Читать книгу A Dictionary of Islam - Thomas Patrick Hughes - Страница 24

DIVINATION. Kahānah, or foretelling future events, is unlawful in Islām.

Muʿāwiyah ibn Ḥākim relates: “I said to the Prophet, ‘O Messenger of God, we used to do some things in the time of ignorance of which we are not sure now. For example, we used to consult diviners about future events?’ The Prophet said, ‘Now that you have embraced Islām you must not consult them.’ Then I said, ‘And we used to take bad omens?’ The Prophet said, ‘If from a bad omen you are thrown into perplexity, let it not hinder you from doing the work you had intended to do.’ Then I said, ‘And we used to draw lines on the ground?’ And the Prophet said, ‘There was one of the Prophets who used to draw lines on the ground, therefore if you can draw a line like him it is good, otherwise it is vain.’”

ʿĀyishah says, “the people asked the Prophet about diviners, whether they spoke true or not. And he said, ‘You must not believe anything they say.’ The people then said, ‘But, O Prophet! they sometimes tell what is true?’ The Prophet replied, ‘Because one of the genii steals away the truth and carries it into the diviner’s ear; and the diviners mix a hundred lies to one truth.’” [MAGIC.]

DIVORCE. Arabic t̤alāq (طلاق‎). In its primitive sense the word t̤alāq means dismission, but in law it signifies a release from the marriage tie.

The Muḥammadan law of divorce is founded upon express injunctions contained in the Qurʾān, as well as in the Traditions, and its rules occupy a very large section in all Muḥammadan works on jurisprudence.

I. The teaching of the Qurʾān on the subject is as follows:—

Sūrah ii. 226:—

“They who intend to abstain from their wives shall wait four months; but if they go back from their purpose, then verily God is Gracious, Merciful:

“And if they resolve on a divorce, then verily God is He who Heareth, Knoweth.

“The divorced shall wait the result, until they have had their courses thrice, nor ought they to conceal what God hath created in their wombs, if they believe in God and the last day; and it will be more just in their husbands to bring them back when in this state, if they desire what is right. And it is for the women to act as they (the husbands) act by them, in all fairness; but the men are a step above them. God is Mighty, Wise.

“Ye may give sentence of divorce to your wives twice: Keep them honourably, or put them away with kindness. But it is not allowed you to appropriate to yourselves aught of what ye have given to them, unless both fear that they cannot keep within the bounds set up by God. And if ye fear that they cannot observe the ordinances of God, no blame shall attach to either of you for what the wife shall herself give for her redemption. These are the bounds of God: therefore overstep them not; for whoever oversteppeth the bounds of God, they are evil doers.

“But if the husband give sentence of divorce to her a third time, it is not lawful for him to take her again, until she shall have married another husband; and if he also divorce her then shall no blame attach to them if they return to each other, thinking that they can keep within the bounds fixed by God. And these are the bounds of God; He maketh them clear to those who have knowledge.

“But when ye divorce women, and the time for sending them away is come, either retain them with generosity, or put them away with generosity: but retain them not by constraint so as to be unjust towards them. He who doth so, doth in fact injure himself. And make not the signs of God a jest; but remember God’s favour towards you, and the Book and the Wisdom which He hath sent down to you for your warning, and fear God, and know that God’s knowledge embraceth everything.

“And when ye divorce your wives, and they have waited the prescribed time, hinder them not from marrying the husbands when they have agreed among themselves in an honourable way. This warning is for him among you who believeth in God and in the last day. This is most pure for you, and most decent. God knoweth, but ye know not.

“Mothers, when divorced, shall give suck to their children two full years, if the father desire that the suckling be completed; and such maintenance and clothing as is fair for them, shall devolve on the father. No person shall be charged beyond his means. A mother shall not be pressed unfairly for her child, nor a father for his child: And the same with the father’s heir. But if they choose to wean the child by consent and by bargain, it shall be no fault in them. And if ye choose to have a nurse for your children, it shall be no fault in you, in case ye pay what ye promised her according to that which is fair. Fear God, and know that God seeth what ye do.

“It shall be no crime in you if ye divorce your wives so long as ye have not consummated the marriage, nor settled any dowry on them. And provide what is needful for them—he who is in ample circumstances according to his means, and he who is straitened, according to his means—with fairness: This is binding on those who do what is right.

“But if ye divorce them before consummation, and have already settled a dowry on them, ye shall give them half of what ye have settled, unless they make a release, or he make a release in whose hand is the marriage tie. But if ye make a release, it will be nearer to piety.”

Sūrah lxv. 1:—

“O Prophet! when ye divorce women, divorce them at their special times. And reckon those times exactly, and fear God your Lord. Put them not forth from their houses, nor allow them to depart, unless they have committed a proven adultery. This is the precept of God; and whoso transgresseth the precept of God, assuredly imperilleth his own self. Thou knowest not whether, after this, God may not cause something new to occur which may bring you together again.

“And when they have reached their set time, then either keep them with kindness, or in kindness part from them. And take upright witnesses from among you, and bear witness as unto God. This is a caution for him who believeth in God and in the latter day. And whoso feareth God, to him will He grant a prosperous issue, and will provide for him whence he reckoned not upon it.

“And for him who putteth his trust in Him will God be all-sufficient. God truly will attain his purpose. For everything hath God assigned a period.

“As to such of your wives as have no hope of the recurrence of their times, if ye have doubts in regard to them, then reckon three months, and let the same be the term of those who have not yet had them. And as to those who are with child, their period shall be until they are delivered of their burden. God will make His command easy to Him who feareth Him.

***

“Lodge the divorced wherever ye lodge, according to your means; and distress them not by putting them to straits. And if they are pregnant, then be at charges for them till they are delivered of their burden; and if they suckle your children, then pay them their hire and consult among yourselves, and act generously: And if herein ye meet with obstacles, then let another female suckle for him.”

II. The teaching of Muḥammad on the general subject of Divorce is expressed in the Traditions as follows:—

“The thing which is lawful but disliked by God is divorce.”

“The woman who asks her husband to divorce her without a cause, the smell of Paradise is forbidden her.”

