Early Islam William Montgomery Watt download

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islam-william-montgomery-
watt-51971872

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Early Islam A Critical Reconstruction Based On Contemporary Sources

Karlheinz Ohlig

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islam-a-critical-reconstruction-
based-on-contemporary-sources-karlheinz-ohlig-49939634

Early Islam In Medina Mlik And His Muwaa Yasin Dutton

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islam-in-medina-mlik-and-his-
muwaa-yasin-dutton-50215534

Early Islam And The Birth Of Capitalism Benedikt Koehler

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islam-and-the-birth-of-capitalism-
benedikt-koehler-6725254

Early Islam The Sectarian Milieu Of Late Antiquity Guillaume Dye

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islam-the-sectarian-milieu-of-
late-antiquity-guillaume-dye-52391804
Early Islam And The Birth Of Capitalism Benedikt Koehler

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islam-and-the-birth-of-capitalism-
benedikt-koehler-230946672

Early Islamic Theology The Mutazilites And Alashari Reprint Richard M

Frank

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islamic-theology-the-mutazilites-
and-alashari-reprint-richard-m-frank-47288068

Early Islamic North Africa A New Perspective Corisande Fenwick

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islamic-north-africa-a-new-
perspective-corisande-fenwick-50226262

Early Islamic Iran Volume V The Idea Of Iran Edmund Herzig Sarah
Stewart Editors

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islamic-iran-volume-v-the-idea-of-
iran-edmund-herzig-sarah-stewart-editors-50227282

Early Islamic Institutions Administration And Taxation From The

Caliphate To The Umayyads And Abbsids Abd Alaziz Duri Razic Ali

https://ebookbell.com/product/early-islamic-institutions-
administration-and-taxation-from-the-caliphate-to-the-umayyads-and-
abbsids-abd-alaziz-duri-razic-ali-50678160
Early Islam
Collected articles
 EARLY
ISLAM
Collected articles

W. M ontgom ery W att

Edinburgh University Press

© W. Montgomery Watt 1990

Transferred to digital print 2012

Edinburgh University Press

22 George Square, Edinburgh

Set in Linotronic Times Roman

by Koinonia Limited, Bury, and
Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY

British Library Cataloguing

in Publication Data
Watt, W. Montgomery (William Montgomery) 1909-
Early Islam
1. Islam, history
I. Title
297.09
i s b n 0 7486 0170 8
 Contents

Introduction vii
P art A. M u h a m m a d and the Q u r ’an
1. The Condemnation of the Jews of Banti Qurayza 1
2. The Reliability of Ibn Ishaq’s Sources 13
3. The Dating of the Qur’an 24
4. Conversion in Islam at the Time of the Prophet 34
5. His name is Ahmad 43
6. The Camel and the Needle’s Eye 51
7. TheM enoftheUkhdud 54
8. God’s Caliph: Qur’anic Interpretations and Umayyad
Claims 57
9. Reflections on some Verses of Surat al-Duha 64
10. The Christianity criticized in the Qur’an 66
11. Two interesting Christian-Arabic Usages 71

P art B. E a rl y I s l a m i c T h o u g h t
1. The Early Development of the Muslim Attitude
to the Bible 77
2. Some Muslim Discussions of Anthropomorphism 86
3. Created in His Image: A Study of Islamic Theology 94
4. The Logical Basis of Early Kalam 101
5. The Origin of the Islamic Doctrine of Acquisition 117
6. WasWasilaKharijite? 129
7. The Significance of Kharijism under the 'Abbasids 135
8. The Reappraisal o f' Abbasid Shi'ism 140
9. Sidelights on Early Imamite Doctrine 154
10. The Significance of the early Stages of Imamite Shl'ism 162
11. The Great Community and the Sects 173
12. The Beginning of the Islamic Theological Schools 185

Original Sources of Publication

of the Articles 191
Notes 192
Bibliography 202
Index 205
 Introduction

The articles selected for reproduction here are those which contain
material not found, or at least not found in such detail in my books. The
selection has been restricted to my main fields of research, namely,
Muhammad, the Qur’an and the early history of the Islamic sects.
‘The condemnation of the Jews of Banu Qurayza’ (A .l) was a first
attempt to justify the assumptions underlying my use of the sources in
my books on the life of Muhammad. I felt this to be desirable, especially
because of the publication of Joseph Schacht’s Origins o f Muhammadan
Jurisprudence (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1950). In this he seemed to be
questioning the authenticity of all anecdotal material about Muhammad.
I believe I was correct in distinguishing ‘historical Traditions’ from the
legal ones with which Schacht was mainly concerned, and I now go so
far as to maintain that for Muslim scholars the historical material and
the legal and dogmatic material constituted two separate disciplines,
namely, Sira and Hadlth, with little overlapping. Earlier European
scholars had tended to assume that because the Traditions or Hadlth
dealt with the sayings and doings of Muhammad they were a source for
his biography, but this is clearly not the case, as I have pointed out in
the second article (§6). It follows that the criticisms of Hadlth made by
Schacht and others do not apply directly to the material used for
describing Muhammad’s career. I have not pursued further the study of
isnads, but in view of the large amount of early historical work now
known to exist, some interesting results could probably be obtained from
such a study.
The second article, on ‘The Reliability of Ibn Ishaq’s Sources’ (A.2),
was by way of defending the general authenticity of Sira-material against
more recent attacks. It followed the lines of an earlier article, ‘The
Materials used by Ibn Ishaq’, which was a paper read at a conference on
Islamic historiography held in London in 1958 and was published in the
report of the conference - Historians o f the Middle East, edited by
Bernard Lewis and P. M. Holt (London, Oxford University Press, 1962),
pp. 23-34. In the original paper I used illustrative material from the
account of the battle of Badr, but replaced this in the later version with
material from the battle of Uhud.
As a pupil of Richard Bell I like to emphasize the importance of the
vii
 INTRODUCTION
work which he did on the Qur’an. The article on T he Dating of the
Qur’an’ (A.3) isolates the points relevant to this topic and perhaps
expresses them more clearly than was done in my revisal of his
Introduction to the Qur'an. For this reason it seemed worth while
including it here.
The article on ‘Conversion in Islam’ (A.4) is based on a paper given
to a conference in London in 1972 on conversion to Islam, and repeated
at Toronto in a revised form in 1978. It underlines a difficulty to be faced
in Muslim-Christian dialogue, namely, the fact that most Muslims have
little factual knowledge about other religions.
The article entitled ‘His Name is Ahmad’ (A.5) is of considerable
importance. Since its publication in 1953 no evidence has been produced
to invalidate its main contention that until about 125 A.H. Ahmad was
not regarded as an alternative form of the name Muhammad and was
not given to any Muslim boy. In the article I attempted to explain this
fact by suggesting that it was linked with the interpretation of the Qur’anic
phrase (61.6) ismu-hu ahmadu and arguing that for long the word ahmadu
here was taken as an adjective and not as a name. This explanation may
be queried, but the fact remains a fact and demands some explanation.
The fact was accepted by Joseph Schacht in the article ‘Ahmad’ in the
Encyclopaedia o f Islam, new edition. Geoffrey Parrinder (Jesus in the
Qur'an, London, Faber, 1965,97) makes the additional point that neither
Ibn Ishaq (d. 767) nor his editor Ibn Hisham (d. 833) seemed to be aware
that ahmadu in this phrase could be taken as a proper name.
‘The Camel and the Needle’s Eye’ (A.6) is perhaps chiefly a curiosity;
but it calls attention to the fact that Islam came in part from the same
cultural milieu as Christianity. This is something which is further
illustrated by ‘Two Interesting Christian-Arabic Usages’ (A .11).
‘The Men of the Ukhdud’ (A.7) argues, on the basis of recently
available material, against the eschatological interpretation of Sura 85
favoured by various Western scholars, and suggests that it contains a
historical reminiscence. This is a point which could be of importance in
future Muslim-Christian dialogue.
‘God’s Caliph’ (A.8) is firstly a study of the use in the Qur’an of Khalifa
and other forms of the same root, but this leads to a discussion of the
Umayyad dynasty’s justification of its rule. It thus contributes to a
reassessment of the place of the Umayyads in Islamic history, since the
traditional accounts are based on the anti-Umayyad propaganda of the
'Abbasids.
‘Reflections on some Verses of Surat al-Duha’ (A.9) indicates how the
earlier part of the Qur’an was not just the proclamation of a new religion,
but was also a support for Muhammad in his own spiritual life.
‘The Christianity criticized in the Qur’an’ (A. 10) is of some importance
for future Muslim-Christian dialogue. There were people in Mecca who
viii
 INTRODUCTION
had some knowledge of Christianity, but it was limited and inaccurate.
This was presumably due to the inadequate understanding of their faith
by the Christians with whom the pagan Meccans came in contact. It would
follow that mistaken statements about Christianity in the Qur’an should
not be taken as indications of ignorance among the Meccans but rather
of inadequacies among the Christians with whom they came in contact.
T he Early Development of the Muslim Attitude to the Bible’ (B.l)
is probably the most important article here reproduced. Its contention,
which I believe to be fully justified, is that the doctrine of the complete
corruption (tahrif) of the scriptures of the Peoples of the Book was not
explicitly stated in the Qur’an, and probably not even implied there, but
was elaboratd by Muslim scholars in the first Islamic century. The scholars
claimed that the doctrine is found in the Qur’an, but their arguments do
not stand up to examination.
The formulation of this doctrine is the first important example of what
became a normal practice among Muslim scholars, namely, the exaltation
of theological dogma above historical fact and the requirement that
history should conform with dogma. The doctrine was presumably
worked out in order to protect ordinary Muslims from Christian criticisms
of the Qur’an, and this it did effectively, since Muslims could reject any
argument based on a Biblical text. It has, however, bedevilled subsequent
Muslim-Christian relations, and perhaps even weakened Islam itself.
Christians clearly cannot accept the view that the text of the Bible is
corrupt on the basis of dubious arguments from a few verses of the Qur’an,
and without any attempt to prove it from existing texts of the Bible. The
modern discipline of literary criticism has led the more educated
Christians to sophisticated views of how the Bible has reached its present
form; and it is important for Muslim-Christian dialogue that Muslims
should abandon their blanket rejection of the Bible and pay attention to
modem Christian views.
‘Some Muslim Discussions of Anthropomorphism’ (B.2) raises the
question of how religious language is related to the realities to which it
refers. This is a subject which requires much fuller discussion at the
present time by both Christians and Muslims within their own religions;
and it will also be found important for inter-religious dialogue. In later
writings I have suggested ‘amodal’ and ‘amodality’ as translations for
bi-la kayf and balkafiyya, but of course these terms still need to be
explained.
A closely related topic is dealt with in ‘Created in His Image’ (B.3).
Muhammad was reported on one occasion to have used the Biblical
phrase ‘God created Adam in his image’, but because of the strong
objections of Muslim thinkers to anthropomorphism the majority refused
to accept the Biblical interpretation, that this meant in God’s image. One
cannot but admire the ingenuity shown in finding alternatives.
IX
 INTRODUCTION
‘The logical Basis of Early Kalam’ (B.4) is a translation with comments
of part of the first chapter (asl) of al-Baghdadl’s Usui al-din. In making
the translation I was hoping both to bring the material to the attention
of scholars and also to suggest standard translations for technical terms,
such as ‘widely transmitted’ for mutawatir. Some of the remarks about
the sects in my comments need to be revised to bring them into line with
my later views. Although there are some interesting points in the
remainder of the chapter, it was never translated, partly through pressure
of other work and partly because much of it is concerned more with legal
matters than with Kalam.
‘The Origin of the Islamic Doctrine of Acquisition’ (B.5) was my first
scholarly article, and arose out of work on my Ph.D. thesis - Free Will
and Predestination in Early Islam (London, Luzac, 1949). It called in
question the assumption current at that time that the doctrine of
‘acquisition’ (kasb) had been originated and developed by al-Ash’ar! and
his followers, and it suggested instead that the doctrine had probably
been invented by Dirar. This was the first time attention had been called
to the possible importance of Dirar, for until then he had not been
mentioned in writings about the early sects. The importance of the role
of Dirar has been confirmed by Josef van Ess in recent work, such as his
article on Dirar in the Encyclopaedia o f Islam, Supplement.
The treatment of the Jahmiyya in the article must now be regarded as
unsatisfactory, since I have come to realize that the Jahmiyya was rjot
strictly a sect but rather a term of abuse used by Hanbalites and others
for groups of which they disapproved. (See ‘The Great Community and
the Sects’, below p. 173 and my Formative Period, 143-8, ‘The Alleged
Sect of the Jahmiyya’.) It is perhaps worth remarking that until about
1950 scholarly knowledge of the Islamic sects was based mainly on al-
Shahrastanl’s Milal and to a lesser extent on al-Baghdadl’s Farq bayn
al-firaq. It is to be noted too that these authors spoke of sects rather than
individuals, even when the teaching of a supposed sect, such as the
Thumamiyya or the Jahiziyya, was merely that of the man after whom
it was named. This is probably because conservative Muslim scholars
objected to the repetition of heretical views, and al-Baghdadi and al-
Shahrastanl had to justify what they were doing by claiming that they
were expounding a hadith which stated that there were seventy-three
sects in Islam.
As more of the early sources have been studied by Western scholars
it has become clear that the later standard accounts of some of the sects,
such as the Mu'tazilites and the Imamites, are not in accordance with
the earlier material. It has also become clear that some of the names of
sects were originally nicknames and were used differently by different
people. This question of sect-names is discussed in ‘The Great
Community and the Sects’ (B .ll). The articles on the Kharijites and the
x
 INTRODUCTION
Shl'ites contain further illustrative material on the points mentioned.
‘The Significance of Kharijism under the 'Abbasids’ (B.7) is intended
to show how what had originally been a reforming and revolutionary
movement for the whole of Islam was transformed into the distinctive
creed of a small community, serving to mark it off from others and to
increase its internal cohesion. Some evidence for this transformation is
contained in ‘Was Wasil a Kharijite?’ (B.6), but the main purpose of
that article was to argue against the hypothesis that Wasil was a
propagandist for the *Abbasids. It also shows that the beginnings of
Mu'tazilism were rather different from what the later accounts suggest.
The three articles on Shfism are similarly concerned with the relation
between early sources and the later standard accounts. Thus ‘The
Reappraisal of 'Abbasid Shl'ism’ (B.8) examines in detail relevant
material in al-Nawbakhtl’s Firaq al-ShCa, and shows that from 750 to
874 the imams later recognized by the Imamites cannot have been
explicitly claiming to rule the whole Islamic world. ‘Sidelights on Early
Imamite Doctrine’ (B.9) made use of material found in Shaykh Tusl’s
List of Shrite Books. This originated in a paper read at a conference in
honour of Shaykh TusI, and an almost identical version was published
in Publications o f the School o f Theology o f the Mashhad University,
no. 6, 7 (1352/1973), 1-18, under the title ‘Materials from Shaykh Tusi’s
Fihrist for the Early History of Imamite Doctrine’.
‘The Significance of the Early Stages of Imamite Doctrine’ (B.10) is
important in that it discusses in greater detail than does The Formative
Period the distinction between the lesser occultation and the greater
occultation, especially in respect of their political implications.
Finally, ‘The Beginnings of the Islamic Theological Schools’ (B.12)
brings together material illustrative of the early stages of theological
teaching in Islam.

xi
 Part A

Muhammad and the Qur'

 Al. The Condemnation of the Jews of Banu Qurayza
A Study of the Sources of the Sira

1. Material. One of the well-known incidents in the life of Muhammad

is the judgement pronounced on the Jews of the tribe of Qurayza after
their unconditional surrender to the Muslims in A.H.5. The men of
military age were condemned to death, and the women and children to
enslavement. According to the standard account the sentence was
pronounced not by Muhammad himself but by the leading man among
the Arab confederates of the Qurayza, Sa'd b. Mu'adh. This account,
however, has been questioned by one of the foremost writers on these
matters.
‘By this version the tradition has tried to remove from Muhammad
the direct responsibility for the inhuman massacre of about 900 innocent
persons; the artifice of the traditionists is so transparent that it is hardly
necessary to set it in relief. The sentence of Sa'd was in any case dictated
and inspired by the Prophet, who certainly made him understand what
was the decision required of him. The responsibility for the slaughter
falls entirely on the Prophet’ (Caetani, Annali dell’ Islam, I, p. 632).
In the present article the sources for this incident are examined in
detail, partly in order to refute this suggestion of Caetani’s about their
unreliability, but more particularly for the light thrown on the sources
for the life of Muhammad in general. The question of the morality of
the sentence is a separate one which may be left aside here. It will be
convenient to start by tabulating the material. (The biographical notes
added to the names in the isnad or chain of authorities are mostly taken
from Tahdhib al-Tahdhib by Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani.)
IBN SA'D (d. 230), Tabaqat, III, 2, pp. 3ff., article on Sa'd b. Mu'adh.
A. (pp. 3f.)
c. Yazid b. Harun: d. 206; lived in Wasit; mawla.
b. Muhammad b. 'Amr b. 'Alqama: d. 144-5; in Medina; connected
with B. Zuhra.
b? 'Amr b. 'Alqama: in Medina.
a. 'Alqama (b. Waqqas al-Laythl): d. c. 70; in Medina.
a. 'A ’isha: d. 58; in Medina.
(Part of a long story.) On being wounded during the siege of Medina

