XI. The Position of Woman in Muslim Lands In Pre-Islamic and Early Islamic Times

PART THREE

It has been commonly held that Islām has implied the degradation of women and, therefore, in order to ascertain to what extent the position of women was affected, unfavourably, by the adoption of the new faith, it is necessary to consider what was the position of women in Arabia and other countries which accepted Islām, before the time of the Prophet. The lawlessness of the times in which the Arab tribes were constantly at war with each other, naturally involved hardship to the women and the fate of women captured in war was pitiable in the extreme. The great poverty of the wandering Arabs and the uncertainty and scarcity of their food supply, were probably the origin of the barbarous custom of female infanticide, which was prevalent in primitive Arabia and was rendered more cruel by the fact that such infants were buried alive in order to avoid the necessity of shedding the blood of kindred. Yet with all this, there is little doubt that the free Arab woman in pre-Islamic and even early Islamic times held a more independent and more respected position than the Muslim woman of to-day and that her present degraded position is due to Islamic teaching which has prevailed since the second and third centuries of the Muslim era, to keep her in a position of almost complete subordination to the male sex. It seems plain that before the time of Muhammad there was a family system, matriarchal in type, in which kinship was reckoned through the female side. Under this system, the wife received her husband into her tent, the children belonged to her and were reckoned as members of her tribe, while she had the right to dismiss her husband at her pleasure. This is not to say that the Arab woman was absolutely free, but control was vested, not in the husband, but in her own male relatives, and the head of the family was not the father, but the mother’s brother, and it is reasonable to suppose that such a system would give far more extensive rights to the woman-since, in case of dispute, she would be supported by her relations against her husband-than the Islamic type of marriage. This state of things was still in existence to some extent in Muhammad’s time and such customs did not die out altogether during the first two centuries after the rise of Islām. It would seem even to be possible that Muhammad’s first marriage was more of this type. His wife was older than himself, she was wealthy, and it is more than likely that she proposed marriage to one who, though of good family, was an orphan, poor, and actually in her service. That a man of such strong passions, and with such ideals of Paradise as he sets forth in the earlier Sūras of the Meccan period, should have remained content with one wife, no longer young, in a state of society in which polygamy was rife, would have been unlikely had he not been bound by economic limitations and the dominant personality of his wife. When her influence was removed, he was not slow to take advantage of his freedom. Abū al-Faraj (ob. A.D. 967) in his Kitab al-Aghānī, throws much light on the position and character of the women of the period immediately preceding the rise of Islām, and of the earliest period of the Muslim era,^1,2,3 and some of his stories shew a very chivalrous attitude on the part of the pagan Arabs towards their womenkind, and also make clear the independent character of the women themselves. There is the story of Durayd b. Şimma, living in the last century before Islām. Durayd b. Simma went out with the horsemen of the Benī Jusham, and when they reached the valley of the Beni Kunayna, which is called al-Akhram, with the intention of raiding the Benī Kunayna, he saw a man on the side of the valley and a woman in a camel-litter with him, and when Durayd beheld him, he said to one of his horsemen, “Call out to him to leave the woman in the litter and save himself”, for he did not know him. The man went up to the stranger and delivered his message and refused to leave him, whereupon the stranger threw down the reins of the camel and said to the woman: Go on at thy gentle pace, in safety, The pace of a laden camel, walking quietly, For to turn aside from a foeman who sought me would be base, Test my gallantry and tell (others) of my achievement. Then he attacked the horseman and flung him down and took his horse and gave it to the woman. Durayd sent another horseman to see what his companion was doing; he found him prostrate and cried out to the stranger, who appeared to be deaf; then, thinking that he had not heard him, he approached him. This latter threw down the reins once more and flung himself on the horseman and knocked him down, bidding him: Stand aside from the way of the free-born lady, she is well protected, For you meet in front of her Rabi’a. In his hand is that which defends from wrong, Then take it, a swift thrust, for my thrust in war is swift. When Durayd thought that a long time had passed, he sent another horseman to see what the other two were doing; when he reached them, he found them both stretched on the ground, and the horseman said to Rabi’a, “Let go the woman in the litter”. Then Rabī’a said to her, “Make your way to the encampment”, and turning to the other, he said: What do you seek from a grim-faced lion? Do you not see horseman upon horseman? The hand on the spear destroyed them both despairing. Then he pierced him and slew him, breaking his own spear. Now Durayd was puzzled and supposed that they had taken the woman and slain the man, and he went