Jawaharlal Nehru: The Arabs Conquer from Spain to Mongolia

Part II:
The Arabs Conquer from Spain to Mongolia

Jawaharlal Nehru
May 23,1932

LIKE the founders of some other religions, Mohammad was a rebel against many of the existing social customs. The religion he preached, by its simplicity and directness and its flavour of democracy and equality, appealed to the masses in the neighbouring countries who had been ground down long enough by autocratic kings and equally autocratic and domineering priests. They were tired of the old order and were ripe for a change. Islam offered them this change, and it was a welcome change, for it bettered them in many ways and put an end to many old abuses. Islam did not bring any great social revolution in its train which might have put an end to a large extent to the exploitation of the masses. But it did lessen this exploitation so far as the Muslims were concerned, and made them feel that they belonged to one great brotherhood.

So the Arabs marched from conquest to conquest. Often enough they won without fighting. Within twenty-five years of the death of their Prophet, the Arabs conquered the whole of Persia and Syria and Armenia and a bit of Central Asia on the one side; and Egypt and a bit of northern Africa on the west. Egypt had fallen to them with the greatest ease, as Egypt had suffered most from the exploitation of the Roman Empire and from the rivalry of Christian sects. There is a story that the Arabs burnt the famous library of Alexandria, but this is now believed to be false. The Arabs were too fond of books to behave in this barbarous manner. It is probable, however, that the Emperor Theodosius of Constantinople, about whom I have told you something already, was guilty of this destruction, or part of it. A part of the library had been destroyed long before, during a siege at the time of Julius Caesar. Theodosius did not approve of old pagan Greek books dealing with the old Greek mythologies and philosophies. He was much too devout a Christian. It is said that he used these books as fuel with which to heat his baths.

The Arabs went on advancing both in the east and the west. In the east, Herat and Kabul and Balkh fell, and they reached the lndus river and Sindh. But beyond this they did not go into India, and for several hundred years their relations with the Indian rulers were of the friendliest. In the west they marched on and on. It is said that their general Okba went right across northern Africa till he reached the Atlantic Ocean, on the western coast of what is now known as Morocco. He was rather disappointed at this obstacle, and he rode as far as he could into the sea and then expressed his sorrow to the Almighty that there was no more land in that direction for him to conquer in His name!

From Morocco and Africa, the Arabs crossed the narrow sea into Spain and Europe - the Pillars of Hercules, as these narrow straits were called by the old Greeks. The Arab general who crossed into Europe landed at Gibraltar, and this name itself is a reminder of him. His name was Tariq, and Gibraltar is really Jabal-ut-Tariq, the rock of Tariq.

Spain was conquered rapidly, and the Arabs then poured into southern France. So, in about 100 years from the death of Mohammad, the Arab Empire spread from the south of France and Spain right across northern Africa to Suez, and across Arabia and Persia and Central Asia to the borders of Mongolia. India was out of it except for Sindh. Europe was being attacked by the Arabs from two sides - directly at Constantinople, and in France, via Africa. The Arabs in the south of France were small in numbers and they were very far from their homeland. Thus they could not get much help from Arabia, which was busy then conquering Central Asia. But still these Arabs in France frightened the people of western Europe, and a great coalition was formed to fight them. Charles Martel was the leader of this coalition and in 732 A.C. he defeated them at the battle of Tours in France. This defeat saved Europe from the Arabs. "On the plains of Tours," a historian has said, "the Arabs lost the empire of the world when almost in their grasp." There can be no doubt that if the Arabs had won at Tours, European history would have been tremendously changed. There was no one else to stop them in Europe and they could have marched right across to Constantinople and put an end to the Eastern Roman Empire and the other States on the way. Instead of Christianity, Islam would then have become the religion of Europe, and all manner of other changes might have taken place. But this is just a flight of imagination. As it happened, the Arabs were stopped in France. For many hundreds of years afterwards, however, they remained and ruled in Spain.

