
made by Abulpharagius himself or, are only in-
to
terpolations.
Mr. Krell
of
Germany thus remarks
on the Abstract
" There
which are not found

it
are
many
27
things in
it
But
in the original Syrian.
does not appear whether these additions are
interpolations
gius, or
made
after the death of
Abulphara-
whether they were made by Abulphara-
gius himself
because
all
the editions are incom-
plete."
The mention
rian Library,
of the burning of the Alexand-
though made
The
in the original Syrian.
passage
in the Abstract, is not
suspicion that this
an interpolation
is
is
by
strengthened
was edited by Procorrections, and he was
the fact that this Abstract
Pococke with his
fessor
very
clever
in
discredit of the
concocting
occurrences
the
to
Mussalmans.
This discussion was entered
into, to find out
whether Abdul Latif and Haji Khalifa had given
any evidence
or not.
in connection with this occurrence,
But even granting for the sake of argu-
ment, that these authors had accepted this tradition
the next
as true,
whether their evidence

Latif Bagdadi
question
is
was born
that
arises
is
Abdul
and
557 Hegira
reliable or not.
in
Who
Haji Khalifa lived only two centuries ago.

then can say that the evidence of authors,
who
were born 500 years or more after the occurrence,

and who quote no authority, nor give any reference,
is
sufficient
to establish
the truth of an
alleged to have occurred in the
the Hegira
first
event
century after
28
With regard
to these authors,
we must
also
enquire into the status they occupy as historians,
European authors have, even in this connection, made use of ungrounded arguments. They
for the
sing the praises of Haji Khalifa and

in
Abdul Latif
high sounding words, and add that in consider-
ation of their dignity
and greatness, they should be
To expose
regarded as authorities.
the hollow-
ness of the praise bestowed by the European historians,
it is
enough
to put one question.
We
also
admit that Abdul Latif and Haji Khalifa are very
But we beg
what branch
of learning ? Abdul Latif was undoubtedly a great
Many of his works on
Professor of Medicine.
able authors.
medicine are
still
extant.
to ask, in
Ibn-i-Aseeba has, in his
him in great
detail, from which his extensive knowledge of
medicine is evident. But, has any one called him
Has he, in his Autobiography mena historian ?
Lives of Eminent Physicians, referred to
tioned anything about the science of history

not,
what supports
of historical events
If
his greatness in the recording

?
If
any
were
historical event
based on the authority of A l-Fambi or A vicena (great

Physicians), what value and reliance can be placed
/-
on
it ?
Haji Khalifa has undoubtedly written a
very valuable book on bibliography which
is
not a
historical work, but only contains a description of
books written by
this
we know
of
Mahomedan
authors.
Besides
no other production of
his.
Neither has he written any well-known historical
work, nor has any one classed him
The
truth, however,
is,
though
to our antagonists, that such
29
among historians.
it is
very shameful
an important occur-
rence, which, as they say, continued in operation

for six
months,
not authenticated by any refer-
is
hundreds and thousands of Mussalman works on history, but they have to take
ence to
it
in the
refuge under the protection of a Professor of medicine or a Bibliographer.
Up to the present point, we had treated our antagonists as the plaintiffs in this discussion, for they
are really such, on accepted canons of literary
controversy.
We
shall
now proceed
a step further
and turn the tables by becoming complainants.
We
maintain that neither the Library was destroyed under the orders of Caliph Omar, nor
did any Mussalmans ever destroy it. In the first
place, the procedure for establishing a negation,
(1)
by tradition and
clearly understood.
that
it
is
will
by probability, must be
For instance,
let
us suppose,
held that a certain event did not occur
at a certain period
it
(2)
in
proving this traditionally,
be enough to show that
traced in spite of
all
the
means
it
cannot
available for
be
know-
ing the events that occurred in the said period.
Turning
have to be shown
that all the evidence available and the circumstances are against the probability of such an
to possibility,
it
will
occurrence. Upon these principles we hold that

the Alexandrian Library was not destroyed by
the Mussalmans.