to meet them and found Rabī’a without a spear. Meanwhile the tribesmen had come down and found those who were slain. Durayd said to him: O rider, one such as you should not be slain, and my horsemen will be roused on account of their friends; I see no spear with you and I see you are young. Take this spear (of mine) and I will return to my friends and will keep them from you. So Durayd came to his friends and said, “The rider with the woman has defended her and slain your horsemen and taken my spear. Do not hope for anything from him”, and the people went away, and Durayd said: I have not seen or heard of one like him, as protector of his lady, a cavalier not to be slain. He slew horsemen, who were not an easy prey; then went his way as if nought had happened; Smiling in appearance, unlined was his face; like the sharp sword, as the hands of the burnisher polished it; He took his lady and trailed his spear; gazing to the right, towards their abode. Dost thou see the horsemen, from fear of his sword, like the prey under the fierce swoop of the hawk? Would that (I knew) who were his father and mother, O friend, one like him cannot be unknown.⁴

There is also a sequel to the story, in which the lady shews no less chivalry than Durayd and Rabī’a had done on this occasion. Not long after, the Benī Mālik b. Kunayna, the tribe of Rabī’a b. Mukaddam, raided the Beni Jusham, the tribe of Durayd, and slew and captured and took booty, and they took prisoner Durayd b. al-Şimma and he concealed his identity. While he was with them, there came some women walking by him, and one of them cried out and said, “Ye have slain and brought destruction. What have our people brought upon us? Verily, this is he who gave Rabī’a his spear on the day of the camel-litter”. Then she cast her robe over him and said, “O people of Firās, I will protect him from you, this is our friend of the day of the Valley”. Then they asked him who he was, and he said, “ I am Durayd b. al-Şimma. What has happened to Rabi’a b. Mukaddam? “They said,” The Beni Salim slew him “. He said,” Who was the woman in the litter who was with him? “She said,” Rayta bint Judhal al-Ta’an, and I am she and I was his wife “. The people kept Durayd in prison and discussed with one another and said,” We must not be ungrateful for Durayd’s kindness towards us “, but someone said,” Certainly he must not go out of our hands except with the consent of al-Mukhāriq who took him captive “. But the woman that night made an impassioned appeal in verse for Durayd, and next morning the people arose and helped one another and set him free, and Rayta clothed him and gave him food and sent him to his own people. And never again, up to his death, did he make raids against the Beni Firās. There is yet another story told of Durayd in his old age, and the poetess al-Khansa, which shews the independent spirit of the latter.^5,6

Durayd one day passed by when al-Khansa, the daughter of ‘Amr b. al-Shurayd, had been smearing a camel with tar and was anxious to finish the task. When she was bathing herself afterwards, Durayd b. Simma saw her, though she was unaware of him, and she struck him with astonishment and he composed an ode on her. Next morning he went to her father and sought her in marriage. Her father said to him, “You are welcome, Abū Qurra, you are noble, one whose merit is not questioned, a chief not to be turned from his desire and a man of energy not to be rebutted-but this woman has qualities unlike any other, but I will mention you to her and she will decide”. Then he went in to her and said to her, “ O Khansa, the cavalier of Hawāzin has come to thee and the chief of the Beni Jusham, Durayd b. al-Şimma, seeking thee in marriage, and he is such as thou knowest “, and Durayd was listening to their talk. She said,” O my father, dost thou suppose that I will leave my cousins who are like sharp-pointed spears and marry an old man of the Beni Jusham, who will be a corpse to-day or to-morrow? “Her father went out to him and said, “ O Abū Qurra, she has refused thee, but maybe she will give (another) answer later”, but he said, “I heard what you were saying”, and so went away. A picture of the ideal woman of pagan Arabia is drawn by the poet al-Shanfara of Azd, whose description shews a much higher and more appreciative conception of womanhood than is commonly found in Islām: Alas! Ummu ‘Amr set firm her face and has flitted and gone: she bade no farewell to her neighbours what time she went away.⁷

She gave us no warning of what she purposed, but suddenly the necks of her camels towered above us as forth they sped. She dwelt in my eyes at even, at night and when morning dawned; and now has she ended all things, and flitted and passed and gone. Alas my heart for Umaimah and all my longing for her! yea, she was my life’s delight, and now all its joy is fled. O thou sweet comrade! not one thou to start men’s evil tongues; not thou, when thy name is mentioned, to draw a word of reproach. She dwells in a tent pitched high above all the slandering herd, when many a tent stands where there gathers around it scorn. She won me whereas, shamefaced, no maid to let fall her veil, no wanton to glance behind, she walked forth with steady tread. Her eyes seek the ground, as though she looked for a thing lost there, straight forward she goes: if thou speak to her, few are her words and low. At night after little sleep she rises to carry forth her supper to wives who have need, when such gifts are few enow. Not one is Umaimah for gossip to bring to her husband shame: when mention is made of women, pure and unstained is she. The day done, at eve glad comes he home to his eye’s Delight; he needs not to ask of her— “Say, where didst thou pass the day?” And slender is she where meet and full where it so beseems, and tall, straight, a fairy shape, if such upon earth there be. And nightlong as we sat there, methought that the tent was roofed above us with basil sprays, all fragrant with evening’s dew. Sweet basil from Halyah dale, its branches abloom and fresh, that fills all around with balm, no starveling of droughty sands. To the pagan period, too, belongs the story of Buhaysa, daughter of Aws b. Haritha. Al-Harith b. ‘Awf, a famous Arab chieftain, was minded to seek a wife of the daughters of Aws b. Haritha, though warned that he might be rejected.⁸

