VOLUME XV SLICE VIII Kite-Flying to Kyshtym (continued 6)

KOMATI, a river of south-eastern Africa. It rises at an elevation of about 5000 ft. in the Ermelo district of the Transvaal, 11 m. W. of the source of the Vaal, and flowing in a general N. and E. direction reaches the Indian Ocean at Delagoa Bay, after a course of some 500 miles. In its upper valley near Steynsdorp are gold-fields, but the reefs are almost entirely of low grade ore. The river descends the Drakensberg by a pass 30 m. S. of Barberton, and at the eastern border of Swaziland is deflected northward, keeping a course parallel to the Lebombo mountains. Just W. of 32° E. and in 25° 25´ S. it is joined by one of the many rivers of South Africa named Crocodile. This tributary rises, as the Elands river, in the Bergendal (6437 ft.) near the upper waters of the Komati, and flows E. across the high veld, being turned northward as it reaches the Drakensberg escarpment. The fall to the low veld is over 2000 ft. in 30 m., and across the country between the Drakensberg and the Lebombo (100 m.) there is a further fall of 3000 ft. A mile below the junction of the Crocodile and Komati, the united stream, which from this point is also known as the Manhissa, passes to the coast plain through a cleft 626 ft. high in the Lebombo known as Komati Poort, where are some picturesque falls. At Komati Poort, which marks the frontier between British and Portuguese territory, the river is less than 60 m. from its mouth in a direct line, but in crossing the plain it makes a wide sweep of 200 m., first N. and then S., forming lagoon-like expanses and backwaters and receiving from the north several tributaries. In flood time there is a connexion northward through the swamps with the basin of the Limpopo. The Komati enters the sea 15 m. N. of Lourenço Marques. It is navigable from its mouth, where the water is from 12 to 18 ft. deep, to the foot of the Lebombo.

The railway from Lourenço Marques to Pretoria traverses the plain in a direct line, and at mile 45 reaches the Komati. It follows the south bank of the river and enters the high country at Komati Poort. At a small town with the same name, 2 m. W. of the Poort, on the 23rd of September 1900, during the war with England, 3000 Boers crossed the frontier and surrendered to the Portuguese authorities. From the Poort westward the railway skirts the south bank of the Crocodile river throughout its length.

KOMOTAU (Czech, Chomútov), a town of Bohemia, Austria 79 m. N.N.W. of Prague by rail. Pop. (1900), 15,925, almost exclusively German. It has an old Gothic church, and its town-hall was formerly a commandery of the Teutonic knights. The industrial establishments comprise manufactories of woollen cloth, linen and paper, dyeing houses, breweries, distilleries, vinegar works and the central workshops of the Buschtĕhrad railway. Lignite is worked in the neighbourhood. Komotau was originally a Czech market-place, but in 1252 it came into the possession of the Teutonic Order and was completely Germanized. In 1396 it received a town charter; and in 1416 the knights sold both town and lordship to Wenceslaus IV. On the 16th of March 1421, the town was stormed by the Taborites, sacked and burned. After several changes of ownership, Komotau came in 1588 to Popel of Lobkovic, who established the Jesuits here, which led to trouble between the Protestant burghers and the over-lord. In 1594 the lordship fell to the crown, and in 1605 the town purchased its freedom and was created a royal city.

KOMURA, JUTARO, Count (1855- ), Japanese statesman, was born in Hiuga. He graduated at Harvard in 1877, and entered the foreign office in Tokyo in 1884. He served as chargé d’affaires in Peking, as Japanese minister in Seoul, in Washington, in St Petersburg, and in Peking (during the Boxer trouble), earning in every post a high reputation for diplomatic ability. In 1901 he received the portfolio of foreign affairs, and held it throughout the course of the negotiations with Russia and the subsequent war (1904-5), being finally appointed by his sovereign to meet the Russian plenipotentiaries at Portsmouth, and subsequently the Chinese representatives in Peking, on which occasions the Portsmouth treaty of September 1905 and the Peking treaty of November in the same year were concluded. For these services, and for negotiating the second Anglo-Japanese alliance, he received the Japanese title of count and was made a K.C.B. by King Edward VII. He resigned his portfolio in 1906 and became privy councillor, from which post he was transferred to the embassy in London, but he returned to Tokyo in 1908 and resumed the portfolio of foreign affairs in the second Katsura cabinet.

KONARAK or Kanarak, a ruined temple in India, in the Puri district of Orissa, which has been described as for its size “the most richly ornamented building—externally at least—in the whole world.” It was erected in the middle of the 13th century, and was dedicated to the sun-god. It consisted of a tower, probably once over 180 ft. high, with a porch in front 140 ft. high, sculptured with figures of lions, elephants, horses, &c.

KONG, the name of a town, district and range of hills in the N.W. of the Ivory Coast colony, French West Africa. The hills are part of the band of high ground separating the inner plains of West Africa from the coast regions. In maps of the first half of the 19th century the range is shown as part of a great mountain chain supposed to run east and west across Africa, and is thus made to appear a continuation of the Mountains of the Moon, or the snow-clad heights of Ruwenzori. The culminating point of the Kong system is the Pic des Kommono, 4757 ft. high. In general the summits of the hills are below 2000 ft. and not more than 700 ft. above the level of the country. The “circle of Kong,” one of the administrative divisions of the Ivory Coast colony, covers 46,000 sq. m. and has a population of some 400,000. The inhabitants are negroes, chiefly Bambara and Mandingo. About a fourth of the population profess Mahommedanism; the remainder are spirit worshippers. The town of Kong, situated in 9° N., 4° 20´ W., is not now of great importance. Probably René Caillié, who spent some time in the western part of the country in 1827, was the first European to visit Kong. In 1888 Captain L. G. Binger induced the native chiefs to place themselves under the protection of France, and in 1893 the protectorate was attached to the Ivory Coast colony. For a time Kong was overrun by the armies of Samory (see Senegal), but the capture of that chief in 1898 was followed by the peaceful development of the district by France (see Ivory Coast).

KONGSBERG, a mining town of Norway in Buskerud amt (county), on the Laagen, 500 ft. above the sea, and 61 m. W.S.W. of Christiania by rail. Pop. (1900), 5585. With the exception of the church and the town-house, the buildings are mostly of wood. The origin and whole industry of the town are connected with the government silver-mines in the neighbourhood. Their first discovery was made by a peasant in 1623, since which time they have been worked with varying success. During the 18th century Kongsberg was more important than now, and contained double its present population. Within the town are situated the smelting-works, the mint, and a Government weapon factory. Three miles below the Laagen forms a fine fall of 140 ft. (Labrofos). The neighbouring Jonksnut (2950 ft.) commands extensive views of the Telemark. A driving-road from Kongsberg follows a favourite route for travellers through this district, connecting with routes to Sand and Odde on the west coast.

KONIA. (1) A vilayet in Asia Minor which includes the whole, or parts of, Pamphylia, Pisidia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Cilicia and Cappadocia. It was formed in 1864 by adding to the old eyalet of Karamania the western half of Adana, and part of south-eastern Anadoli. It is divided into five sanjaks: Adalia, Buldur, Hamid-abad, Konia and Nigdeh. The population (990,000 Moslems and 80,000 Christians) is for the most part agricultural and pastoral. The only industries are carpet-weaving and the manufacture of cotton and silk stuffs. There are mines of chrome, mercury, cinnabar, argentiferous lead and rock salt. The principal exports are salt, minerals, opium, cotton, cereals, wool and livestock; and the imports cloth-goods, coffee, rice and petroleum. The vilayet is now traversed by the Anatolian railway, and contains the railhead of the Ottoman line from Smyrna.

(2) The chief town [anc. Iconium (q.v.)], altitude 3320 ft., situated at the S.W. edge of the vast central plain of Asia Minor, amidst luxuriant orchards famous in the middle ages for their yellow plums and apricots and watered by streams from the hills. Pop. 45,000, including 5000 Christians. There are interesting remains of Seljuk buildings, all showing strong traces of Persian influence in their decorative details. The principal ruin is that of the palace of Kilij Arslan II., which contained a famous hall. The most important mosques are the great Tekke, which contains the tomb of the poet Mevlana Jelal ed-din Rumi, a mystic (sufi) poet, founder of the order of Mevlevi (whirling) dervishes, and those of his successors, the “Golden” mosque and those of Ala ed-Din and Sultan Selim. The walls, largely the work of Ala ed-Din I., are preserved in great part and notable for the number of ancient inscriptions built into them. They once had twelve gates and were 30 ells in height. The climate is good—hot in summer and cold, with snow, in winter. Konia is connected by railway with Constantinople and is the starting-point of the extension towards Bagdad. After the capture of Nicaea by the Crusaders (1097), Konia became the capital of the Seljuk Sultans of Rum (see Seljuks and Turks). It was temporarily occupied by Godfrey, and again by Frederick Barbarossa, but this scarcely affected its prosperity. During the reign of Ala ed-Din I. (1219-1236) the city was thronged with artists, poets, historians, jurists and dervishes, driven westwards from Persia and Bokhara by the advance of the Mongols, and there was a brief period of great splendour. After the break up of the empire of Rum, Konia became a secondary city of the amirate of Karamania and in part fell to ruin. In 1472 it was annexed to the Osmanli empire by Mahommed II. In 1832 it was occupied by Ibrahim Pasha who defeated and captured the Turkish general, Reshid Pasha, not far from the walls. It had come to fill only part of its ancient circuit, but of recent years it has revived considerably, and, since the railway reached it, has acquired a semi-European quarter, with a German hotel, cafés and Greek shops, &c.

See W. M. Ramsay, Historical Geography of Asia Minor (1890); St Paul the Traveller (1895); G. Le Strange, Lands of the E. Caliphate (1905).

(D. G. H.)