30
The work
of
composing and compiling books
by Mussalmans, commenced about 140 Hegira,

about which time Muhammad-bin- 1sac wrote a Bio-
graphy of the Prophet.

wrote general
made
by,
times
of,
histories,
After
in which,
and the events
that
historians
this,
the conquests
happened
in the
the four Caliphs find detailed mention.
Of these works, those that are extant and those

whose names have come down to us are
:
by Balazari,
Conquest of countries
(1).
Balazari
lived in the reign of Caliph Al Muthavakkil Billah.
He
has given a detailed description of
events with
and contiguous
full
History of Yakub.
(2).
bin-Abi Yakub.
This
been a contemporary
ar-Rashid.
He
is
i.e.,
all
the
authorities.
History of Ahmed-
a very old author having
Mamoonhistory' down to 259
of the courtiers of
carried this
Hegira, and probably he was living in that year.
This work was
Leyden
(3).
published in
two volumes
at
in 1883.
History
of
Abu Hanifa.
Published
in
Leyden.
(4)
is
History of
A bu-Jaffer
Thabri.
This history
somewhat more recent than those above men-
tioned, the author having died in 310 Hegira.
composed
his work, giving contiguous authorities
for all the events
the persons by
down.
He
This
is
he described, and the names of
whom the
traditions were
handed
a storehouse of all those traditions

current at some former
that are extant, or were
time.
therefore correct to say on account
It is
of this circumstance, that
which does
300 years,
work,
is
31
any tradition of the
not find mention
not an historical occurrence.
in
Holland, and
in this
This
very voluminous work and 23 volumes of
been printed
first
it
is
have
many more volumes
are to follow.
(5).
The
of
histories
Ibn-i-Aseer and Ibn-i-
Khaldoun, which are considered
to
be very
reliable,
are only abstracts of the History of Thabri, as the
authors
themselves
acknowledged
have
them
to be.
In addition to the above works,

histories of Islam
have been written.
gards ancient events, such
many more
But as
books derive
re-
their
information only from those above referred

a fact which
said
is
amply proved by
numerous works.
to,
a perusal of the
Besides the above, books
have been written particularly regarding Egypt

and Alexandria. Those which we have been able
to discover, are the following
(Here
Though
present
is
given a
list
of Books.)
these books are not available at the
day,
many compilations
of a
previous
period are existing, in which the traditions of
all
the old books are gathered together. For example,

in his Introduction to "
Husnul-Mahazira," Seothi
wrote that he compiled

tories, of
it
from twenty-eight
his-
which the most comprehensive was that
32
by Makreezi, which contains details of the minutest

occurrences in Egypt and Alexandria.
These books are authentic, and over and above

them, there
no other means available for instituting an enquiry into the condition of those times.
is
In none of
them
any information obtainable

regarding the event under discussion.
All of
is
them, specially Thabri, the Conquest of Countries
by Balazari, Husnul-Mahazira
and Makreezi's
work, contain detailed descriptions of the Conquest
of Alexandria
but in not one of them
is
there any
mention of the library.
No
is
information regarding this alleged occurrence
obtainable even in books, where
it
ought to have
been at least incidentally or accidentally alluded
For
to.
instance, in the biographies that have been
written of physicians and other learned men, in
which a general mention of Philoponus occurs,

there
is
no
reference
to
it.
Abulpharagius
concocts this story while writing of Philoponus
and says
" Philoponus
Amr
asked
for
the gift of
upon which Amr, acting under instructions from the Caliph Omar,
ordered that it should be burnt." Philoponus was
a physician and philosopher. All his works have
the library from
been translated into Arabic, and

of this, his detailed
life is
in
consequence
to be found recorded in
the Biography of physicians and other learned
men.
Ibn-i-Aseeba and Ibnun-Nadim have given
ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY
full
also
life
Amr and was
himself before
Notwithstanding
respect.
is
and works of Philoponus.

mentioned that he presented
particulars of the
They have
from which
destruction
in
alleged
also found
incidental
but even these do not contain any
The
writings of
Abdul
fact,
however,
circumstance
is
that besides the
Latif, a true extract
we have given above,

medan literature does
!
from which
the whole field of
Maho-
not contain any mention of
What
be adduced to prove
Even
its
such works as Geographies, memoirs
reference.
tradition
plain that
entirely without foundation.
is
of travel, &c.
this
these details there
all
is
it
The event could have

mention
received with great
mention anywhere of the
not the slightest
library
33
stronger argument can
the baselessness of
this
in the older Christian histories there is
no
mention of it. Eusex, the Patriarch of Alexandria,
who
died in 940 a.d., has written a detailed ac-
count of the conquest of Alexandria.
Almacin
who
lived
three hundred
the alleged occurrence,
that
is,
Similarly
years after
two hundred
years before Abulpharagius, wrote a history of
Egypt, wherein he has described

the conquest of Alexandria.
But
in great detail,
in these
books
word about the destruction