When he rode up to the dwelling of Aws, the latter first bade him welcome, but when he understood that he came as a suitor, he dismissed him curtly. The wife of Aws inquired whom her husband had sent away so summarily, and when she heard that it was the most renowned of the Arab chiefs who had come as a suitor, she rebuked him for rejecting such an alliance and bade him ride after al-Harith and tell him that she had not been consulted and did not approve the reply. So Aws rode after the wooer and gave his wife’s message and brought al-Harith back to partake of his hospitality. Aws then went to his eldest daughter and asked her if she would marry this chief of Arab chieftains, but she refused, saying that she was not fair to look upon, and that she had many faults, and that he was not related to her, nor one who belonged to a neighbouring tribe and that he might divorce her. Her father agreed with her view and sought his second daughter, who gave a like reply. So he went to his youngest daughter, Buhaysa, who said, “I am fair of face, skilled in handwork, tall of stature, of noble lineage. If he divorces me, God will requite it to him with evil”. So the marriage was arranged and the bridegroom thought he had won his bride, but found himself mistaken: she would not receive him there among her own people. So they set off, and when they arrived at his abode the bride demanded that the customary feast of slain camels and sheep should be provided for the Arab guests. When all was done as she wished, the bridegroom came to his bride, but she said, “Is this a time for dallying with your wife, while the Arabs are at war with each other? Go, reconcile the tribes and then return to your own people”. So al-Harith went at her behest and reconciled the warring tribes and paid the blood-money due, to the amount of three thousand camels. Then he returned, amid the plaudits of his people, and claimed the reward he had so hardly earned. His wife received him gladly, and they were blessed with a goodly family. These free Bedouin women not only exercised a good deal of freedom in the choice of a husband, but constantly refused to marry a man who already had a wife, and also freely exercised the right to leave their husbands as they saw fit. This freedom prevailed during the earliest period of Islām, before the legislation of the Islamic theologians had produced the deadening effects which we find later. Thus we are told of the wife of ‘Abbas b. Mirdās, son of al-Khansa, the poetess already mentioned, who, on hearing of the conversion of her husband to Islām, struck her tent and returned to her own people. Again, there was Umm Habtar, wife of Abū Duwād, who took her husband to task for dissipating his wealth by extravagance; he could not gainsay her, and she parted from him. Again we are told of Salma bint ‘Amr, Umm ‘Abd al-Muttalib, a noble woman, who would not marry a man except on condition that she retained her own freedom of action, and if she disliked anything in a man, she left him. When she was married to Uhayha, the latter planned a raid against her people. She was with Uhayha in his fortress and with her was her son ‘Amr, then a baby. She tied the boy up so that he cried all night and kept Uhayha awake, and then in the morning she loosed the child and he slept, and Uhayha, tired out by his wakeful night, slept also. Salmā tied a rope to the top of the fortress, let herself down and went and warned her people. The raid took place, but there was little bloodshed, as it was expected, and her people named her the Mutadalliyya because she let herself down from the fortress. Of ‘A’isha bint Yahya we hear that she refused to^{9,10,11,12,13} marry her betrothed unless he left the Hijāz, where he was living at the time, and came to live in Başra with her, and she also demanded that she should be the only wife. The fiancé was not willing, and her father said to him: “She is a woman of excellent intelligence, and I have not found her equal, but she is also a woman of strong character and jealous. I have heard that you have two wives and she will not endure being the third”. As the man would not put away his wives and live with her in Başra, she refused to marry him. The poets, too, had reason to complain that their wives failed to treat them with the respect they expected. We are told that Miskin al-Dārimi was reciting a qasida and sang: My fire and my neighbour’s fire are one, The pot falls to him, before it falls to me. His wife said to him: I believe it; certainly your neighbour sits and cooks his pot, and enjoys himself by the fire, then he takes it down and eats and you take a share, like a dog, and when he is satisfied, you eat, no doubt. Truly the pot falls to him before you. This does not suggest the submissive wife who was the ideal of Islām, nor does the account