KONIECPOLSKI, STANISLAUS (1591-1646), Polish soldier, was the most illustrious member of an ancient Polish family which rendered great services to the Republic. Educated at the academy of Cracow, he learned the science of war under the great Jan Chodkiewicz, whom he accompanied on his Muscovite campaigns, and under the equally great Stanislaus Zolkiewski, whose daughter Catherine he married. On the death of his first wife he wedded, in 1619, Christina Lubomirska. In 1619 he took part in the expedition against the Turks which terminated so disastrously at Cecora, and after a valiant resistance was captured and sent to Constantinople, where he remained a close prisoner for three years. On his return he was appointed commander of all the forces of the Republic, and at the head of an army of 25,000 men routed 60,000 Tatars at Martynow, following up this success with fresh victories, for which he received the thanks of the diet and the palatinate of Sandomeria from the king. In 1625 he was appointed guardian of the Ukraine against the Tatars, but in 1626 was transferred to Prussia to check the victorious advance of Gustavus Adolphus. Swedish historians have too often ignored the fact that Koniecpolski’s superior strategy neutralized all the efforts of the Swedish king, whom he defeated again and again, notably at Homerstein (April 1627) and at Trzciand (April 1629). But for the most part the fatal parsimony of his country compelled Koniecpolski to confine himself to the harassing guerrilla warfare in which he was an expert. In 1632 he was appointed to the long vacant post of hetman wielki koronny, or commander in chief of Poland, and in that capacity routed the Tatars at Sasowy Rogi (April 1633) and at Paniawce (April and October 1633), and the Turks, with terrific loss, at Abazd Basha. To keep the Cossacks of the Ukraine in order he also built the fortress of Kudak. As one of the largest proprietors in the Ukraine he suffered severely from Cossack depredations and offered many concessions to them. Only after years of conflict, however, did he succeed in reducing these unruly desperadoes to something like obedience. In 1644 he once more routed the Tatars at Ockmatow, and again in 1646 at Brody. This was his last exploit, for he died the same year, to the great grief of Wladislaus IV., who had already concerted with him the plan for a campaign on a grand scale against the Turks, and relied principally upon the Grand Hetman for its success. Though less famous than his contemporaries Zolkiehwski and Chodkiewicz, Koniecpolski was fully their equal as a general, and his inexorable severity made him an ideal lord-marcher.

See an unfinished biography in the Tyg. Illus. of Warsaw for 1863; Stanislaw Przylenski, Memorials of the Koniecpolskis (Pol.) (Lemberg, 1842).

(R. N. B.)

KÖNIG, KARL RUDOLPH (1832-1901), German physicist, was born at Königsberg (Prussia) on the 26th of November 1832, and studied at the university of his native town, taking the degree of Ph.D. About 1852 he went to Paris, and became apprentice to the famous violin-maker, J. B. Vuillaume, and some six years later he started business on his own account. He called himself a “maker of musical instruments,” but the instruments for which his name is best known are tuning-forks, which speedily gained a high reputation among physicists for their accuracy and general excellence. From this business König derived his livelihood for the rest of his life. He was, however, very far from being a mere tradesman, and even as a manufacturer he regarded the quality of the articles that left his workshop as a matter of greater solicitude than the profits they yielded. Acoustical research was his real interest, and to that he devoted all the time and money he could spare from his business. An exhibit which he sent to the London Exhibition of 1862 gained a gold medal, and at the Philadelphia Exposition at 1876 great admiration was expressed for a tonometric apparatus of his manufacture. This consisted of about 670 tuning-forks, of as many different pitches, extending over four octaves, and it afforded a perfect means for testing, by enumeration of the beats, the number of vibrations producing any given note and for accurately tuning any musical instrument. An attempt was made to secure this apparatus for the university of Pennsylvania, and König was induced to leave it behind him in America on the assurance that it would be purchased; but, ultimately, the money not being forthcoming, the arrangement fell through, to his great disappointment and pecuniary loss. Some of the forks he disposed of to the university of Toronto and the remainder he used as a nucleus for the construction of a still more elaborate tonometer. While the range of the old apparatus was only between 128 and 4096 vibrations a second, the lowest fork of the new one made only 16 vibrations a second, while the highest gave a sound too shrill to be perceptible by the human ear. König will also be remembered as the inventor and constructor of many other beautiful pieces of apparatus for the investigation of acoustical problems, among which may be mentioned his wave-sirens, the first of which was shown at Philadelphia in 1876. His original work dealt, among other things, with Wheatstone’s sound-figures, the characteristic notes of the different vowels, manometric flames, &c.; but perhaps the most important of his researches are those devoted to the phenomena produced by the interference of two tones, in which he controverted the views of H. von Helmholtz as to the existence of summation and difference tones. He died in Paris on the 2nd of October 1901.

KÖNIGGRÄTZ (Czech, Hradec Králové), a town and episcopal see of Bohemia, Austria, 74 m. E. of Prague by rail. Pop. (1900), 9773, mostly Czech. It is situated in the centre of a very fertile region called the “Golden Road,” and contains many buildings of historical and architectural interest. The cathedral was founded in 1303 by Elizabeth, wife of Wenceslaus II; and the church of St John, built in 1710, stands on the ruins of the old castle. The industries include the manufacture of musical instruments, machinery, colours, and carton-pierre, as well as gloves and wax candles. The original name of Königgrätz, one of the oldest settlements in Bohemia, was Chlumec Dobroslavský; the name Hradec, or “the Castle,” was given to it when it became the seat of a count, and Kralove, “of the queen” (Ger. Königin), was prefixed when it became one of the dower towns of the queen of Wenceslaus II., Elizabeth of Poland, who lived here for thirty years. It remained a dower town till 1620. Königgrätz was the first of the towns to declare for the national cause during the Hussite wars. After the battle of the White Mountain (1620) a large part of the Protestant population left the place. In 1639 the town was occupied for eight months by the Swedes. Several churches and convents were pulled down to make way for the fortifications erected under Joseph II. The fortress was finally dismantled in 1884. Near Königgrätz took place, on the 3rd of July 1866, the decisive battle (formerly called Sadowa) of the Austro-Prussian war (see Seven Weeks’ War).

KÖNIGINHOF (Dvur Kralove in Czech), the seat of a provincial district and of a provincial law-court, is situated in north-eastern Bohemia on the left bank of the Elbe, about 160 kilometres from Prague. Brewing, corn-milling and cotton-weaving are the principal industries. Pop. about 11,000. The city is of very ancient origin. Founded by King Wenceslaus II. of Bohemia (1278-1305), it was given by him to his wife Elizabeth, and thus received the name of Dvur Kralove (the court of the queen). During the Hussite wars, Dvur Kralove was several times taken and retaken by the contending parties. In a battle fought partly within the streets of the town, the Austrian army was totally defeated by the Prussians on the 29th of June 1866. In the 19th century Dvur Kralove became widely known as the spot where a MS. was found that was long believed to be one of the oldest written documents in the Czech language. In 1817 Wenceslas Hanka, afterwards for a long period librarian of the Bohemian museum, declared that he had found in the church tower in the town of Dvur Kralove when on a visit there, a very ancient MS. containing epic and lyric poems. Though Dobrovsky, the greatest Czech philologist of the time, from the first expressed suspicions, the MS. known as the Kralodvorsky Rukopis manuscript of Königinhof was long accepted as genuine, frequently printed and translated into most European languages. Doubts as to the genuineness of the document never, however, ceased, and they became stronger when Hanka was convicted of having fabricated other false Bohemian documents. A series of works and articles written by Professors Goll, Gebauer, Masoryk, and others have recently proved that the MS. is a forgery, and hardly any Bohemian scholars of the present day believe in its genuineness.

The discussion of the authenticity of the MS. of Dvur Kralove lasted with short interruptions about seventy years, and the Bohemian works written on the subject would fill a considerable library. Count Lützow’s History of Bohemian Literature gives a brief account of the controversy.

KÖNIGSBERG (Polish Krolewiec), a town of Germany, capital of the province of East Prussia and a fortress of the first rank. Pop. (1880), 140,800; (1890), 161,666; (1905), 219,862 (including the incorporated suburbs). It is situated on rising ground, on both sides of the Pregel, 4½ m. from its mouth in the Frische Haff, 397 m. N. E. of Berlin, on the railway to Eydtkuhnen and at the junction of lines to Pillau, Tilsit and Kranz. It consists of three parts, which were formerly independent administrative units, the Altstadt (old town), to the west, Löbenicht to the east, and the island Kneiphof, together with numerous suburbs, all embraced in a circuit of 9½ miles. The Pregel, spanned by many bridges, flows through the town in two branches, which unite below the Grüne Brücke. Its greatest breadth within the town is from 80 to 90 yards, and it is usually frozen from November to March. Königsberg does not retain many marks of antiquity. The Altstadt has long and narrow streets, but the Kneiphof quarter is roomier. Of the seven market-places only that in the Altstadt retains something of its former appearance. Among the more interesting buildings are the Schloss, a long rectangle begun in 1255 and added to later, with a Gothic tower 277 ft. high and a chapel built in 1592, in which Frederick I. in 1701 and William I. in 1861 crowned themselves kings of Prussia; and the cathedral, begun in 1333 and restored in 1856, a Gothic building with a tower 164 ft. high, adjoining which is the tomb of Kant. The Schloss was originally the residence of the Grand Masters of the Teutonic order and later of the dukes of Prussia. Behind is the parade-ground, with the statues of Albert I. and of Frederick William III. by August Kiss, and the grounds also contain monuments to Frederick I. and William I. To the east is the Schlossteich, a long narrow ornamental lake covering 12 acres. The north-west side of the parade-ground is occupied by the new university buildings, completed in 1865; these and the new exchange on the south side of the Pregel are the finest architectural features of the town. The university (Collegium Albertinum) was founded in 1544 by Albert I., duke of Prussia, as a “purely Lutheran” place of learning. It is chiefly distinguished for its mathematical and philosophical studies, and possesses a famous observatory, established in 1811 by Frederick William Bessel, a library of about 240,000 volumes, a zoological museum, a botanical garden, laboratories and valuable mathematical and other scientific collections. Among its famous professors have been Kant (who was born here in 1724 and to whom a monument was erected in 1864), J. G. von Herder, Bessel, F. Neumann and J. F. Herbart. It is attended by about 1000 students and has a teaching staff of over 100. Among other educational establishments, Königsberg numbers four classical schools (gymnasia) and three commercial schools, an academy of painting and a school of music. The hospitals and benevolent institutions are numerous. The town is less well equipped with museums and similar institutions, the most noteworthy being the Prussia museum of antiquities, which is especially rich in East Prussian finds from the Stone age to the Viking period. Besides the cathedral the town has fourteen churches.