These authors were
of the Alexandrian Library.
zealous Christians, and it cannot be suspected that
they were in any way partial to the Mahomedans.
too,
there
is
not a
34
They were
and were critical

enquirers, and they could not have looked upon the
destruction of a collection of such valuable books
also fond of learning
as an ordinary matter.
By
long residence and great
had acquired a very intimate and extensive knowledge of Egypt. Under
curiosity of mind, they
these circumstances, the absolute silence of these
two authors on this disputed point, plainly proves

that it has no foundation whatever in truth.
In consequence of this, European authors with a
keen sense of justice, such as Gibbon and Krell
have adduced their silence as a strong proof
against the truth of this tradition.
Another very strong argument to prove the

baselessness of this story
is
is,
that the library, that
alleged to have been burnt,
had been destroyed
before the time of the Mussalmans.
The
library
been established by the idolatrous Kings

of Egypt, who worshipped many gods, so that
when Egypt came under the influence of
had
Christianity,
religious fanaticism, in
by
their
celebrated
Kings actuated by
which they were encouraged
the Christian
priests,
destroyed
authors and
the
historians
books.
of
The
Europe,
have had to admit that this library had been

destroyed before the time of Islam. M. Renan,
the celebrated French
lecture on " Islam
critic,
once delivered a
and Knowledge " before the

Academy, which was printed in pamphlet form in
Paris in 1883. Although thislecture was character-
35
ized by religious prejudice against the Mussal-
mans, that
is
an attempt was made
to say,
in
it
to
prove with great emphasis that Islam and Know-
can never exist
ledge
man
in
together;
this
bigoted
nevertheless refers to the Alexandrian Library
these words:
alleged
that
Library,
it is
"
Though
Amr
it
has often been
Alexandrian
destroyed the
not true
had been destroyed
for, it
long before."
The
destruction of
time of Islam
is
such an accepted
those European historians
prove
story cannot
the
Draper
writes: " Julius
than half;
library
this
who
fact, that
the
even
are anxious to
with
disagree
it.
Dr.
Caesar had burnt more
Patriarchs
the
before
of Alexandria
had
not only permitted, but superintended the dis-
persion of almost
states he
the rest.
all
Orosius expressly
saw the empty cases
the library twenty
shelves of
or
years after Theophilus, the
uncle of St. Cyril, had procured from the Emperor
Theodosius a rescript
for its destruction."
As, thus, the destruction of the library previous

to the
advent of the Mohammedans
is
an ascer-
tained fact, our antagonists have had recourse to
another subterfuge.
destroyed by
it
was that
Some
Amr was
allege that the library
not the Royal library, but
of Serapium; as for instance, the writer
in the Spectator,
who
refers to
it,
by way of sup-
porting the statement of Abulpharagius.
Such an
36
argument
is,
however, nothing less than attributing
a meaning to a passage which the
never dreamt of;
for,
writer himself
Abulpharagius, in referring to
the request Philoponus
made to Amr
for the books,
uses the following distinct language
" Those
philosophical works that are in the Royal treasure
houses"
(i.e.,
this story refers to

difficult for
But even admitting that

the Serapium library, it will be
libraries).
our antagonists to prove that that libra-
ry existed at the conquest of Alexandria.
It
may,
however, turn out that the whole or nearly the whole

of that library also, had already been destroyed.
Mr. Krell writes that the condition of Serapium
and
its
library
in darkness.
is
It is,
up
time
to this
enveloped
however, an ascertained fact
which was attach-
that the temple of Serapium, to
ed the library, had, in 389 A. D., in the reign of