given of a woman of the early generations of Islām, who displayed a like spirit in her relations with her husband. This was ‘A’isha, daughter of Talha and Umm Kulthūm and granddaughter of Abū Bakr. She refused to veil her face from anyone, and when her husband, Muş‘ab, reproached her with it, she said, “Since God Almighty has sealed me with the stamp of beauty, I desire that men should behold it and recognise His grace towards them, and I will not veil it. Verily, there is no defect in me, that anyone should speak of it”. Since her husband could not restrain his jealousy, she broke off all relations with him for a time, and was not^14,15 reconciled with him until he returned victorious from battle. Other writers speak of heroic women of these early days, who even went into battle with their menfolk. Such was the gallant Nusayba, daughter of Ka’b, Umm Habib, who lived in Muhammad’s time, who fought on the day of Yamāma and returned wounded, and also fought on the day of Uhud A.D. 625. One writer says that in battle she lost a hand and sustained twelve wounds. She was one of the two women who offered allegiance on the day of ‘Aqaba. We are told, too, that on the day of the Yarmūk, A.D. 634, certain Muslim women fought zealously, among them Hind, daughter of ‘Utba, Umm Mu’wīya. We hear of another warrior woman of this period who fought against Islām named Umm Qirfa Fatima, daughter of Rabi’a, and widow of Malik, son of Hudhayfa. When Zayd, the adopted son of Muhammad, was conducting a caravan on its way from Medīna to Syria he was attacked by the tribe of the Fezāra, acting under the orders of Umm Qirfa; the caravan was captured and Zayd was wounded. This woman lived not far from the Wadi al-Kora, in a fortress wellstocked with weapons of war, and had such a reputation that the people of her time used to say proverbially, “more unassailable than Umm Qirfa”. Zayd swore that he would be revenged on her, and when he recovered from his wounds he invested her fortress, surprised her troops, slew and scattered them and put her to a cruel death. Yet another woman of the same martial spirit was Sajāh, daughter of al-Harith b. Suwayd b. ‘Uqfān, who^{16,17,18,19,20} belonged to Mesopotamia, and was brought up among the Beni Taghlib. She had been brought up as a Christian, but after the death of Muhammad she proclaimed herself a prophetess. She advanced from Mesopotamia with a large number of tribesmen into the country of the Benī Tamim, announcing her intention of attacking Abu Bakr. The Benī Tamim were divided, some supporting the prophetess, while others fought against her claims. Finally, she agreed to an exchange of prisoners, to payment of blood-money for the slain, and to leaving the country with her troops. She then led her followers on to Yamāma, where the false prophet Musaylima was established. He was in difficulties from other directions and thought it wise to treat with Sajāh, who granted him a private interview. The result was that they agreed to marry, and the marriage took place immediately. Sajāh agreed to withdraw her army to Mesopotamia and Musaylima to give her a year’s revenue from Yamāma. She took half of the sum with her and left three of her generals behind to receive the rest. She herself continued to live in Mesopotamia as a nominal Christian, but in the end accepted Islām. Later she went to live in Başra, where she died. Such a type of woman-warrior had little chance of survival in any country where Islamic legislation was strictly enforced. Again, the picture drawn by Jalāl al-Din Rūmī in the Mathnawi of the Bedouin and his wife, shews plainly that the Bedouin woman had a great reputation for independence of spirit and freedom of speech. He says: If he [ the husband ] be Rustam, son of Zāl or greater than Hamza, he is yet as a captive under the authority of his old woman. Even though outwardly you dominate your wife, yet inwardly you are dominated (by her).^21,22,23,24

Here the Sufi poet is speaking allegorically of the domination of the carnal soul, but the choice of comparison which he makes suggests that the Bedouin woman of his own time (Rūmi died A.D. 1273) could at least hold her own with her husband. Such women as these were not the product of a community in which women were regarded as slaves, or one in which they regarded themselves as on anything but an equal footing with their menfolk. Not only was this the case, but we find that the women of these early days inspired much of the most beautiful poetry of this period. The chivalrous devotion that could be felt by the Arabs of pre-Islamic times towards their women we have already illustrated by the story of Rabi’a and his wife Rayta, and even in the beginning of Islām itself we find traces of a tenderness and reverence which the attitude towards women adopted by the theologians after the second century or so was destined to destroy. In the lament of Muwaylik al-Mazmūm, who wrote probably about the beginning of the third century A.n., over his wife, we find a spirit of touching devotion to both her and her motherless babe, though of the sex later so despised: Let us pass along by the grave wherein she lieth; Umm al-‘Alā, calling her, if haply she may hear! Hast thou then come to dwell, thou who wast very fearful, In a land where even the brave go on their way in fear? May God bless and keep thee, O thou lamented one, For that desolate, lonely place is not meet for thee. Thou hast left behind for our pity thy little one; She knows not why she should grieve for thee, and yet she grieves, She misses the sweetness of thy loving care for her.^25,26