Königsberg is a naval and military fortress of the first order. The fortifications were begun in 1843 and were only completed in 1905, although the place was surrounded by walls in early times. The works consist of an inner wall, brought into connexion with an outlying system of works, and of twelve detached forts, of which six are on the right and six on the left bank of the Pregel. Between them lie two great forts, that of Friedrichsburg on an island in the Pregel and that of the Kaserne Kronprinz on the east of the town, both within the environing ramparts. The protected position of its harbour has made Königsberg one of the most important commercial cities of Germany. A new channel has recently been made between it and its port, Pillau, 29 miles distant, on the outer side of the Frische Haff, so as to admit vessels drawing 20 feet of water right up to the quays of Königsberg, and the result has been to stimulate the trade of the city. It is protected for a long distance by moles, in which a break has been left in the Fischhauser Wiek, to permit of freer circulation of the water and to prevent damage to the mainland.

The industries of Königsberg have made great advances within recent years, notable among them are printing-works and manufactures of machinery, locomotives, carriages, chemicals, toys, sugar, cellulose, beer, tobacco and cigars, pianos and amber wares. The principal exports are cereals and flour, cattle, horses, hemp, flax, timber, sugar and oilcake. There are two pretty public parks, one in the Hufen, with a zoological garden attached, another the Luisenwahl which commemorates the sojourn of Queen Louisa of Prussia in the town in the disastrous year 1806.

The Altstadt of Königsberg grew up around the castle built in 1255 by the Teutonic Order, on the advice of Ottaker II. King of Bohemia, after whom the place was named. Its first site was near the fishing village of Steindamm, but after its destruction by the Prussians in 1263 it was rebuilt in its present position. It received civic privileges in 1286, the two other parts of the present town—Löbenicht and Kneiphof—receiving them a few years later. In 1340 Königsberg entered the Hanseatic League. From 1457 it was the residence of the grand master of the Teutonic Order, and from 1525 till 1618 of the dukes of Prussia. The trade of Königsberg was much hindered by the constant shifting and silting up of the channels leading to its harbour; and the great northern wars did it immense harm, but before the end of the 17th century it had almost recovered.

In 1724 the three independent parts were united into a single town by Frederick William I.

Königsberg suffered severely during the war of liberation and was occupied by the French in 1807. In 1813 the town was the scene of the deliberations which led to the successful uprising of Prussia against Napoleon. During the 19th century the opening of a railway system in East Prussia and Russia gave a new impetus to its commerce, making it the principal outlet for the Russian staples—grain, seeds, flax and hemp. It has now regular steam communication with Memel, Stettin, Kiel, Amsterdam and Hull.

See Faber, Die Haupt- und Residenzstadt Königsberg in Preussen (Königsberg, 1840); Schubert, Zur 600-jährigen Jubelfeier Königsbergs (Königsberg, 1855); Beckherrn, Geschichte der Befestigungen Königsbergs (Königsberg, 1890); H. G. Prutz, Die königliche Albertus-Universität zu Königsberg im 19 Jahrhundert (Königsberg, 1894); Armstedt, Geschichte der königlichen Haupt- und Residenzstadt Königsberg (Stuttgart, 1899); M. Schultze, Königsberg und Ostpreussen zu Anfang 1813 (Berlin, 1901); and Gordak, Wegweiser durch Königsberg (Königsberg, 1904).

KÖNIGSBORN, a spa of Germany, in the Prussian province of Westphalia, immediately to the N. of the town of Unna, of which it practically forms a suburb. It has large saltworks, producing annually over 15,000 tons. The brine springs, in connexion with which there is a hydropathic establishment, have a temperature of 93° F., and are efficacious in skin diseases, rheumatism and scrofula.

See Wegele, Bad Königsborn und seine Heilmittel (Essen, 1902).

KÖNIGSHÜTTE, a town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Silesia, situated in the middle of the Upper Silesian coal and iron district, 3 m. S. of Beuthen and 122 m. by rail S.E. of Breslau. Pop. (1852), 4495; (1875), 26,040; (1900), 57,919. In 1869 it was incorporated with various neighbouring villages, and raised to the dignity of a town. It has two Protestant and three Roman Catholic churches and several schools and benevolent institutions. The largest iron-works in Silesia is situated at Königshütte, and includes puddling works, rolling-mills, and zinc-works. Founded in 1797, it was formerly in the hands of government, but is now carried on by a company. There are also manufactures of bricks and glass and a trade in wood and coal. Nearly one-half of the population of the town consists of Poles.

See Mohr, Geschichte der Stadt Königshütte (Königshütte, 1890).

KÖNIGSLUTTER, a town of Germany, in the duchy of Brunswick, on the Lutter 36 m. E. of Brunswick by the railway to Eisleben and Magdeburg. Pop. (1905), 3260. It possesses an Evangelical church, a castle and some interesting old houses. Its chief manufactures are sugar, machinery, paper and beer. Near the town are the ruins of a Benedictine abbey founded in 1135. In its beautiful church, which has not been destroyed, are the tombs of the emperor Lothair II., his wife Richenza, and of his son-in-law, Duke Henry the Proud of Saxony and Bavaria.

KÖNIGSMARK, MARIA AURORA, Countess of (1662-1728), mistress of Augustus the Strong, elector of Saxony and king of Poland, belonged to a noble Swedish family, and was born on the 8th of May 1662. Having passed some years at Hamburg, where she attracted attention both by her beauty and her talents, Aurora went in 1694 to Dresden to make inquiries about her brother Philipp Christoph, count of Königsmark, who had suddenly and mysteriously disappeared from Hanover. Here she was noticed by Augustus, who made her his mistress; and in October 1696 she gave birth to a son Maurice, afterwards the famous marshal de Saxe. The elector however quickly tired of Aurora, who then spent her time in efforts to secure the position of abbess of Quedlinburg, an office which carried with it the dignity of a princess of the Empire, and to recover the lost inheritance of her family in Sweden. She was made coadjutor abbess and lady-provost (Pröpstin) of Quedlinburg, but lived mainly in Berlin, Dresden and Hamburg. In 1702 she went on a diplomatic errand to Charles XII. of Sweden on behalf of Augustus, but her adventurous journey ended in failure. The countess, who was described by Voltaire as “the most famous woman of two centuries,” died at Quedlinburg on the 16th of February 1728.

See F. Cramer, Denkwürdigkeiten der Gräfin M. A. Königsmark (Leipzig, 1836); and Biographische Nachrichten von der Gräfin M. A. Königsmark (Quedlinburg, 1833); W. F. Palmblad, Aurora Königsmark und ihre Verwandte (Leipzig, 1848-1853); C. L. de Pöllnitz, La Saxe galante (Amsterdam, 1734); and O. J. B. von Corvin-Wiersbitzki, Maria Aurora, Gräfin von Königsmark (Rudolstadt, 1902).

KÖNIGSMARK, PHILIPP CHRISTOPH, Count of (1665-1694), was a member of a noble Swedish family, and is chiefly known as the lover of Sophia Dorothea, wife of the English king George I. then electoral prince of Hanover. Born on the 14th of March 1665, Königsmark was a brother of the countess noticed above. After wandering and fighting in various parts of Europe he entered the service of Ernest Augustus, elector of Hanover. Here he made the acquaintance of Sophia Dorothea, and assisted her in one or two futile attempts to escape from Hanover. Regarded, rightly or wrongly, as the lover of the princess, he was seized, and disappeared from history, probably by assassination, on the 1st of July 1694. One authority states that George I. was accustomed to boast about this deed; but this statement is doubted, and the Hanoverian court resolutely opposed all efforts to clear up the mystery. It is not absolutely certain that Sophia Dorothea was guilty of a criminal intrigue with Königsmark, as it is probable that the letters which purport to have passed between the pair are forgeries. The question of her guilt or innocence, however, has been and still remains a fruitful and popular subject for romance and speculation.

See Briefwechsel des Grafen Königsmark und der Prinzessin Sophie Dorothea von Celle, edited by W. F. Palmblad (Leipzig, 1847); A. Köcher, “Die Prinzessin von Ahlden,” in the Historische Zeitschrift (Munich, 1882); and W. H. Wilkins, The Love of an Uncrowned Queen (London, 1900).

KÖNIGSSEE, or Lake of St Bartholomew, a lake of Germany, in the kingdom of Bavaria, province of Upper Bavaria, about 2½ m. S. from Berchtesgaden, 1850 ft. above sea-level. It has a length of 5 m., and a breadth varying from 500 yards to a little over a mile, and attains a maximum depth of 600 ft. The Königssee is the most beautiful of all the lakes in the German Alps, pent in by limestone mountains rising to an altitude of 6500 ft., the flanks of which descend precipitously to the green waters below. The lake abounds in trout, and the surrounding country is rich in game. On a promontory by the side of the lake is a chapel to which pilgrimages are made on St Bartholomew’s Day. Separated by a narrow strip of land from the Königssee is the Obersee, a smaller lake.

KÖNIGSTEIN, a town of Germany, in the kingdom of Saxony, situated in a deep valley on the left bank of the Elbe, at the influx of the Biela, in the centre of Saxon Switzerland, 25 m. S.E. of Dresden by the railway to Bodenbach and Testchen. It contains a Roman Catholic and a Protestant church, a monument to the composer Julius Otto, and has some small manufactures of machinery, celluloid, paper, vinegar and buttons. It is chiefly remarkable for the huge fortress, lying immediately to the north-west of the town, which crowns a sandstone rock rising abruptly from the Elbe to a height of 750 ft. Across the Elbe lies the Lilienstein, a similar formation, but unfortified. The fortress of Königstein was probably a Slav stronghold as early as the 12th century, but it is not mentioned in chronicles before the year 1241, when it was a fief of Bohemia. In 1401 it passed to the margraves of Meissen and by the treaty of Eger in 1459 it was formally ceded by Bohemia to Saxony. About 1540 the works were strengthened, and the place was used as a point d’appui against inroads from Bohemia. Hence the phrase frequently employed by historians that Königstein is “the key to Bohemia.” As a fact, the main road from Dresden into that country lies across the hills several miles to the south-west, and the fortress has exercised little, if any, influence in strategic operations, either during the middle ages or in modern times. It was further strengthened under the electors Christian I., John George I. and Frederick Augustus II. of Saxony, the last of whom completed it in its present form. During the Prussian invasion of Saxony in 1756 it served as a place of refuge for the King of Poland, Augustus III., as it did also in 1849, during the Dresden insurrection of May in that year, to the King of Saxony, Frederick Augustus II. and his ministers. It was occupied by the Prussians in 1867, who retained possession of it until the peace of 1871. It is garrisoned by detachments of several Saxon infantry regiments, and serves as a treasure house for the state and also as a place of detention for officers sentenced to fortress imprisonment. A remarkable feature of the place is a well, hewn out of the solid rock to a depth of 470 ft.