Theodosius, been converted into a church. But
whether the library existed
in
that place at the
time of this transformation, or whether it had

been destroyed, or whether the books had been
away
The last
to
carried
Constantinople,
is
not proved at
viz.,
that the books were
translated to Constantinople,
appears the most
all.
probable
supposition,
for,
the library founded by Theodosius
the Second, in Constantinople in the

consisted mainly of books from
fifth
century,
Egypt and Asia
Minor.
M.
Sedillot
assuming that the disputed library
existed in Serapium
wrote: " No contemporary
37
historian mentions the event (the destruction of
the library), but even were
have referred
to a limited
it
a fact,
number
it
could only
of books
for,
had been desCaesar, and partly in
before 390 A.D., the greater part
troyed
partly in the time of
the time of Theodosius."
We now proceed to establish the truth or otherwise of this story with the help of the principles of
" probability." The details of this occurrence, as
described by Abulpharagius (who
is
the concoctor
of this fiction), are so absurd, that all
European
and against the truth of the

Professor
tradition, look upon them as spurious.
DeSacy, who with great zeal and emphasis, has
historians
for
attempted to prove
details,
The
as
given by
truth, has admitted that the
Abulpharagius,
are false.
Contributors to the Encyclopaedia Britannica,
have also laughed

idle
at
them.
In fact, what but an
story can the allegations of the distribution
of the books
in
its
among the baths (about
four thousand
number), of their continuing to be consumed
for six
months, and of their serving as
fuel,
be
Though Abulpharagius does

not give the exact number of baths in Egypt, it is
ascertained that their number was four thousand.
supposed to be
It is
therefore
necessary to understand by the
term " the baths of Egypt," four thousand baths,
European historians have generally understood it to mean. If now we calculate arithmetically what number fell to each bath a day, we
as the
38
find that
it
could not have exceeded one book or
rather half a book, or that the baths were so small

that one book or even hall a book sufficed for each,
daily, or that the
books were so voluminous that
book was quite enough to serve as
half a
whole day.
a bath for a
It is
fuel for
also an admitted fact that in those days
books were written on parchment, which could

not be used as fuel.
It
therefore,
appears the
more absurd that books should have served this

purpose. Dr. Draper writes:
"We may be sure
that the bath-men of Alexandria did not resort to
parchment, so long as they could find any thing
else, and of parchment, a very large portion of
these books was composed."
This story was, no doubt, concocted
for the
upon the Mussalmans.

But they never thought that the Christians would
stand accused of it on this very account. Let
us even suppose the impossible story of Amr
purpose of casting
dirt
distributing these books
true
among the
the bath keepers being
all
baths, to be
Christians, they
could have saved the books by using some other

fuel, for
after
Amr did not'stay
its
months in Alexandria
conquest, and there was no fear of being
six
called to account.
Although
enough
to
this
summary
convince
impossibility,
description,
which
the general public of
is sufficient
is
its
to dispose of this fiction,
39
more
fully ex-
further researches will, no doubt,
pose
If
its fallacy.
we
look at this occurrence from
the point of view of possibility,
we have
to take
into consideration the following circumstances
How
and under what conditions was Alexandria
taken possession of
How
were the other countries, conquered under
similar circumstances, treated
What was
Caliph Omar
the general
in
such cases
What were the personal

dices of Amr Ibnul-A'as ?
Whether
of procedure of
inclinations
and preju-
traces of the knowledge preserved in
medan works
still
extant in
Maho-
The answer
mode
the Alexandrian Library are
more
to each
one of these questions can
or less settle the disputed point.
reference to any of the authentic histories of
the time, will prove that protection was guaranteed

to the
ria.
conquered race
after the taking of
Balazari, in his " Conquest of Countries,"
a very ancient work, wherein
all
scribed with proper references
thus writes
"
Alexand-
the events are de-
and
authorities,
Amr
conquered Alexandria with the help of

the sword, and plundered the commissariat, but
spared the people and did not massacre or imprison them, but guaranteed them protection."
4o
met with in the works

of Ibn-i-Aseer, Ibn-i-Khaldoun and others. The
most important item that was guaranteed was that
The same
their
description
is
property,
cash,
lives,
&c, would be
animals, houses,
When
tion
articles,
left
domestic
unmolested.
Persia and Syria were conquered, protec-
was guaranteed, and the
articles of the agree-
ments entered into are quoted
in
all
histories,
from which we gather that these rights were parti-
The agreement with Egypt
cularly protected.
to in the following
itself is referred
terms
Amr
Ibnul-A'as granted to the Egyptians the protection
and property to the extent of