From Spain to Mongolia the Arabs triumphed, and these nomads from the deserts became the proud rulers of a mighty empire. Saracens they were called, perhaps from Sahra and nashin - the dwellers of the desert. But the dwellers of the desert took soon enough to luxury and city life, and palaces grew up in their cities. In spite of their triumphs in distant countries, they could not get rid of their old habit of quarrelling amongst themselves. Of course, there was something worth quarrelling about now, for the headship of Arabia meant the control of a great empire. So there were frequent quarrels for the place of the Khalifa. There were petty quarrels, family quarrels, leading to civil war. These quarrels resulted in a big division in Islam and two sects were formed - the Sunnis and Shiahs - which still exist.

Trouble came soon after the regimes of the first two great Khalifas - Abu Bakr and Omar. Ali, the husband of Fatima, who was the daughter of Mohammad, was Khalifa for a short while. But there was continuous conflict. Ali was murdered, and some time later his son Hussain, with his family, were massacred on the plain of Karbala. It is this tragedy of Karbala that is mourned year after year in the month of Moharram by the Muslims, and especially the Shiahs.

The Khalifa now becomes an absolute king. There is nothing of democracy or election left about him. He was just like any other absolute monarch of his day. In theory he continued to be the religious head also, the Commander of the Faithful. But some of these rulers actually insulted Islam, of which they were supposed to be the chief protectors.

For about 100 years the Khalifas belonged to a branch of Mohammad's family, known as the Ommeyades. Damascus was made their capital, and this old city became very beautiful, with its palaces, mosques, fountains and kiosks. The water-supply of Damascus was famous. During this period the Arabs developed a special style of architecture which has come to be known as Saracenic architecture. There is not much of ornamentation in this. It is simple and imposing and beautiful. The idea behind this architecture was the graceful palm of Arabia and Syria. The arches and the pillars and the minarets and domes remind one of the arching and doming of palm groves.

This architecture came to India also, but here it was influenced by Indian ideas and a mixed style was evolved. Some of the finest examples of Saracenic architecture are still in Spain.

Wealth and empire brought luxury and the games and arts of luxury. Horse-racing was a favourite amusement of the Arabs, so also were polo and hunting and chess. There was quite a fashionable craze for music and especially for singing, and the capital was full of singers with their trains and hangers-on.

Another great but very unfortunate change gradually took place. This was in the position of women. Among the Arabs women did not observe any purdah. They were not secluded and hidden away. They moved about in public, went to mosques and lectures, and even delivered lectures. But success made the Arabs imitate more and more the customs of the two old empires on either side of them the Eastern Roman and the Persian. They had defeated the former and put an end to the latter, but they themselves succumbed to many an evil habit of these empires. It is said that it was due especially to the influence of Constantinople and Persia that the seclusion of women began among the Arabs. Gradually the harem system begins, and men and women meet each other less and less socially. Unhappily this seclusion of women became a feature of Islamic society, and India also learnt it from them when the Muslims came here. It amazes me to think that some people put up with this barbarity still. Whenever I think of the women in purdah, cut off from the outside world, I invariably think of a prison or a zoo! How can a nation go ahead if half of its population is kept hidden away in a kind of prison!

Fortunately, India is rapidly tearing the purdah away. Even Muslim society has largely rid itself of this terrible burden. In Turkey, Kamal Pasha has put an end to it completely, and in Egypt it is going fast.

One thing more and I shall finish this letter .The Arabs, especially at the beginning of their awakening, were full of enthusiasm for their faith. Yet they were a tolerant people and there are numerous instances of this toleration in religion. In Jerusalem the Khalifa Omar made a point of it. In Spain there was a large Christian population which had the fullest liberty of conscience. In India the Arabs never ruled except in Sindh, but there were frequent contacts, and the relations were friendly. Indeed, the most noticeable thing about this period of history is the contrast between the toleration of the Muslim Arab and the intolerance of the Christian in Europe.

Courtesy: Jawaharlal Nehru, Glimpses of World History [Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989, Centennial Edition], pp. 145-149.

Part I

Part III

Part IV

Home
Index of My Writings
Have you visited my other sites?
Kazi Nazrul Islam Page?
Genocide 1971 Page?
Hadith Humor Page?
Economics-Finance Page?