See Klemm, Der Königstein in alter und neuer Zeit (Leipzig, 1905); and Gautsch, Aelteste Geschichte der sächsischen Schweiz (Dresden, 1880).

KÖNIGSWINTER, a town and summer resort of Germany, in the Prussian Rhine province, on the right bank of the Rhine, 24 m. S.S.E. of Cologne by the railway to Frankfort-on-Main, at the foot of the Siebengebirge. Pop. (1905), 3944. The romantic Drachenfels (1010 ft.), crowned by the ruins of a castle built early in the 12th century by the archbishop of Cologne, rises behind the town. From the summit, to which there is a funicular railway, there is a magnificent view, celebrated by Byron in Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage. A cave in the hill is said to have sheltered the dragon which was slain by the hero Siegfried. The mountain is quarried, and from 1267 onward supplied stone (trachyte) for the building of Cologne cathedral. The castle of Drachenburg, built in 1883, is on the north side of the hill. Königswinter has a Roman Catholic and an Evangelical church, some small manufactures and a little shipping. It has a monument to the poet, Wolfgang Müller. Near the town are the ruins of the abbey of Heisterbach.

KONINCK, LAURENT GUILLAUME DE (1809-1887), Belgian palaeontologist and chemist, was born at Louvain on the 3rd of May 1809. He studied medicine in the university of his native town, and in 1831 he became assistant in the chemical schools. He pursued the study of chemistry in Paris, Berlin and Giessen, and was subsequently engaged in teaching the science at Ghent and Liége. In 1856 he was appointed professor of chemistry in the Liége University, and he retained this post until the close of his life. About the year 1835 he began to devote his leisure to the investigation of the Carboniferous fossils around Liége, and ultimately he became distinguished for his researches on the palaeontology of the Palaeozoic rocks, and especially for his descriptions of the mollusca, brachiopods, crustacea and crinoids of the Carboniferous limestone of Belgium. In recognition of this work the Wollaston medal was awarded to him in 1875 by the Geological Society of London, and in 1876 he was appointed professor of palaeontology at Liége. He died at Liége on the 16th of July 1887.

Publications.—Éléments de chimie inorganique (1839); Description des animaux fossiles qui se trouvent dans le terrain Carbonifère de Belgique (1842-1844, supp. 1851); Recherches sur les animaux fossiles (1847, 1873). See Notice sur L. G. de Koninck, by E. Dupont; Annuaire de l’Acad. roy. de Belgique (1891), with portrait and bibliography.

KONINCK, PHILIP DE [de Coninck, de Koningh, van Koening] (1619-1688), Dutch landscape painter, was born in Amsterdam in 1619. Little is known of his history, except that he was a pupil of Rembrandt, whose influence is to be seen in all his work. He painted chiefly broad sunny landscapes, full of space, light and atmosphere. Portraits by him, somewhat in the manner of Rembrandt, also exist; there are examples of these in the galleries at Copenhagen and Christiania. Of his landscapes the principal are “Vue de l’embouchure d’une rivière,” at the Hague; a slightly larger replica is in the National Gallery, London; “Lisière d’un bois,” and “Paysage” (with figures by A. Vandevelde) at Amsterdam; and landscapes in Brussels, Florence (Uffizi), Berlin and Cologne.

Several of his works have been falsely attributed to Rembrandt, and many more to his namesake and fellow-townsman Salomon de Koninck (1609-1656), who was also a disciple of Rembrandt; his paintings and etchings consist mainly of portraits and biblical scenes.

Both these painters are to be distinguished from David de Koninck (1636-?1687), who is also known as “Rammelaar.” He was born in Antwerp. He studied there under Jan Fyt, and later settled in Rome, where he is stated to have died in 1687; this is, however, doubtful. His pictures are chiefly landscapes with animals, and still-life.

KONITZ, a town of Germany, in the province of West Prussia, at the junction of railways to Schneidemühl and Gnesen, 68 m. S.W. of Danzig. Pop. (1905), 11,014. It is still surrounded by its old fortifications, has two Evangelical and two Roman Catholic churches, a new town-hall, handsome public offices, and a prison. It has iron-foundries, saw-mills, electrical works, and manufactures of bricks. Konitz was the first fortified post established in Prussia by Hermann Balk, who in 1230 had been commissioned as Landmeister, by the grand-master of the Teutonic order, to reduce the heathen Prussians. For a long time it continued to be a place of military importance.

See Uppenkamp, Geschichte der Stadt Konitz (Konitz, 1873).

KONKAN, or Concan, a maritime tract of Western India, situated within the limits of the Presidency of Bombay, and extending from the Portuguese settlement of Goa on the S. to the territory of Daman, belonging to the same nation, on the N. On the E. it is bounded by the Western Ghats, and on the W. by the Indian Ocean. This tract comprises the three British districts of Thana, Ratnagiri and Kolaba, and the native states of Janjira and Sawantwari. It may be estimated at 300 m. in length, with an average breadth of about 40. From the mountains on its eastern frontier, which in one place attain a height of 4700 ft., the surface, marked by a succession of irregular hilly spurs from the Ghats, slopes to the westward, where the mean elevation of the coast is not more than 100 ft. above the level of the sea. Several mountain streams, but none of any magnitude, traverse the country in the same direction. One of the most striking characteristics of the climate is the violence of the monsoon rains—the mean annual fall at Mahabaleshwar amounting to 239 in. The coast has a straight general outline, but is much broken into small bays and harbours. This, with the uninterrupted view along the shore, and the land and sea breezes, which force vessels steering along the coast to be always within sight of it, rendered this country from time immemorial the seat of piracy; and so formidable had the pirates become in the 18th century, that all ships suffered which did not receive a pass from their chiefs. The Great Mogul maintained a fleet for the express purpose of checking them, and they were frequently attacked by the Portuguese. British commerce was protected by occasional expeditions from Bombay; but the piratical system was not finally extinguished until 1812. The southern Konkan has given its name to a dialect of Marathi, which is the vernacular of the Roman Catholics of Goa.

KONTAGORA, a province in the British protectorate of Northern Nigeria, on the east bank of the Niger to the north of Nupe and opposite Borgu. It is bounded W. by the Niger, S. by the province of Nupe, E. by that of Zaria, and N. by that of Sokoto. It has an area of 14,500 sq. m. and a population estimated at about 80,000. At the time of the British occupation of Northern Nigeria the province formed a Fula emirate. Before the Fula domination, which was established in 1864, the ancient pagan kingdom of Yauri was the most important of the lesser kingdoms which occupied this territory. The Fula conquest was made from Nupe on the south and a tribe of independent and warlike pagans continued to hold the country between Kontagora and Sokoto on the north. The province was brought under British domination in 1901 as the result of a military expedition sent to prevent audacious slave-raiding in British protected territory and of threats directed against the British military station of Jebba on the Niger. The town of Kontagora was taken in January of 1901. The emir Ibrahim fled, and was not captured till early in 1902. The province, after having been held for a time in military occupation, was organized for administration on the same system as the rest of the protectorate. In 1903 Ibrahim, after agreeing to take the oath of allegiance to the British crown and to accept the usual conditions of appointment, which include the abolition of the slave trade within the province, was reinstated as emir and the British garrison was withdrawn. Since then the development of the province has progressed favourably. Roads have been opened and Kontagora connected by telegraph with headquarters at Zungeru. British courts of justice have been established at the British headquarters, and native courts in every district. In 1904 an expedition reduced to submission the hitherto independent tribes in the northern belt, who had up to that time blocked the road to Sokoto. Their arms were confiscated and their country organized as a district of the province under a chief and a British assistant resident.

KOORINGA [Burra], a town of Burra county, South Australia on Burra Creek, 101 m. by rail N. by E. of Adelaide. Pop. (1901), 1994. It is the centre of a mining and agricultural district in which large areas are devoted to wheat-growing. The famous Burra Burra copper mine, discovered by a shepherd in 1844, is close to the town, while silver and lead ore is also found in the vicinity.

KÖPENICK (Cöpenick), a town of Germany, in the Prussian province of Brandenburg, on an island in the Spree, 9 m. S.E. from Berlin by the railway to Fürstenwalde. Pop. (1905), 27,721. It contains a royal residence, which was built on the site of a palace which belonged to the great elector, Frederick William. This is surrounded by gardens and contains a fine banqueting hall and a chapel. Other buildings are a Roman Catholic and a Protestant church and a teachers’ seminary. The varied industries embrace the manufacture of glass, linoleum, sealing-wax and ink. In the vicinity is Spindlersfeld, with important dye-works.

Köpenick, which dates from the 12th century, received municipal rights in 1225. Shortly afterwards, it became the bone of contention between Brandenburg and Meissen, but, at the issue of the feud, remained with the former, becoming a favourite residence of the electors of Brandenburg. In the palace the famous court martial was held in 1730, which condemned the crown-prince of Prussia, afterwards Frederick the Great, to death. In 1906 the place derived ephemeral fame from the daring feat of a cobbler, one Wilhelm Voigt, who, attired as a captain in the army, accompanied by soldiers, whom his apparent rank deceived, took the mayor prisoner, on a fictitious charge of having falsified accounts and absconded with a considerable sum of municipal money. The “captain of Köpenick” was arrested, tried, and sentenced to a term of imprisonment.

See Graf zu Dohna, Kurfürstliche Schlösser in der Mark Brandenburg (Berlin, 1890).