1
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
by the Meccans Sa'd b. Mu'adh prayed that God would not bring his life
to an end until he had seen vengeance on the Banu Qurayza.
Subsequently, when the Jewish tribe was hard pressed by the Muslim
besiegers, they asked for Sa'd and surrendered only when it was agreed
that he should decide their fate. When Sa'd came to Muhammad, the
latter told those present to stand in honour of their sayyid or chief; 'Umar
said, Our sayyid is God; at that Muhammad only said, Help him down.
Sa'd then gave his judgement: their fighting men were to be put to death,
their women and children enslaved, and their property divided.
Muhammad remarked, You have judged their case with the judgement
of God and of His Messenger (la-qad hakamta fi-him bi-hukm Allah
wa-hukm rasulihi). Sa'd prayed.
B. (p. 5, 5)
c. Wakl' b. al-Jarrah: d. 196; in Kufa; Ru’asi.
c. Isra’il (b. Yunus): d. 160-2; in Kufa; Sabi'i; Hamdanl.
b. Abu Ishaq ('Amr b. 'Abdallah): d. 126-9; Kufa; Sabi'i.
a. Abu Maysara: d. 63; Kufa; Hamdanl.
(Similar to A but much shorter.) Sa'd prayed for vengeance but there
is no mention of the B. Qurayza asking that he should pronounce their
sentence. When Muhammad asked him to judge, he said he was afraid
he might not hit upon God’s judgement about them; Muhammad simply
replied, Judge. Sa’d gave the first two parts of the sentence as in A, and
Muhammad remarked, You have indeed hit upon God’s judgement in
respect of them. (No mention of sayyid.)
C. (p. 5,12)
c. 'Ubaydallah b. Musa: d. 213-4; Kufa; Shi'i.
c. Isra’il: d. 160-2; Kufa.
b. Jabir (al-Ju'fl): d. 127-32; Kufa; Shi'i.
b. 'Amir (al-Sha'bi): d. 103-10; Kufa.
a. 'Abdallah b. Yazid al-Ansari: d. c. 70?; Kufa; Khatmi (of Aws);
for 'All at Camel, later for Ibn al-Zubayr.
(Even shorter than B.) Similar to B, except that in sending for Sa'd
Muhammad says to men of his clan, Call your sayyid.
D. (p. 5,16)
c. Yahya b. 'Abbad: d. 198; Basra; of B. Dubay'a of Aws.
c. 'Affan b. Muslim: d. 219-20; Basra; held Qur’an uncreated,
c. Abu ’1-Walid al-Tayalisi: d. 227; Basra. All from
c. Shu'ba: d. 160; Basra.
b. Sa'd b. Ibrahim: d. 125-8; Wasit, etc.; of B. Zuhra of Quraysh;
anti-Umayyad.
a. Abu Umama b. Sahl b. Hunayf: d. 100; of B. Aws; father fought

2
 The Condemnation o f the Jews o f Banu Qurayza
for 'All at Siffln.
a. Abu Sa'Id al-Khudrl: d. 74; of B. Khazraj.
Only the story of the judgement. When Sa'd arrived, Muhammad said,
Stand for your sayyid or the best of you. His final remark is, You have
judged their case with the judgement of the angel (v.l, king) (malak,
malik). 'Affan said malik, but Yahya and Abu’l-Walld said malak. Ibn
Sa'd thinks the former more correct.
E. (p. 5, 24)
c. Yahya b. 'Abbad: d. 198; Basra.
c. Sulayman b. Harb: d. 224; Basra; said to report according to the
sense, not the letter,
c. Hammad b. Salama: d. 168; Basra.
b. Muhammad b. Ziyad: d. ?; Medina, later Basra; of B. Jumah of
Quraysh;
a. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Amr: grandson of Sa'd b. Mu'adh.
Muhammad asked Sa'd for advice. Sa'd replied, I know God has given
you a command about them, and you will fulfil it. Muhammad said, Yet
counsel me. Sa'd said, If I were in charge of their case, I would put to
death, etc. Muhammad said, You have counselled me to do what God
commanded.
F. (p. 6,12)
c. 'Abdallah b. Numayr: d. 169; Kufa.
b. Hisham b. 'Urwa; d. 145-7; of B. Asad of Quraysh.
b. 'Urwa: d. 91-4; Medina; brother of 'Abdallah b. al-Zubayr.
('Urwa had previous part of story from 'A ’isha, but not this.) It was
(apparently) Muhammad’s own decision to give the responsibility to Sa'd.
No mention of sayyid. The final remark is given as a separate item (F*)
introduced by the words of 'Urwa, I was informed that Muhammad . . .
said, You have judged their case with the judgement of God.
G. (p. 6, 17)
c. Khalid b. Makhlad al-Bajali: d. 213-4; Kufa; Shi'i.
c. Muhammad b. Salih al-Tammar: d. 168; Medina; mawla of Ansar,
b. Sa'd b. Ibrahim b. 'Abd al-Rahman: d. 125-8; (see D).
a. 'Amir b. Sa'd: of B. Zuhra of Quraysh; son of following,
a. Sa'd b. Abi Waqqas: d. 50 or 55; ‘brother’ of Sa'd b. Mu'adh.
Very brief. Instead of ‘fighting men’ Sa'd says ‘those on whom the
razors have gone’, and Muhammad’s remark runs: He has judged their
case with the judgement of God which He gave above seven heavens.
AL-W AQIDI (d. 207), tr. Wellhausen, 215f.
H.
3
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’ AN
c. Kharija b. ’Abdallah: d. 165; Medina: of B. Najjar of Khazraj; had
Zubayrid sympathies.
b. Da’ud b. al-Husayn: d. 135; Medina; Khariji.
a. Abu Sufyan: d. ? 90; friend of B. 'Abd al-Ashhal of Aws.
a. Muhammad b. Maslama: d. 46; Ashhali; neutral in civil wars.
Similar to G in both Sa’d’s judgement and Muhammad’s, Muhammad
appointed Sa’d judge at the request of Aws. The source is uncertain
whether Muhammad told all or only the Medinans to rise in honour of
Sa'd.
IBN HISHAM (d. 218 or 213), Sira, based on Ibn Ishaq (d. 151).
I. (688f)
c. Ibn Ishaq
b. Al-Zuhri: d. 123-5; of B. Zuhra of Quraysh; friend of 'Urwa.
(general source for story of B. Qurayza - p. 684).
Muhammad entrusts judgement to Sa'd because Aws claim equal
treatment with Khazraj. The words ‘Stand for your sayyid’ are said by
the Muhajirun to mean the Ansar, but the latter say they referred to all
Muslims. (Ibn Hisham mentions as a variant that it was the Jews who
asked for Sa'd.)
I*.(689)
c. Ibn Ishaq.
b. 'Asimb. 'Umarb. Qatada: d. 120-29; Medina; of B. Zafarof Aws.
b. 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Amr: grandson of Sa'd b. Mu'adh.
a. 'Alqama b. Waqqas: d. c. 70.
Muhammad said, You have judged their case with the judgement of
God from above seven heavens.
AL-TABAR'I (d. 310), Annales, 1,1492f.
Repeats Ibn Ishaq’s account with the addition:
J.
c. Ibn W akf: d. 247; Kufa.
c. Muhammad b. Bishr: d. 203; Kufa.
b. Muhammad b. 'Amr: d. 144-5; (see A),
b? 'Amr:
a. 'Alqama: d. c. 70;
a. Abu Sa'id al-Khudri: d. 74; (see D).
Muhammad said, Stand for your sayyid (or ‘for the best of you’). No
comment on this. The sentence and Muhammad’s remark are as in A.
K. With the same isnad as J, except that Abu Sa'id is replaced by 'A ’isha,
al-Tabari (1486, 15-1487, 12) gives an abbreviated version of A.
2. The Contents o f the Traditions. The variants in the story can be
4
 The Condemnation o f the Jews o f Banu Qurayza
explained as modifications of a basic account from political and
theological motives. The basic account would run somewhat as follows:
The Jews surrendered unconditionally to Muhammad. The Aws, or some
of them, pleaded for their Jewish confederates (or at least were
discontented at their probable fate); Muhammad therefore appointed
Sa'd judge of the case, and when he came made a remark applying the
words ‘your sayyid’ to Sa'd. After Sa'd had passed judgement,
Muhammad said, You have judged their case with the judgement of God.
The reason for the appointment of Sa'd must have been the interest
of the Aws in the case. Some of the Aws probably felt that they had to
support their confederates, the B. Qurayza, right or wrong, against
Muhammad, who was by no means the unquestioned ruler of Medina at
this period, but primarily the chief of the ‘tribe’of Muhajirun from Mecca.
Whether the Aws fully expressed their feelings to Muhammad or not,
his motive would be the same, to avoid dissension between the Meccan
Muslims and the Aws.
The suggestion that the request for Sa'd came from the Jews (A, K)
may simply be to make a good story; they hoped for a more lenient
judgement but did not get it. Alternatively, the true account of the
mysterious incident of Abu Lubaba (which cannot be discussed fully
here) may be that he undertook to use the influence of the Aws to secure
lenient terms for the B. Qurayza. In the latter case the variant in A and
K is not contrary to the other account but complementary.
The variant in E, that Muhammad merely asked Sa'd for advice, is
doubtless a later modification intended to magnify the position of the
Prophet and his successors. The point was to give full responsibility to a
man who was a confederate of those to be punished.
The phrase ‘Stand in honour of your sayyid’ had uncomfortable
implications, for the Ansar could and did take it to mean that one of
them was worthy and capable of having authority over Quraysh.
Muhammad probably did use it; it would help to impress recalcitrants
among the Aws that Sa'd’s judgement had to be accepted. Later especially
in the period between Muhammad’s death and the murder of 'Uthman,
those of the Ansar who objected to a caliph from Quraysh would
remember it and exaggerate its importance. The versions in H and I
record the disputes about the interpretation. The remark of 'Umar in A
is lofty in sentiment, but certainly a pure invention. The alternative phrase
given in D and J is much less objectionable and removes the sting. The
form in C is ingenious, for there, while the word sayyid is kept, the
remark is so changed that it would normally be addressed only to men
of Sa'd’s clan, and thereby it becomes harmless. This form might
conceivably be a genuine historical reminiscence; but the saying is so
trivial that it would not have been recorded unless the standard version
had been already in circulation. This would not be until at least six years
5
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
after the event (and might have been much longer), and it is improbable
that anyone would remember the precise form of a trivial remark for
that length of time. The form in C is therefore almost certainly an
invention.
The alteration of ‘God’ to ‘angel’ or ‘king’ in D is doubtless due to the
desire to avoid the appearance of attributing to Sa'd something akin to
prophethood. The same desire is responsible for the addition in B and
C of a remark by Sa'd, which has the effect of making Sa'd responsible
for the phrasing of Muhammad’s comment (which is also less
objectionable theologically). The form in D read with ‘king’ is the only
one of all the versions which does not imply that Muhammad approved
of Sa'd’s judgement.
The use of a picturesque phrase instead of ‘fighters’ in G and H, and
of an unusual word for ‘heavens’ in I*, maybe taken as an indication that
these are the original forms of the sayings. But it is possible that, as
people became aware that traditions were being forged, the more subtle
forgers introduced archaic expressions to conceal their forgeries. It seems
unlikely, however, that this has happened here.
This examination could be continued through other variations from
the basic account, but these are the main ones, at least in the present
connection. The basic account must have become quite firmly
established, for this examination of the variants has made it clear that
the sayyid incident and the final comment, despite the difficulties they
caused, could neither be entirely ignored nor directly denied. Further
discussion of the basic account may be deferred until the isnads have
been examined.
3. The Authorities for the Traditions. The various scraps of material,
or ‘traditions’, are all provided with an isnad, that is, a chain of
authorities, each of whom heard the anecdote personally from the person
whose name follows. The practice of giving such isnads, however, was
probably not common until the beginning of the second century.1Indeed,
Ibn Ishaq (d. 151) sometimes gives no authority, and frequently names
only his immediate informant (as in I); in not a few cases, on the other
hand, he has a complete chain going back to an eye-witness of the event.
Al-WaqidI (d. 207) is similar, for in the case of events like the battle of
Uhud he names several general authorities without specifying the precise
contribution of each. His percentage of complete isnads is perhaps slightly
higher than that of Ibn Ishaq. In Ibn Sa'd (d. 230), on the contrary, it is
the rule to find complete isnads. This greater attention to sources is in
keeping with general intellectual changes, but it may be specially
connected with the insistence of al-Shafi'I (d. 204) that the basis of law
ought to be traditions going back to Muhammad with an unbroken isnad.2
The corollary of this desire for a complete chain of authorities is that
the isnad, as it were, grew backward. The generation whose date of death
6
 The Condemnation o f the Jews o f Banu Qurayza
falls between A.H. 100 and 150 handed on its anecdotes, we may suppose,
with only slight indications of their sources in many cases - sometimes
perhaps none at all. It was therefore left to later scholars to complete
the isnad. This does not necessarily mean that the earlier part of the
isnad is sheer invention, though the most recent student of legal
traditions, Dr. Schacht, assigns a large role to such invention. In the
more purely historical sphere isnads may rather be said to have grown
by a process of ‘hypothetical reconstruction’. In other words the later
scholars set down the sources from which they supposed - perhaps not
altogether without justification - that their informant had got his material.
Even if the persons named were not the real sources, such hypothetical
isnads may still give an indication of the sort of milieu from which the
information came. One of the differences between legal doctrine and
historical material of the types under consideration is that, while the
former may have originated in the second century, the latter if genuine
must have come from someone in contact with the actual events.
Another line of thought also points to the importance of the generation
which died between 100 and 150. During the first century there were
current romanticized tales of the maghazl or expeditions of Muhammad;
we may also assume that individuals, families and other groups treasured
and handed on isolated memories of the Prophet. It was not till toward
the end of the first century that we find the first scholarly attempts to
produce an orderly and tolerably complete account of the Maghazi, those
of 'Urwa b. al-Zubayr (d. 91-4) and Wahb b. Munabbih (d. 110-16).
Following on these two was a series of men learned in the biography of
the Prophet. Since isnads were only coming into fashion, these men were
presumably more interested in the historical facts than in the sources of
their knowledge of the facts, though they doubtless mentioned their
authorities sporadically. In respect of this relative unconcern for
authorities the first ‘collectors’ of the life and expeditions of Muhammad
may be called unscientific. Ibn Ishaq may be regarded as the first of the
succeeding group of ‘scientific’ transmitters of biographical material; and
therefore the first or unscientific collectors come to an end with those,
whose death-date is 150. It may further be noticed that the study of the
biographies of the transmitters commenced about 150; Shu'ba (d. 160)
was one of the first noted for this study (Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib, IV, no.
580; cf., Goldziher, M. S., II, index).
The scientific biographers may be further divided. The first section -
from Ibn Ishaq to al-Waqidl - consists of those who generally give
authorities for their statements but do not merely repeat the exact words
they have heard and do not always give a complete chain of authorities
back to the Prophet. With Ibn Sa'd commences the second section, those
who attempt to give complete chains for all statements. This latter
subdivision, however, is not important for the special question under
7
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
discussion, and it will be sufficient to classify the persons mentioned in
the isnads under three heads:
a. informal transmitters d. up to 100.
b. Early or unscientific collectors d. 100-150.
c. Scientific scholars d. 150 on.
The names in the material in §1 have been marked with the appropriate
letter. The divisions, of course, are not hard and fast, for the classes
merge into one another, but the classification is a useful working guide
as we turn from general considerations to an examination of the special
material.
In confirmation of some of the above remarks it may be noticed that
the shortest and most incomplete isnad is found in the earliest writer,
namely in I where Ibn Ishaq refers only to al-Zuhrl. This incomplete
character of many of the chains in Ibn Ishaq, together with the similarity
of the isnads in the two independent recensions of Ibn Hisham and al-
Tabari, justifies us in thinking that the editors have generally left the
isnads in the form given to them by Ibn Ishaq himself. It is also noteworthy
that TJrwa, the earliest of the unscientific biographers, in some cases at
least apparently gave no references (F and F*).
The first collectors and transmitters of material, those of class B, are
tolerably definite figures about whom we have some biographical details,
and of whose tendencies we can learn something by studying the traditions
they handed on. Thus Jabir al-Ju'fl (d. 127-32) is known to have been
an ardent partisan of the Shl'a,3 and is also reported by Waki' to have
been the first to disseminate traditions in Kufa.4 Sa'd b. Ibrahim, a
grandson o f 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Awf, one of the earliest Muslims, held
the doctrine of Qadar (or free will) and had friends among the sect of
Khawarij; these facts show that he was inclined to be an opponent of the
Umayyads. One of these KharijI friends was Da’ud b. al-Husayn (in H).
He appears to have given some information about his sources; at least
most of the scanty biographical details about Abu Sufyan in Ibn Sa'd5
come by way of Da’ud. The similarity of the earlier part of the isnads in
A and K suggests that the early collector there, Muhammad b. 'Amr,
must himself have stated his sources in full; this is quite in keeping with
the fact that his death-date is only about half a dozen years before that
of Ibn Ishaq.
From these early collectors the material was handed on by a succession
of scholars, and, apart from deliberate forgeries, the isnad is a record of
this process of handing on. Prior to the early collectors, however, the
isnad has a different character; it is a statement of how second-century
scholars imagined the material came to the early collectors, and was
probably added to the material in the middle and later part of that century.
Thus in E the isnad ends with 'Abd al-Rahman b. 'Amr, whereas in I*
it is taken beyond him to 'Alqama. 'Abd al-Rahman, indeed, like others
8
 The Condemnation o f the Jews o f Banu Qurayza
of the later first-century figures such as' Amr b .' Alqama and Abu Sufyan,
is very shadowy and does not receive an article in Ibn Hajar’s Tahdhibf
The earlier first-century authorities, on the other hand , are often well-
known worthies, like Abu Sa'id al-Khudrl, but their connection with
specific traditions may well be doubted. By contrasting A and F we get
some light on the use made of the name of 'A ’isha. In A the whole long
story is ascribed to her, but in F a clear break is made just before the
part we are specially concerned with, and Sa'd’s appointment and
judgement are given on 'Urwa’s authority alone, and Muhammad’s final
comment on the authority of an unnamed informant of 'Urwa. These
distinctions may be due to the careful scholarship of Ibn Hisham or -
perhaps more likely - to that of 'Abdallah b. Numayr who may have
noticed that 'A ’isha could not have been an eye-witness of the last part
of the story and may therefore have deleted her name. A comparison of
A with I* and J, in all of which the name of 'Alqama appears, further
suggests that the name of 'A ’isha may have been added to an isnad which
previously ended with 'Alqama, and similarly in J that of Abu SaTd.
Before the biographical study of the authorities was far advanced it seems
to have been believed that 'Alqama was a primary witness of events
about this period. Ibn Hajar quotes at second hand a report from Yazld
b. Harun from Muhammad b. 'Amr from 'Amr - the same chain as in
A - that 'Alqama said he had been at the siege of Medina just before
the attack on the B. Qurayza; this is probably a later attempt to vindicate
the soundness of isnads which stop at 'Alqama; but the more reliable
biographers tended to hold that, though born during the Prophet’s
lifetime, he had not been a Companion capable of reporting his sayings.7
If despite these indications of later fabrication we suppose that the
isnads give hints of the sort of milieu in which the informal transmission
took place, the material before us gives examples of at least two types,
the family or clan group and the political group. Thus we have 'Alqama
with his son and grandson (A, J, K); Abu Ishaq hands on from a fellow
tribesman of Hamdan (and at the scientific stage is reported by his
grandson, Isra’Il) (B); in B, Sa'd got his information from members of
his own clan of Zuhra, while the early part of the isnad of H suggests
that H represents the clan tradition of the B. 'Abd al-Ashhal. The best
example of a political group is in C, where al-Sha'bl was secretary to
'Abdallah b. Yazld, governor of Kufa for Ibn al-Zubayr. In the sphere
of legal traditions Dr. Schacht considers transmission within a family
generally suspect.8 But the fact that forgers chose this method of trying
to secure an appearance of authenticity seems to presuppose that there
were genuine traditions with authentication of this type. Indeed among
the more purely historical traditions included in the biography of
Muhammad there is a very large number which are handed down in a
family or clan and which have every appearance of being genuine. It is
9
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
only natural that the clan should remember those of its members who
were honourably connected with the great events at the beginning of
Islam. It is of course also natural that there should be some exaggeration
of ancestral exploits, but allowance can be made for that. The main work
of the first biographers of Muhammad was the collection of such family
memories from members of the families concerned. Family traditions
were probably also the most reliable, since traditions handed down in a
political group would tend to have a political twist given to them.
The political affinities of the later scholars, especially those of group
C, are matters of great interest, but too far-reaching to be dealt with
here. The most that can be done is to see whether anything can be said
about the origin of the chief variants from the basic account.
In D and G the name of Sa'd b. Ibrahim occurs, and, as it is improbable
that a scholar of Sa'd’s period would hand on two divergent accounts,
there is a strong presumption that Shu'ba is responsible for the malak
variation in D; malik is almost certainly a conjectural emendation of
malak by 'Affan or by some unnamed person between Shu'ba and him.
On the other hand, Isra’il, the common transmitter in B and C, is a little
later, and might have handed on two variants. Actually the difference
of the two versions is slight; B alone has the prayer for vengeance, and
C alone the sayyid incident. We seem to have a choice between (a)
holding that Isra’il handed on the sayyid incident from Jabir and that
W akf omitted it, and (b) holding that 'Ubaydallah was the author of this
transformed version of the sayyid incident and ascribed the whole to a
man of similar political views known to have been in contact with Isra’il.
The latter possibly seems more likely.
In view of the similarity of part of the isnad in A and K it is practically
certain that Yazld b. Harun (or someone unnamed between him and
Muhammad b. 'Amr) introduced the remark of 'Umar about God being
their sayyid which occurs only in A. In D and E one of Ibn Sa'd’s
informants is the same, Yahya b. 'Abbad, and he must therefore have
handed on two versions; thus the variants must have originated not later
than Shu'ba and Hammad. A separate line of thought has already led us
to suspect Shu'ba in D. In E suspicion tends to fall, therefore, on
Hammad, though his immediate source is a possible alternative. Thus in
most cases the variations seem to have come into being during the second
century.
4. Conclusions. For the Western scholar the results of the examination
of isnads are more conjectural and less satisfying than those of the
examination of contents, yet the former study is a necessary complement
of the latter. If we come back to the basic account that we assumed, the
isnads (especially F and F*) seem to show that Muhammad’s final word
of praise was originally handed down separately from the rest of the
story. The omission of the sayyid incident in some accounts suggests that
10
 The Condemnation o f the Jews o f Band Qurayza
it may also have been separate, though added to the story at an earlier
time than the final comment.
Several of the facts we have been considering point to the conclusion
that the final comment was circulated by 'Alqama, or perhaps even by
a member of Sa'd’s family in the name of 'Alqama. That would be in the
second half of the first century. The most plausible motive for so doing
would be the desire to defend Sa'd from a charge of inhumanity. It is
impossible to know whether there is any historical basis for the anecdote.
The most likely time for the sayyid incident to have been put into
circulation is soon after 11 and certainly before 36. It does not appear in
our material without some addition or modification which reduces the
objectionable character of its implications.
It is further worthy of note that the alleged first-century authorities
mostly belong to the clan of Sa'd b. Mu'adh, the B. 'Abd al-Ashhal, to
the clan of his ‘brother’ in Islam, Sa'd b. Abl Waqqas, the B. Zuhra, or
to the family of al-Zubayr with which the B. Zuhra were on good terms,
or else had some special connection with one of these. The isnads of B
and C are Kufan throughout, those of H and I (with I*) are Medinan;
those of D and E begin in Medina and finish up in Basra; and so on.
It should be quite clear by this time that Caetani’s suggestion that the
judgement was attributed to Sa'd in order to avoid making Muhammad
directly responsible for the ‘inhuman massacre’ is completely baseless.
In the earliest period his family and .their friends remembered his
appointment as judge as an honour and glory, and it appears to have
been they who later made Muhammad a bulwark for Sa'd, not Sa'd a
scapegoat for Muhammad. Caetani’s alternative suggestion that Sa'd
pursued not the course that he thought best but that dictated to him by
Muhammad is more difficult to dispose of. The prayer of Sa'd for
vengeance might have been introduced to defend him from a charge of
subservience. On the whole, however, it seems unlikely that a man who
had been one of the foremost supporters of Muhammad from the time
of his earliest contacts with the Ansar should not have been in general
agreement with Muhammad’s policy, of which this was an integral part.
Allegiance to Islam involved readiness to sacrifice or disavow old clan
attachments where these were contrary to the good of the umma or
Islamic community.
Finally, let us try to see this discussion in true perspective. The matters
which cause difficulty to the Muslim scholars, notably the sayyid incident
and the closing comment, are in a sense secondary matters. About the
primary matters, the broad outlines of events, there is practically no
doubt. The B. Qurayza were besieged and eventually surrendered; their
fate was decided by Sa'd; nearly all the men were executed; Muhammad
did not disapprove. About all that, there is .pace Caetani, no controversy.
The Western scholar of slra must therefore beware of paying so much
11
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’ AN
attention to the debates to be traced in his sources that he forgets the
solid core of undisputed fact. This solid core is probably more extensive
than is usually realized: in the special material examined in this article
the percentage of solid core, so to speak, seems to be below average.
The presence of this core of fact is the distinctive feature of the historical
element in the traditions about Muhammad, as contrasted, for example,
with the legal element. Any theory, therefore, about the sources for the
biography of the Prophet must account somehow or other for the
transmission of this solid core of undisputed material. This study in detail
of the sources for a single incident is an attempt to make a contribution
towards such a theory.