“There are three things which, whether done in joke or in earnest, shall be considered serious and effectual, namely, marriage, divorce, and taking a wife back.”

“Every divorce is lawful except a mad-man’s.”

“Cursed be the second husband who makes the wife (divorced) lawful for her first husband, and cursed be the first husband for whom she is made lawful.”—(Mishkāt, xiii. c. xv.)

III. Sunnī Muḥammadan Doctors are not agreed as to the Moral Status of Divorce.

The Imām ash-Shāfiʿī, referring to the three kinds of divorce (which will be afterwards explained), says: “They are unexceptionable and legal because divorce is in itself a lawful act, whence it is that certain laws have been instituted respecting it; and this legality prevents any idea of danger being annexed to it.” But, on the other hand, the Imām Abū Ḥanīfah and his disciples say that divorce is in itself a dangerous and disapproved procedure, as it dissolves marriage, an institution which involves many circumstances both of a spiritual as well as of a temporal nature. Nor is its propriety at all admitted, but on the ground of urgency of release from an unsuitable wife. And in reply to ash-Shāfiʿī, they say that the legality of divorce does not prevent its being considered dangerous, because it involves matters of both a spiritual and temporal character.

The author of the Sharḥu ʾl-Wiqāyah, p. 108, says:—“Divorce is an abominable transaction in the sight of God, therefore such an act should only take place from necessity, and it is best to only make the one sentence of divorce” (i.e. t̤alāqu ʾl-aḥsan).

IV. The Sunnī Law of Divorce:—Divorce may be given either in the present time or may be referred to some future period. It may be pronounced by the husband either before or after the consummation of the marriage. It may be either given in writing or verbally.

The words by which divorce can be given are of two kinds:—Ṣarīḥ, or “express,” as when the husband says, “Thou art divorced”; and kināyah, or “metaphorical,” as when he says, “Thou art free; thou art cut off; veil yourself! Arise! seek for a mate,” &c. &c.

Divorce is divided into t̤alāqu ʾs-sunnah, or that which is according to the Qurʾān and the Traditions, and t̤alāqu ʾl-badiʿ, or a novel or heterodox divorce, which, although it is considered lawful, is not considered religious.

T̤alāqu ʾs-sunnah is either the aḥsan, or “the most laudable,” or ḥasan, the “laudable” method. T̤alāqu ʾl-aḥsan, or the “most laudable” method of divorce, is when the husband once expressly pronounces to his enjoyed but un-pregnant wife the sentence, “Thou art divorced!” when she is in t̤uhr or a state of purity, during which he has had no carnal connection with her, and then leaves her to complete the prescribed ʿiddah, or “period of three months.” Until the expiration of the ʿiddah, the divorce is revocable, but after the period is complete, it is irreversible, and if the husband wishes to take his wife back, they must go through the ceremony of marriage. But it must be observed that after the t̤alāqu ʾl-aḥsan, the woman is not, as in the other kinds of divorce, compelled to marry another man, and be divorced before she can return to her former husband. All that is required is a re-marriage. The author of the Hidāyah says this mode of divorce is called aḥsan, or “most laudable,” because it was usually adopted by the Companions of the Prophet, and also because it leaves it in the power of the husband to take his wife back, and she thus remains a lawful subject for re-marriage to him. Some European writers on Muḥammadanism have overlooked this fact in condemning the Muslim system of divorce.

The t̤alāqu ʾl-ḥasan, or “laudable divorce,” is when the husband repudiates an enjoyed wife by three sentences of divorce, either express or metaphorical, giving one sentence in each t̤uhr, or “period of purity.” Imām Mālik condemns this kind of divorce, and says it is irregular. But Abū Ḥanīfah holds it to be ḥasan, or “good.”

The t̤alāqu ʾl-badiʿ, or “irregular form of divorce,” is when the husband repudiates his wife by three sentences, either express or metaphorical, given them one at a time: “Thou art divorced! Thou art divorced! Thou art divorced!” Or, “Thou art free! Thou art free! Thou art free!” Even holding up three fingers, or dropping three stones, is held to be a sufficiently implied divorce to take legal effect. The Muslim who thus divorces his wife is held, in the Hidāyah, to be an offender against the law, but the divorce, however irregular, takes legal effect.

In both these kinds of divorce, badiʿ and ḥasan, the divorce is revocable (rajīʿ) after the first and second sentences, but it is irrevocable (bāʾin) after the third sentence. After both ḥasan and badiʿ divorces, the divorced wife cannot, under any circumstances, return to her husband until she has been married, and enjoyed, and divorced by another husband. Muḥammadan doctors say the law has instituted this (somewhat disgraceful) arrangement in order to prevent divorces other than t̤alāqu ʾl-aḥsan.

A husband may divorce his wife without any misbehaviour on her part, or without assigning any cause. The divorce of every husband is effective if he be of a sound understanding and of mature age; but that of a boy, or a lunatic, or one talking in his sleep, is not effective.

If a man pronounce a divorce whilst in a state of inebriety from drinking fermented liquor, such as wine, the divorce takes place. Repudiation by any husband who is sane and adult, is effective, whether he be free or a slave, willing, or acting under compulsion; and even though it were uttered in sport or jest, or by a mere slip of the tongue, instead of some other word. (Fatāwā-i-ʿĀlamgīrī, vol. i. p. 497.)

A sick man may divorce his wife, even though he be on his death-bed.

An agent or agents may be appointed by a husband to divorce his wife.

In addition to the will and caprice of the husband, there are also certain conditions which require a divorce.

The following are causes for divorce, but generally require to be ratified by a decree from the Qāẓī or “judge”:—

(1.) Jubb. That is, when the husband has been by any cause deprived of his organ of generation. This condition is called majbūb. In this case the wife can obtain instant divorce if the defect occurred before marriage. Cases of evident madness and leprosy are treated in the same way. Divorce can be obtained at once.

(2.) ʿUnnah, or “impotence.” (This includes ratq, “vulva impervia cœunti”; and qarn, “vulva anteriore parte enascens.”) In cases of impotency in either husband or wife, a year of probation can be granted by the judge.