KOPISCH, AUGUST (1799-1853), German poet, was born at Breslau on the 26th of May 1799. In 1815 he began the study of painting at the Prague academy, but an injury to his hand precluded the prospects of any great success in this profession, and he turned to literature. After a residence in Dresden Kopisch proceeded, in 1822, to Italy, where, at Naples, he formed an intimate friendship with the poet August, count of Platen Hallermund. He was an expert swimmer, a quality which enabled him in company with Ernst Fries to discover the blue grotto of Capri. In 1828 he settled at Berlin and was granted a pension by Frederick William IV., who in 1838 conferred upon him the title of professor. He died at Berlin on the 3rd of February 1853. Kopisch produced some very original poetry, light in language and in form. He especially treated legends and popular subjects, and among his Gedichte (Berlin, 1836) are some naïve and humorous little pieces such as Die Historie von Noah, Die Heinzelmännchen, Das grüne Tier and Der Scheiderjunge von Krippstedt, which became widely popular. He also published a translation of Dante’s Divine Comedy (Berlin, 1840), and under the title Agrumi (Berlin, 1838) a collection of translations of Italian folk songs.

Kopisch’s collected works were published in 5 vols. (Berlin, 1856.)

KOPP, HERMANN FRANZ MORITZ (1817-1892), German chemist, was born on the 30th of October 1817 at Hanau, where his father, Johann Heinrich Kopp (1777-1858), a physician, was professor of chemistry, physics and natural history at the Lyceum.

After attending the gymnasium of his native town, he studied at Marburg and Heidelberg, and then, attracted by the fame of Liebig, went in 1839 to Giessen, where he became a privatdozent in 1841, and professor of chemistry twelve years later. In 1864 he was called to Heidelberg in the same capacity, and he remained there till his death on the 20th of February 1892. Kopp devoted himself especially to physico-chemical inquiries, and in the history of chemical theory his name is associated with several of the most important correlations of the physical properties of substances with their chemical constitution. Much of his work was concerned with specific volumes, the conception of which he set forth in a paper published when he was only twenty-two years of age; and the principles he established have formed the basis of subsequent investigations in that subject, although his results have in some cases undergone modification. Another question to which he gave much attention was the connexion of the boiling-point of compounds, organic ones in particular, with their composition. In addition to these and other laborious researches, Kopp was a prolific writer. In 1843-1847 he published a comprehensive History of Chemistry, in four volumes, to which three supplements were added in 1869-1875. The Development of Chemistry in Recent Times appeared in 1871-1874, and in 1886 he published a work in two volumes on Alchemy in Ancient and Modern Times. In addition he wrote (1863) on theoretical and physical chemistry for the Graham-Otto Lehrbuch der Chemie, and for many years assisted Liebig in editing the Annalen der Chemie and the Jahresbericht.

He must not be confused with Emil Kopp (1817-1875), who, born at Warselnheim, Alsace, became in 1847 professor of toxicology and chemistry at the École supérieure de Pharmacie at Strasburg, in 1849 professor of physics and chemistry at Lausanne, in 1852 chemist to a Turkey-red factory near Manchester, in 1868 professor of technology at Turin, and finally, in 1871, professor of technical chemistry at the Polytechnic of Zürich, where he died in 1875.

KOPRÜLÜ, or Kuprili (Bulgarian Valésa, Greek Vélissa), a town of Macedonia, European Turkey, in the vilayet of Salonica, situated 600 ft. above sea-level, on the river Vardar, and on the Salonica-Mitrovitza railway, 25 m. S.E. of Uskub. Pop. (1905), about 22,000. Koprülü has a flourishing trade in silk; maize and mulberries are cultivated in the neighbourhood. The Greek and Bulgarian names of the town may be corrupt forms of the ancient Bylazora, described by Polybius as the chief city of Paeonia.

KORA, or Cora, an ancient town of Northern India, in the Fatehpur district of the United Provinces. Pop. (1901), 2806. As the capital of a Mahommedan province, it gave its name to part of the tract (with Allahabad) granted by Lord Clive to the titular Mogul emperor, Shah Alam, in 1765.

KORAN. The Koran (Kor’án) is the sacred Book of Islam, on which the religion of more than two hundred millions of Mahommedans is founded, being regarded by them as the immediate word of God. And since the use of the Koran in public worship, in schools and otherwise, is much more extensive than, for example, the reading of the Bible in most Christian countries, it has been truly described as the most widely-read book in existence. This circumstance alone is sufficient to give it an urgent claim on our attention, whether it suit our taste and fall in with our religious and philosophical views or not. Besides, it is the work of Mahomet, and as such is fitted to afford a clue to the spiritual development of that most successful of all prophets and religious personalities. It must be owned that the first perusal leaves on a European an impression of chaotic confusion—not that the book is so very extensive, for it is not quite as large as the New Testament. This impression can in some degree be modified only by the application of a critical analysis with the assistance of Arabian tradition.

To the faith of the Moslems, as has been said, the Koran is the word of God, and such also is the claim which the book itself advances. For except in sur. i.—which is a prayer for men—and some few passages where Mahomet (vi. 104, 114; xxvii. 93; xlii. 8) or the angels (xix. 65; xxxvii. 164 sqq.) speak in the first person without the intervention of the usual imperative “say” (sing. or pl.), the speaker throughout is God, either in the first person singular or more commonly the plural of majesty “we.” The same mode of address is familiar to us from the prophets of the Old Testament; the human personality disappears, in the moment of inspiration, behind the God by whom it is filled. But all the greatest of the Hebrew prophets fall back speedily upon the unassuming human “I”; while in the Koran the divine “I” is the stereotyped form of address. Mahomet, however, really felt Mahomet’s View of Revelation. himself to be the instrument of God; this consciousness was no doubt brighter at his first appearance than it afterwards became, but it never entirely forsook him. Nevertheless we cannot doubt his good-faith, not even in the cases in which the moral quality of his actions leaves most to be desired. In spite of all, the dominant fact remains, that to the end he was zealous for his God and for the salvation of his people, nay, of the whole of humanity, and that he never lost the unconquerable certainty of his divine mission.

The rationale of revelation is explained in the Koran itself as follows: In heaven is the original text (“the mother of the book,” xliii. 3; “a concealed book,” lv. 77; “a well-guarded tablet,” lxxxv. 22). By the process of “sending down” (tanzíl), one piece after another was communicated to the Prophet. The mediator was an angel, who is called sometimes the “Spirit” (xxvi. 193), sometimes the “holy Spirit” (xvi. 104), and at a later time “Gabriel” (only in ii. 91, 92; lxvi. 4). This angel dictates the revelation to the Prophet, who repeats it after him, and afterwards proclaims it to the world (lxxxvii. 6, &c.). It is plain that we have here a somewhat crude attempt of the Prophet to represent to himself the more or less unconscious process by which his ideas arose and gradually took shape in his mind. It is no wonder if in such confused imagery the details are not always self-consistent. When, for example, this heavenly archetype is said to be in the hands of “exalted scribes” (lxxx. 13 sqq.), this seems a transition to a quite different set of ideas, namely, the books of fate, or the record of all human actions—conceptions which are actually found in the Koran. It is to be observed, at all events, that Mahomet’s transcendental idea of God, as a Being exalted altogether above the world, excludes the thought of direct intercourse between the Prophet and God.

It is an explicit statement of the Koran that the sacred book was revealed (“sent down”) by God, not all at once, but piecemeal and gradually (xxv. 34). This is evident from the actual composition of the book, and is Component Parts of the Koran. confirmed by Moslem tradition. That is to say, Mahomet issued his revelations in fly-leaves of greater or less extent. A single piece of this kind was called either, like the entire collection, kor’ān, i.e. “recitation,” “reading,” or, better still, is the equivalent of Aramaic geryānā “lectionary”; or kitāb, “writing”; or sūra, which is perhaps the late-Hebrew shūrā, and means literally “series.” The last became, in the lifetime of Mahomet, the regular designation of the individual sections as distinguished from the whole collection; and accordingly it is the name given to the separate chapters of the existing Koran. These chapters are of very unequal length. Since many of the shorter ones are undoubtedly complete in themselves, it is natural to assume that the longer, which are sometimes very comprehensive, have arisen from the amalgamation of various originally distinct revelations. This supposition is favoured by the numerous traditions which give us the circumstances under which this or that short piece, now incorporated in a larger section, was revealed; and also by the fact that the connexion of thought in the present sūras often seems to be interrupted. And in reality many pieces of the long sūras have to be severed out as originally independent; even in the short ones parts are often found which cannot have been there at first. At the same time we must beware of carrying this sifting operation too far,—as Nöldeke now believes himself to have done in his earlier works, and as Sprenger also sometimes seems to do. That some sūras were of considerable length from the first is seen, for example, from xii., which contains a short introduction, then the history of Joseph, and then a few concluding observations, and is therefore perfectly homogeneous. In like manner, xx., which is mainly occupied with the history of Moses, forms a complete whole. The same is true of xviii., which at first sight seems to fall into several pieces; the history of the seven sleepers, the grotesque narrative about Moses, and that about Alexander “the Horned,” are all connected together, and the same rhyme through the whole sūra. Even in the separate narrations we may observe how readily the Koran passes from one subject to another, how little care is taken to express all the transitions of thought, and how frequently clauses are omitted, which are almost indispensable. We are not at liberty, therefore, in every case where the connexion in the Koran is obscure, to say that it is really broken, and set it down as the clumsy patchwork of a later hand. Even in the old Arabic poetry such abrupt transitions are of very frequent occurrence. It is not uncommon for the Koran, after a new subject has been entered on, to return gradually or suddenly to the former theme,—a proof that there at least separation is not to be thought of. In short, however imperfectly the Koran may have been redacted, in the majority of cases the present sūras are identical with the originals.

How these revelations actually arose in Mahomet’s mind is a question which it is almost as idle to discuss as it would be to analyse the workings of the mind of a poet. In his early career, sometimes perhaps in its later stages also, many revelations must have burst from him in uncontrollable excitement, so that he could not possibly regard them otherwise than as divine inspirations. We must bear in mind that he was no cold systematic thinker, but an Oriental visionary, brought up in crass superstition, and without intellectual discipline; a man whose nervous temperament had been powerfully worked on by ascetic austerities, and who was all the more irritated by the opposition he encountered, because he had little of the heroic in his nature. Filled with his religious ideas and visions, he might well fancy he heard the angel bidding him recite what was said to him. There may have been many a revelation of this kind which no one ever heard but himself, as he repeated it to himself in the silence of the night (lxxiii. 4). Indeed the Koran itself admits that he forgot some revelations (lxxxvii. 7). But by far the greatest part of the book is undoubtedly the result of deliberation, touched more or less with emotion, and animated by a certain rhetorical rather than poetical glow. Many passages are based upon purely intellectual reflection. It is said that Mahomet occasionally uttered such a passage immediately after one of those epileptic fits which not only his followers, but (for a time at least) he himself also, regarded as tokens of intercourse with the higher powers. If that is the case, it is impossible to say whether the trick was in the utterance of the revelation or in the fit itself.