the smallest weight and measure. According to
the Mojamul-Baldan, the agreement was to the
following effect
Their lands and property will
of their lives, blood,
remain
theirs,
and no part thereof shall be molested.'
The behaviour
of Caliph
Omar towards
the
protected people cannot in this connection be fully
gone
into,
but
it
may,
en passant,
be mentioned that
he always extended the same treatment alike to

the
people
protected
and the Mussalmans as
regards their lives and property.
In the town of
Mussalman killed a protected subject.

The Mussalman was thereupon ordered to be
executed, and the order was carried out publicly.
The poor among the protected used to be given
Hira,
doles from the
public charitable funds.
During
the conquest of Persia and Syria, churches and
temples were
left
unmolested.
When
about to

41
what more could Caliph Omar have done
die,
than make the following three behests

"
To him who
me,
shall
be appointed Caliph after
hereby solemnly make these behests under
instructions from the Prophet, viz:
(1)
He
shall
carry out the agreements entered into with the
protected people
(2)
he shall fight
tection against their enemies
and
(3)
for their pro-
he
shall not
impose more burdens upon them than what they

can bear."
Though
Caliph
the bigoted authors of Europe accuse
Omar
of cruelty and oppression, they do
whenever verbal or
written orders were issued by him, they were at
once literally carried out.
The most bigoted of
not
dispute the fact that
Christian
historians cannot
instance throughout his
were not
It
point out
life
single
wherein his orders
fully enforced.
being thus admitted that a guarantee of pro-
was granted to the inhabitants of Alexanand the behaviour of Caliph Omar towards
tection
dria,
protected people being fully understood,

possible that the great
monument
(i. e.
how
is it
library) of
the Alexandrians could have been destroyed in
such an unsympathetic manner
Could
this library
have been more abominable to the Mussalmans

than churches and idolatrous fire temples ? When
hundreds and thousands of churches and fire temples were allowed to continue to exist in
all
the

42
conquered
countries,
nay,
tion of such institutions,
when
preserva-
the
whether existing within
the towns or without, was specially enjoined,

is it
how
possible to conceive that such a cruel fate
was reserved
The
truth
for a library
is,
that Abulpharagius
(who
concocter of this false tradition) did not

to tell a
lie.
If
is
the
know how
he had stated that this event had
occurred during the siege or conquest,
have appeared possible,
it
might
for the blind fury of
often stops short at nothing.
But when
it is
war
admit-
had been given to the city, that

the inhabitants had been guaranteed against
molestation, that the enthusiasm of attack and
open warfare had cooled down, the perpetration
of such a barbarous act could only have appeared
ted that protection
possible to Abulpharagius.
Professor Sedillot has,
upon these very grounds, declared Abulpharagius'

description as unreliable.
is
He
writes
'
When
it
accepted that immediately after the conquest,
the city was not destroyed,
it is
difficult to believe
that such a barbarous order could have been passed

at a
time
when
the blood of the conquerors had
cooled down.'
Abulpharagius himself has borne high testimony

to the ability
He
and inclination
of
Amr
Ibnul-A'as.
thus writes of him in connection with Philo-
ponus.
43
u He (Philoponus) presented himself before Amr.
Amr had
heard of the ability of Philoponus, and
he therefore received him with great respect, and

listened to his discoures on philosophical subjects,
As Amr
man, he was
Arabs had never known.
such as the
himself was a clever and intelligent
became charmed with him. He

therefore found John's company indispensable, and
never allowed him to leave his side."
greatly struck and
Just fancy a
learning,
man
Amr who was
like
fond of
who, notwithstanding his religious
zeal,
looked upon a learned Christian as his dear friend,
and who had been charmed by his
literary
and
philosophical discourses, ordering the destruction

of the library in such
an unfeeling manner, an
act,
which even the worst barbarian would not have
committed
We
admit that
Amr was
but, in his letter to Caliph

least,
have put
had, on
many
in a
word
not absolute,
Omar, he
Amr
Omar to
for the library.
occasions, pressed Caliph
sanction measures to which the latter