(3.) Inequality of race or tribe. A woman cannot be compelled to marry a man who belongs to an inferior tribe, and, in case of such a marriage, the elders of the superior tribe can demand a divorce; but if the divorce is not demanded, the marriage contract remains.

(4.) Insufficient dower. If the stipulated dowry is not given when demanded, divorce takes place.

(5.) Refusal of Islām. If one of the parties embrace Islām, the judge must offer it to the other three distinct times, and if he or she refuse to embrace the faith, divorce takes place.

(6.) Laʿn, or “imprecation.” That is, when a husband charges his wife with adultery, the charge is investigated, but if there is no proof, and the man swears his wife is guilty, and the wife swears she is innocent, a divorce must be decreed.

(7.) Īlāʾ, or “vow.” When a husband makes a vow not to have carnal intercourse with his wife for no less than four months, and keeps the vow inviolate, an irreversible divorce takes place.

(8.) Reason of property. If a husband become the proprietor of his wife (a slave), or the wife the proprietor of her husband (a slave), divorce takes place.

(9.) An invalid marriage of any kind, arising from incomplete nikāḥ, or “marriage ceremony,” or from affinity, or from consanguinity.

(10.) Difference of country. For example, if a husband flee from a dāru ʾl-ḥarb, or “land of enmity,” i.e. “a non-Muslim country,” to a dāru ʾl-Islām, or “country of Islām,” and his wife refuse to perform hijrah (flight) and to accompany him, she is divorced.

(11.) Apostasy from Islām. The author of the Raddu ʾl-Muk͟htār (vol. ii. p. 643) says: “When a man or woman apostatises from Islām, then an immediate dissolution (fask͟h) of the marriage takes place, whether the apostasy be of the man or of the woman, without a decree from the Qāẓī.” And again, (p. 645), “If both husband and wife apostatise at the same time, their marriage bond remains; and if at any future time the parties again return to Islām, no re-marriage is necessary to constitute them man and wife; but if one of the parties should apostatise before the other, a dissolution of the marriage takes place ipso facto.”

Mr. J.B.S. Boyle, of Lahore, says: “As relevant to this subject, I give a quotation from Mr. Currie’s excellent work on the Indian Criminal Codes, p. 445. The question is as to the effect of apostasy from Islām upon the marriage relation, and whether sexual intercourse with the apostate renders a person liable to be convicted for adultery under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code. A. and B., Mahommedans, married under the Mahommedan law, are converted to Christianity. The wife, B., is first converted, but continues to live with her husband; subsequently the husband, A., is converted. Subsequent to the conversion of B., A. and B., still living together as husband and wife, both professing Christianity, B. has sexual intercourse with C. Will a conviction hold against C. under Section 497? Both Macnaghten and Baillie say the marriage becomes dissolved by apostasy of either party, and Grady, in his version of Hamilton’s Hidāyah, p. 66, says: “If either husband or wife apostatize from the faith, a separation takes place, without divorce, according to Abū Haneefa and Abū Yoosuf. Imām Mahommed alleges if the apostasy is on the part of the husband.

“Apostasy annuls marriage in Haneefa’s opinion, and in apostasy separation takes place without any decree of the magistrate. Cases which might decide this point have been lately tried both at Lucknow and Allahabad: at the former place in re Afzul Hosein v. Hadee Begum, and at the latter Zuburdust Khan v. Wife. But from certain remarks to be found in the judgment of the High Court, N.W. P., the Courts of Oudh and N.W. P., appear to differ on the most essential point. The point before the Oudh Court was (Hadee Begum’s plea) that her marriage contract was dissolved by reason of her own apostasy, a sufficient answer to a suit brought by her Mahommedan husband for restitution of conjugal rights; i.e. Does the apostasy of a Mahommedan wife dissolve a marriage contract against the express wish of a Mahommedan husband in dar-ool-harb (land of war)? for India, it is contended, is not, under its present administration, dar-ool-Islam (land of safety). The Oudh Court held (admitting that apostasy by the husband dissolved the marriage and freed the wife) that apostasy by the wife did not free her if her husband sued for restitution of conjugal rights. They argued that apostasy by the wife, without the wish of the husband, could not be entertained; in fact, that as regards her husband’s volition, the apostasy could not exist, and would not be recognised. That a suit for restitution of conjugal rights before the competent court of the time, seemed to them to be equivalent of the suit before the Cazee (Judge). The Oudh judges, in the absence of distinct precedent, say they fell back on the customs of the people amongst whom they lived. The Oudh Court evidently considered there was an essential difference between apostasy of a man and apostasy of a woman, of the husband or the wife; also between apostasy to a faith in a book and apostasy to the idol worship Mahommed and his followers renounce. Does such an essential difference exist? The point before the High Court N.W.P. was: Can a Mahommedan professing Christianity subsequent to his marriage with a Mussulmani, according to the Mahommedan law, obtain a decree for dissolution of that marriage under Act IV. of 1869, his wife having subsequently to him professed Christianity, and they under their new faith having lived together as man and wife? or whether the wife’s contention is sound, that her marriage was cancelled by her husband’s apostasy? They held the apostasy of the husband dissolved the marriage tie. This the Oudh Court admits, but the point before the Oudh Court was not before the High Court, N.W. P.; nevertheless from comments made by the High Court, N.W. P., on the Oudh decision, they evidently did not agree with the finding come to by the latter Court, on the point before it.

“Now, Mr. Currie asks in the above extract, does such an essential difference exist between apostasy to a book—that is, to a kitabee faith—and apostasy to idol worship? Answering this question necessitates a few remarks upon the judgments above mentioned. According to Mahommedan law, a man may lawfully marry a kitabeeah, but marriage with a Pagan or polytheist is unlawful. But the principle in Mahommedan law is, that when one of the parties turns to a state of religion that would render the marriage contract illegal if it were still to be entered into, what was legal before is made void. A Mahommedan woman, becoming a kitabeeah, does not render the marriage void, for there is nothing to render the marriage contract illegal if it were still to be entered into; but if the Mahommedan woman becomes an idolatress, the marriage is void, for the woman has turned to a state of religion that would render the marriage contract illegal if it were still to be entered into; a Mahommedan woman, becoming a Christian, consequently, would not be separated from her husband, because she belongs to the religion of the book, that is, a kitabee faith. If a kitabeeah becomes an idolatress, the marriage is dissolved, but if she change from one religion to another, and still remain a kitabeeah, the marriage is not vitiated. So far the Oudh Court is correct in its decision, that the Mahommedan wife’s conversion to Christianity did not render the marriage null and void, but that a suit for restitution of conjugal rights would lie; and taking the case of C. having sexual intercourse with B. the wife of A. converted to Christianity, a conviction under Section 497, Indian Penal Code, would hold good. But with all deference, I do not think that the Oudh Court is correct when it states that ‘apostasy by the wife without the wish of the husband could not be entertained; in fact, that as regards her husband’s volition, the apostasy could not exist, and would not be recognised.’