How the various pieces of the Koran took literary form is uncertain. Mahomet himself, so far as we can discover, never wrote down anything. The question whether he could read and write has been much debated The Koran Written. among Moslems, unfortunately more with dogmatic arguments and spurious traditions than authentic proofs. At present one is inclined to say that he was not altogether ignorant of these arts, but that from want of practice he found it convenient to employ some one else whenever he had anything to write. After the migration to Medina (A.D. 622) we are told that short pieces—chiefly legal decisions—were taken down immediately after they were revealed, by an adherent whom he summoned for the purpose; so that nothing stood in the way of their publication. Hence it is probable that in Mecca, where the art of writing was commoner than in Medina, he had already begun to have his oracles committed to writing. That even long portions of the Koran existed in written form from an early date may be pretty safely inferred from various indications; especially from the fact that in Mecca the Prophet had caused insertions to be made, and pieces to be erased in his previous revelations. For we cannot suppose that he knew the longer sūras by heart so perfectly that he was able after a time to lay his finger upon any particular passage. In some instances, indeed, he may have relied too much on his memory. For example, he seems to have occasionally dictated the same sūra to different persons in slightly different terms. In such cases, no doubt, he may have partly intended to introduce improvements; and so long as the difference was merely in expression, without affecting the sense, it could occasion no perplexity to his followers. None of them had literary pedantry enough to question the consistency of the divine revelation on that ground. In particular instances, however, the difference of reading was too important to be overlooked. Thus the Koran itself confesses that the unbelievers cast it up as a reproach to the Prophet that God sometimes substituted one verse for another (xvi. 103). On one occasion, when a dispute arose between two of his own followers as to the true reading of a passage which both had received from the Prophet himself, Mahomet is said to have explained that the Koran was revealed in seven forms. In this apparently genuine dictum seven stands, of course, as in many other cases, for an indefinite but limited number. But one may imagine what a world of trouble it has cost the Moslem theologians to explain the saying in accordance with their dogmatic beliefs. A great number of explanations are current, some of which claim the authority of the Prophet himself; as, indeed, fictitious utterances of Mahomet play throughout a conspicuous part in the exegesis of the Koran. One very favourite, but utterly untenable interpretation is that the “seven forms,” are seven different Arabic dialects.

When such discrepancies came to the cognizance of Mahomet it was doubtless his desire that only one of the conflicting texts should be considered authentic; only he never gave himself much trouble to have his wish carried into Abrogated Readings. effect. Although in theory he was an upholder of verbal inspiration, he did not push the doctrine to its extreme consequences; his practical good sense did not take these things so strictly as the theologians of later centuries. Sometimes, however, he did suppress whole sections or verses, enjoining his followers to efface or forget them, and declaring them to be “abrogated.” A very remarkable case is that of the two verses in liii., when he had recognized three heathen goddesses as exalted beings, possessing influence with God. This had occurred in a moment of weakness, in order that by such a promise, which yet left Allah in his lofty position, he might gain over his fellow-countrymen. This object he achieved, but soon his conscience smote him, and he declared these words to have been an inspiration of Satan.

So much for abrogated readings; the case is somewhat different when we come to the abrogation of laws and directions to the Moslems, which often occurs in the Koran. There is nothing in this at variance with Mahomet’s idea Abrogated Laws. of God. God is to him an absolute despot, who declares a thing right or wrong from no inherent necessity but by his arbitrary fiat. This God varies his commands at pleasure, prescribes one law for the Christians, another for the Jews, and a third for the Moslems; nay, he even changes his instructions to the Moslems when it pleases him. Thus, for example, the Koran contains very different directions, suited to varying circumstances, as to the treatment which idolaters are to receive at the hands of believers. But Mahomet showed no anxiety to have these superseded enactments destroyed. Believers could be in no uncertainty as to which of two contradictory passages remained in force; and they might still find edification in that which had become obsolete. That later generations might not so easily distinguish the “abrogated” from the “abrogating” did not occur to Mahomet, whose vision, naturally enough, seldom extended to the future of his religious community. Current events were invariably kept in view in the revelations. In Medina it called forth the admiration of the Faithful to observe how often God gave them the answer to a question whose settlement was urgently required at the moment. The same näiveté appears in a remark of the Caliph Othman about a doubtful case: “If the Apostle of God were still alive, methinks there had been a Koran passage revealed on this point.” Not unfrequently the divine word was found to coincide with the advice which Mahomet had received from his most intimate disciples. “Omar was many a time of a certain opinion,” says one tradition, “and the Koran was then revealed accordingly.”

The contents of the different parts of the Koran are extremely varied. Many passages consist of theological or moral reflections. We are reminded of the greatness, the goodness, the righteousness of God as manifested Contents of the Koran. in Nature, in history, and in revelation through the prophets, especially through Mahomet. God is magnified as the One, the All-powerful. Idolatry and all deification of created beings, such as the worship of Christ as the Son of God, are unsparingly condemned. The joys of heaven and the pains of hell are depicted in vivid sensuous imagery, as is also the terror of the whole creation at the advent of the last day and the judgment of the world. Believers receive general moral instruction, as well as directions for special circumstances. The lukewarm are rebuked, the enemies threatened with terrible punishment, both temporal and eternal. To the sceptical the truth of Islam is held forth; and a certain, not very cogent, method of demonstration predominates. In many passages the sacred book falls into a diffuse preaching style, others seem more like proclamations or general orders. A great number contain ceremonial or civil laws, or even special commands to individuals down to such matters as the regulation of Mahomet’s harem. In not a few definite questions are answered which had actually been propounded to the Prophet by believers or infidels. Mahomet himself, too, repeatedly receives direct injunctions, and does not escape an occasional rebuke. One sūra (i.) is a prayer, two (cxiii. cxiv.) are magical formulas. Many sūras treat of a single topic, others embrace several.

From the mass of material comprised in the Koran—and the account we have given is far from exhaustive—we should select the histories of the ancient prophets and saints as possessing a peculiar interest. The purpose of Narratives. Mahomet is to show from these histories how God in former times had rewarded the righteous and punished their enemies. For the most part the old prophets only serve to introduce a little variety in point of form, for they are almost in every case facsimiles of Mahomet himself. They preach exactly like him, they have to bring the very same charges against their opponents, who on their part behave exactly as the unbelieving inhabitants of Mecca. The Koran even goes so far as to make Noah contend against the worship of certain false gods, mentioned by name, who were worshipped by the Arabs of Mahomet’s time. In an address which is put in the mouth of Abraham (xxvi. 75 sqq.), the reader quite forgets that it is Abraham, and not Mahomet (or God himself), who is speaking. Other narratives are intended rather for amusement, although they are always well seasoned with edifying phrases. It is no wonder that the godless Korrishites thought these stories of the Koran not nearly so entertaining as those of Rostam and Ispandiār, related by Naḍr the son of Ḥārith, who had learned in the course of his trade journeys on the Euphrates the heroic mythology of the Persians. But the Prophet was so exasperated by this rivalry that when Naḍr fell into his power after the battle of Badr, he caused him to be executed; although in all other cases he readily pardoned his fellow-countrymen.

These histories are chiefly about Scripture characters, especially those of the Old Testament. But the deviations from the Biblical narratives are very marked. Many of the alterations are found in the legendary anecdotes Relation to the Old and New Testaments. of the Jewish Haggada and the New Testament Apocrypha; but many more are due perhaps to misconceptions such as only a listener (not the reader of a book) could fall into. One would suppose that the most ignorant Jew could never have mistaken Haman, the minister of Ahasuerus, for the minister of Pharaoh, as happens in the Koran, or identified Miriam, the sister of Moses, with Mary (= Mariām), the mother of Christ. So long, however, as we have no closer acquaintance with Arab Judaism and Christianity, we must always reckon with the possibility that many of these mistakes were due to adherents of these religions who were his authorities, or were a naïve reproduction of versions already widely accepted by his contemporaries. In addition to his misconceptions there are sundry capricious alterations, some of them very grotesque, due to Mahomet himself. For instance, in his ignorance of everything out of Arabia, he makes the fertility of Egypt—where rain is almost never seen and never missed—depend on rain instead of the inundations of the Nile (xii. 49).

It is uncertain whether his account of Alexander was borrowed from Jews or Christians, since the romance of Alexander belonged to the stereotyped literature of that age. The description of Alexander as “the Horned” in the Koran is, however, in accordance with the result of recent researches, to be traced to a Syrian legend dating from A.D. 514-515 (Th. Nöldeke, “Beiträge zur Gesch. des Alexanderromanes” in Denkschriften Akad. Wien, vol. xxxviii. No. 5, p. 27, &c.). According to this, God caused horns to grow on Alexander’s head to enable him to overthrow all things. This detail of the legend is ultimately traceable, as Hottinger long ago supposed, to the numerous coins on which Alexander is represented with the ram’s horns of Ammon.1 Besides Jewish and Christian histories there are a few about old Arabian prophets. In these he seems to have handled his materials even more freely than in the others.