She keeps us wakeful at night, our soothing is in vain. When I hear the sound of her wailing, throughout the night, My thoughts are turned to thee, and mine eyes are filled with tears. This is a cry from the heart of a man who loved tenderly and deeply, and who mourned a companion, not a slave. The imposition of the veil was not known among Arab women before Islām, and not only the story of ‘A’isha given above, but other accounts by early writers shew that the women resented this new restriction which hindered free intercourse with men, to which they had been accustomed. In the matter of religion, too, in the earliest days of Islām, women exercised a freedom in worship which in later days was withdrawn from them, though without doubt they had exercised it in the days of Ignorance. Among the traditions collected by Al-Suyūtī we find an account of the wife of ‘Umar, who used to be present at the morning and evening prayers among the men in the mosque. They said to her, “Why do you go outside (of the house) when you know that ‘Umar hates it and is jealous?” She said, “What hinders him from forbidding me to do it?” They replied, “He is hindered by the saying of the Prophet, ‘Do not prevent the handmaids of God from access to the places where He is worshipped ”. Another woman, ‘Atīka bint Zayd b. ‘Amr b. Nufayl, the wife of ‘Umar b. al-Khattab, used to ask his permission to go to the mosque and when he remained silent, she said,” I shall go until you prevent me “. Umm Şafiyya Khawla bint Qays used to say,” In the time of the Prophet and Abu Bakr, and at the beginning of the Caliphate of ‘Umar, we used to be^27,28,29 in the mosque, and the women used to mix with the men… and ‘Umar said, ‘I send you away, O freeborn women ’, and he sent us away, but we used to be present at the time of prayers “. Another tradition concerning the above-mentioned wife of ‘Umar relates that when she went out to prayer she was recognised, and they said to ‘Umar,” Why did you not forbid her? “He said,” If I had not heard the Apostle of God say, ‘Do not hinder the handmaids of God from going to the places where God is worshipped ’, I should have done so “. Again it is related that the women used to pray with the Apostle between daybreak and sunrise, then they went out, wrapped up in their garments. There is ample evidence, then, that at the beginning of the Islamic era women had much freedom in the choice of their husbands, that marriage was in many cases an equal partnership and that women could, and did, assert their right to an independent life. Social intercourse between women and men was not restricted to close relatives, but women might meet with strangers in society. They went about freely and had the right, as we have seen, to go into the mosques at the time of prayer, to worship in common with the men. Moreover, those who were versed in jurisprudence expressly recognised the right of a wife on marriage to make a condition that there should be no second wife, nor even a concubine, and this right, as we have seen above, was frequently claimed. The woman, then, at the beginning of the Islamic period, had a dignity and independence not found later, and early Arabic literature reveals a feeling even of chivalrous reverence for womanhood.^30,31,32

From the third century A.H., this position of the women deteriorated. Even before the time of Muhammad, the marriage of captive women with their captors and of female slaves with their masters, was in vogue, and we are told that the Muslim men preferred slaves as wives, because of the independent spirit of the free Arab women. A slave-wife was the chattel of her husband, who could therefore claim absolute authority over her. This led to the institution of the ba’l marriage or marriage of domination, clinched by the payment of a dowry in the case of freeborn women. The position of the wife approximated to that of a slave, and her husband claimed authority over her, an authority which became more and more despotic. A tradition of the Prophet related that he said that if it had been permissible for one human being to worship another, he would have liked to order women to worship their husbands. Such a view of marriage, ascribed to the founder of Islām, could not fail to have its effect on his followers. The wife, in this type of marriage, went to her husband, instead of her husband coming to her, and the children were reckoned as belonging exclusively to him. “The effect of Muhammed’s legislation in favour of women was more than outweighed by the establishment of marriages of dominion as the one legitimate type, and by the gradual loosening of the principle that married women could count on their own kin to stand by them against their husbands”. Temporary marriages were common, and men kept female slaves in addition to their legal wives. Polygamy, authorised by the Qur’an, with all its evil effects, was general, and the harim-system, with its rigid seclusion of all but women of the poorest classes, together with the wearing of the veil, was sternly enforced.^33,34,35