“So far as regards a woman’s apostatising to a kitabee faith, this holds good; but if a woman turns to Paganism, ipso facto the marriage is void, and does not depend upon the volition of the husband (having regard to the principle we have adverted to above), so that the husband under such circumstances could not maintain a suit for conjugal rights, nor would a conviction hold good against C., under Section 497, Indian Penal Code for sexual intercourse with B., the wife of A., who has apostatised to Paganism. The decisions of the two Courts, however, seem correct, on the principles of Mahommedan law, as to the effect of a husband apostatising from Islām. By Mahommedan law, a marriage by a female Moslem with a man not of the Mahommedan faith is unlawful: applying the principle quoted before, the man having turned to a state of religion that would render the contract illegal if it were still to be entered into, the marriage is void. The apostasy of the husband dissolves the marriage tie; consequently there does exist an essential difference between apostasy of a man and of a woman, of the apostasy of the husband or the wife; also between apostasy to a faith in a book, that is, a revealed religion having a book of faith, and apostasy to the idol worship Mahommed and his followers renounce. The law allows a person the right to cease to be a Mahommedan in the fullest sense of the word, and to become a Christian, and to claim for himself and his descendants all the rights and obligations of a British subject.” (Hogg v. Greenway, &c., 2, Hyde’s Reports, 3. Manual of Laws relating to Muḥammadans and their Relations of Life.)

V. In addition to the forms of divorce already explained, there are three others of a peculiar nature, called k͟hulaʾ, mubāraʾah, and z̤ihār.

The form of divorce known as k͟hulaʾ, is when, a husband and wife disagreeing, or for any other cause, the wife, on payment of a compensation or ransom to her husband, is permitted by the law to obtain from him a release from the marriage tie. The k͟hulaʾ is generally effected by the husband giving back the dower or part thereof. When the aversion is on the part of the husband, it is generally held that he should grant his wife’s request without compensation; but this is purely a matter of conscience, and not of law.

Mubāraʾah is a divorce which is effected by a mutual release.

Z̤ihār, from z̤ahr, “back,” is a kind of divorce which is effected by a husband likening his wife to any part or member of the body of any of his kinswomen within the prohibited degree. As for example, if he were to say to his wife, “Thou art to me like the back of my mother.” The motive of the husband in saying so must be examined, and if it appear that he meant divorce, his wife is not lawful to him until he have made expiation by freeing a slave, or by fasting two months, or by feeding sixty poor men. (See Qurʾān, Sūrah lviii. 4.)

(For the Sunnī Law of Divorce, see the Hidāyah and its Commentary, the Kifāyah; Durru ʾl-Muk͟htār and its Commentary, the Raddu ʾl-Muk͟htār; the Fatāwā-i-ʿĀlamgīrī; Hamilton’s English Edition, Hidāyah; Tagore Law Lectures, 1873.)

VI. The Shīʿah law of Divorce differs only in a few particulars from that of the Sunnīs. According to Shīʿah law, a man must be an adult of understanding, of free choice and will, and of design and intention, when he divorces his wife. A marked contrast to the licence and liberty allowed by the Sunnī law. Nor can the Shīʿah divorce be effected in any language of a metaphorical kind. It must be express and be pronounced in Arabic (if the husband understand that language), and it must be spoken and not written. A divorce amongst the Shīʿahs does not take effect if given implicatively or ambiguously, whether intended or not. It is also absolutely necessary that the sentence should be pronounced by the husband in the presence of two just persons as witnesses, who shall hear and testify to the wording of the divorce.

(For the Shīʿah law of divorce, see Shirʿatu ʾl-Islām; Taḥrīru ʾl-Aḥkām; Mafātīḥ; Mr. Neil Baillie’s Digest of Muḥammadan Law; Imamiah Code; Tagore Law Lectures, 1874.)

VII. Compared with the Mosaic Law. When compared with the Mosaic law, it will be seen that by the latter, divorce was only sanctioned when there was “some uncleanness” in the wife, and that whilst in Islām a husband can take back his divorced wife, in the law of God it was not permitted. See Deut. xxiv. 1–4.

“When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her; then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

“And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife.

“And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

“Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.”

The ground of divorce in the Mosaic law was “some uncleanness in her.” There were two interpretations of this by the Jewish doctors of the period of the New Testament. The School of Shammai seemed to limit it to a moral delinquency in the woman, whilst that of Hillel extended it to trifling causes. Our Lord appears to have regarded all the lesser causes than fornication as standing on too weak a ground.

Matt. v. 32: “But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.”

It will be seen that Muḥammad adopted the teaching of the School of Hillel, omitting the bill of divorcement, which was enjoined in Deut. xxiv. 3, thereby placing the woman entirely at the will and caprice of her husband.

Burkhardt tells us of an Arab, forty-five years old, who had had fifty wives, so that he must have divorced two wives and married two fresh ones on the average every year. We have cases of Muḥammad’s own “Companions” not much better. This is the natural and legitimate effect of the law.

Sir William Muir (Life of Mahomet, vol. iii. p. 305) says: “The idea of conjugal unity is utterly unknown to Mahometans, excepting when the Christian example is by chance followed; and even there, the continuance of the bond is purely dependent on the will of the husband.… I believe the morale of Hindu society, where polygamy is less encouraged, to be sounder, in a very marked degree, than that of Mahometan society.”