The opinion has already been expressed that Mahomet did not make use of written sources. Coincidences and divergences alike can always be accounted for by oral communications from Jews who knew a little and Christians who knew next to nothing. Even in the rare passages where we can trace direct resemblances to the text of the Old Testament (cf. xxi. 105 with Ps. xxxvii. 29; i. 5 with Ps. xxvii. 11) or the New (cf. vii. 48 with Luke xvi. 24; xlvi. 19 with Luke xvi. 25), there is nothing more than might readily have been picked up in conversation with any Jew or Christian. In Medina, where he had the opportunity of becoming acquainted with Jews of some culture, he learned some things out of the Mishna, e.g. v. 35 corresponds almost word for word with Mishna Sanhedrin iv. 5; compare also ii. 183 with Mishna Berak’hoth i. 2. That these are only cases of oral communication will be admitted by any one with the slightest knowledge of the circumstances. Otherwise we might even conclude that Mahomet had studied the Talmud; e.g. the regulation as to ablution by rubbing with sand, where water cannot be obtained (iv. 46), corresponds to a talmudic ordinance (Berak’hoth 15 a). Of Christianity he can have been able to learn very little, even in Medina; as may be seen from the absurd travesty of the institution of the Eucharist in v. 112 sqq. For the rest, it is highly improbable that before the Koran any real literary production—anything that could be strictly called a book—existed in the Arabic language.

In point of style and artistic effect, the different parts of the Koran are of very unequal value. An unprejudiced and critical reader will certainly find very few passages where his aesthetic susceptibilities are thoroughly satisfied. Style. But he will often be struck, especially in the older pieces, by a wild force of passion, and a vigorous, if not rich, imagination. Descriptions of heaven and hell, and allusions to God’s working in Nature, not unfrequently show a certain amount of poetic power. In other places also the style is sometimes lively and impressive; though it is rarely indeed that we come across such strains of touching simplicity as in the middle of xciii. The greater part of the Koran is decidedly prosaic; much of it indeed is stiff in style. Of course, with such a variety of material, we cannot expect every part to be equally vivacious, or imaginative, or poetic. A decree about the right of inheritance, or a point of ritual, must necessarily be expressed in prose, if it is to be intelligible. No one complains of the civil laws in Exodus or the sacrificial ritual in Leviticus, because they want the fire of Isaiah or the tenderness of Deuteronomy. But Mahomet’s mistake consists in persistent and slavish adherence to the semi-poetic form which he had at first adopted in accordance with his own taste and that of his hearers. For instance, he employs rhyme in dealing with the most prosaic subjects, and thus produces the disagreeable effect of incongruity between style and matter. It has to be considered, however, that many of those sermonizing pieces which are so tedious to us, especially when we read two or three in succession (perhaps in a very inadequate translation), must have had a quite different effect when recited under the burning sky and on the barren soil of Mecca. There, thoughts about God’s greatness and man’s duty, which are familiar to us from childhood, were all new to the hearers—it is hearers we have to think of in the first instance, not readers—to whom, at the same time, every allusion had a meaning which often escapes our notice. When Mahomet spoke of the goodness of the Lord in creating the clouds, and bringing them across the cheerless desert, and pouring them out on the earth to restore its rich vegetation, that must have been a picture of thrilling interest to the Arabs, who are accustomed to see from three to five years elapse before a copious shower comes to clothe the wilderness once more with luxuriant pastures. It requires an effort for us, under our clouded skies, to realize in some degree the intensity of that impression.

The fact that scraps of poetical phraseology are specially numerous in the earlier sūras, enables us to understand why the prosaic mercantile community of Mecca regarded their eccentric townsman as a “poet,” or even a Rhetorical Form and Rhyme. “possessed poet.” Mahomet himself had to disclaim such titles, because he felt himself to be a divinely inspired prophet; but we too, from our standpoint, shall fully acquit him of poetic genius. Like many other predominantly religious characters, he had no appreciation of poetic beauty; and if we may believe one anecdote related of him, at a time when every one made verses, he affected ignorance of the most elementary rules of prosody. Hence the style of the Koran is not poetical but rhetorical; and the powerful effect which some portions produce on us is gained by rhetorical means. Accordingly the sacred book has not even the artistic form of poetry; which, among the Arabs, includes a stringent metre, as well as rhyme. The Koran is never metrical, and only a few exceptionally eloquent portions fall into a sort of spontaneous rhythm. On the other hand, the rhyme is regularly maintained; although, especially in the later pieces, after a very slovenly fashion. Rhymed prose was a favourite form of composition among the Arabs of that day, and Mahomet adopted it; but if it imparts a certain sprightliness to some passages, it proves on the whole a burdensome yoke. The Moslems themselves have observed that the tyranny of the rhyme often makes itself apparent in derangement of the order of words, and in the choice of verbal forms which would not otherwise have been employed; e.g. an imperfect instead of a perfect. In one place, to save the rhyme, he calls Mount Sinai Sīnīn (xcv. 2) instead of Sīnā (xxiii. 20); in another Elijah is called Ilyāsīn (xxxvii. 130) instead of Ilyās (vi. 85; xxxvii. 123). The substance even is modified to suit exigencies of rhyme. Thus the Prophet would scarcely have fixed on the unusual number of eight angels round the throne of God (lxix. 17) if the word thamāniyah, “eight,” had not happened to fall in so well with the rhyme. And when lv. speaks of two heavenly gardens, each with two fountains and two kinds of fruit, and again of two similar gardens, all this is simply because the dual termination (ān) corresponds to the syllable that controls the rhyme in that whole sūra. In the later pieces, Mahomet often inserts edifying remarks, entirely out of keeping with the context, merely to complete his rhyme. In Arabic it is such an easy thing to accumulate masses of words with the same termination, that the gross negligence of the rhyme in the Koran is doubly remarkable. One may say that this is another mark of the Prophet’s want of mental training, and incapacity for introspective criticism.

On the whole, while many parts of the Koran undoubtedly have considerable rhetorical power, even over an unbelieving reader, the book, aesthetically considered, is by no means a first-rate performance. To begin with Stylistic Weaknesses. what we are most competent to criticize, let us look at some of the more extended narratives. It has already been noticed how vehement and abrupt they are where they ought to be characterized by epic repose. Indispensable links, both in expression and in the sequence of events, are often omitted, so that to understand these histories is sometimes far easier for us than for those who heard them first, because we know most of them from better sources. Along with this, there is a great deal of superfluous verbiage; and nowhere do we find a steady advance in the narration. Contrast in these respects the history of Joseph (xii.) and its glaring improprieties with the admirably conceived and admirably executed story in Genesis. Similar faults are found in the non-narrative portions of the Koran. The connexion of ideas is extremely loose, and even the syntax betrays great awkwardness. Anacolutha are of frequent occurrence, and cannot be explained as conscious literary devices. Many sentences begin with a “when” or “on the day when” which seems to hover in the air, so that the commentators are driven to supply a “think of this” or some such ellipsis. Again, there is no great literary skill evinced in the frequent and needless harping on the same words and phrases; in xviii., for example, “till that” (ḥattā idhā) occurs no fewer than eight times. Mahomet, in short, is not in any sense a master of style. This opinion will be endorsed by any European who reads through the book with an impartial spirit and some knowledge of the language, without taking into account the tiresome effect of its endless iterations. But in the ears of every pious Moslem such a judgment will sound almost as shocking as downright atheism or polytheism. Among Dogma of the Stylistic Perfection of the Koran. the Moslems, the Koran has always been looked on as the most perfect model of style and language. This feature of it is in their dogmatic the greatest of all miracles, the incontestable proof of its divine origin. Such a view on the part of men who knew Arabic infinitely better than the most accomplished European Arabist will ever do, may well startle us. In fact, the Koran boldly challenged its opponents to produce ten sūras, or even a single one, like those of the sacred book, and they never did so. That, to be sure, on calm reflection, is not so very surprising. Revelations of the kind which Mahomet uttered, no unbeliever could produce without making himself a laughing-stock. However little real originality there is in Mahomet’s doctrines, as against his own countrymen he was thoroughly original, even in the form of his oracles. To compose such revelations at will was beyond the power of the most expert literary artist; it would have required either a prophet or a shameless impostor. And if such a character appeared after Mahomet, still he could never be anything but an imitator, like the false prophets who arose about the time of his death and afterwards. That the adversaries should produce any sample whatsoever of poetry or rhetoric equal to the Koran is not at all what the Prophet demands. In that case he would have been put to shame, even in the eyes of many of his own followers, by the first poem that came to hand. Nevertheless, it is on a false interpretation of this challenge that the dogma of the incomparable excellence of the style and diction of the Koran is based. The rest has been accomplished by dogmatic prejudice, which is quite capable of working other miracles besides turning a defective literary production into an unrivalled masterpiece in the eyes of believers. This view once accepted, the next step was to find everywhere evidence of the perfection of the style and language. And if here and there, as one can scarcely doubt, there was among the old Moslems a lover of poetry who had his difficulties about this dogma, he had to beware of uttering an opinion which might have cost him his head. We know of at least one rationalistic theologian who defined the dogma in such a way that we can see he did not believe it (Shahrastānī, p. 39). The truth is, it would have been a miracle indeed if the style of the Koran had been perfect. For although there was at that time a recognized poetical style, already degenerating to mannerism, a developed prose style did not exist. All beginnings are difficult; and it can never be esteemed a serious charge against Mahomet that his book, the first prose work of a high order in the language, testifies to the awkwardness of the beginner. And further, we must always remember that entertainment and aesthetic effect were at most subsidiary objects. The great aim was persuasion and conversion; and, say what we will, that aim has been realized on the most imposing scale.