12
 A2. The Reliability of Ibn Ishaq's Sources

Some twenty years ago I published a brief study on ‘The Materials used
by Ibn Ishaq’.9While I have found no reason to modify in any important
respect the views I there expressed, recent attacks on the credibility of
the whole corpus of sources for the early history of Islam10 make some
reexamination of the sources appropriate.
For much of the first half of this century many Western scholars
approved of the somewhat sceptical views held by Henri Lammens and
Carl Heinrich Becker. The essence of these views was that the Sira of
Ibn Ishaq consisted primarily of ‘the already existing dogmatic and juristic
hadith. . . collected and chronologically arranged’, and that to this had
been added expanded versions of historical allusions in the Qur’an. “This
view has two weaknesses: firstly, it does not explain where the chronology
came from, since the hadith were not dated; and secondly, it wrongly
assumes that all the statements about Muhammad in the Sira fall within
the category of ‘dogmatic and juristic hadith’. Muslim scholars always
regarded sira as a separate discipline from hadith, and the probability is
that it was the earlier to be established. The corollary of the Lammens-
Becker view was that the only reliable source for the biography of
Muhammad was the Qur’an itself, and this point was well expressed by
Regis Blach&re.12Since the Qur’an in isolation from the Sira yields hardly
any historical information, the conclusion was that hardly anything can
be known about the life of Muhammad.
Scepticism was taken a stage further by John Wansbrough when he
adopted the view that the text of the Qur’an did not take its present
shape until a century and a half after Muhammad; and two of
Wansbrough’s disciples went on to reject all the Muslim sources for the
early history of Islam and to postulate an alternative first phase of that
religion which they renamed ‘Hagarism’. Though scholarly opinion in
general has not accepted the main conclusions or the assumptions of
these writers, the argument against their assumptions has not yet been
stated as fully as possible, and some consideration of reliability is
therefore relevant to any discussion of the sources used by Ibn Ishaq.
Before examining these in detail, however, it is worth reminding
ourselves of a general principle of all historical research, namely, that
the ostensible sources for any series of events are always to be accepted
13
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
unless some grounds can be shown for their rejection or partial rejection.
In the particular case of early Islamic history, including the career of
Muhammad, grounds had indeed been shown for doubting the reliability
of ‘dogmatic and juristic Hadith’, but the Lammens-Becker view failed
to take account of other types of material to which the objections did
not apply and which have not subsequently been criticized on other
grounds.
Let us now therefore try to list the various types of material used by
Ibn Ishaq. It is important to realize, however, that probably all of this
material had already been worked over by several generations of scholars.
Fuat Sezgin names nineteen earlier scholars who had dealt with the
biography of the Prophet.13 Ibn Ishaq’s immediate teacher was the well-
known al-Zuhrl (d. 742).
1: The Main Events o f the Maghazi or the Basic Framework. First and
foremost among the materials used by Ibn Ishaq must be mentioned the
basic framework of the Sira, which I formerly called ‘the maghazi-
material’. This is to be taken as comprising the list of maghazi or
expeditions, the group against whom each was directed, the leader and
the number of participants and in some cases their names, the results,
and the approximate date and relative chronological position. In the case
of major events like the battle of Badr this material also includes an
outline of the battle or other event. Ibn Ishaq’s arrangement of his Sira
presupposes this maghazi-material, since it provides his underlying
chronological framework. The further information in it he usually gives
without an isnad, as does also al-Waqidl. Into the framework he inserts
the anecdotes about the various expeditions; but these are distinct from
the maghazi-material, usually deal with minor details of the event and
have some isnad, even if not a complete one.
Virtually none of this basic framework or mog/iazf-material can be
derived from the Qur’an. It would appear to be impossible to discover
from the Qur’an the chronological order of the main events: Badr, Uhud,
Khandaq, al-Hudaybiya, conquest of Mecca, Hunayn, Tabuk; and the
minor expeditions are not even mentioned. Nor can the basic framework
be derived from the collections of Hadith. Only in the Sahih of al-
Bukharl among the major extant collections is there a section (64) on
Maghazi. This occupies 140 pages in the European edition and follows
the usual chronological order of the expeditions, which is not surprising
since al-Bukharl lived nearly a century after Ibn Ishaq. It does not
mention all the expeditions, however, and the material presented has
not been critically pruned. Thus in the first paragraph of the section he
quotes a Companion as saying that the first expedition in which
Muhammad himself took part was to al-'Ushayra and also quotes a later
scholar as confirming this, and then adds that Ibn Ishaq mentions two
other expeditions of Muhammad as occurring before al-'Ushayra. In
14
 The Reliability o f Ibn Ishaq's Sources
other words, al-Bukharl, despite his later date, shows the kind of material
from which Ibn Ishaq and his predecessors distilled the basic framework
of the Sira.
The esteem in which Ibn Ishaq is held is doubtless due to the fact that
there is nothing in his Sira which could not be accepted by the community
as a whole. There were several expeditions to which he felt unable to
assign a date, and these he placed together at the end. There were also
some minor chronological details on which al-Waqidl corrected him,
presumably on the basis of further information not accessible to Ibn
Ishaq; and in several cases Ibn Hisham adds the name of the man left in
charge in Medina while Muhammad was away on an expedition. These
points show that the scholarly process of working out the chronological
framework of the Sira continued for some time after Ibn Ishaq. A careful
study of the section on Maghazi in al-Bukharl might yield some valuable
insights into the procedures of the scholars both before and after Ibn
Ishaq.
In order to assess the reliability of this basic framework or maghdzi-
material we must look for evidence of possible bias (a) in the historical
scholars themselves and (b) in those from whom they obtained the
materials with which they worked. With regard to (a) something will be
said towards the end of the article about traces of bias in Ibn Ishaq
himself; and it will be suggested that these do not give any grounds for
thinking that there has been any serious distortion of the basic framework.
With regard to (b) we are on somewhat hypothetical ground, and can at
best look at the possible motives of those who preserved memories of
the expeditions. One such motive would probably be pride in the
achievements of the Islamic community, and for many Arabs this feeling
would merge with the pride their pre-Islamic ancestors had felt in the
achievements of the tribe. Presumably Ibn Ishaq and the other historians
were also moved by such a pride. Another possible motive would be the
desire to maintain the honour of one’s family or tribe; and some of the
maghazi-material seems to have been preserved because it included an
incident which redounded to the honour of a particular family or tribe.
In such cases the importance of the incident would often be exaggerated,
but the implied information about the main event would usually be
correct. Scholars like Ibn Ishaq could have been aware of these
exaggerations and made allowance for them.
One cannot insist sufficiently on the overriding importance of this
maghazi-material, which includes the chronological order of the
expeditions and some basic information about them, together with the
detailed outline of what happened on the main ones. This material was
not noticed as a distinct category by Lammens and Becker, and it is not
open to the objections they and others raised against dogmatic and juristic
Hadlth, although it is fact presupposed by Becker when he speaks of
15
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
arranging Hadlth chronologically. It has also to be presupposed before
the Qur’an can be used as a historical source in line with Blach&re’s
suggestion (and neglecting the speculations of Wansbrough).
The Crone-Cook rejection of the Muslim sources for the early history
of Islam thus appears to be contrary to sound historical methodology.
When one further considers the vast amount of material involved - many
thousands of interlocking items - it is incredible that some person or
group about the eighth century could have invented all these details and
got them universally accepted. It is also incredible that some one at that
date should have been so sophisticated as to realize that invented material
tends to be wholly consistent and then to introduce discrepancies and
corrections in order to put 20th-century investigators off the scent! Most
incredible of all is that no traces have been left of the process of invention.
On the other hand, when the basic framework is accepted as in the main
reliable, it is possible to give a coherent account of the career of
Muhammad and the subsequent history of Islam. Into this account the
various passages of the Qur’an fit in a credible way, and allowance can
also be made for much ‘tendentious shaping’ and distortion of the
anecdotes about Muhammad and other Muslims.
2. Documentary Material. The main document used by Ibn Ishaq is
that commonly referred to as the Constitution of Medina. This is generally
accepted as a genuine document, though there are difficulties about its
precise interpretation. It appears to be a conflation of two or more
versions of the original agreement between Muhammad and the
inhabitants of Medina together with some later modifications. The list
of Muslims present at Badr may also have come from a document, since
this was a matter which affected the payment of stipends by the Islamic
state; but it is also possible that this and other lists were compiled by the
scholars who collected historical material. Other documents, apparently
authentic but not used by Ibn Ishaq, are to be found in the Tabaqat of
Ibn Sa'd (i/2). Whatever Ibn Ishaq bases on documents has clearly a
prima facie reliability.
3 Arab Genealogies and pre-Islamic Events. Ibn Ishaq’s Sira in the
edition by Ibn Hisham begins with a genealogy of Muhammad going
back to Adam. In this the Arabian genealogies have been grafted on to
Biblical genealogies from the book of Genesis, but the whole is presented
as a single entity and there is no mention of any source. It is well-known
that the Arabs attached great importance to genealogies, and that in each
generation several men were known for their expertise in this field. One
such was the first caliph Abu Bakr, and his knowledge doubtless helped
Muhammad politically when he had to deal with rivalries between tribes
and within a tribe, since genealogists usually had also a good knowledge
of the ‘days’ of the Arabs, that is, their battles. Genealogies also served
to give a kind of chronological structure to accounts of pre-Islamic events.
16
 The Reliability o f Ibn Ishaq's Sources
Genealogies are mentioned here because they are a distinct type of
material not derived from Qur’an or Hadlth. Following Ignaz Goldziher15
scholars are inclined to think that the genealogical schemes were modified
during the Umayyad period to reflect contemporary groupings of tribes,
and this means that the earlier parts must be used with great caution.
Nevertheless a historian of Muhammad’s career would be justified in
regarding the genealogies of individuals as mainly correct from about the
time of Muhammad’s birth.
4. Poetry. For the historian of Muhammad the chief value of the poetry
quoted by Ibn Ishaq is that it sometimes throws light on the relations of
friendship or enmity between tribes. From this point of view the value
may be retained even when the passage is not by the person to whom it
is ascribed. The reason is that there is a high likelihood that any forger
would belong to the same tribe and give a similar picture of tribal
relationships. Where the poetry is authentic it may give confirmation and
additional information about points otherwise known. Its contribution
to our knowledge of Muhammad, however, is at best a very minor one.
5. The Qur'an and the Expansions o f it. The Lammens-Becker view
holds that a section of the Sira consists of ‘exegetical elaborations of
Qur’anic allusions’. This point deserves a thorough examination,
especially in the light of Blachere’s claim that the Qur’an itself is the
main historical source.
The Qur’an itself, apart from elaborations and expansions, is certainly
a historical source, but it is very difficult to elicit precise historical
information from it. As an example of this difficulty one may refer to
the passage about the change of Qibla (2.142-50). It does not give a clear
account of what actually happened, though it seems to imply that there
was a period of hesitation. Even this, however, is sufficient to cast doubt
on two versions of how the change came about, namely, the late story
that Muhammad received the command to change while engaged in
leading the salat and that he and his followers at once made an about-turn,
and the more plausible story that 2.144 was revealed by night and
communicated to the Muslims on the following day.16 It is noteworthy
that Ibn Ishaq has no more than a tentative statement about the date of
the change of Qibla (introduced by qila), and has no reference to the
Qur’an. It will be seen presently, however, that he was well aware of the
historical value of the Qur’an and, where he knew the outline of events
from other sources, used it to give confirmation of this and sometimes
to yield additional information.
The expansions and elaborations of the Qur’an are of different types.
Firstly, there were the detailed versions given by popular preachers of
the Biblical and other stories to which there were only brief allusions in
the Qur’an. Sometimes the accounts might be based on the Bible,
sometimes old folk-beliefs might be incorporated, and sometimes there
17
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
would be elements of sheer invention. This type will not be further
discussed here, since it does not occur in Ibn Hisham’s edition of the
Sira. Secondly, there is the material known as asbab al-nuzul, ‘occasions
of revelation’. This has information about the ‘occasion’ on which a
particular passage was revealed. Thus the beginning of Sura 80 is said to
have been revealed when Muhammad was annoyed because a blind man,
Ibn Umm Maktum, wanted to speak to him while he was engaged in
earnest conversation with Abu Jahl and 'Utba ibn R abf a, two wealthy
merchants whom he hoped would accept Islam. The material regarding
‘occasions’ is the primary basis for the dating of the Qur’an, but it does
not cover the whole of it, at least not if most Suras are taken as being
constituted by several distinct revelations. It also contains contradictions.
This means that its reliability is not beyond question. Some accounts may
contain genuine memories, but others may be no more than intelligent
guesses.
Thirdly, there are elaborations in the form of Hadith, that is, of
anecdotes in which Muhammad himself interprets, explains or expands
a Qur’anic passage. These exegetical Hadith are open to the same types
of objection to which other Hadith are open; and these will be dealt with
under the next heading.
It will be useful at this point to look at Ibn Ishaq’s account of the battle
of Uhud. His arrangement of material is similar to that in his account of
the battle of Badr,17 and is as follows:
555 Introduction, names his general sources
555-592 Anecdotes arranged on the basis of mflgMzf-material and
incorporated in that (some poems between 567 and 582)
592-606 a Qur’anic passage with some expansions
607-611 lists of the Muslim and Meccan dead
611-638 poetry (mostly longer passages)
(the paging is that of Wustenfeld’s edition).
In the main narrative section (here called ‘anecdotes’) Ibn Ishaq inserts
at appropriate points (556,571,579,585) four verses for which ‘occasions
of revelation’ have been independently handed down. Then on pages
592 to 606 he deals with the long passage, Sura 3, verses 121 to 179. Ibn
Hisham in his introduction to this section quotes Ibn Ishaq as saying that
the passage contains a description of what happened on the day of Uhud.
Ibn Ishaq then goes through the passage verse by verse, explaining the
reference of each. Most of this appears to be based on his knowledge of
the course of the battle derived from the mflg/mzf-material. No sources
are mentioned, though earlier scholars may well have had similar ideas.
Exceptionally, after verse 171 which speaks of those martyred at Uhud
as experiencing God’s favour and bounty, Ibn Ishaq inserts five
elaborations in Hadlth-form (with isnads) apparently intended to explain
how the martyrs can be in this condition although they cannot be in
18
 The Reliability o f Ibn Ishaq's Sources
Paradise until after the Last Judgement. These anecdotes are clearly
expansions of the verse to deal with theological difficulties. In the rest
of his exposition, however, Ibn Ishaq is showing how the Qur’an is in
accord with his account of the battle, and indeed confirms and illustrates
it. It is to be noted, however, that he does not refer to the Qur’an (apart
from the four minor points) until he has produced an account of the
battle from other sources.
Most modern scholars would disagree with Wansbrough and accept
the Qur’an as a reliable source contemporary with the events to which
it refers, but they would also be aware of the great difficulty of interpreting
it. Their method would essentially be that of Ibn Ishaq, namely, to
interpret the Qur’an on the basis of an already-known outline of events,
hoping in this way to gain additional insight into some points
6. Anecdotes classified as Hadith. When Becker wrote that the main
part of the biography of Muhammad consisted of ‘the already existing
dogmatic and juristic hadith . . . collected and chronologically arranged’,
it is clear that he had not compared such a work as the Sira of Ibn Ishaq
with the main collections of Hadith. There is virtually nothing in these
collections which is relevant to the biography of Muhammad from a
modern historical standpoint. On a rough estimate these works are named
in only about 1% of the references both in Das Leben Mohammeds of
Frants Buhl and in my own two books on Muhammad. After all most
Hadiths consist of sayings of Muhammad or brief conversations with
him, occasionally also with a brief description of the setting; only rarely
is there any historical information. Becker seems to have assumed that
any anecdote in which Muhammad is mentioned is thereby a Hadith;
but this is not so. Only al-Bukhari has a section (bdb) on Maghazi, as
was pointed out above; and only al-Bukhari, Muslim and al-Tirmidhl
have sections on Tafsir (interpretation of the Qur’an). This is an
indication that about this time Sira and Tafsir became separate
disciplines. Subsequently specialists in Hadith restricted themselves to
those which had some legal, theological or political reference. Some
Hadiths, especially where the interest is theological, may well be sheer
inventions; in other cases there seems rather to be some modification of
a real saying. For the reasons just given, however, the admission that
most Hadiths are unreliable has hardly any adverse effect on the work
of the modern historian of Muhammad’s career. (It may be noted that
Ibn Ishaq himself uses the word hadith in the sense o f‘account’ or ‘story’;
for example, in his introduction to the battle of Uhud.)
7. Other Anecdotes. The main narrative sections of Ibn Ishaq’s Sira
may be said to contain three types of material: (a) the main outline of
events, usually given without isnad of any kind; (b) fuller accounts of
certain events (such as the battle of Uhud), given on the authority of
certain previous scholars jointly but without assigning specific sections
19
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
to each; (c) minor anecdotes, for which an isnad is given, though this is
not always complete. The first type is roughly what was described as the
basic framework, and the second type might be called extensions of that.
The third type, on the other hand, consists mostly of accounts of minor
incidents of the sort which men involved in the events would have liked
to tell their descendants. These have been collected from many sources
and ‘chronologically arranged’ within the material of the first two types.
Not all mention Muhammad, and sometimes, even when he is mentioned,
he is not the central figure in the story. As an example one might give
the story of a man called Qatada, who picked up Muhammad’s broken
bow at Uhud and kept it, and who also had a bad eye-wound which was
tended by Muhammad.18The story is told by his grandson 'Asim, a writer
on the Sira, who adds that Qatada later maintained that this eye was
better than the other.
The reasons given above for accepting the reliability of the basic
framework apply also to most of the extensions. The anecdotes of the
third type are not in general open to the objections raised against Hadlths
(in the strict sense), though they may be liable to some forms of
exaggeration. Each story, too, must be examined for possibilities of
distortion. Thus it may well be that Ibn Ishaq included the story about
Qatada because he thought that it suggested that Muhammad had some
power of healing, although he does not say this in so many words. Despite
this possibility the story may be true in essentials; that is, Qatada did
have an eye-wound, even if not as bad as stated, and Muhammad did
tend it; and Qatada may well have said later that he saw better with this
eye. This is precisely the kind of thing one would expect to be handed
down in a family.
In his book on The Origins o f Muhammadan Jurisprudence (170)
Joseph Schacht speaks of Hadlths handed down in a single family and
condemns them all as spurious, regarding the ‘family isnady as a device
to give an appearance of authenticity. While this may be so in the legal
field, the use of such a device presupposes that there had been genuine
‘family isnads\ presumably in the historical field. Curiously enough, it
happens that I personally, despite the fact of being a European living in
1980, know of an event which happened about 200 years ago but is not
recorded in any book or document, and base my knowledge on a ‘family
isnad\ My maternal grandfather as a small boy was told by his great­
grandmother (called Mrs Burns, but no relative) that she had once
entertained to tea the poet Robert Burns in her house in Kilmarnock,
and she added that at this period ‘he was not much thought o f. He died
in 1796. If this can happen in the non-oral culture of nineteenth- and
twentieth- century Europe - and I have no reason to doubt the truth of
the story - one might reasonably expect that in the predominantly oral
culture of seventh-century A rabia families would preserve tolerably
20
 The Reliability o f Ibn Ishaq's Sources
reliable reports of encounters between their ancestors and Muhammad;
and it appears that some reports were written down within about a century
of the events.
Such considerations tend to confirm the view expressed above that the
basic framework and its extensions are on the whole reliable. They also
suggest that anecdotes of the third type may contain genuine
reminiscences and should not be rejected without examination.
THE PROCEDURES OF TH E H IS T O R IA N S

