Tired of reading? Add this page to your Bookmarks or Favorites and finish it later.
|
|
How far the story of Omar's commanding the baths of Alexandria to be
heated with the books from the great library is true, we shall never
know. Some have doubted the story altogether: but so many fresh
corroborations of it are said to have been lately discovered, in Arabic
writers, that I can hardly doubt that it had some foundation in fact.
One cannot but believe that John Philoponus, the last of the Alexandrian
grammarians, when he asked his patron Amrou the gift of the library,
took care to save some, at least, of its treasures; and howsoever
strongly Omar may have felt or said that all books which agreed with the
Koran were useless, and all which disagreed with it only fit to be
destroyed, the general feeling of the Mohammedan leaders was very
different. As they settled in the various countries which they
conquered, education seems to have been considered by them an important
object. We even find some of them, in the same generation as Mohammed,
obeying strictly the Prophet's command to send all captive children to
school--a fact which speaks as well for the Mussulmans' good sense, as
it speaks ill for the state of education among the degraded descendants
of the Greek conquerors of the East. Gradually philosophic Schools
arose, first at Bagdad, and then at Cordova; and the Arabs carried on
the task of commenting on Aristotle's Logic, and Ptolemy's Megiste
Syntaxis--which last acquired from them the name of Almagest, by which
it was so long known during the Middle Ages.
But they did little but comment, though there was no Neoplatonic or
mystic element in their commentaries. It seems as if Alexandria was
preordained, by its very central position, to be the city of
commentators, not of originators. It is worthy of remark, that
Philoponus, who may be considered as the man who first introduced the
simple warriors of the Koreish to the treasures of Greek thought, seems
to have been the first rebel against the Neoplatonist eclecticism. He
maintained, and truly, that Porphyry, Proclus, and the rest, had
entirely misunderstood Aristotle, when they attempted to reconcile him
with Plato, or incorporate his philosophy into Platonism. Aristotle was
henceforth the text-book of Arab savants. It was natural enough. The
Mussulman mind was trained in habits of absolute obedience to the
authority of fixed dogmas. All those attempts to follow out metaphysic
to its highest object, theology, would be useless if not wrong in the
eyes of a Mussulman, who had already his simple and sharply-defined
creed on all matters relating to the unseen world. With him metaphysic
was a study altogether divorced from man's higher life and aspirations.
So also were physics. What need had he of Cosmogonies? what need to
trace the relations between man and the universe, or the universe and
its Maker? He had his definite material Elysium and Tartarus, as the
only ultimate relation between man and the universe; his dogma of an
absolute fiat, creating arbitrary and once for all, as the only relation
between the universe and its Maker: and further it was not lawful to
speculate. The idea which I believe unites both physic and metaphysic
with man's highest inspirations and widest speculations--the Alexandria
idea of the Logos, of the Deity working in time and space by successive
thoughts--he had not heard of; for it was dead, as I have said, in
Alexandria itself; and if he had heard of it, he would have spurned it
as detracting from the absoluteness of that abysmal one Being, of whom
he so nobly yet so partially bore witness. So it was to be; doubtless
it was right that it should be so. Man's eye is too narrow to see a
whole truth, his brain too weak to carry a whole truth. Better for him,
and better for the world, is perhaps the method on which man has been
educated in every age, by which to each school, or party, or nation, is
given some one great truth, which they are to work out to its highest
development, to exemplify in actual life, leaving some happier age--
perhaps, alas! only some future state--to reconcile that too favoured
dogma with other truths which lie beside it, and without which it is
always incomplete, and sometimes altogether barren.
|