DĪWĀN (ديوان‎). (1) In Muḥammadan law, the word signifies an account or record book, and also the bags in which the Qāẓī’s records are kept. (2) It is also a court of justice, a royal court. (3) Also a minister of state; the chief officer in a Muḥammadan state; a finance minister. (4) In British courts a law-suit is called dīwānī, when it refers to a civil suit, in contradistinction to faujdārī, or “criminal suit.” (5) A collection of odes is called a dīwān, e.g. Dīwān-i-Ḥāfiz̤, “the Poems of Ḥāfiz̤.”

DIYAH (دية‎). A pecuniary compensation for any offence upon the person. [FINES.]

DOGS (Arabic kalb, pl. kilāb; Heb. ‏כֶּלֶב‎) are unclean animals; for according to a tradition by Abū Hurairah, Muḥammad said that when a dog drinks in a vessel, it must be washed seven times, and that the first cleansing should be with earth. (Mishkāt, book iii. c. ii. pt. 1.)

“Most people believe that when a dog howls near a house it forebodes death, for, it is said, a dog can distinguish the awful form of Azrāʿīl, the Angel of Death.” (Burton’s Arabia, vol. i. p. 290.)

Ibn ʿUmr says that dogs used to come into the Masjid at Makkah in the time of the Prophet, but the Companions never purified the mosque when the dog was dry.

The Imām Abū Yūsuf holds that the sale of a dog that bites is unlawful, whilst the Imām ash-Shāfiʿī has said that the sale of a dog is absolutely illegal, because the Prophet said the wages of whoredom and the price of a dog are forbidden. Abū Ḥanīfah holds that dogs which are trained to hunt or watch may be lawfully sold. (Hamilton’s Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 543.)

It is lawful to hunt with a trained dog, and the sign of a dog being trained is that he catches game three times without killing it. The dog must be let slip with the ejaculation: Bismillāhi ʾllāhi Akbar! “In the name of God, the great God!” when all game seized by him becomes lawful food. This custom is founded upon a verse in the Qurʾān, Sūrah v. 6: “Lawful for you are all good things and what ye have taught beasts of prey to catch, training them like dogs; ye teach them as God taught you. And mention the name of God over it.”

Rules for hunting with dogs will be found in Hamilton’s Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 170.

DOG STAR. Sirius, or the dog star, was an object of worship amongst the ancient Arabs, and is mentioned in the Qurʾān, under the name of ash-Shiʿra, Sūrah liii. 50: “He (God) is the Lord of the Dog Star.”

DOWER. Arabic, mahr (مهر‎), Heb. (‏מֹהַר‎). Dower is considered by some lawyers to be an effect of the marriage contract, imposed on the husband by the law as a mark of respect for the subject of the contract—the wife; while others consider that it is in exchange for the usufruct of the wife, and its payment is necessary, as upon the provision of a support to the wife depends the permanency of the matrimonial connection. Thus, it is indispensable a fortiori, so much so, that if it were not mentioned in the marriage contract, it would be still incumbent on the husband, as the law will presume it by virtue of the contract itself, and award it upon demand being made by the wife. In such case, the amount of dower will be to the extent of the dowers of the women of her rank and of the ladies of her father’s family. Special beauty or accomplishments may, however, be pleaded for recovering a larger award than the customary dower, where the amount of dower is not mentioned in the contract. There is no limit to the amount of dower; it may be to a very large amount, considering the position and circumstance of the bridegroom, but its minimum is never less than ten dirhams; so where it is fixed at a lesser amount, the law will augment it up to ten dirhams. The dower need not invariably be in currency, or even in metal; everything, except carrion, blood, wine, and hog. Also the bridegroom’s own labour, if he is a free man, being held by the law to be a good dower.

Dower is generally divided into two parts, termed muʿajjal, “prompt,” and muʾajjal, “deferred.” The muʿajjal portion is exigible on entering into the contract, while the muʾajjal part of the dower is payable upon dissolution of the contract. Although the first part is payable, and is sometimes paid, at the time the contract is entered into, yet it has been the general practice (at least in India) to leave it unpaid, and so like an on-demand obligation it remains due at all times—the wife’s right to the same not being extinguished by lapse of time. The wife’s (or her guardian’s) object in leaving the exigible part of the dower unrealised, seems to be that there may always exist a valid guarantee for the good treatment of her by her husband. The women of the respectable classes reserve their right and power to demand their exigible dowers till such time as occasion should require the exercise thereof. The custom of fixing heavy dowers, generally beyond the husband’s means, especially in India, seems to be based upon the intention of checking the husband from ill-treating his wife, and, above all, from his marrying another woman, as also from wrongfully or causelessly divorcing the former. For in the case of divorce the woman can demand the full payment of the dower. In the event of the death of the husband, the payment of the dower has the first claim on the estate after funeral expenses; the law regarding it as a just debt. (Tagore Law Lectures, 1873, p. 341; Hidāyah, vol. i. p. 122.)

DREAMS. Arabic ḥulm (حـلـم‎); manām (منام‎); rūyāʾ (روياء‎). The term used for a bad dream is ḥulm, and for an ordinary dream manām, rūyāʾ being used to express a heavenly vision. [RUYA.]

According to the traditions, the Prophet is related to have said, “A good dream is of God’s favour and a bad dream is of the devil; therefore, when any of you dreams a dream which is such as he is pleased with, then he must not tell it to any but a beloved friend; and when he dreams a bad dream, then let him seek protection from God both from its evil and from the wickedness of Satan; and let him spit three times over his left shoulder, and not mention the dream to anyone; then, verily, no evil shall come nigh him.” “The truest dream is the one which you have about day-break.” “Good dreams are one of the parts of prophecy.” (Mishkāt, xxi. c. iv.)

DRESS. Arabic libās (لـبـاس‎). Decent apparel at the time of public worship is enjoined in the Qurʾān, Sūrah vii. 29: “O children of Adam! wear your goodly apparel when ye repair to any mosque.” Excess in apparel and extravagance in dress are reproved, Sūrah vii. 25: “We (God) have sent down raiment to hide your nakedness, and splendid garments; but the raiment of piety, this is the best.”