The materials collected by those first interested in the biography of the

Prophet were presumably family memories. It is perhaps significant that
many of the first collectors and historians themselves came from the
families of men who had played an important part under Muhammad.
Thus of the first ten writers mentioned by Sezgin, no. 1 is the son of Sa'd
ibn 'Ubada, the leader of the Khazraj, no. 4 is a son of the poet Ka'b
ibn Malik, no. 7 is 'Urwa the son of al-Zubayr, no. 8 is a son of no. 1,
no. 9 is a grandson of the caliph Abu Bakr, and no. 10 the grandson of
Qatada already mentioned; no. 6 may be the son of the caliph 'Uthman,
but there is some confusion about him.19 The number of scholars who
left written material about the maghazi or other aspects of the Sira, such
as the lists of names, shows that there must have been a great amount
of activity in this field.
The nature of this activity and its vast extent, together with its early
date, serves to explain the absence of the isnad. Thus when Shurahbll
(no. 8) drew up lists of the Emigrants to Medina and of the men at Badr
the important thing was the list and not how he arrived at it, except
perhaps in one or two doubtful cases; the presence of most of the names
on the lists would be matters of general knowledge, capable of being
known from dozens of sources, or in technical language mutawatir. The
fact that two Companions (as recorded by al-Bukharl) said that the
expedition to al-'Ushayra was the earliest in which Muhammad himself
took part became irrelevant after Ibn Ishaq and al-Waqidl had established
that there were two or three earlier ones. The historians must quickly
have realized that some of the family memories communicated to them
were inaccurate, not through deliberate misrepresentation but because
of ignorance or some oversight. Since there was no point in handing on
inaccurate memories, the practice of the historians came to include the
rejection of some of the material collected. This may be part of the reason
why Sira developed as a discipline completely distinct from Hadlth-study.
The early students of Sira must have devoted a great deal of scholarly
labour to the sifting of memories and other evidence, and what they
handed on was only the assured results of this process as they saw them.
The use of the isnad was known at least from the time of al-Zuhrl (d.
742), who was both a Hadlth-student and the outstanding historian of
21
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
his generation, but it was not de rigueur as it later became. When Ibn
Ishaq quotes al-Zuhrl, he sometimes gives his sources and sometimes
not. Presumably the information which Ibn Ishaq gives without any
source is what was generally regarded by students of the Sira as ‘assured
results’, known by tawatur.
All these considerations justify a general confidence in the historical
methodology of Ibn Ishaq and his predecessors. The essential work seems
to have been done in the first Islamic century, perhaps in the first half
of it ; and this established the chronological order of the main events and
many of the minor events - the basic framework which Ibn Ishaq gives
without isnad. After the appearance of the first written works the chief
effort of subsequent scholars such as Ibn Ishaq was to obtain from these
as much information as possible. The high esteem in which the Sira of
Ibn Ishaq is held is probably due to his relative completeness and
accuracy, together with the type of picture he gives of the Prophet. Al-
Waqidl corrects Ibn Ishaq’s chronology on some minor points and has
also some additional information, but he does not seem to have been so
popular.
Some special features of the Sira of Ibn Ishaq may be mentioned briefly.
Firstly, he was accused of Shl'ite and Qadarite sympathies; but the
evidence for this is slight. Certainly he states that ‘All was the first male
Muslim and neglects the reports that it was Abu Bakr or Zayd ibn Haritha;
but on the other hand he omits specifically Shl'ite material like the Hadlth
about Khumm. Again, his inclusion of two anecdotes from the Qadarite
'Amr ibn 'Ubayd hardly justifies an accusation of Qadarism. Secondly
he was criticized for taking material from Jews and Christians. This
appears to have been mainly in the first part of his Sira, the Mubtada’
or Mabda9, which is omitted in the edition of Ibn Hisham. The criticism
is little more than a reflection of later attitudes. Thirdly, he tends to exalt
the figure of Muhammad above the merely human, as in the suggestion
that his touch healed Qatada’s eye. Another example is in the story of
the death of Quzman who, after being badly wounded at Uhud, hastened
his own death by cutting a vein. Al-WaqidI has here a more primitive
version, in which Muhammad in effect says that suicide leads to Hell;
but Ibn Ishaq reports that Muhammad had been in the habit of saying
‘He belongs to the people of Hell’, and thus makes it an example of
Muhammad’s supernatural foreknowledge. In other cases, however, al-
Waqidl has stories not found in Ibn Ishaq which illustrate Muhammad’s
supernatural powers.
Sufficient has been said here to show that it would be possible to write
a complete book about the early writers on the career of Muhammad.
What it is important to emphasize at the present juncture is that in this
examination of materials for the Sira nothing has been found to justify
the complete rejection of Ibn Ishaq, al-Waqidl and their predecessors;
22
 The Reliability o f Ibn Ishaq's Sources
and that on the other hand reasons have been given for accepting virtually
the whole of the basic framework and its extensions and, with a due
exercise of caution, much of the other types of material also.