ally
could, at
was person-
opposed.
For instance, the Caliph by no means approved

of an attack on Egypt and Alexandria but Amr
;
persuaded him to sanction the proposal, by taking

the responsibility upon himself, and saying that
it
was by no means
a difficult task.
According to
the tradition of the learned Balazari (a celebrated

historical authority),
Amr
Ibnul-A'as did not even
44
wait for the Caliph's permission, but started for
Egypt.
generally accepted that in settling
It is
the terms upon which Egypt and Alexandria capitulated,
and
with the inhabitants,

course, the Caliph
Amr had
his
own way.
his formal
Amr
Ibnul-A'as
Could
not
have done the same with regard
more noteworthy
to the library
fact is that
Amr
his letter to the Caliph, written
in
after the
Of
was informed and
sanction obtained.
agreement
in framing those of the
Ibnul-A'as,
immediately
conquest of Alexandria, mentions every
Thus
thing in detail.
after referring to the cap-
ture of the city, he writes:
" In
this city, there
are four thousand baths, four thousand terraced
houses,
forty
thousand Jewish tax-payers, four
hundred royal places
of recreation
and twelve
But
thousand gardens that produce vegetables."

in all these particulars,
we
find
no mention of the
imaginary library of our friend Abulpharagius.
Taking into consideration

facts, the truth of
before the
libraries
advent
ans of the times.
for
of
whatever
Islam,
ancient
in Alexandria,
had
reasons detailed by the histori-
Notwithstanding these unfortun-
ate incidents, however,
all
not entirely disappeared;

for
these historical
the matter appears to be that
might have existed
been destroyed,
all
had
which
traces of literature
for, in
such a
city,
hundreds of years had been the recognised
seat of learning,
it
was impossible
that
all literary
45
mementoes should have been destroyed all at once.

Thus, some time before Islam, there were seven
very celebrated doctors and philosophers in Alexandria.
up
Of them Philoponus
to the time of
libraries of
Amr
lived longest, even
Ibnul-A'as.
The
ancient
Alexandria had long before been des-
had been collected

the time of the Muslim con-
troyed, but the books, that

later on, existed at
quest,
and for
a long time thereafter.
Thus,
in the
when a search was made

for literary remains, a number of books were
The emissaries of
obtained from Alexandria.
time of the Abbasides,
Haroun-ar-Rasheed, Mamoon-ar-Rasheed and AlMuthavakkil-Billah,
who scoured
Syria, Palestine,
Asia Minor and Cyprus in search of philosophical
and medical works, went to Alexandria also with

the same purpose and collected many books. One
of them,
Hunain-Bin-Isac writes
"
travelled
over the island of Cyprus, Syria, Palestine and
all
Egypt in search of Galenius' work,

and ultimately reached Alexandria, but
the cities of
AI
I
burhan,
could find no trace of
it.
In
Damascus only
fragments of the work existed, and these too in
an uncompiled form."
Though Hunain
did not succeed in obtaining a
copy of this book, as the ancient
had
been destroyed before the time of the Mahomedans,
the works that had been composed after such
destruction and preserved up to the Mahomedan
libraries
period, were, almost without exception available.
46
The works
of the seven learned contemporaries
Philoponus were obtained,
of
Special care was taken
translated into Arabic.

of Philoponus'
prises those
complete, and
The following
works.
list
com-
which have been translated into
Arabic.
[Here follows a
list
of Philoponus' works.]
Besides the above there are other books, the
which are to be found
details of
&c, and
Physicians,
Had
Nadeem.
the
in the history of
the Bibliotheca of Ibn-un-
Alexandrian
Amr
been
library
was
necessary that the works of Philoponus, who was
the contemporary of Amr, and (according to
destroyed
in the
time of
Ibnul-A'as,
it
Abulpharagius) the Librarian, should have been

the
first
to be destroyed.
In fact, the
books that were preserved
and Alexandria up
to the time of the advent of
the
Mahomedans, were not
the
Mahomedans
that
had been destroyed before
also learn
at
all
their time.
We
from history that no object of antiquity
up to the time
Mahomedans, was allowed
but such
destroyed, but
could not recover the books
that had escaped destruction
the
Egypt
in
objects
were,
in
of
to be destroyed
subsequent times,
very carefully preserved as literary mementoes.