According to the Hidāyah (vol. iv. p. 92), a dress of silk is not lawful for men, but women are permitted to wear it. Men are prohibited from wearing gold ornaments, and also ornaments of silver, otherwise than a silver signet ring. The custom of keeping handkerchiefs in the hand, except for necessary use, is also forbidden.

The following are some of the sayings of the Prophet with regard to dress, as recorded in the Traditions. Mishkāt, xx. c. i.: “God will not look at him on the Day of Resurrection who shall wear long garments from pride.” “Whoever wears a silken garment in this world shall not wear it in the next.” “God will not have compassion upon him who wears long trousers (i.e. below the ankle) from pride.” “It is lawful for the women of my people to wear silks and gold ornaments, but it is unlawful for the men.” “Wear white clothes, because they are the cleanest, and the most agreeable; and bury your dead in white clothes.”

According to the Traditions, the dress of Muḥammad was exceedingly simple. It is said he used to wear only two garments, the izār, or “under garment” which hung down three or four inches below his knees, and a mantle thrown over his shoulders. These two robes, with the turban, and white cotton drawers, completed the Prophet’s wardrobe. His dress was generally of white, but he also wore green, red, and yellow, and sometimes a black woollen dress. It is said by some traditionists that in the taking of Makkah he wore a black turban. The end of his turban used to hang between his shoulders. And he used to wrap it many times round his head. It is said, “the edge of it appeared below like the soiled clothes of an oil dealer.”

He was especially fond of white-striped yamanī cloth. He once prayed in a silken dress, but he cast it aside afterwards, saying, “it doth not become the faithful to wear silk.” He once prayed in a spotted mantle, but the spots diverted his attention, and the garment was never again worn.

His sleeves, unlike those of the Eastern choga or k͟haftān, ended at the wrist, and he never wore long robes reaching to his ankles.

At first, he wore a gold ring with the stone inwards on his right hand, but it distracted his attention when preaching, and he changed it for a silver one. His shoes, which were often old and cobbled, were of the Ḥaẓramaut pattern, with two thongs. And he was in the habit of praying with his shoes on. [SHOES.]

The example of Muḥammad has doubtless influenced the customs of his followers in the matter of dress, the fashion of which has remained almost the same in eastern Muḥammadan countries centuries past; for although there are varieties of dress in Eastern as well as in European countries, still there are one or two characteristics of dress which are common to all oriental nations which have embraced Islām, namely, the turban folded round the head, the white cotton drawers, or full trousers, tied round the waist by a running string; the qamīs, or “shirt,” the k͟haftān, or “coat,” and the lungī, or “scarf.” The qamīṣ is the same as the ketoneth of the Hebrews, and the χίτων of the Greeks, a kind of long shirt with short sleeves, the ends of which extend over the trousers or drawers, reaching below the knees. The k͟haftān answers to the Hebrew ‏מְעִיל‎ meil (1 Sam. xviii. 4), a tunic worn as an outer garment. The Jewish ‏בֶּגֶד‎ beged, or ‏שִׂמְלָה‎ simlah, must have been similar to the quadrangular piece of cloth still worn as a scarf in Central Asia, and called a lungī, and similar to the ʿabāʾ of the Egyptians. It is worn in various ways, either wrapped round the body, or worn over the shoulders, and sometimes folded as a covering for the head.

The dress of Muḥammadans in Egypt is very minutely described by Mr. Lane in his Modern Egyptians, vol. i. p. 36.

The dress of the men of the middle and higher classes of Egypt consists of the following articles. First a pair of full drawers of linen or cotton tied round the body by a running string or band, the ends of which are embroidered with coloured silks, though concealed by the outer dress. The drawers descend a little below the knees or to the ankles; but many of the Arabs will not wear long drawers, because prohibited by the Prophet. Next is worn a qamīs or “shirt,” with very full sleeves, reaching to the wrist; it is made of linen of a loose open texture, or of cotton stuff, or of muslin, or silk, or of a mixture of silk and cotton in strips, but all white. Over this, in winter, or in cool weather, most persons wear a sudeyree, which is a short vest of cloth, or of striped coloured silk, or cotton, without sleeves. Over the shirt and the sudeyree, or the former alone, is worn a long vest of striped silk or cotton (called kaftān) descending to the ankles, with long sleeves extending a few inches beyond the fingers’ ends, but divided from a point a little above the wrist, or about the middle of the fore-arm, so that the hand is generally exposed, though it may be concealed by the sleeve when necessary, for it is customary to cover the hands in the presence of a person of high rank. Round this vest is wound the girdle, which is a coloured shawl, or a long piece of white-figured muslin.

The ordinary outer robe is a long cloth coat, of any colour, called by the Turks jubbah, but by the Egyptians gibbeh, the sleeves of which reach not quite to the wrist. Some persons also wear a beneesh, which is a robe of cloth with long sleeves, like those of the kaftān, but more ample; it is properly a robe of ceremony, and should be worn over the other cloth coat, but many persons wear it instead of the gibbeh.

Another robe, called farageeyeh, nearly resembles the beneesh; it has very long sleeves, but these are not slit, and it is chiefly worn by men of the learned professions. In cold or cool weather, a kind of black woollen cloak, called abāyeh, is commonly worn. Sometimes this is drawn over the head.

AN EGYPTIAN MAULAWI (LANE).

In winter, also, many persons wrap a muslin or other shawl (such as they use for a turban) about the head and shoulders. The head-dress consists, first, of a small close-fitting cotton cap, which is often changed; next a tarboosh, which is a red cloth cap, also fitting close to the head with a tassel of dark-blue silk at the crown; lastly, a long piece of white muslin, generally figured, or a kashmere shawl, which is wound round the tarboosh. Thus is formed the turban. The kashmere shawl is seldom worn except in cool weather. Some persons wear two or three tarbooshes one over another. A shereef (or descendant of the Prophet) wears a green turban, or is privileged to do so, but no other person; and it is not common for any but a shereef to wear a bright green dress. Stockings are not in use, but some few persons in cold weather wear woollen or cotton socks. The shoes are of thick red morocco, pointed, and turning up at the toes. Some persons also wear inner shoes of soft yellow morocco, and with soles of the same; the outer shoes are taken off on stepping upon a carpet or mat, but not the inner; for this reason the former are often worn turned down at the heel.