Mahomet repeatedly calls attention to the fact that the Koran is not written, like other sacred books, in a strange language, but in Arabic, and therefore is intelligible to all. At that time, along with foreign ideas, many foreign Foreign words. words had crept into the language; especially Aramaic terms for religious conceptions of Jewish or Christian origin. Some of these had already passed into general use, while others were confined to a more limited circle. Mahomet, who could not fully express his new ideas in the common language of his countrymen, but had frequently to find out new terms for himself, made free use of such Jewish and Christian words, as was done, though perhaps to a smaller extent, by certain thinkers and poets of that age who had more or less risen above the level of heathenism. In Mahomet’s case this is the less wonderful because he was indebted to the instruction of Jews and Christians, whose Arabic—as the Koran pretty clearly intimates with regard to one of them—was very defective. On the other hand, it is yet more remarkable that several of such borrowed words in the Koran have a sense which they do not possess in the original language. It is not necessary that this phenomenon should in every case be due to the same cause. Just as the prophet often misunderstood traditional traits of the sacred history, he may, as an unlearned man, likewise have often employed foreign expressions wrongly. Other remarkable senses of words were possibly already acclimatized in the language of Arabian Jews or Christians. Thus, forqān means really “redemption,” but Mahomet uses it for “revelation.” The widespread opinion that this sense first asserted itself in reference to the Arab root (faraqa), “sever,” or “decide,” is open to considerable doubt. There is, for instance, no difficulty in deriving the Arab meaning of “revelation” from the common Aramaic “salvation,” and this transference must have taken place in a community for which salvation formed the central object of faith, i.e. either amongst those Jews who looked to the coming of a Messiah or more probably, among Christians, since Christianity is in a very peculiar sense the religion of salvation. Milla is properly “word” (= Aramaic mellthā), but in the Koran “religion.” It is actually used of the religion of the Jews and Christians (once), of the heathen (5 times), but mostly (8 times) of the religion of Abraham, which Mahomet in the Medina period places on the same level with Islam. Although of the Aramaic dialects none employs the term Melltha in the sense of religion, it appears that the prophet found such a use. Illiyūn, which Mahomet uses of a heavenly book (Sūra 83; 18, 19), is clearly the Hebrew elyōn, “high” or “exalted.” It is, however, doubtful in what sense this word appeared to him, either as a name of God, as in the Old Testament it often occurs and regularly without the article, or actually as the epithet of a heavenly book, although this use cannot be substantiated from Jewish literature. So again the word mathānī is, as Geiger has conjectured, the regular plural of the Aramaic mathnīthā, which is the same as the Hebrew Mishnah, and denotes in Jewish usage a legal decision of some of the ancient Rabbins. But in the Koran Mahomet appears to have understood it in the sense of “saying” or “sentence” (cf. xxxix. 24). On the other hand, it is by no means certain that by “the Seven Mathani” (xv. 87) the seven verses of Sūra i. are meant. Words of undoubtedly Christian origin are less frequent in the Koran. It is an interesting fact that of these a few have come over from the Abyssinian; such as hawārīyūn “apostles,” māida “table,” munāfig “doubter, sceptic,” ragūn “cursed,” miḥrāb “temple”; the first three of these make their first appearance in sūras of the Medina period. The word shaitān “Satan,” which was likewise borrowed, at least in the first instance, from the Abyssinian, had probably been already introduced into the language. Sprenger has rightly observed that Mahomet makes a certain parade of these foreign terms, as of other peculiarly constructed expressions; in this he followed a favourite practice of contemporary poets. It is the tendency of the imperfectly educated to delight in out-of-the-way expressions, and on such minds they readily produce a remarkably solemn and mysterious impression. This was exactly the kind of effect that Mahomet desired, and to secure it he seems even to have invented a few odd vocables, as ghislīn (lxix. 36), sijjīn (lxxxiii. 7, 8), tasnīm (lxxxiii. 27), and salsabīl (lxxvi. 18). But, of course, the necessity of enabling his hearers to understand ideas which they must have found sufficiently novel in themselves, imposed tolerably narrow limits on such eccentricities.

The constituents of our present Koran belong partly to the Mecca period2 (before A.D. 622), partly to the period commencing with the migration to Medina (from the autumn of 622 to 8th June 632). Mahomet’s position in Date of the Several Parts. Medina was entirely different from that which he had occupied in his native town. In the former he was from the first the leader of a powerful party, and gradually became the autocratic ruler of Arabia; in the latter he was only the despised preacher of a small congregation. This difference, as was to be expected, appears in the Koran. The Medina pieces, whether entire sūras or isolated passages interpolated in Meccan sūras, are accordingly pretty broadly distinct, as to their contents, from those issued in Mecca. In the great majority of cases there can be no doubt whatever whether a piece first saw the light in Mecca or in Medina; and for the most part the internal evidence is borne out by Moslem tradition. And since the revelations given in Medina frequently take notice of events about which we have fairly accurate information, and whose dates are at least approximately known, we are often in a position to fix their date with at any rate considerable certainty; here again tradition renders valuable assistance. Even with regard to the Medina passages, however, a great deal remains uncertain, partly because the allusions to historical events and circumstances are generally rather obscure, partly because traditions about the occasion of the revelation of the various pieces are often fluctuating, and often rest on misunderstanding or arbitrary conjecture. An important criterion for judging the period during which individual Meccan sūras, interpolated in Medina revelations, arose (e.g. Sūr. xvi. 124, vi. 162) is provided by the Ibrāhīm legend, the great importance of which, as throwing light on the evolution of Mahomet’s doctrine in its relation to older revealed religions, has been convincingly set forth by Dr Snouck Hurgronje in his dissertation for the doctor’s degree and in later essays.3 According to this, Ibrāhīm, after the controversy with the Jews, first of all became Mahomet’s special forerunner in Medina, then the first Moslem, and finally the founder of the Ka’ba. But at all events it is far easier to arrange in some sort of chronological order the Medina sūras than those composed in Mecca. There is, indeed, one tradition which professes to furnish a chronological list of all the sūras. But not to mention that it occurs in several divergent forms, and that it takes no account of the fact that our present sūras are partly composed of pieces of different dates, it contains so many suspicious or undoubtedly false statements, that it is impossible to attach any great importance to it. Besides, it is a priori unlikely that a contemporary of Mahomet should have drawn up such a list; and if any one had made the attempt he would have found it almost impossible to obtain reliable information as to the order of the earlier Meccan sūras. We have in this list no genuine tradition, but rather the lucubrations of an undoubtedly conscientious Moslem critic, who may have lived about a century after the Flight.

Among the revelations put forth in Mecca there is a considerable number of (for the most part) short sūras, which strike every attentive reader as being the oldest. They are in an altogether different strain from many others, The Meccan Sūras. and in their whole composition they show least resemblance to the Medina pieces. It is no doubt conceivable—as Sprenger supposes—that Mahomet might have returned at intervals to his earlier manner; but since this group possesses a remarkable similarity of style, and since the gradual formation of a different style is on the whole an unmistakable fact, the assumption has little probability; and we shall therefore abide by the opinion that these form a distinct group. At the opposite extreme from them stands another cluster, showing quite obvious affinities with the style of the Medina sūras, which must therefore be assigned to the later part of the Prophet’s work in Mecca. Between these two groups stand a number of other Meccan sūras, which in every respect mark the transition from the first period to the third. It need hardly be said that the three periods—which were first distinguished by Professor Weil—are not separated by sharp lines of division. With regard to some sūras, it may be doubtful whether they ought to be reckoned amongst the middle group, or with one or other of the extremes. And it is altogether impossible, within these groups, to establish even a probable chronological arrangement of the individual revelations. In default of clear allusions to well-known events, or events whose date can be determined, we might indeed endeavour to trace the psychological development of the Prophet by means of the Koran, and arrange its parts accordingly. But in such an undertaking one is always apt to take subjective assumptions or mere fancies for established data. Good traditions about the origin of the Meccan revelations are not very numerous. In fact the whole history of Mahomet previous to the Flight is so imperfectly related that we are not even sure in what year he appeared as a prophet. Probably it was in A.D. 610; it may have been somewhat earlier, but scarcely later. If, as one tradition says, xxx. 1 seq. (“The Romans are overcome in the nearest neighbouring land”) refers to the defeat of the Byzantines by the Persians, not far from Damascus, about the spring of 614, it would follow that the third group, to which this passage belongs, covers the greater part of the Meccan period. And it is not in itself unlikely that the passionate vehemence which characterizes the first group was of short duration. Nor is the assumption contradicted by the tolerably well attested, though far from incontestable statement, that when Omar was converted (A.D. 615 or 616), xx., which belongs to the second group, already existed in writing. But the reference of xxx. 1 seq. to this particular battle is by no means so certain that positive conclusions can be drawn from it. It is the same with other allusions in the Meccan sūras to occurrences whose chronology can be partially ascertained. It is better, therefore, to rest satisfied with a merely relative determination of the order of even the three great clusters of Meccan revelations.

In the pieces of the first period the convulsive excitement of the Prophet often expresses itself with the utmost vehemence. He is so carried away by his emotion that he cannot choose his words; they seem rather to burst from Oldest Meccan Sūras. him. Many of these pieces remind us of the oracles of the old heathen soothsayers, whose style is known to us from imitations, although we have perhaps not a single genuine specimen. Like those other oracles, the sūras of this period, which are never very long, are composed of short sentences with tolerably pure but rapidly changing rhymes. The oaths, too, with which many of them begin were largely used by the soothsayers. Some of these oaths are very uncouth and hard to understand, some of them perhaps were not meant to be understood, for indeed all sorts of strange things are met with in these chapters. Here and there Mahomet speaks of visions, and appears even to see angels before him in bodily form. There are some intensely vivid descriptions of the resurrection and the last day which must have exercised a demonic power over men who were quite unfamiliar with such pictures. Other pieces paint in glowing colours the joys of heaven and the pains of hell. However, the sūras of this period are not all so wild as these; and those which are conceived in a calmer mood appear to be the oldest. Yet, one must repeat, it is exceedingly difficult to make out any strict chronological sequence. For instance, it is by no means certain whether the beginning of xcvi. is really, what a widely circulated tradition calls it, the oldest part of the whole Koran. That tradition goes back to the Prophet’s favourite wife Ayesha; but as she was not born at the time when the revelation is said to have been made, it can only contain at the best what Mahomet told her years afterwards, from his own not very clear recollection, with or without fictitious additions, and this woman is little trustworthy. Moreover, there are other pieces mentioned by others as the oldest. In any case xcvi. 1 sqq. is certainly very early. According to the traditional view, which appears to be correct, it treats of a vision in which the Prophet receives an injunction to recite a revelation conveyed to him by the angel. It is interesting to observe that here already two things are brought forward as proofs of the omnipotence and care of God: one is the creation of man out of a seminal drop—an idea to which Mahomet often recurs; the other is the then recently introduced art of writing, which the Prophet instinctively seizes on as a means of propagating his doctrines. It was only after Mahomet encountered obstinate resistance that the tone of the revelations became thoroughly passionate. In such cases he was not slow to utter terrible threats against those who ridiculed the preaching of the unity of God, of the resurrection, and of the judgment. His own uncle Abū Lahab had rudely repelled him, and in a brief special sūra (cxi.) he and his wife are consigned to hell. The sūras of this period form almost exclusively the concluding portions of the present text. One is disposed to assume, however, that they were at one time more numerous, and that many of them were lost at an early period.