23
 A 3 . The Dating of the Q ur'an:
a Review of Richard Bell's Theories

The appearance of Richard Bell’s Introduction to the Qur’an20is a suitable

occasion for considering the general principles underlying the detailed
dating of the Qur’an in his translation. This leads on to the question of
the extent to which even approximate dates can be assigned to the various
sections, and also to an estimate of advances to be expected in this branch
of Qur’anic studies. Bell’s work further raises questions of interpretation,
but these are not discussed here except in so far as they bear on the dating.
Underlying Bell’s system of dating are two general principles. Since
these are a convenient focus for discussion, it will be well to begin with
a formulation of them. They are:
(1) The normal unit o f revelation is the short passage.
(2) The text was ‘revised’ by Muhammad himself.
These principles are fundamental to all the chronological side of his
work. Indeed, if they are sound, and if it is possible to apply them in
detail to an appreciable extent, they must be fundamental to all future
work on the dating of the Qur’an.
A third principle has greatly influenced the external appearance of
Bell’s translation, namely:
(3) The passages were, at least sometimes, committed to writing.
This is held by Bell to be necessary to explain the order of various
passages; but it is seldom, if ever, directly relevant to the dating.
About the first of these principles there is, in a sense, wide agreement
among both Muslim and non-Muslim scholars. Traditional Muslim
accounts of the ‘occasions of revelation’ often refer to short passages
containing only a verse or two, and this is reflected in the headings of
the suras in the official Egyptian edition, where sura 9, for example, is
described as ‘Medinan, except the last two verses which are Meccan’.
Noldeke likewise recognized that some suras contained passages
belonging to different dates, and most non-Muslim scholars, without
considering the matter in detail, have accepted this point of view. Regis
Blachere, in his chronological arrangement of the suras in his translation,
goes so far as to split up some of the suras and to date the sections
separately.
So, it would be generally agreed that the Qur’anic revelations
frequently consisted of short passages. There would be room for
24
 The Dating o f the Qur'an
discussion, however, whether the whole, or nearly the whole, of the
Qur’an was made up of short passages, or whether the unit of revelation
was not sometimes a nearly complete sura. There are some suras that
possess a formal unity, and look as if they had each been revealed as a
piece. This formal unity is exemplified in one way by the story of Joseph
in sura 12, and in another way by the parallel stories of former prophets,
with similarities of wording, which are found in a number of suras, such
as 11 and 54. It seems clear, then, that not all the Qur’an consists of short
passages, but that sometimes long passages constituted a single
revelation.
The existence of long passages seems to be admitted by Bell. Yet,
taking as his basis the principle that the short passage was the normal
unit of revelation, he has gone much further than any other student of
the Qur’an in attempting to identify and date the original units of
revelation. In the course of this attempt he has been led to propound
some additional theories about the original form of the revelations, and
the way in which they assumed their present shape. His second main
principle, namely, that ‘revision’ took place, is relevant here, but it may
be left aside meantime. Apart from that Bell’s suggestions may be divided
into two groups.
(a) Firstly, he held that the short passages of the original revelation
consisted of several different types.21 One important type in the earliest
days was the ‘sign-passage’, that is, a short passage citing various natural
phenomena as evidence of God’s power and goodness; and this type
continued to appear in later days also. Another type is the punishment-
story, that is, an account of the punishment of a tribe or community
which rejected the message of the prophet sent to them. Yet another
type is what Bell calls the ‘slogan’. By this he means a short statement
usually introduced by the word ‘Say’, and he thinks these ‘slogans’ were
designed to be repeated by Muhammad’s followers. Then there was a
type of passage reminiscent of the Arab Kahin or soothsayer, which
contained a number of oaths forming a jingle, but without much sense.
From this Bell distinguishes asseverative passages, where the oaths had
a bearing on what was to be asserted. He also speaks of ‘“when” passages’
containing descriptions of the Last Judgement, of dramatic scenes, of
narratives and parables (pp. 74-8).
In addition to all these types Bell gives a description of what is not so
much a separate type of passage as a general form of paragraph which
might be found in more than one type. He gives 49.13 as an example
and then remarks:
‘Here, following the address, we have an indication of the subject
that has called for treatment, then comes a declaration regarding
it, and finally the passage is closed by a sententious maxim. This
form is found not only in passages with direct address, but in a
25
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
multitude of others. They begin by stating their occasion; a question
has been asked, the unbelievers have said or done something,
something has happened, or some situation has arisen. The matter
is dealt with shortly, in usually not more than three or four verses;
at the end comes a general statement, often about Allah, which
rounds off the passage.’
These short pieces of various kinds Bell supposes to have circulated
independently. In his propaganda, he thinks, Muhammad from the
earliest times made use of slogans (p. 75). Similarly, ‘sign’ passages were
one of the means that he adopted at all stages of his career in order to
appeal to men, while punishment stories, which seem to have had a
separate existence (p. 121), were used to inspire men with fear and
thereby soften their hearts to accept the message.
In all this conception of types of short passages there is little that could
not be generally accepted. The novelty in Bell’s view is the thought,
implicit rather than explicit, that the different types had different
functions. Some were for persuading possible converts, some for
repetition by Muslims facing opponents, some for use in worship, and
so on. This is an attractive idea and would bear further study.
(b) The second group of suggestions made by Bell as he works out his
first basic principle (that the normal unit of revelation is the short piece)
has as its centre the view that Muhammad himself put together short
pieces to make a longer composition. From the standpoint taken by both
Muslim and non-Muslim scholars this is much more of an innovation.
Yet reflection tends to justify it. The traditional standpoint seems to rest
on assumptions that have not been carefully scrutinized. Though it has
commonly been admitted that short passages were often revealed
separately, the implications of this admission have not been worked out;
and it has been supposed that in many cases whole suras, or large parts
of suras, were revealed at once, and that the fitting together of separate
passages could be ascribed to those who ‘collected’ the Qur’an after
Muhammad’s death.
If, however, the short passages are the general rule and the long
passages are the exceptions, then it would be strange that the ‘collectors’
should group together what Muhammad left as separate items. It would
have been more natural to treat each separate passage as a separate sura.
Even if the ‘collectors’ are responsible for only a little grouping of
passages, they doubtless had some precedent for it. It is difficult to avoid
the conclusion that Muhammad himself was responsible for combining
separate revelations into suras. The challenge in 11.13/16 to produce ten
suras would seem to imply that more than ten suras were then extant.
These might conceivably have been suras consisting of single short
passages, like some of the suras at the end of the Qur’an as we have it.
Since nearly all the suras in the present Qur’an are composite suras,
26
 The Dating o f the Qur'an
however, it seems more likely that the reference is to suras of this kind,
and that therefore separate revelations had been combined into suras by
Muhammad himself.
The tendency to ascribe all combinations of separate revelations to
‘collectors’ and not to Muhammad is perhaps connected with the desire
of orthodox Islam to safeguard the miraculous nature of the Qur’an by
insisting that Muhammad could neither read nor write. Yet, even on the
view that Muhammad was illiterate in this sense, he may still be credited
with combining separate passages. He could either have relied solely on
memory, since to remember a group of passages together would be no
more difficult than to remember separate passages; or he may have
employed amanuenses to write down the composite suras.
It ought to be assumed that, if Muhammad combined separate
revelations in this way, he did so because he believed it was in accordance
with the command of God. With the exception of one passage to be
discussed presently, there is no explicit command to this effect. The
Qur’an seems to imply, however, that the revelations constituted a unity,
though they ‘came down’ separately; and thus the work of combining
them would be simply the restoration of the original unity (cf. 17.106/107).
The one passage that might be taken to be a command to combine
separate revelations is the opening of sura 73, especially the words rattilfl-
qur'anatartiFn. The usual Muslim interpretation of this is that it prescribes
leisurely cantillation or chanting in measure. The basic application of
ratila, however, seems to be to front teeth, and it means that they are
even in growth and well set together. The word is also used metaphorically
of a thing that is well arrranged or disposed, and this metaphorical use
predominates in the second stem. For rattala'l-kalam Lane gives the
meaning ‘he put together and arranged well the component parts of the
speech, or saying, and made it distinct’. It would therefore seem that
73.4 may originally have been taken to refer to the combining of separate
fragments of revelation. The only other instance of the word in the Qur’an
(25.32/34), where God says rattalna-hu tartiFn has been much discussed
by commentators; it is noteworthy that the Muslim Pickthall translates
‘We have arranged it in right order’.
Bell gives sura 80 as an example of a composite sura which has been
put together, he thinks, by Muhammad. It consists of five distinct passages,
but they ‘are so arranged that we can follow a line of thought binding
them together’, and thus ‘form more or less of a unity’.22
In Muhammad’s work of combining short pieces into larger units, Bell
thinks he was guided by certain ideas, and that these changed from time
to time. Apart from an early period before Muhammad began to combine
separate pieces, there are two main periods in his activity, the Qur’an
period and the Book period. In the Qur’an period Muhammad’s aim was
to produce passages suitable for recitation in the course of the salat or
27
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
worship. This period therefore begins ‘about the same time as the
institution of the salat, at any rate after Muhammad had gained some
adherents’.23 Not all the separate passages already existing, however,
were immediately incorporated into the Qur’an. In 15.87 we read: ‘We
have bestowed upon thee seven of the mathani and the mighty Qur’an.’
Especially if the mathani are identified with the punishment stories, as
Bell, following Sprenger and others, has argued, this verse will imply
that parts of the present Qur’an were not included in it when that verse
was revealed. This would be in keeping with the distinct functions of the
various types of short passages. For these longer compositions consisting
of several short passages the term suras was introduced, in Bell’s view,
some time during the Qur’an period. He is further inclined to think ‘that
the Qur’an was definitely closed about the time of the battle of Badr’ (p.
132), but realizes that the evidence for this is slender.
It is clear, however, that the idea of the Qur’an as a collection of
passages for recitation in public or private worship was superseded in
Muhammad’s mind by the idea of a Book, that is, of written Scriptures
comparable to those of the Jews and Christians. There are numerous
references to the Book in the Qur’an. The aim was doubtless to include
in the Book all the revealed material extant, whether it had hitherto been
used for recitation in worship or not. The Book was thus more extensive
than the Qur’an, as the latter term was first used, but in course of time
the two came to be regarded as identical. The principles on which separate
pieces were combined to form suras were doubtless the same for the
Qur’an and the Book, except that greater length might perhaps be allowed
in the Book.
These, then, are the lines on which Bell works out his first main
principle.
The second main principle is more revolutionary and likely to provoke
opposition. It is that Muhammad himself, in the course of combining
separate pieces into suras - and possibly also at other times - did some
editing or ‘revising’. This is contrary to the common idea that he merely
recorded those contents of his consciousness which, somehow or other,
he recognized as revelations. Yet the idea of a ‘revision’ of the Qur’an
by way of additions - and perhaps also of deletions, though there is no
direct evidence of these - is not necessarily contrary to orthodox Muslim
beliefs. Orthodoxy accepts the fact of ‘abrogation’, that is, the cancelling
of certain prescriptions and their replacement by others. Thus 73.20 is
usually taken as abrogating the obligation to spend part of the night in
prayer which is laid down at the beginning of the sura. The basis of the
abrogation is presumably that what was good and edifying for the Muslim
community at one period is not necessarily so at another. Now the same
could hold of additions to the text. Thus - to take an example which Bell
does not indicate as a revision - 5.51/56 might originally have run: ‘O ye
28
 The Dating o f the Qur'an
who have believed, do not choose Jews as friends; they are friends to
each other; whoever makes friends is one of them.’ This would be
perfectly appropriate in the period between Badr and Uhud when the
verse is said to have been revealed. The words ‘and Christians’, which
occur after ‘Jews’ in the present text would at that period have been
inappropriate, since the Muslims in Medina had practically no contacts
with Christians, while some of Muhammad’s early followers were on
good terms with the Negus of Abyssinia. It was only in the closing years
of Muhammad’s life when he was trying to detach Ghassan and their
neighbours from the Byzantine allegiance that the words ‘and Christians’
would have a point. If abrogation took place, then there would seem to
be no reason why ‘revision’ of this type should not take place, since it
involved no change of principle, but merely the extension of an existing
principle to new circumstances. Indeed, something very like ‘revision’ of
this kind is implied by 16.101/103: ‘When We substitute one verse for
another - God knoweth best what He revealeth - they say, Thou art
simply an inventor.’ The possiblity of the deletion of verses or parts of
verses seems to be implied by references to Muhammad’s being caused
to forget by God (87.7; cf. 2.106/100). It may be concluded, then, that
from the standpoint of Muslim orthodoxy there are no insuperable
objections to Bell’s conception of ‘revision’, though an attitude of
conservative distrust would be only natural. The psychologically-minded
modern scholar may like to suppose that Muhammad had some method
of ‘listening for guidance’ where he thought a passage required revision.
If we accept his sincerity, he cannot be regarded as ‘revising’ passages
except in so far as he believed he had divine authority for doing so. It is
almost certain that no one other than Muhammad would have presumed
to make such ‘revisions’.
Bell considers that there are a number of formal characteristics -
‘roughnesses’ of style - that enable us to recognize revisions and
alterations (83 ff.). Sometimes it is possible to remove the rhyme-phrases
of a passage and to leave a series of verses with a different rhyme. In
such cases Bell argues that the secondary rhyme-phrases have been added
to adapt the passage to its place in the sura. Further signs of revision are
abrupt changes of rhyme, repetition of a rhyme-word in adjoining verses,
breaks in grammatical construction, abrupt changes in the length of
verses, sudden changes of the dramatic situation with changes of pronoun,
the appearance of seemingly contradictory statements side by side, the
juxtaposition of passages of different dates, and the occurrence of late
phrases in earlier passages. He also considers that in many cases
explanations of a word or phrase, and reservations introduced by ilia,
‘except’, are later additions. Where a subject is treated in a somewhat
different way in neighbouring verses, revision is to be suspected. It can
sometimes be made to seem probable, too, that a passage has had
29
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
alternative continuations, and that these simply follow one another in
the present text. Many examples of all these features will be found in
Bell’s translation.
Another sign of revision is connected with Bell’s third principle, the
existence of written documents. It frequently happens that an extraneous
subject is found in a passage that is apparently meant to be homogeneous.
This phenomenon, Bell suggests, is to be explained by supposing that
the extraneous material stood on a scrap of writing material, that the
addition was written on the back of this, and that, when the addition was
copied out in its proper place, the extraneous material on the other side
was copied out also and made to follow.
This, then, is the theoretical basis of Bell’s work on the dating of the
passages of the Qur’an. It is at once obvious that it completely changes
the nature of the problem of dating the Qur’an. It is no longer a question
of trying to determine the order in which the suras were revealed, and
then assigning dates to a few short passages that are clearly different in
date from their context. It has now become a question of dating separately
each passage of a few verses. In the case of revisions, a single word even
may have a different date from the rest of the verse. The problem of
dating the Qur’an has thus been made much more complex.
In these changed circumstances, it is necessary to reconsider Noldeke’s
criterion of date, namely, the length of the verses. In this respect the
view that the ‘short pieces’ belong to different types is relevant, since it
would be only natural for the style to vary with the type of utterance and
the function it was intended to perform. As Bell puts it, ‘style may be
deliberately adopted to suit varying ends in view’, and ‘there are, in fact,
passages in the Qur’an which seem to suggest that different styles were
used at the same time for different kinds of utterances’ (p. 103). This
does not mean that the criterion of style is valueless. The criterion of
style, however, is insufficient to date a passage accurately; it gives no
more than a rough approximation. Bell is therefore inclined to attach
more weight to phraseology. When the introduction of a phrase can be
linked with a definite event in Muhammad’s life, it becomes an indication
of date.
In the last resort, therefore, the main criterion of date in the Qur’an
is the content of the separate passages. A careful study must be made of
the ideas and implications of each passage, and of their relevance to the
various phases of Muhammad’s career. In the Meccan period nothing
more than the barest outline is possible, but in the Medinan period there
are a number of outstanding events, whose date is known, which provide
a framework into which original revelations and revisions can be fitted
with a fair degree of accuracy. Even in the Medinan period, however,
the work of dating is far from simple. Similar passages throughout the
Qur’an have to be laboriously compared with one another in the attempt
30
 The Dating o f the Qur'an
to detect the growth of conceptions. In the end there will be many points
about which the scholar can only say wa-llahu a'lam.

Up to this point this article has consisted in a sympathetic but partly

independent presentation of Richard Bell’s theories. It remains to make
a critical appraisal of them and of his whole attempt at dating the Qur’an.
With regard to his first basic principle it would seem that there could
be little dispute. At most there might be some divergences in detail. In
a sura like 54, where there are four punishment stories resembling one
another in phraseology, they must have constituted a single whole from
the first and cannot have circulated independently of one another.
Similarly most of the story of Joseph in sura 12 must have existed as a
unity from the first. Bell may sometimes seem to have gone too far in
breaking up passages into their component parts. For example, in making
a division (albeit with hesitation) after 19.36/37, he seems to have failed
to notice that verses almost identical with this verse and the next one
occur together at 43.64 f. Nevertheless, as a pioneer in the analysis of
suras into their original elements he was justified in looking for as many
breaks as possible and leaving it to others to correct any exaggerations.
However much scholars may differ from Bell’s detailed conclusions, it
is no longer possible for serious scholars to do other than accept his first
basic principle that the normal unit of revelation was the short piece,
and its corollary that Muhammad was responsible for at least the first
stage of combining these pieces into suras.
Much the same may be said about his second basic principle. His
particular conclusions are often disputable, but in view of the great mass
of detailed evidence for ‘revision’ which is contained in his translation,
it must now be accepted that Muhammad ‘revised’ the revelations to a
great extent. These two principles and the subordinate theories are the
basis underlying the whole of the dating, and it is difficult to see how
any future work on the dating of the Qur’an can avoid beginning from
these principles.
With regard to Bell’s third principle of the existence of written
documents, some on the back of others, a little scepticism is justified -
perhaps not so much with the principle itself as with the contemporary
scholar’s ability to apply it in detail. Some of Bell’s applications of it are
convincing, and provide a neat explanation for the appearance of
extraneous passages in otherwise homogeneous contexts. Nevertheless
to apply the hypothesis as widely as he has done would seem to require
a more thorough theoretical justification than can readily be given. Where
there are grounds for suspecting revision, Bell tends to look for two
passages of equal length, and then to suppose that one was written on
the back of the other. But scraps of writing material need not have been
exactly filled on one side; some space may have been left on the first
31
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’AN
side, or the passage may have spilled over to the second side; the writing
need not always have been of the same size; and so on. Thus in the
application of Bell’s third principle there cannot be the same degree of
certainty that there is about his first two. In a few cases we may be fairly
certain that a certain passage was written on the back of a certain other
passage. In most cases, however, even if we suspect that the present
order of the text is due to the use of the two sides of the writing material,
we cannot with any degree of certainty say what was on the back of what.
It is unfortunate that this hypothesis has had so great an influence on
the physical appearance of Bell’s translation, since that gives the
impression that this document-hypothesis is the central part of Bell’s
theories about the Qur’an. One sees that he was justified in trying to
work out the hypothesis in the fullest possible detail. Yet one also regrets
the prominence it receives, since that obscures the other much more
valuable parts of Bell’s work. In the long run it will probably be found
that his greatest contribution to the study of the Qur’an, apart from his
insistence on the two basic principles, has been his detailed dating of the
fragments into which he analyses the suras. This is especially important
in the Medinan period, where the dates of many important events are
known, so that the revelations can be dated in relation to them.
Along the lines thus pioneered by Bell there is good hope of further
advances towards an agreed dating of the Qur’an. Such advances,
however, require a minute examination of the text of the Qur’an and a
laborious comparison of passage with passage. There is over three-
quarters of a century between the first edition of Theodor Noldeke’s
history and the appearance of Richard Bell’s translation, and it may well
be as long again before the latter’s work is superseded.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE

The following articles by Dr. Richard Bell are relevant to the subject of
this article:
‘Muhammad’s Pilgrimage Proclamation,’ Journal o f the Royal Asiatic
Society (1937), 233 ff.
‘Who were the Hanlfs?’, Moslem World, xx (1930), 120 ff.
‘A duplicate in the Koran; the composition of Surah xxiii’, MW., xviii
(1928), 227-33.
‘The Men on the A 'raf (vii, 44), MW., xxii (1932).
‘The Origin of the *Id al-adha’, MW., xxiii (1933), 117 ff.
‘Muhammad’s Call’, MW., xxiv (1934), 13 ff.
‘Muhammad’s Visions’, MW., xxiv (1934), 145 ff.
‘Muhammad and the previous Messengers’, MW., xxiv (1934), 330-40.
‘Muhammad and Divorce in the Qur’an’, MW., (1939), 55-62.
‘Surat al-Hashr’ (lix), MW., xxxviii (1948).
‘The Beginnings of Muhammad’s Religious Activity’, Transactions o f the
32
 The Dating of the Qur'an
Glasgow University Oriental Society, vii, 16-24.
The Sacrifice of Ishmael’, TGUOS., x, 29-31.
T he Style of the Qur’an’, TGUOS., xi, 9 ff.
‘Muhammad’s Knowledge of the Old Testament’, Studia Semitica et
Orientalia, ii, Glasgow, 1945.