AN EGYPTIAN PEASANT (LANE).

The costume of the men of the lower orders is very simple. These, if not of the very poorest class, wear a pair of drawers, and a long and full shirt or gown of blue linen or cotton, or of brown woollen stuff, open from the neck nearly to the waist, and having wide sleeves. Over this some wear a white or red woollen girdle; for which servants often substitute a broad red belt of woollen stuff or of leather, generally containing a receptacle for money. Their turban is generally composed of a white, red, or yellow woollen shawl, or of a piece of coarse cotton or muslin wound round a tarboosh, under which is a white or brown felt cap; but many are so poor, as to have no other cap than the latter, no turban, nor even drawers, nor shoes, but only the blue or brown shirt, or merely a few rags, while many, on the other hand, wear a sudeyree under the blue shirt, and some, particularly servants in the houses of great men, wear a white shirt, a sudeyree, and a kaftān, or gibbeh, or both, and the blue shirt over all. The full sleeves of this shirt are sometimes drawn up by means of a cord, which passes round each shoulder and crosses behind, where it is tied in a knot. This custom is adopted by servants (particularly grooms), who have cords of crimson or dark blue silk for this purpose.

In cold weather, many persons of the lower classes wear an abayeh, like that before described, but coarser and sometimes (instead of being black) having broad stripes, brown and white, or blue and white, but the latter rarely. Another kind of cloak, more full than the abayeh, of black or deep blue woollen stuff, is also very commonly worn, it is called diffeeyeh. The shoes are of red or yellow morocco, or of sheep-skin. Those of the groom are of dark red morocco. Those of the door-keeper and the water-carrier of a private house, generally yellow.

The Muslims are distinguished by the colours of their turbans from the Copts and the Jews, who (as well as other subjects of the Turkish Sultān who are not Muslims) wear black, blue, gray, or light-brown turbans, and generally dull-coloured dresses.

The distinction of sects, families, dynasties, &c., among the Muslim Arabs by the colour of the turban and other articles of dress, is of very early origin. There are not many different forms of turbans now worn in Egypt; that worn by most of the servants is peculiarly formal, consisting of several spiral twists one above another like the threads of a screw. The kind common among the middle and higher classes of the tradesmen and other citizens of the metropolis and large towns is also very formal, but less so than that just before alluded to.

The Turkish turban worn in Egypt is of a more elegant fashion. The Syrian is distinguished by its width. The Ulama and men of religion and letters in general used to wear, as some do still, one particularly wide and formal called a mukleh. The turban is much respected. In the houses of the more wealthy classes, there is usually a chair on which it is placed at night. This is often sent with the furniture of a bride; as it is common for a lady to have one upon which to place her head-dress. It is never used for any other purpose.

The dress of the women of the middle and higher orders is handsome and elegant. Their shirt is very full, like that of the men, but shorter, not reaching to the knees; it is also, generally, of the same kind of material as the men’s shirt, or of coloured crape, sometimes black. A pair of very wide trousers (called shintiyān) of a coloured striped stuff, of silk and cotton, or of printed or plain white muslin, is tied round the hips under the shirt, with a dikkeh; its lower extremities are drawn up and tied just below the knee with running strings, but it is sufficiently long to hang down to the feet, or almost to the ground, when attached in this manner. Over the shirt and shintiyān is worn a long vest (called yelek), of the same material as the latter; it nearly resembles the kaftān of the men, but is more tight to the body and arms; the sleeves also are longer, and it is made to button down the front from the bosom to a little below the girdle, instead of lapping over; it is open, likewise on each side, from the height of the hip downwards.

In general, the yelek is cut in such a manner as to leave half of the bosom uncovered, except by the shirt, but many ladies have it made more ample at that part, and according to the most approved fashion it should be of sufficient length to reach to the ground, or should exceed that length by two or three inches or more. A short vest (called anteree) reaching only a little below the waist, and exactly resembling a yelek of which the lower part has been cut off, is sometimes worn instead of the latter. A square shawl, or an embroidered kerchief, doubled diagonally, is put loosely round the waist as a girdle, the two corners that are folded together hanging down behind; or sometimes the lady’s girdle is folded after the ordinary Turkish fashion, like that of the men, but more loosely.

Over the yelek is worn a gibbeh of cloth or velvet or silk, usually embroidered with gold or with coloured silk; it differs in form from the gibbeh of the men, chiefly in being not so wide, particularly in the fore part, and is of the same length as the yelek. Instead of this, a jacket (called saltah), generally of cloth or velvet, and embroidered in the same manner as the gibbeh, is often worn.

AN EGYPTIAN LADY (LANE).

The head-dress consists of a takeeyeh and tarboosh, with a square kerchief (called faroodeeyeh) of printed or painted muslin or one of crape, wound tightly round, composing what is called a rabtah. Two or more such kerchiefs were commonly used a short time since, and still are sometimes to form the ladies’ turban, but always wound in a high flat shape, very different from that of the turban of the men. A kind of crown, called kurs, and other ornaments, are attached to the ladies’ head-dress. A long piece of white muslin, embroidered at each end with coloured silks and gold, or of coloured crape ornamented with gold thread, &c., and spangles, rests upon the head, and hangs down behind, nearly or quite to the ground; this is called tarhah, it is the head-veil; the face-veil I shall presently describe. The hair, except over the forehead and temples, is divided into numerous braids or plaits, generally from eleven to twenty-five in number, but always of an uneven number; these hang down the back. To each braid of hair are usually added three black silk cords with little ornaments of gold, &c., attached to them. Over the forehead the hair is cut rather short, but two full locks hang down on each side of the face; these are often curled in ringlets and sometimes plaited.

Few of the ladies of Egypt wear stockings or socks, but many of them wear mezz (or inner shoes) of yellow or red morocco, sometimes embroidered with gold. Over these, whenever they step off the matted or carpeted part of the floor, they put on baboog (or slippers) of yellow morocco, with high-pointed toes, or use high wooden clogs or pattens, generally from four to nine inches in height, and usually ornamented with mother-of-pearl or silver, &c.

THE INDIAN BURKA. (A.F. Hole.)