Muhammad’s legislation concerning women was undoubtedly meant in the first place for their protection, e.g. his prohibition of female infanticide was an act of humanity, and his laws concerning marriage and seclusion may have tended towards ensuring the safety of women in lawless times. His laws also secured to women the right to property and inheritance, and he made some attempt to improve the loose moral standard prevailing among the Arabs of his time. But when all this is admitted, the ultimate effect of his legislation was the degradation and enslavement of Muslim womanhood throughout the centuries up to the present time, simply because enactments which may have been suited to the times in which he lived, and others which were promulgated to suit his own temperament and his personal domestic circumstances, were given the force of Divine Law and enshrined in a sacred Book, believed to be uncreated, and fetters which should have been shaken off with the progress of time and civilisation were riveted on the necks of Muslim women, and have done more than anything else to hamper the progress of countries under Muslim rule. That Islām is responsible for the degradation of Muslim women is proved not only by the facts in regard to pre-Islamic and early Islamic times mentioned above, but also by the fact that in countries where, owing to natural circumstances or to the persistence of early customs among the people, the Muslim laws and customs regarding women have not been strictly enforced, women have enjoyed a much greater degree of freedom and respect than in more orthodox Muslim lands. Ibn Battuta speaks with great indignation of the women of the Maldives, because they did not cover their heads, not even their ruler, who was a woman. They wore a robe, which left half the body uncovered, and clad thus they went into the markets³⁶ and elsewhere. Ibn Battuta, when appointed judge of these islands, endeavoured to remedy this state of things, but failed to get his way with the women. They were in the habit, a strange thing in his eyes, of going out to earn a living as servants, being engaged chiefly in spinning. The women refused to leave their country, and if a stranger married one of them he had to part from her if he left the islands. They did not allow any man to watch them eat. Another strange thing to the traveller was the fact that these islanders were ruled by a woman, Khadīja, daughter of the Sultan Jalal al-Din ‘Umar. She was mentioned by the preacher in the mosque, in the Friday prayers and on other days in these terms: “O Lord, look upon Thy handmaid, whom Thou hast made pre-eminent in knowledge of the two worlds, and hast made her a means of mercy towards all the Muslims, that is, the Sultana Khadīja, daughter of the Sultan Jalal al-Din, son of the Sultan Şalah al-Din”. The writer was further scandalised by finding that divorced women continued to live with the husbands who had divorced them until they remarried. Obviously, these inhabitants of the Maldives were bad Muslims, but their failure to observe the laws of Islām reacted favourably on the position and liberty of their women. Ibn Battūta, reporting on his visit to the Western Sudan, in regard to the district now inhabited by the Tuaregs, expresses his astonishment at the customs and manners of the people. He noted that the women were very beautiful and of more account than the men. The men were not inclined to jealousy on account of their wives. No man was called after his father, but counted his family to be that of his maternal uncle. What a man left at his death went to his sister’s sons, not to his own.^37,38,39

The writer notes that this custom prevailed elsewhere only among the Hindus and in Malabar. He goes on to say that the women of these Berber tribes felt no bashfulness in the presence of men and did not veil themselves, though they were zealous in the performance of their prayers. They would not leave the country with their husbands and even if they were willing, their families would prevent it. The women enjoyed friendship and companionship with men who were strangers and not relatives, and the husbands saw no objection to it. Ibn Battuta went one day to visit a man named Abū Muhammad Yandakan, whom he found seated on a carpet, while near by was his wife seated on a divan, conversing with a man who sat beside her. Ibn Battuta said to his host, “Who is this woman?” He replied that she was his wife. Ibn Battuta then inquired who was the man with her. He said, “A friend of hers”. The traveller, much scandalised, said to him, “And are you content with this, you who have lived in our country and are acquainted with the sacred law?” His host rebuked him fittingly for his interference, in saying, “The association of women with men among us is a good custom and is carried on in a suitable manner. It arouses no suspicion and our women are not like those of your country.” Ibn Battuta was highly offended and never again visited this man. The historian Ibn Khaldūn, in his account of these Berber tribes of the Sahara, also gives a picture of the high position held by the women of the tribes. He says that, at the time of the Arab invasions, one of the most powerful of the Berber chiefs was the Jewish Kāhina, queen of Mount Auras, whose real name was Dihya, daughter of Tabeta, son of Tifan. When Hasan, governor of Egypt, was ordered to march against the Berbers, he was informed that the Kāhina was the most^40,41 powerful ruler among them and he marched against her. She inflicted a signal defeat upon him and drove out his troops from her territory in A.H. 69. Five years later Hasan once more invaded North Africa and the Kāhina thereupon destroyed all the towns and the farms in the country from Tripoli to Tangiers. The Berbers were indignant and submitted to Hasan, and the gallant Kahina was slain at Mount Auras, at a place called to this day Bir al-Kahina (= the well of the priestess), and her subjects embraced Islām. The Tuaregs of Ibn Battuta’s account and of modern times are the descendants of these Berbers, and the high position maintained