33
 A4. Conversion in Islam at the Time of the Prophet

A study of conversion in Islam during Muhammad’s lifetime immediately

runs into a serious difficulty. The idea of conversion in the strict sense
does not occur in Islam. Of course, changes of religious allegiance occur.
Christians, atheists and pagans become Muslims, and occasionally
Muslims become Christians; but no single Arabic word covers all these
cases. Islamic thought makes an absolute distinction between what we
would call conversion to Islam and conversion from Islam. The former
is described as isldm (surrender to God) and ihtida’ (following guidance),
whereas the latter is irtidad (apostasy). The two are not even regarded
as two species of the genus ‘change of religion’. The simplest way of
studying the topic will therefore be, firstly, to consider how the Qur’an
conceives what happens when, as we say, a man becomes Muhammad’s
follower or attaches himself to Muhammad’s religion; and secondly, to
consider further material from the Sira or biography of Muhammad.
In the earliest passages of the Qur’an there is no thought of a man
changing from one religious community to another. The relevant question
is whether he is going to respond or fail to respond to God’s message as
delivered by Muhammad, whether he is going to count it true or count
it false. Thus in Surat Quraysh (106) the citizens of Mecca, in thanksgiving
for their prosperity, are called upon to ‘worship the Lord of this House’
(fa-l-ya'budu rabba hadha l-bayt). It is worth looking at this verse more
closely. It is almost certainly very early, and ‘the House’ is universally
taken to be the Ka'ba at Mecca. Since the verse is included in the Qur’an,
Muslims must have identified the Lord of the House with God (Allah) ;
yet the phrase must also have indicated to contemporaries the deity (or
the principal deity) already worshippepd at the Ka'ba. There is no
question of conversion here. Indeed, to call upon the people of Mecca
to worship the deity whom they already worship is not, it would appear,
a summons to a revolutionary change of religion. As one reflects, one
rather wonders whether there is any novelty at all in this sura. I believe
that there is, and that reasons can be given for such a view.
Though our knowledge of religious conditions in Mecca at this period
is meagre, it can be inferred from Arabic poetry that practice of the
traditional religion - about whose gods we know a little - was now
vestigial. This is not surprising since it was essentially the religion of
34
 Conversion in Islam at the Time o f the Prophet
agricultural people and had little relevance to nomads. There was just
sufficient life in the old religion for Muhammad’s opponents to attempt
to stir up religious feelings against him. It may further be inferred from
the Qur’an that some of Muhammad’s Meccan contemporaries were
coming to regard Allah as a ‘high god’, transcending the deities
worshipped in various local shrines but somewhat remote (Watt, 1971).
That many Meccans should thus believe in a ‘high god’ is fully in
accordance with the fact that belief in a ‘high god’ or ‘a supreme god’
was at this period widespread throughout the Fertile Crescent (Teixidor).
The story of the ‘satanic verses’ is relevant here (Watt, 1953:101-7). This
story can hardly be an invention since it appears in the Tafsir of al-Tabari
and other commentaries of the Qur’an as an explanation of the phrase
(22.52/51) about Satan ‘throwing’ or ‘introducing’ something to meet a
prophet’s wish. For a time Muhammad accepted as a genuine revelation
certain verses approving prayers to local deities; presumably he regarded
these as a kind of angel who might be asked to intercede with the ‘high
god’. Subsequently, however, he realized that these verses were
incompatible with strict monotheism and had been intruded by Satan.
With these points in mind the element of novelty in Surat Quraysh
may be discerned. While there may have been a handful of genuine
monotheists in Mecca, the summons to worship is best understood as
addressed to those who regarded ‘the Lord of this House’ as the ‘high
god’. The wording of the sura implies that this ‘high god’ is no remote
being who may be neglected with impunity in many cases, but is the
source of the material prosperity of the Meccans. That God is both all-
powerful and beneficent to man is one of the dominant themes of the
early passages of the Qur’an, and has consequences which are little short
of revolutionary. This then is the element of novelty in Surat Quraysh,
but it is presented as a kind of expansion of an important strand in
contemporary thought, so that prima facie no change of religion or even
of direction is involved.
It was only gradually that Muhammad’s followers came to be marked
off from other members of the Meccan community. The term muslim,
and the corresponding noun islam as a name for the religion, are possibly
not used in the Qur’an until about the second year after the Hijra, and
certainly did not at first have the full technical meaning. The term
mu"minim, ‘believers’, is both earlier and more frequently used, occurring
179 times in the Qur’an as against 37 occurrences of muslimun. For a
short period the term hanif was employed - a point to be discussed
presently.
The earliest word, however, to describe the religious and moral
practices of Muhammad’s followers was the verb tazakkd and the verbal
noun al-tazakki (but the corresponding participle is not found in the
Qur’an) (Watt, 1953, 165-9). The word is difficult to translate. The
35
 MUHAMMAD AND THE QUR’ AN
common renderings ‘purify’, ‘give alms’, ‘purify by almsgiving’ do not fit
all the instances. A commentator Ibn Zayd, quoted by al-Tabari on 79.18,
asserts that everywhere in the Qur’an tazakki signifies islam\ and in the
Meccan period this presumably means no more than the distinctive
practices of Muhammad’s followers. An examination of the various
instances of the word (20.76/78; 35.18/19; 79.18; 80.3, 7; 87.14; 92.18)
suggests that there is no necessary connection with almsgiving or ritual
purity but that it connotes aiming at moral purity or uprightness. The
aim of Muhammad’s preaching appears to be to bring about a man’s
tazakki (80;79); and tazakki leads to prosperity in the fullest sense, and
to Paradise (20). Other aspects of the practice of Muhammad’s followers
at Mecca are named in 87.14, 15: ‘Prospered has he who tazakka, and
mentions (dhakara) the name of his Lord and worships (salla)\ In all
this, however, there is nothing that requires anything like conversion in
new adherents, though tazakki may have included some definite act
marking a break with the past.
Eventually the new religious movement roused oposition against
Muhammad. From a relatively early period there had been passive
opposition, that is, failure to respond to Muhammad’s message; and the
Qur’an says (96.6, 7) that this is because man is presumptuous (yatgha)
and prides himself on his wealth (istaghna). This moves towards the
denial of the truth of the messages (takdhib - counting false) and unbelief
(kufr - with a suggestion of ingratitude). The contrasted attitude is
described by such words as iman (faith), tasdiq (counting true) and huda
(guidance). In accordance with this line of thought Muhammad’s function
is described as that of being a ‘warner’ (nadhir), that is, one who warns
of impending punishment, whether temporal or eschatological, for
conduct opposed to tazakki.
Passive opposition was eventually supplemented by active opposition,
that is, attempts to stop the practice of the new religion. Men were forcibly
prevented from praying (96.9f.), or were incarcerated by their families.
Muhammad himself was subjected to many petty vexations, and was
eventually deprived of the clan-protection without which he could not
go on proclaiming his religion in Mecca. The coolness between
Muhammad and the pagan Meccans became a complete break. The
‘satanic verses’ were annulled, and prayers to local deities forbidden. It
was insisted that there is no deity apart from Allah, the ‘high god’, God.
This break with the pagans is marked by such suras as 109 and 112. The
practices of Muhammad and his followers are now described as his din
or ‘religion’ (or ‘way of life’); he is to say to the unbelievers, ‘you have
your din and I mine’ (109.6).
This break with the pagans meant that Muhammad’s followers were
now marked off from the rest of the community. They had to stand up
to be counted; and they might be cold-shouldered by their family and
36
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
two helpers, sit in a room by themselves. Mr. Spice only stands by
the sideboard, and Mr. Hornby behind my lady the Countess, just to
look at. And do you know, miss—poor Miss Julia that was—is
considered nobody at all. Every thing is my Lady Countess."
"Do they think so, Taylor?"
"I hear the servants that I associate with, miss, make strange
observations, as we do sometimes talk over things amongst
ourselves; and they say that the Lady Countess is a very determined
woman, and manages my lord completely. Poor Miss Julia has no
power at all; but the Lady Countess is very kind-spoken to her, and
they say Miss Julia is very content to be put on one side."
"Lady Ennismore, if you please, Taylor."
"Ah! she is no Lady Ennismore, miss, unless she has her proper
situation in this house. As to my lord, miss, I assure you the footmen
speak of him in a very odd way."
"In what way?"
"Why one of them said openly at supper the word 'ass,' Miss
Wetheral; and another said he couldn't follow his nose without the
Lady Countess at his side: they all pity poor Miss Julia, and say she
is too good for him."
"I shall tell papa, Taylor."
"Oh, gracious, Miss Wetheral! don't bring me up about such things; I
really couldn't appear, upon my oath, before any one, for the world.
I must hold my tongue."
"No, speak on, Taylor: you must talk me to sleep."
"Well, indeed, miss! The footman, Number 7, as they call him—for
they are called out by number, not by name—has been some years
at Bedinfield; and he says the Lady Countess had great power over
her husband, the late lord. She was always bland and agreeable to
speak to, if nothing offended her, but Number 7 says it was a sight
to see her angry. She never forgave any one, and will allow no one
to differ with her. Miss Julia is so gentle! that's one thing; she will
never offend; but if she ever does, Number 7 says it will be the
worse for her."
"How can Number 7 tell any thing, Taylor?"
"Oh! Miss Wetheral, he says things very hard to believe; but no one
contradicted him. He says his lady will never part with power till she
is in her grave, and that Miss Julia will only lead a quiet life while she
gives way. I think my Lady Kerrison and my Lady Ennismore have
not done so well, miss, though they are quality. I must say I should
like to be first in my own house—I should expect—if my husband—
indeed, says I—"
Taylor's words appeared broken, and they gradually became extinct.
Christobelle fell asleep during her lengthy speech.
 CHAPTER XIX.

Lady Ennismore and Julia were already in the breakfast-room, when

Christobelle and her father descended the following morning. Lord
Ennismore was seated with a decanter of water on the table before
him; and he had sundry bottles stationed round it, from which he
weighed certain powders, and immersed the whole in a goblet of
water. His lordship was too occupied to rise upon their entrance, but
he apologised for the apparent want of gallantry.
"Excuse me, Sir John Wetheral, and also I entreat your pardon, Miss
Wetheral, for my sitting posture; but I am, at this moment,
preparing my morning draught. I shall, however, have much pleasure
in drinking your health, when the preparation is completed."
"I will stand proxy to your words, my dear Augustus," said the
Countess; "I am anxious about the given quantities of the powders,
and entreat you to be careful in examining the measures. Three
grains, I know, is the proper quantity. Three grains of each. My dear
Miss Wetheral, I hope you slept well. Sir John, I am going to carry
you with me per force, round the park. Three grains only, my dear
son."
"Thank you, my dear mother; I am very accurate: I have just
concluded my dose."
Lord Ennismore stood up with an air, which he intended should be
picturesque and gallant. His lordship held the goblet in one hand,
and a tea-spoon in the other, as he bowed low to Christobelle and
her father.
"I have the honour to drink to your welfare, as also to express our
pleasure at your conferring upon us the honour of your company."
His lordship then stirred the liquid into a state of effervescence, and
drank the contents of the goblet. Julia extended her hand to receive
the empty goblet, but the Countess prevented the action.
"No, my dear Julia, I will receive it from my son. I know you are not
fond of powders and effervescing draughts; young people seldom
like them. Let me take the glass from your husband." Her ladyship
perceived the goblet was not quite relieved of its contents. "My dear
Augustus, I am not easy. I wish I possessed the calmness of Julia,
but I never shall be so self-possessed; I am always in little alarms
about you. You have left a wine-glassful in this goblet, and you will
not feel its beneficial effects."
Lord Ennismore's satisfaction was observable at the care expressed
by his mother's remarks. Julia was totally ignorant of any concealed
purpose lurking in her ladyship's alarm. She only smiled at her
mother's perfectly unwarranted fears, and playfully jested at their
unfounded use. The Countess patted Julia's cheek.
"My dear love, you cannot know a mother's agonising, though,
perhaps, foolish fears. A young wife is not aware of the nature of
unpleasing symptoms, such as I fear I see arising in my son's
system. Sir John, I think we may assert it as a fact, that a parent's
anxiety is even more keenly acute than a wife's alarm."
Sir John did not agree with her ladyship. He thought parental pangs
must be to every heart a bitter trial; but a wife's welfare, or a
husband's health, must be a paramount interest. To his idea, a
mother's affection must bow to that of a wife.
"You think so, Sir John?" The Countess smiled bewitchingly upon her
son. "I believe I did my duty to my lord; I think I devoted myself to
his wishes; but I surely feel a more intense love for my son.
Perhaps," continued the Countess, sighing, "perhaps his very
delicate health interested my feelings too powerfully for my repose."
"I am, and must be," said his lordship, in most sententious tones,
"extremely fortunate in possessing a relation so interested in my
well-doing. I am sure my excellent wife feels for me a proper and
lively affection; but, as the Countess-dowager remarks, there is want
of reflection in the young, which only the more aged gain by
experience."
"My dear lord," exclaimed Julia, with gentle earnestness, "I should
be the only proper attendant; and I should be a most willing one,
too; if you would allow me to mix your medicines—but Lady
Ennismore has so frequently assured me...."
"Come, come, my sweet Julia, away with self-upbraidings, or
upbraiding of any nature! I bear witness to your worth and kindness;
let us proceed to despatch our breakfast, that I may claim Sir John's
company." The Countess allowed no pause in the conversation to
enable Julia to continue her observation.
"Sir John, I look forward to great commendations on your part. My
son's taste is admirably set forth in the new drive, which
comprehends a circuit of three miles. My dear Miss Wetheral, you
have a fine lady's appetite: surely Bedinfield will effect a change. I
am sure my Julia will enjoy an hour or two of chat with you, my
young friend, while we are absent. A little chat upon Wetheral topics.
Julia talks with so much fervour of her friends in Shropshire!"
"I wish they would all think of me with equal interest, and become
better correspondents," observed Julia, energetically.
"Talking of correspondence," said the Countess, addressing Sir John,
"how few of our earliest friends ever continue to keep up the
delightful intercourse of extreme youth. So many new objects, so
many new perceptions! We rarely can long persevere in the course
of our early career."
"My daughter's friend makes the same remark. Miss Wycherly
complains of Julia's silence," observed Sir John.
"I have written frequently, papa," cried Julia, her whole figure
becoming animated with the subject. "I have even invited Penelope
to Bedinfield, without receiving an acceptation or denial. What can
my friend plead in extenuation of her neglect? I did expect to be
summoned to her marriage. I promised to attend her summons."
"You did not inform me of this arrangement, Julia," remarked the
Countess; "I was not aware of the intended pleasure of another visit
into Shropshire."
"I did not answer for you, dear mother. I was not aware at that time
of your intention to reside at Bedinfield. I only assured Penelope,
Lord Ennismore, and myself, would swell her train."
"You have changed your resolution, of course," said the Countess, in
a dry tone of voice.
"No, indeed: I should like to surprise Penelope. Papa, we will return
with you to Wetheral, if my lord has no objection."
"No plan can give me greater pleasure, my love. Let us return
together, if you please. If your ladyship will add your society,
Wetheral will be proud to receive you. Lady Wetheral will rejoice to
see you."
"Oh! let us all return with papa," exclaimed Julia, turning to her lord
with eagerness; "let us all return with papa to dear Wetheral!"
"I am sensible of Sir John's politeness," returned his lordship, "more
particularly as change of air is beneficial to every constitution. I shall
with pleasure revisit Wetheral, if the Countess-dowager has no
engagements to prevent her quitting Bedinfield."
"My dear mother, you are not engaged? You will accompany us,
won't you?" said Julia, affectionately and eagerly.
"I am grieved that it is out of my power to accept Sir John's polite
invitation," replied the Countess, with much suavity.
"Oh! I am so sorry! but, my lord, you will take me to Wetheral; you
will return with me into Shropshire," continued Julia, anxiously
watching the stolid face of her dull lord. "You have no engagement,
Augustus?"
"None whatever, my dear Lady Ennismore," was his lordship's reply;
"but if my mother cannot postpone her engagements, we had
perhaps better defer our visit."
"I have every hope," said Sir John, bowing politely to the Countess,
"I have every hope that Lady Ennismore will yet favour us with her
company. Perhaps, upon a little consideration, one or two
engagements may give way, to do us honour."
"I will consult with my son," replied the Countess, with her most
bewitching smile. "A visit to Wetheral must be a pleasure too
agreeable to relinquish, if we can postpone less agreeable
engagements. I shall not fail to draw upon my invention for excuses
in one quarter. My dear Julia, I hope we shall accomplish a visit to
Wetheral. I hope my lord's health will continue: but I do not like his
pallid complexion this morning."
"Do I look unwell?" asked his lordship, in an anxious tone, "do I
appear changed to-day, my dear mother?"
"I don't approve of that pale cheek, my dear son. Julia, do you
notice a little hectic spot—a very small spot, just upon the cheek-
bone?"
Julia looked at her lord's leaden face. "No, I do not discover a spot, I
cannot perceive a hectic spot—do you, papa?"
"My dearest Julia, is it possible you cannot distinguish a little feverish
appearance? I see it from this distance, with great uneasiness."
"Now, papa, you shall judge between us. Do you see any
appearance of spot or fever upon my lord's cheek?"
Sir John put on his glasses with an air of grave solemnity. "Am I
constituted judge in this matter?"
"Oh, yes, papa, you shall declare the precise state of the matter,"
exclaimed Julia, laughingly.
"No one must judge for me. No one can judge for a mother's quick
eye," said the Countess, playfully, "but still in the multitude of
counsellors there is wisdom; therefore, I should wish to hear Sir
John's opinion."
Sir John Wetheral examined Lord Ennismore's cheek with great
command of countenance: there was no spot, or even the slightest
tinge of colour; all was colourless, still, and heavy: dull, dismal, and
disagreeable.
"My good lord," he said, "I am pleased to join my daughter in her
happy fearlessness; and still better pleased to be able to soothe her
ladyship's apprehensions. I think there is nothing alarming in your
cheek. Rather pale, but I can perceive no hectic tendency."
Lord Ennismore turned anxiously towards his mother. Her eyes were
fixed apprehensively upon him: he turned towards Julia; she was
engaged with the merrythought of a chicken. He again turned to the
Countess.
"My dear mother, you are not satisfied with Sir John Wetheral's
opinion: I see you think I am unwell, and you are always watching
me, therefore, you understand my constitution better than any one
can do. I don't think I am very well this morning. I could almost
fancy my head was uncomfortable."
"You never give way to fancy, my dear son, therefore, you are not
well. I can read the expression of your poor heavy eyes this
morning: I am very uneasy." The Countess rose with some
perturbation from the breakfast-table.
Lord Ennismore rose also. "Excuse me, Sir John Wetheral, excuse
me, Miss Wetheral, if I appear abrupt in quitting your company. I will
retire, if you please, this morning; I certainly feel very unwell, and a
few hours quiet will be calming. Pray don't rise, Lady Ennismore; my
mother will give me her assistance to my apartments; my dear
mother, will you be so kind as to give me an audience?"
Julia rose, and offered her arm to Lord Ennismore, but he again
declined her assistance. The Countess approached with exultation in
her looks and manner; but soft words were upon her lips.
"I believe we old people are better fitted for nurses, my dear Julia.
Your alarm, perhaps, would be greater than my own upon any
emergency, but an old head is more used to critical situations. My
dearest love, will you accompany our friends into the sitting-room,
and then join us; you will be very anxious to see the effect of my
old-fashioned remedies. My dear Sir John, I will see you again to
arrange our drive."
Lord Ennismore quitted the breakfast-room with a look of real
dejection. His valet, who had been summoned, followed his lordship,
as he leaned upon the arm of the Countess. Her implied suspicions
had taken such deep root in the weak mind of her son, that his
imagination led him to believe he was seriously ill. His lordship
walked softly, with the air of a person who felt assured he had been
suddenly seized with an alarming and painful malady: his person
shrunk into greater insignificance, his eye wore a more heavy
expression—he was the perfect illustration of Molière's "Malade
Imaginaire," as he walked gently across the grandly-proportioned
apartment. What a creature to possess a wife so lovely as Julia, and
to be the representative of the earldom of Ennismore! to own the
baronial halls of Bedinfield, and write himself a man!
Sir John Wetheral would not let Julia depart when they entered the
sitting-room. He made her take a seat by his side upon the sofa, and
he held her hand, while he gazed fondly upon her. Julia smiled, and
asked him "if he was examining the hectic appearances upon her
cheek."
"No, my child, here are no symptoms of green and yellow
melancholy; you look well, Julia, therefore, you must be happy."
"Yes, papa, I am indeed happy. Lady Ennismore spoils me, and will
not let me stir from her side, 'lest the winds of heaven should blow
too roughly on my cheek.' She is all kindness."
"And Lord Ennismore is indulgent, Julia, and makes you happy?"
"I wish he would not take so much medicine, papa; otherwise, he
never contradicts me in anything. I cannot think it wholesome to
take such a quantity of medicine. The Countess encourages him, I
think."
"You love him, Julia?"
"Yes, pretty well, papa. Mamma told me I should like him better and
better every day, when I was once married, but I can't say that is
quite the case. I like Lord Ennismore, though: he never offends me,
except in the quantity of pills and powders. I don't like him better,
but then I don't think I like him worse."
"You are anxious to visit Wetheral again, my love?"
"Indeed, papa, I am. I want to find out why my friends have been
silent. Mamma has behaved very ill: she has never written me a line,
though I addressed her every month. I can't imagine what my
friends are made of. The Countess warned me of all this."
"What can Lady Ennismore prophecy, who is so distantly known to
your friends, Julia?"
"She tells me, papa, that every body is envious of my marriage, and
that my friends will fall away, because all youthful friendships are
hollow. Penelope has, indeed, proved how little my letters interest
her."
"Indeed, Julia," exclaimed Christobelle, "Miss Wycherly has not
received one letter from Bedinfield. She told me so very sorrowfully
at Hatton."
"I cannot think that," returned her sister. "The Countess herself took
my letters to seal, and order them to be put into the post-bag.
Penelope must have received them, but she is preparing for her
marriage, and Charles Spottiswoode engrosses her attention."
"No, indeed, Julia; remember Miss Wycherly's message by papa."
"I cannot understand it all," replied Julia, as the tears rushed to her
eyes; "I love all my friends dearly, but now I am Countess of
Ennismore not a soul thinks of me, to keep up a correspondence.
Mamma told me that rank bought every thing, yet I cannot purchase
a line from my own home, 'to bid God bless me.' I am very unhappy
about it sometimes, only Lady Ennismore comforts me, and says she
loves me for a hundred friends."
"Think no more of it, my love, we shall be all united at Wetheral
soon, and you shall lecture Penelope before us in conclave." Sir John
pressed Julia to him as he spoke. She smiled through her tears.
"Oh, you are all included in my coming lecture! You are all
delinquents! I thought I should have fainted when I heard of your
arrival yesterday, so unexpectedly! I was flying down to you, but
dear Lady Ennismore arrested my flight. She made me lie down, and
take some of my lord's horrid drops. She advised me, too, to receive
you in the drawing-room; it was more becoming my station, and
your demerits. I forgot station and demerits, when I heard your dear
name, papa." She threw her arms round her father's neck, and
proceeded. "What care I for any one, like my own dear papa? I
know I should be fonder of Lord Ennismore if he was not always
mixing up draughts and lotions, and if he was more with me; but his
rooms are near Lady Ennismore, and mine are in the left wing of this
immense place."
"You do not mean to infer, my love, that you have separate
apartments!" said her father, starting up from the sofa. "Four months
of matrimony, and a separation already, Julia!"
"Oh, that's an old affair now, papa. Lord Ennismore had his rooms
prepared near Lady Ennismore these three months, because he
thought she understood the pennyweights and grains better than I
do. I only see my lord at meals, and he is extremely attentive to me
then, I must say; but I cannot like him as I should do if he consulted
me about his medicines. I should learn the weights and measures in
time, you know."
Sir John walked to the window, without making any reply. The
Countess entered the room at the moment; she spoke kindly and
feelingly to her daughter; at the same time taking both her hands,
and pressing them with affectionate solicitude.
"My dear love, my lord is inquiring for you: he feels better, much
better, but I have decided upon sending for Dr. Anstruther. He
wishes you to sit with him; he inquires for Julia upon all occasions,
and I am now come for you. My son is full of regrets," added her
ladyship, turning towards her guests, "that he should feel one of his
little seizures at this particular moment, when he wished to do the
honours of Bedinfield; but he deputes me to act for him. He has
insisted upon my ordering the barouchette, to drive Miss Wetheral
and yourself to the plantations. My dear son will hope to be perfectly
well at dinner: he is quite nervous about the plantations."
Sir John appeared too engrossed with his own emotions to reply; but
he bowed to her ladyship's speech. She turned to Christobelle.
"My dear young friend, we shall return to luncheon, therefore, as my
daughter remains with her husband, you will, probably, be glad to
accompany us in our drive. We shall set out in half an hour."
Christobelle promised herself little pleasure in the drive, since Julia
would not be with them, but she would prepare to attend her
ladyship's summons. The two ladies then proceeded towards the
hall. Julia looked back at her father, as he seated himself near
Christobelle, and smiled.
"Papa, I shall find out about the letters from Lady Ennismore. I am
sure Penelope is wrong!"
"What is this little affair, Julia?" asked Lady Ennismore, with peculiar
quickness.
"My friends say they have received no letters from Bedinfield, my
dear mother. You know I wrote, for you were kind enough to seal my
long crossed epistles. You told me they would serve me so!"
"I have often known fluctuations in correspondence among young
people, my love. I used to fancy in my youth that I was particularly
ill-used; but, when I look back, I perceive it was circumstances
which over-ruled many events."
Lady Ennismore continued speaking to Julia, but the distance
prevented the substance of her remarks reaching her friends. Before
the speech concluded, however, they had gained the door, which
Lady Ennismore closed after their transit, and the subject was never
more renewed. A heavy sigh from her father arrested Christobelle's
attention. She asked him if he was ill.
"Not in body, my dear child: my mind alone is wretched."
"Oh, why, papa?" she exclaimed, in surprise; "what makes you
wretched in this beautiful place of Julia's? and Julia herself so well
and happy!"
"There is no happiness with that dangerous woman, and that feeble
son!" said her father, as he paced the room. "There is no peace for
my poor child—ignorance, ignorance is her only earthly chance! Why
was I so weak, so deluded, to marry my poor child to a wretched
idiot?"
"Papa," Christobelle uttered gently—"dear papa, who are you
meaning?"
He did not hear her speak; her father apparently forgot her
presence, for he continued walking.
"To give way to a woman's tears, when my judgment recoiled at the
union, was folly, was wickedness. My heart will feel this, for I knew it
was wrong, yet I sanctioned it by my presence. My poor Julia!—my
poor, poor girl!"
Christobelle could not bear to hear her father's self-reproach; she
went to him and took his hand.
"Papa," she said, "don't say you have done wrong; you never did
wrong to any body. We all say how good and kind you are to us."
He stopped and looked earnestly at her.
"I have brought you up, Chrystal, with very different principles. I do
not think you will bring me in sorrow to the grave. I think you will
not sell yourself to perjury and ambition, as others have done."
"I will never do what you tell me not to do, papa."
"I hope not—I hope not, my child. I tell you not to marry a selfish,
heartless man, as Clara and Julia have done, to secure wealth and
rank, which they will never enjoy in peace—which they will never
enjoy in respectability. It is a hard fate, but even the young must
endure it if they barter peace for riches. God help them! their poor
mother has done this, and I did not act a father's part by them!" Sir
John seated himself, and Christobelle knelt by him, and held his
hand to her lips, and kissed it repeatedly. He was recalled to
recollection by this movement, and he raised her from the attitude
she had chosen, to a seat by her side.
"My dear Chrystal, never repeat the remarks to any third person,
which you have heard now from my lips. Remember the trust I have
in your youth, because you have been my companion, and have
learned to be silent, and to think a parent's word sacred. You will
understand my distress of mind at a future period; but at this
moment the knowledge of my suffering would be incomprehensible
to you. In your steadiness of character I hope for much comfort
hereafter."
Christobelle did indeed hope to be his comfort in age, as he had
been her shield in youth. Her words were simple, and her
expressions were uttered with untutored energy, but they were
sincere in feeling. His society, his kindness, his information, had
been her happiness; for they had shielded her from a mother's
reproaches, and her increasing loss of self-command. They had
preserved her from ambitious feelings, by withdrawing her from her
mother's influence; and, by offering her the calm pleasures of his
study, instead of consigning her first young days to the infected air
of Thompson's room, and Thompson's arguments, Christobelle had
known only indulgence and gentle treatment. How could she help
loving this estimable parent, or fail to make his slightest wish the law
of her heart? She did promise—and redeemed that promise—that
she would never breathe to a human being the conversations which
he entrusted to her sacred keeping.
Lady Ennismore was true to her appointment. She did the honours
of the new drive with infinite grace, and conversed with Sir John
upon every subject with fluent and astonishing information. Her
ladyship appeared quite equal to guide the destinies of Bedinfield.
Every improvement originated with herself, however carefully she
subscribed Lord Ennismore's name to the plans; and her perfect
acquaintance with agricultural economy proved her equal to the task
of superintending her son's immense property. Christobelle was
delighted with the polite tact of her manners, as she directed her
conversation from John to herself. It is assuredly a great gift to
possess that polite ease, and well-directed attention, which gives a
flattering unction to the vanity of all who receive its plastic touch. It
is the wand of a fairy which turns words into the pearls and
diamonds of the little tale—which does so delightfully
"Wash, and comb, and lay us down softly."