Ibnul-Bandi,
who was an
inhabitant of
Egypt

and a great astrologer wrote:
47
Vazir Abul-
Kasim Ali-bin-Ahrned Jurjani took charge

the library
of
of
Cairo in 435 Hegira, and issued
Qazi abu Abdullah Qazai and Ibn-iKhalkh Varraq to catalogue the books and to
orders to
bind those, the covers of which had been

I
visited
the library in
two gentlemen,
company
the
of these
the books
refer to
to
spoilt.
liked
The works on Astronomy, Geometry and
best.
Philosophy alone amounted to 6,500 volumes.
Here
saw
the brazen globe which
Ptolemy Claudius.
age,
and found
wanted
be
to
it
to ascertain
2,250 years old.
also found another globe of silver,
Hassan
Sofi
had made
was used by
for
its
I
which Abul
Uzdud-Dowlah.
It
weighed 3,000 dirhams, and had been purchased

for 3,000 dinars (about 15,000 Rs.)
We
of
have conducted our inquiry into the truth
this
critical
subject
research,
on
the
and
it
accepted
is
canons
of
therefore perfectly
immaterial to us whether the European historians
agree with us or not
but
it is
necessary to state
for the information of the credulous

larly for the benefit of those
belief in
who
and particu-
place implicit
European w orks, that notwithstanding

T
the fact that at one time this tradition had been
accepted as true throughout Europe, as

researches began
to
progress, the
critical
force of
its
48
alleged truth commensurately declined, so
much
number of modern authors

now agree in putting it down as an unfounded
and doubtful occurrence. Thus far the controso that the largest
versy has progressed up to the present time,

it is
trusted that the day
after the fullest enquiry

will join
is
not far distant,
and research,
hands and exclaim,

To them we attributed blame
The fault, howe'er, is ours alone.
THE
END.
all
md
when
Europe

An Enquiry in To The Destruction of The Grand Alexanderian Library - Allama Shibli Nomani

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

An Enquiry in To The Destruction of The Grand Alexanderian Library - Allama Shibli Nomani

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

AN ENQUIRY INTO THE

Allama Shibli Nomani

DESTRUCTION OF THE ANCIENT

MOULVI SHIBLI NOMANI,

FREE TRANSLATION (FROM THE ORIGINAL URDU.)

Price, Govt. AvnaIs Eight.

PUBLISHED BY THE TRANSLATOR, HYDERABAD, DECCAN.

[All Rights Reserved.]

NAWAB MOHSINUL-MULK, MOHSINUD-DOWLAB

MUNIR NAVAZ JUNG,

THE NIZAM'S GOVERNMENT;

WHO, BY HIS EDUCATION, ATTAINMENTS, IMPRESSIVE

THE MUHAMMADAN COMMUNITY;

His Most Obedient Servant,

takes this opportunity of expressing his best

Shibli INIomani, Professor of

Arabic, Aligarh College, and Author of the original,

for the readiness

with which he kindly

permitted the publication of the translation.

Aziz Mirza, Esq.,

H. H. the Nizam's Government,

the literary help he has received from him, and

begs hereby to acknowledge the same.

and the general get-up.

DESTRUCTION OF THE ANCIENT

notions that at one time

in relation to the history of Islam,

continue to possess the public mind, the

subject of this brochure

the Europeans had, from a long time

only laid during the period of the Crusades.

impression, which the Europeans began to have of

emerge from dark-

make any progress

that they were a fighting,

destructive and barbarous people, and, worst of

they were the enemies of the Sacred Cross, as

About this time also, numerous strange stories

DESTRUCTION OF THE ANCIENT

reached such a stage of notoriety that they came

by high and low.

in course of time, books,

novels and philosophical works,

posed, these current ideas found their

one day, trying to convince his audience that he

those that were

carried the message to

does not matter

author's translation of Bacon's language is evidently

for the observers of his law.

called the hill to

If the hill will not

The people assembled Muhamto him again and again

he was never a whit abashed, but

So these men, when they have promised great matters, and

Thus the inference which

the author draws from the extract

historian, nor does

any way derogatory to

the great Prophet

illustration, in the course of a dissertation

the reason being, that such traditions