by their women undoubtedly goes back to these pre-Islamic times. The modern Tuaregs trace their descent from a woman named Tin Hinane; inheritance is through the female line and the status of a man is in accordance with the status of his mother. The Tuareg woman displays her attractions in a manner quite unusual in Muslim countries. Her face is not veiled and she freely visits her relations. She has insisted on monogamy and has male friends and visitors. She exercises control over her own property and her camels are branded with her own mark. She does not follow her husband to his home on marriage, but sets up her tent near her parents for a year after marriage. She can divorce her husband at her will and return to her own home. She is the undisputed mistress of the household. She is better educated than the men, she knows how to read and write and she is the one to teach the children to read. The right of the tobol, implying authority over the tribe, is transmitted through the women. The woman presides at the ahal, an assembly where gallantry is de rigueur^42,43,44 and where men and women vie in wit and elegance. It is noteworthy that the writer adds that the Tuaregs are not a religious people, and as they do not understand Arabic, they do not observe the ordinances imposed by the Qur’an, e.g. Ramadan is not generally observed. In the Eastern Sudan also, in some respects, the women hold a higher position than is usual among Muslim women and no doubt the distinctive customs of these tribes go back to the days before they were converted to Islām. A modern writer-speaking of the Rubātāb in particular, but dealing with customs which he says are common to most of the tribes on the banks of the Nile in the provinces of Khartoum, Berber and Dongola-notes that the women do not veil themselves and that they enter one another’s houses without asking permission. Both men and women pride themselves on powers of endurance, bearing flogging and branding with fire. They are fond of games and physical exercises and most of the women can swim. In the household the woman is supreme, its management is left entirely in her hands and the husband must consult her before disposing of any of his household goods. Further, he is expected to bear with all her caprices, and if she abuses him, he ought to laugh at it and will not be despised for doing so, as he would be if he submitted to abuse from a man. The husband is absolutely forbidden to use violence to his wife, whatever her offence. The consent of a girl’s mother is necessary for her marriage to anyone but her uncle’s son. A man must shew the utmost respect to his mother-in-law and all his wife’s relatives. The tribesmen of the Shaigia, of Dongola, have long^45,46,47 had a custom of being led into battle by a maiden. Azila, of the Amrab, led her tribe into battle about 1690 in the Shaigia war of independence. At the battle of Korti, 1820, the Shaigia were led by a virgin named Muhayra bint Abad of the Suareb, mounted in a litter on a camel, and her tribesmen rallied round her as a standard. A month later, at Jebel Dager, the Shaigia were again led by a woman, Şafia, daughter of Mek Sabil. Again, we find that primitive custom has been stronger than Islamic legislation in some respects among the Bedouin dwellers in the desert to-day. Doughty speaks of the comparative freedom of the Bedouin housewife and of how she may leave her husband at will, and custom will not allow him to prevent her from doing so. He also speaks of a custom similar to that we have mentioned as prevailing in Dongola, by which, “at any general battle of the tribes, there is mounted some beautiful damsel of the shaykh’s daughters, whose generous loud Alleluias for her people, in presence of their enemies, inflame her young kinsmen’s hearts to leap in that martial dance to a multitude of deaths”. Such a maiden ”, he says, “is called an ‘Atāyfa ’, and it would be infamous to kill such an one, but she may be in danger in the course of the battle”. Here we have a custom in accordance with the heroic spirit of a Nusayba, and it is evident that Islamic laws concerning the seclusion and incompetency of woman have failed to prevail; such martial training must produce a feminine type very different from the feeble captive of the harim. In all these cases we find that, though the country is nominally Muslim, the non-observance of Muslim^48,49,50 laws and customs has enabled the women to retain some, or perhaps all, of their primitive freedom, which, in countries where Islamic ordinances have been rigidly enforced, has been lost, with consequent degradation to the womenkind of those countries. It is to be noted that those Muslim countries which have determined to bring their civilisations into line with those of the modern West, have first of all found it necessary to abrogate the Islamic legislation concerning women. On the other hand, we find in the history of the early centuries of Islām, in those countries where the new faith took firm root, sometimes through an unduly harsh interpretation of the precepts of the Qur’an, and still more through numerous traditions which were brought to bear on the subject, the Muslim woman became more and more of a slave and chattel; and under the degrading and narrowing influence of the harim, she lost that dignity and independence of character for which she had been noted in an earlier age. In the matter of religion, seclusion and the limitation of their freedom certainly hindered women in the exercise of their religious duties, and the almost complete lack of education which