No one could exceed Lady Ennismore in that most fascinating, most

dangerous gift of attraction. Christobelle felt under its spell, bound
towards her by the silent and potent effects of soothed vanity. She
felt she was of equal consideration with her father in Lady
Ennismore's eyes; for her opinions were elicited, and listened to with
marked attention. Christobelle was raised above the level of her
understanding—she was gratified—she was delighted with Lady
Ennismore. The dull drive which had been anticipated, passed
pleasantly, even rapidly, to her charmed feelings; and Sir John
confessed to her, that he could not feel surprised at her ladyship's
powerful influence over the unsuspicious and gentle heart of Julia.
Lady Ennismore was equally fascinating at luncheon. She did not
partake of the delicacies which tempted the eye, and impelled
appetite; but her lively conversation almost recompensed them for
the absence of Julia, whose excuses she tendered. "Lord Ennismore
was certainly very unwell; he was suffering much pain in the head.
His dear Julia never left her son when he had those wretched
attacks. He could not endure her to be a moment from his sight; but
she had deputed her to give her best love to both dear relations,
whom she hoped to meet at dinner, or at least, in the evening."
But Julia did not appear at the promised hour. "Lord Ennismore's
symptoms increased. Dr. Anstruther was of opinion his patient was
preparing for another of those alarming attacks. She greatly feared
Julia would be confined to a sick room many days, but her son was
so eagerly bent upon receiving every thing from Julia's hand—so
attached to his lady, it was delightful to witness such conjugal
affection. Lord Ennismore almost increased the disorder, by
regretting his inability to see his agreeable guests: the next visit to
Bedinfield, her ladyship trusted, would be free from such a painful
interruption of intercourse."
The evening passed away, and Julia did not appear. It did seem
strange that she could not make her escape to her family for a
quarter of an hour. Why was Lord Ennismore so anxious for his
lady's society, so very much attached as his mother represented him
to be, and yet allow her apartments to remain at such a distance
from his own? Why was not his attachment manifested in that love
for her society which would make them inseparable, like the
Boscawens, like the Pynsents, nay, even like the unhappily assorted
Kerrisons? Surely, Julia might be replaced by the anxious mother,
while she visited at intervals her own father! Christobelle was
infinitely astonished at Julia's complete seclusion with Lord
Ennismore, for she knew her strong affection to her own family, and
the little anxiety she could suffer for a man whom she professed to
like "pretty well!" This was not love, to compel that devotion of time
and thought to her husband's comforts which Anna Maria would
have shown to her honest-hearted and beloved Tom Pynsent. It was
a line of conduct Christobelle could not comprehend, and her father
did not enlighten her on the subject, when she expressed her
sentiments to him at parting for the night. He doubtless felt and
understood the whole system pursued by the Dowager Countess to
sustain her power at Bedinfield; but Christobelle was too young to
be initiated in the wiles of the human heart, and she wept to think
her sister could absent herself so long from those who loved her,
and who had journeyed so far to enjoy her presence.
The second morning's meal was ungraced by Julia still. Lord
Ennismore was even "seriously" indisposed; and her ladyship spoke
with feeling, and at great length, of her own parental anxiety. Her
mind was torn to pieces with agitation and alarm. She fancied
sometimes, the mild air of the South of Italy would be necessary to
the recovery of her son's health. Julia would be so confined at
Bedinfield, she thought. The bright climate of Rome or Naples would
be beneficial to both her children, and, perhaps, brace her own
nerves. She had talked to Dr. Anstruther upon the subject, and he
quite went with her in her ideas of Rome. "What did her dear Sir
John think?"
Sir John could form no opinion. He was not acquainted with the
nature of the attacks which afflicted Lord Ennismore, and Julia's
health was excellent, if he was to judge by her blooming and healthy
complexion.
"True, my dear sir; Julia does indeed give evidence of health, and a
tranquil mind. I am most happy in the knowledge, indeed in her own
assurance, that her heart is free from care. I have spoken to her this
morning, and she seems delighted with the prospect of a continental
tour. I am very uneasy about my son."
"Have you had medical advice from town, Lady Ennismore?"
"No: Dr. Anstruther is remarkably clever. My son, as well as myself,
pin our faith upon his advise. I am never easy without Dr. Anstruther.
We could not consult a more intelligent medical adviser."
"As I purpose leaving Bedinfield early to-morrow morning, your
ladyship may perhaps...."
"My dear friend, you must not quit us in this hurried way! Surely you
do not leave Bedinfield so soon!" The Countess spoke in tones of
regret, but her eyes betrayed her pleasurable feelings. "I must
mourn my son's illness, since it removes you from us. The next visit
must be at some moment more favourable to all parties. This has
been an unfortunate occurrence. I must lament this very unfortunate
occurrence."
"I wish to see my daughter before I quit Bedinfield," said Sir John
Wetheral, with seriousness of look and manner. "I must see my
daughter before I return to Wetheral: probably she will not be so
closely confined to-day."
"I hope not—I will try to hope not," replied the Countess; "but my
fears will not allow me to be tranquil. When our breakfast is
concluded, I will visit our invalid again, and, if possible, release my
dear Julia. She is very watchful and attentive, dear creature. I
cannot wonder at Ennismore's anxiety to have her with him. We will
see what this hour has produced."
Breakfast was concluded in silence. The Countess lost her lively flow
of spirits, and Sir John did not contribute his usual portion of
pleasant conversation. The trio gradually became silent and sad, and
Lady Ennismore, politely expressing her hopes that they should yet
alter their intention of leaving Bedinfield, rose to visit her son. She
hoped Julia might return to them, when she was with the dear
invalid, to take her place; but, if a short time intervened, she trusted
they would find amusement in the stores of the library, or in
perambulating the grounds. All and every thing was at their
command.
The father and daughter were alone for some hours. Each moment,
as it sped rapidly on, was full of hope that Julia was on her way to
gladden their sight, and delight their hearts; but, as time were on,
they feared some evil accident had befallen the unfortunate Lord
Ennismore. The door at last opened, and the same attendant, who
appeared at their entrance into Bedinfield, again presented herself.
"The Countess of Ennismore regrets the necessity of her absence,
Sir John, but she cannot quit my lord's apartment. I am deputed to
bear her compliments, and the regret of the young Lady Ennismore.
The Countess commands me to say the carriages are at your
disposal, and her ladyship trusts you will excuse her presence till the
hour of dinner."
"I fear his lordship is very unwell," observed Sir John, fixing his eyes
upon the unwelcome messenger with an expression of strong
disbelief in her statement; but she avoided meeting his gaze.
"I am commanded to unfold my message to Sir John Wetheral, but I
was not authorised to speak beyond its purport. I must now return
to her ladyship."
"Stay one instant," resumed Sir John, "and take back my answer. Tell
your lady, I will not occupy the time and services, which appear to
be required on Lord Ennismore's part. I will order my carriage
immediately; but I wish for one moment to take leave of my
daughter, Lady Ennismore, ere I leave her to the mournful task of
watching by her patient. My daughter and myself are useless, since
our exertions cannot benefit Lord Ennismore. I wish to see my
daughter, if you please; and I shall be obliged by your conveying my
wishes to one of her people."
The attendant of Lady Ennismore retired, and they were again two
hours without receiving any interruption. The carriage had been
some moments at the door, and Sir John was walking up and down
the room with hasty steps, when a note was presented to him, upon
a silver waiter, by Lady Ennismore's footman.

"My dear Sir John,

"I cannot wonder at your flight—this is a place of sorrow
and sickness, unfit for the healthy and happy. May we meet
soon again! Julia and myself dare not quit for a moment
our beloved and suffering invalid—he is in great torment.

"Yours most truly,

"E. Ennismore."
Sir John Wetheral rang the bell: a brief pause, and the footman
reappeared.
"Is Dr. Anstruther at this moment in the house?"
"I believe the doctor is now with my lord, Sir John."
"I wish to see Dr. Anstruther the instant he quits Lord Ennismore's
apartment."
The servant bowed, and disappeared.
"This is hopeless and helpless," observed Sir John; "I can only
increase Julia's distress, by remaining at Bedinfield. What use will it
be to inquire into the machinations of the Countess, except to reap
bitterness, and perceive my inability to rouse the torpid character of
her son. My poor Julia's fate depends upon that artful woman's will.
It is vain to look on, and witness that which I cannot control."
"But Lord Ennismore is very ill, papa," exclaimed the sorrowing
Christobelle. "Lord Ennismore is very ill, and Julia cannot leave him
to bid us farewell! Will he die, papa?"
Sir John made no reply to the hurried question. He was struggling
with his own emotions. He led his daughter in silence through the
file of footmen in the hall to the entrance-door, where his carriage
waited, already packed and surmounted by Taylor. Hornby advanced
to inform him of Dr. Anstruther's departure from Bedinfield; he had
driven away before Sir John's message had been delivered to him.
Sir John made no remark; he handed Christobelle into the carriage,
and ordered the door to be closed: he did not enter it himself.
Christobelle entreated him to join her. "My dear papa, where are you
going to ride?"
"In the rumble, my love: the air will do me good. Take Taylor inside."
The exchange was made quickly. Sir John took possession of the
rumble, which enabled him to commune with his own thoughts in
silence, and they quitted for ever the magnificent home, which
Julia's fatal ambition had preferred to the happy days of her
singlehood, in the less courtly domain of Wetheral Castle. They left,
for ever, the towers of Bedinfield, its wooded hills, its calmly
beautiful and luxuriant scenery: they never more beheld its ancient
walls, or visited the home of Julia's choice. In ten days after Sir John
Wetheral's return into Shropshire, the Bedinfield establishment,
including Dr. Anstruther, were on their road to Florence, and it was
said Lord Ennismore's health had compelled the sudden and silently
arranged movement.
 CHAPTER XX.