was the fate of most Muslim women up to very recent years, with a few notable exceptions, prevented them from having any intelligent conception of what was included in the doctrines of Islām. Many Muslim writers speak with contempt of women’s incapacity for religion and of their lack of intelligence and morals. An early writer says, “The majority of women are lacking in religion and virtue and that which prevails in them is ignorance and evil desires”. Tradition states that the Prophet himself said, “I looked into Hell and I saw that the majority of its inhabitants were women, and I looked into Paradise⁵¹ and saw that but few of its inhabitants were women ”. Another tradition of the Prophet represents him as saying: Many men have been perfected, but of women only four; and the falling short of all other women was not due to their inherent nature, but because of their acquired qualities (i.e. that for which they were themselves morally responsible). They are to be described also as wanting in intelligence and religion, and the explanation of their lack of religion is their neglect of prayer and fasting due to pride. Their lack of religion is in truth nothing but their neglect of prayer and fasting and the faith of Islām. For the practice of Islām and faith in it are one and the same thing to the one who realises that good works come from faith. Taqi al-Din al-Hisni (ob. A.D. 1426), writing with great bitterness of the women of his time, says, “The most double-faced (of mankind) are women, because of the weakness of their intellect and their religion and their convictions, and therefore their faith fails”. Such statements, to which many more could be added, might well lead us to suppose that women would not be conspicuous among the religious leaders of Islām and would play but a small part in the development of Islām on the religious side. Western opinion has been liable to assume that woman, as such, was shut out from religious privileges and religious accountability and it has even been asserted that Islām does not allow a woman the possession of a soul. Dr Perron asserts that The path of holiness in Islām was seldom trodden by women and we find but few women on the same. It is too difficult for them, so at least think the men. These everywhere take the front place: all glory, all advantage, all authority, is for the men. They have made everything contribute to their advantage and pre-eminence;^52,53,54 they have appropriated everything, monopolised everything, holiness and even Paradise, for themselves. Yet this does not give a complete picture of the real state of affairs. Woman in Islām was degraded almost as much by social tendencies as by the religious law, and woman as such was not excluded from the spiritual blessings which in Islām were intended to be available for all human beings. The Qur’an itself makes this plain: And God Most High said that for the Muslim men and the Muslim women (i.e. those who have surrendered themselves to His Will) and the believers, men and women, and those who pray, both men and women, and the sincere men and women and the patient men and women and the humble men and women and the charitable (who give the prescribed alms) and those who fast, both men and women, and the chaste and those, both men and women, who remember God often-God will recompense them with forgiveness and a great reward. Shu’ayb al-Hurayfish (ob. A.D. 1398) quotes these verses and continues: So God, Glory be to Him, joined the mention of pious women with pious men, and in women are found the mystic states and ascetic devotion and good works and piety, as in men; and to women is given revelation, and for them are pilgrimages and the unveiling (of the Vision of God) and other things of the special favours which God Most High has assigned to them; also some of them are included in the first rank,… and he gives the names of several famous women saints. Also the writer already mentioned, Taqi al-Din alHisnī, bitter as were his denunciations of the women of his own time, admitted that there had been many good women, and set out to write a book dealing^55,56,57 entirely with the lives of women, holy and of irreproachable faith; in his introduction he says: Praise be to God, Who created the earth and the heavens and provided them with the things created and made that a sign of His Unity-and gathered together the believers, men and women, and established the sacred law, chosen for Himself, and sent His Prophet and through him sent down His book of clear signs, and the people of happiness obeyed Him and did His work, from among the dutiful men and women… and when He exhorted the creatures to be obedient, He did not single out the men, but spoke of the Muslims, men and women, and the believers of both sexes and those who observed the law, men and women, and the verses dealing with this are many and are not secret. So he justifies himself for choosing to write about women and shews that to them also God has granted the highest favours and has chosen some of them to be saints and to receive His revelations. We see, therefore, that in spite of some ecclesiastical restrictions and in spite of the general contempt for her sex, the Muslim woman was, theoretically at least, on a spiritual equality with man and was held to be of equal worth in the sight of God, and that, as a matter of fact, no obstacle was erected great enough to prevent her from rising to that full experience of the inner spiritual life and to that devoted exercise of faith, which was possible for the man and proved to be equally possible for her.⁵⁸