A twelvemonth passed by, unmarked by any event, save the

marriage of Miss Wycherly. Mr. and Mrs. Charles Spottiswoode
resided at Lidham, and Sir John Spottiswoode had returned to
England, to inhabit his almost desolate property in Worcestershire.
Lady Spottiswoode and her daughter were invited to remain with
him at Alverton, to enliven his home, till he could endow it with a
wife; but Sir John's fastidious taste gave little promise to the gay
partakers of Lady Spottiswoode's festivities, that she would be
restored to her once agreeably filled jointure-house, in the Abbey
Foregate.
Worcestershire, also, lay wide and far between the growing loves of
Miss Spottiswoode and Mr. John Tyndal; but there was resolution on
his side, and encouragement on the part of the lady; and the
repeated absences of Mr. John Tyndal from Court Herbert, gave rise
to much observation and prophecy in their circle. The Tom Pynsents
were at Hatton, rejoicing in the prospect of an heir to its prosperity;
and Mrs. Pynsent's ecstasy could only be equalled by the anxiety she
manifested to keep Anna Maria's mind easy. Her whims, in every
respect, were to be met with instant fulfilment. Mrs. Pynsent formed
a most amusing contrast to the fearful Miss Tabitha Boscawen.
Christobelle was domesticated at Hatton a fortnight before her
sister's expected confinement. Her father rejoiced in her visits, for
she was then withdrawn from her mother's increasing petulance—a
petulance, which began to vent its puerile vehemence upon every
being within her power, and which fell upon Christobelle with
peculiar violence.
The extremity of her ladyship's patience had given way under
repeated disappointments connected with Bedinfield and Ripley.
Those matches, which she had most fondly considered her own
scheme, prosecuted to their close, by her own determination and
skill, in the very face of her husband's objections, had given her no
satisfaction. Bedinfield was now deserted by her daughter for a
foreign land; and Sir Foster Kerrison had interdicted the meeting of
Clara and her mother at Ripley. He considered Lady Wetheral an
aider and abettor of his wife's violent spirit; and, having once
forbidden the presence of her ladyship within the walls, the gibing
and bitter reproaches of Clara strengthened and decided his
prohibition. Vexed and irritated by these occurrences, Lady Wetheral
could not turn her attention to her happily-established Anna Maria,
or the gay-hearted Isabel, with her darling child: she forbade
Christobelle ever offending her ears with sounds so repugnant to her
taste.
"Hold your tongue, Bell. I do not choose to be lectured by a pert girl
of thirteen. What is Tom Pynsent to me? I detest a man who can
tamely bear to live shut up with those people at Hatton; and who
can bear the avarice of Boscawen, driving a stupid pair of horses,
when he can so well afford four? Those were your father's matches,
not mine."
"I thought you particularly wished Tom Pynsent to propose to Anna
Maria, mamma?"
"Hold your tongue, Bell."
Christobelle was happy to escape from the cares of Wetheral, to the
perfect freedom of Hatton. Provided every one spoke their mind, and
that mind was free from mean pride, Mrs. Pynsent was content. Her
good-humour to those she loved was proverbial, as her detestation
of folly was public. Luckily, Christobelle was ranked among her
favourites at her first visit.
"You young thing, so you are come to Hatton, are you? Shake
hands. I shall like you, because you showed a good feeling about
your dare-devil sister Kerrison, some time ago. I like warm-hearted
people, without nonsense and pride—here's a welcome to you, you
great, tall, good-looking thing." Mrs. Pynsent wrung her hand with a
good will, which gave severe pain. Christobelle tried to smile.
"What, my welcome is rough, is it? Make a face at once, and don't
pretend you are pleased, when you are no such thing. There's your
sister—she's a proper little tub—and there's Tom, as handsome as
ever—and here's my Bobby, with the gout; but you may go and
shake hands with him. The poor soul can't wag from the sofa."
Christobelle was received affectionately by all and each. Mrs.
Pynsent was full of kind inquiries. Some fell kindly upon her young
friend's heart, and some remarks had better have been left unsaid.
"Well, and how is your father, my young one? A better creature
never walked this earth than Sir John. How is he?"
"Quite well, and desires his compliments."
"Ay, to be sure—and my lady, how is she?"
"I left mamma very unwell."
"Too-too! she can't be ill. Hasn't she married her daughters to two
mad scamps, that her heart was set upon? What is she ill about?
Can't she get you off, just yet, that she is so dull? She had better
throw you at Selgrave's head. Well, and how is my pretty Mrs.
Boscawen?"
Christobelle gave Mrs. Pynsent a full account of Isabel's health, and
her happiness at Brierly.
"Very proper; I am glad to hear it. That was your father's match,
missy. He valued a good man. Lord, Tom, what are you doing there,
with Anna Maria?"
Tom Pynsent was removing a basket of apricots from his lady's
vicinity.
"I won't let my wife eat these unripe things, to make herself ill, and
bring on all sorts of queer feelings. Upon my soul, you have eaten
six half-ripe apricots; you have eaten sour things enough to kill an
old fox, much less a little delicate creature like yourself."
"Just one apricot more, Tom," said Anna Maria, coaxingly.
"By Jove, I'll throw them out to the dogs, Anna! You shall not eat
such trash."
"Just one more, Tom," continued his lady, advancing her hand
towards the basket, and looking half-beseechingly, half-saucily, at
him.
"Upon my word, you are enough to drive a man distracted! I declare
you are more trouble to me than the kennel!" cried Tom Pynsent,
unable to resist her minauderie, and again surrendering the basket
of apricots to her grasp. "I'm sure I hope this won't happen every
time."
"Ha, ha," cried Mrs. Pynsent, "and that's the fear, is it, Master
Tommy? Give up the fruit, and let her eat as much as she likes. Do
you remember, Bobby, how I gobbled your pines, once upon a
time?"
Mr. Pynsent looked up from his newspaper, and shrugged his
shoulders. "I remember a good deal, Pen."
"I'll be bound you do, Bobby."
Anna Maria now expressed a wish to walk with her sister into the
flower-garden. Tom rather demurred at her descending the long
flight of steps. Mrs. Pynsent would allow no opposition.
"Come now, Tommy, let the poor thing hobble about, if she wishes
it; and, if she drops down, pick her up again. I hate a poor
unfortunate woman to be refused any thing. I am sure it's no
sinecure to be such a roundabout."
Tom Pynsent was easily persuaded into measures which he endured
pain in refusing to his lady. His affectionate heart was only anxious
to do right by a creature, whose very footsteps he worshipped; and
his watchfulness proceeded from the fear of losing that which was
dearer to him than light or life. Anna Maria revelled in the very
wantonness of happiness, and she delighted in drawing forth her
husband's attentions, by every little inventive art. She loved also to
rouse his alarms; and enjoyed, with rapturous delight, the
expression of his honest affection.
One morning, as the ladies sat at work, amused by Tom's account of
the progress of his kennel, Anna Maria suddenly sank back upon the
sofa, and, by her closed eyes, and the work falling from her hands,
Mrs. Pynsent did indeed fear some fatal termination to her son's
hopes. Tom Pynsent sat rooted to the spot; his clasped hands and
trembling lips exhibiting every appalling alarm. Mrs. Pynsent and
Christobelle flew to Anna Maria's assistance; but the apparently
dying victim opened her eyes, and laughed heartily, exclaiming—
"My dear Tom, I wanted to see how you would look at my death;
come to me, Tom, and don't look so overpowered."
Tom Pynsent flew to her, as the blood rushed violently into his face,
by the reaction of hope against the horrors of despair. He threw his
arms round her, as she looked half terrified at her own
thoughtlessness.
"By all that's horrible, Anna Maria, never give me such a useless
fright again; I might have had an apoplectic stroke. How could you
play me such a devil's trick?"
She stroked his cheek, as she whispered, "I just wanted to amuse
myself, Tom."
"Yes, it might amuse you, but what sort of amusement was it to me?
What would you have done, if I had dropped down dead with the
shock?"
"Cried, Tom," answered Anna Maria, putting her finger to her eye,
and looking demure. Tom Pynsent looked at her with admiring
affection.
"Upon my word, if you play me this trick again, I'll—"
Anna Maria placed her hand upon his lips, and a little playful scene
ensued, which ended in the usual way. It gave the happy wife the
delight of witnessing her husband's sincere alarm and love, and Tom
Pynsent was charmed with the little ruse, which gave a zest to the
day's routine. "It was," he said, "one of those sly tricks which his
little wife acted so prettily, doubling and harking back, like a knowing
vixen fox. He thought a wife and a fox were devilish alike in their
politics."
It was a pleasing sight to witness the happy understanding which
prevailed among the members composing the family circles at
Hatton. If Mrs. Pynsent failed—and fail she assuredly did, in the
elegances of polished life—yet her domination was kindly wielded
over those who lived under her roof. She respected and loved her
husband, though his cognomen of "Bobby" threw a shade of ridicule
round her gentlest expostulations. She loved her Tom with that blind
enthusiastic fondness which extended itself to every thing connected
with him. She loved his wife, because she belonged to Tom—the
dogs were Tom's dogs—Bobby was Tom's father. Hatton would,
eventually, belong to Tom; therefore, her heart warmed to every one
around her. Was not Christobelle also a favourite? Had she not come
to Hatton to see Tom?—Mrs. Pynsent cautioned Anna Maria not to
repeat her fainting-fit, or trench upon the sacred ground of her
husband's feeling heart too closely; at present she was safe, and
Tom was pleased, so it did not signify.
"The deuce take the best of them, my dear; if they are often called
upon for sorrow, it hardens them, as the cold air stiffens your sticks
of lollypops. Tommy is but a man, after all; and the dog must be
amused, not frightened. What an owl he looked, bless his heart!"
Sir John Spottiswoode appeared suddenly at Hatton. He was staying
at Lidham, and excursing among his friends in Shropshire. Mrs.
Pynsent insisted upon Sir John becoming their guest, and enforced
her request in her usual quaintly expressive style.
"Here, hollo, Sir Jacky, you can't think of leaving us at the rate of a
sneaking call! Make yourself at home, man; and stay with us till
Tom's wife—"
An earnest look of entreaty from Anna Maria checked the rapidity of
Mrs. Pynsent's speech. She hesitated.
"Stay with us, Sir Jacky, till—I'll be hanged if I know what I was
going to say!—if you haven't put every thing out of my head, Anna
Maria. What did you think I was going to say? I wasn't going to talk
like Sally Hancock."
"Stay with us, Spottiswoode," cried Tom Pynsent, "and we'll have a
field-day; such a one as you never saw in Italy."
"Oh, those outlandish places, and those snivelling Frenchmen!"
exclaimed Mrs. Pynsent: "come to us, and here's a pretty girl, worth
all your mamzells."
Mrs. Pynsent pointed Sir John Spottiswoode's attention to
Christobelle. The timid girl felt a poignant shame, which caused deep
blushes to suffuse her face and neck, and she placed herself behind
Anna Maria, till an opportunity offered to escape from the room.
When she returned Sir John had departed, but he was to become a
guest at Hatton for some days, on the following morning. He was to
accompany Mr. Wycherly and the Charles Spottiswoodes to dinner.
Mrs. Pynsent rallied Christobelle upon her flight from the sitting-
room.
"Why, hollo, my young one, you seem to shrink under a little notice.
That won't do for my lady, some time hence. You must expect notice
now. Don't be a fool—an affected fool—or any thing of that kind; but
you must expect to hear yourself admired. Why, you're a monstrous
fine girl, and, if you don't beat Lady Kerrison in a few years, my
name is not Pen Pynsent."
Christobelle blushed more deeply and painfully than before.
"Come, Miss Bell, try to bear beauty without reddening so furiously.
Don't be argued into selling it to the best bidder, and you need not
be ashamed of it."
"My dear Miss Wetheral," said the peaceable Mr. Pynsent, "come and
shelter yourself under my wing."
"A pretty wing you have got to shelter her with, Bobby."
Mr. Pynsent, to use a parliamentary expression, "withdrew his
motion," and Christobelle was again exposed to his lady's jests.
"Now, I say, Sir Jacky would be a proper sort of beau for you, Miss
Bell. A long-legged fellow, as steady as our best hound, with a nice
estate, and a good temper."
"I would rather not leave papa," answered poor Christobelle, almost
inclined to weep.
Mrs. Pynsent laughed heartily. "A good joke this, for Jacky. I only
mention it, my dear, to be beforehand with my Lady Wetheral. When
she tells you of Sir Jacky's estate, you can say it came from me first.
I recommended the spec., mind. It will be droll enough if I get
before my lady, in a matrimonial speculation."
"Come, now, mother, don't tease my friend, Bell," cried the kind-
hearted Tom. "I won't allow any teasing. I shall bespeak Bell for my
second wife; no one else shall have her."
"What is that?" asked Anna Maria, raising her head from examining a
painted screen.
"Why, Bell has promised to be my wife, the very next time you die,
you little rascal." Anna Maria snapped her fingers at him with a
smile; Tom Pynsent snatched a kiss, and proceeded.
"If any one teases sister Bell, I shall feel called upon to take her
part, so run and put on your habit, Bell, and we'll have a scamper
with all the dogs."
Thus ended Christobelle's trouble and blushes; and Mrs. Pynsent
good-humouredly forbore to distress her in future, by recurring to
her appearance, or extolling the fortune and long legs of Sir John
Spottiswoode.
When every species of joke was withdrawn, which caused feelings of
annoyance, Christobelle liked Sir John Spottiswoode's society. He
had travelled much; and she loved to listen to his accounts of the
places he had frequented, and the objects he had observed with
interest. Sir John was sparkling in his descriptions, and he saw that
Christobelle lent an attentive ear to all his communications; a
flattering circumstance, even though the listener proved a girl of
thirteen. They were the best friends in the world. Christobelle loved
to question him upon foreign subjects, and his very easy manners
made her cast away gradually the alarm and restraint of her first
acquaintance with a man so much her senior in age and mental
acquirements. Sir John had seen the Ennismores at Florence. They
were very gay, and Julia was considered the loveliest Englishwoman
in Florence. Her society was greatly courted, and there was a
Colonel Neville who was deeply attached to her. Every body pitied
Colonel Neville. The Countess encouraged his attentions to her
daughter-in-law, which made poor Neville's case more pitiable. The
young Lady Ennismore had given no occasion for remark, for her
conduct was unimpeachable, but poor Neville was sacrificed. He
could not tear himself away, when Sir John quitted Italy. He was
lingering near Lady Ennismore. It must be a case of strong
temptation, he thought, for the young Countess. Neville was a fine
agreeable fellow, and Lord Ennismore looked more fit for the grave.
Pen Spottiswoode was extremely uneasy about her old friend.
In such interesting subjects, Christobelle's attention was deeply
fixed; and, whether they rode or walked, she generally found herself
by the side of Sir John Spottiswoode. Mrs. Pynsent winked her eye,
if their glances met upon these occasions, but she refrained from
making any remark, except by implication.
"I say, Miss Bell, if you would rather not ride to-day with an elderly
man, give me a hint, and I'll get you off."
"Here, hollo, Miss Bell, don't do any thing disagreeable to your mind.
Shall Tom give you his arm to-day? I dare say, like the rest of us,
you prefer variety."
Mrs. Pynsent would not allow Christobelle to return to Wetheral at
the appointed time. "She was a steady tight kind of a lass, and the
deuce a step should she make towards her dull home. She need give
herself no trouble. She would settle the concern with Sir John.
Christobelle should stay over Tom's confinement—he would suffer
quite as much as his little wife—and Jacky Spottiswoode should stay
too. It would make Tom comfortable, when madam was in the
straw."
So it was decided to be, and both continued at Hatton, enjoying long
walks, and assisting each other in dispelling gloomy apprehensions
from the mind of the affectionate and anxious husband. Tom
Pynsent's apprehensions increased as Anna Maria's hour drew near,
and his mother taxed her memory for calming and comfortable
precedents.
"Tom, don't drop your lip, like Sally Hancock. Why, there's Kitty
Barnes, with fifteen enormous purple-faced children: she is alive at
this moment. And look at Polly Mudge, the whipper-in's wife, who
they thought must die; isn't she hanging out the clothes, and
handing the baskets along, as brisk as your three year olds?"
"Anna Maria is so delicate; one can't compare her with Polly Mudge,"
said Tom Pynsent, in doleful tones.
"Well, then, what do you say to Betty Smoker, who always wanted
bacon and greens, an hour after her troubles were over. She was a
poor sickly-looking thing!"
"I hope my poor girl will do the same, if it's a good thing for her,"
replied Tom, in more cheerful accents.
"Let her eat and drink just what she likes, Tom. I won't have her
contradicted in any thing."
At length, the day arrived which was to decide the fate of Tom
Pynsent. The moment Anna Maria complained of feeling ill and
restless, her husband fled to the kennel, and insisted upon some one
bringing him intelligence every ten minutes of his wife's health. Polly
Mudge was deputed to relieve guard with Christobelle; and for
nearly thirteen hours they were employed as carrier-pigeons, to
announce bulletins from Mrs. Pynsent to the kennel, where Tom
pertinaciously resolved to remain. It was the only spot where his
mind could receive amusement, or which had power to distract his
attention from the idea that his wife would not survive her
confinement. He took no nourishment. He continued constantly
employed with his men in examining the dogs, and suggesting
improvements for their convenience.
At length, as the shades of evening began to fall, Mrs. Pynsent
approached the kennel, waving her pocket-handkerchief: it caught
her son's eye as he was preparing to give "Rattler" and "Beauty" a
dose of salt. He bounded over the wall, and gazed earnestly upon
his mother's face. She waved her handkerchief again in triumph, and
gave a powerful cheer. Tom caught up the note, and it was re-
echoed by the huntsmen, till their voices rose far and wide upon the
air. Anna Maria had given birth to a son. Mrs. Pynsent embraced her
son in ecstatic delight, and the tears ran down her cheeks.
"If it isn't as fine a boy as ever blessed my sight! Go and change
that coat, my blessed Tom, and you shall see them both; but don't
go smelling of the kennel, my pretty one!"
Tom Pynsent's heart swelled with a husband's and a father's best
emotions, when he contemplated his wife and child. It seemed as
though his Anna Maria had passed through death, and was raised
again to his eyes and heart. He gazed silently upon them for some
time in astonishment—he gazed upon the infant, as it lay by her
side, who had suffered so much to give it life. He turned to his
mother, who watched the workings of his countenance with delight,
and, seizing her hands, he exclaimed,
"If John Spottiswoode and myself don't drink like fiddlers to-night,
for this day's work!"
All was joy and congratulation at Hatton. Mr. Pynsent, in spite of
gouty pains, insisted upon being carried to the door of his daughter's
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com