THE EGYPTIAN HABARAH.

The riding or walking attire is called tezyeereh. Whenever a lady leaves the house, she wears, in addition to what has been above described, first, a large, loose gown (called tob or sebleh), the sleeves of which are nearly equal in width to the whole length of the gown; it is of silk, generally of a pink or rose or violet colour. Next is put on the burkaʾ or face-veil, which is a long strip of white muslin, concealing the whole of the face except the eyes, and reaching nearly to the feet. It is suspended at the top by a narrow band, which passes up the forehead, and which is sewed, as are also the two upper corners of the veil, to a band that is tied round the head. The lady then covers herself with a habarah, which, for a married lady, is composed of two breadths of glossy, black silk, each ell-wide, and three yards long; these are sewed together, at or near the selvages (according to the height of the person) the seam running horizontally, with respect to the manner in which it is worn; a piece of narrow black ribbon is sewed inside the upper part, about six inches from the edge, to tie round the head. But some of them imitate the Turkish ladies of Egypt in holding the front part so as to conceal all but that portion of the veil that is above the hands. The unmarried ladies wear a habarah of white silk, or a shawl. Some females of the middle classes, who cannot afford to purchase a habarah, wear instead of it an eezār (izār), which is a piece of white calico, of the same form and size as the former, and is worn in the same manner. On the feet are worn short boots or socks (called khuff), of yellow morocco, and over these the baboog. The dress of a large proportion of those women of the lower orders who are not of the poorest class, consists of a pair of trousers or drawers (similar in form to the shintiyān of the ladies, but generally of plain white cotton or linen), a blue linen or cotton shirt (not quite so full as that of the men), reaching to the feet, a burkaʾ of a kind of coarse black crape, and a dark blue tarhah of muslin or linen. Some wear, over the long shirt, or instead of the latter, a linen tob, of the same form as that of the ladies; and within the long shirt, some wear a short white shirt; and some, a sudeyree also, or an anteree. The sleeves of the tob are often turned up over the head; either to prevent their being incommodious, or to supply the place of a tarhah. In addition to these articles of dress, many women who are not of the very poor classes wear, as a covering, a kind of plaid, similar in form to the habarah, composed of two pieces of cotton, woven in small chequers of blue and white, or cross stripes, with a mixture of red at each end. It is called milayeh; in general it is worn in the same manner as the habarah, but sometimes like the tarhah. The upper part of the black burkaʾ is often ornamented with false pearls, small gold coins, and other little flat ornaments of the same metal (called bark); sometimes with a coral bead, and a gold coin beneath; also with some coins of base silver and more commonly with a pair of chain tassels of brass or silver (called oyoon) attached to the corners. A square black silk kerchief (called asbeh), with a border of red and yellow, is bound round the head, doubled diagonally, and tied with a single knot behind; or, instead of this, the tarboosh and faroodeeyeh are worn, though by very few women of the lower classes.

AN INDIAN ZANANA LADY. (A.F. Hole.)

The best kind of shoes worn by the females of the lower orders are of red morocco, turned up, but generally round, at the toes. The burkaʾ and shoes are most common in Cairo, and are also worn by many of the women throughout lower Egypt; but in Upper Egypt, the burkaʾ is very seldom seen, and shoes are scarcely less uncommon. To supply the place of the former, when necessary, a portion of the tarhah is drawn before the face, so as to conceal nearly all the countenance except one eye.

Many of the women of the lower orders, even in the metropolis, never conceal their faces.

Throughout the greater part of Egypt, the most common dress of the women, merely consists of the blue shirt or tob and tarhah. In the southern parts of Upper Egypt chiefly above Akhmeem, most of the women envelop themselves in a large piece of dark-brown woollen stuff (called a hulāleeyeh), wrapping it round the body and attaching the upper parts together over each shoulder, and a piece of the same they use as a tarhah. This dull dress, though picturesque, is almost as disguising as the blue tinge which women in these parts of Egypt impart to their lips. Most of the women of the lower orders wear a variety of trumpery ornaments, such as ear-rings, necklaces, bracelets, &c., and sometimes a nose-ring.

The women of Egypt deem it more incumbent upon them to cover the upper and back part of the head than the face, and more requisite to conceal the face than most other parts of the person. I have often seen women but half covered with miserable rags, and several times females in the prime of womanhood, and others in more advanced age, with nothing on the body but a narrow strip of rag bound round the hips.

Mr. Burckhardt, in his Notes on the Bedouins and Wahabys (p. 47), thus describes the dress of the Badawīs of the desert:—

In summer the men wear a coarse cotton shirt, over which the wealthy put a kombar, or “long gown,” as it is worn in Turkish towns, of silk or cotton stuff. Most of them, however, do not wear the kombar, but simply wear over their shirt a woollen mantle. There are different sorts of mantles, one very thin, light, and white woollen, manufactured at Bag͟hdād, and called mesoumy. A coarser and heavier kind, striped white and brown (worn over the mesoumy), is called abba. The Bag͟hdād abbas are most esteemed, those made at Hamah, with short wide sleeves, are called boush. (In the northern parts of Syria, every kind of woollen mantle, whether white, black, or striped white and brown, or white and blue, are called meshlakh.) I have not seen any black abbas among the Aenezes, but frequently among the sheikhs of Ahl el Shemal, sometimes interwoven with gold, and worth as much as ten pounds sterling. The Aenezes do not wear drawers; they walk and ride usually barefooted, even the richest of them, although they generally esteem yellow boots and red shoes. All the Bedouins wear on the head, instead of the red Turkish cap, a turban or square kerchief, of cotton or cotton and silk mixed; the turban is called keffie; this they fold about the head so that one corner falls backward, and two other corners hang over the fore part of the shoulders; with these two corners they cover their faces to protect them from the sun’s rays, or hot wind, or rain, or to conceal their features if they wish to be unknown. The keffie is yellow or yellow mixed with green. Over the keffie the Aenezes tie, instead of a turban, a cord round the head; this cord is of camel’s hair, and called akal. Some tie a handkerchief about the head, and it is then called shutfe. A few rich sheikhs wear shawls on their heads of Damascus or Bag͟hdād manufacture, striped red and white; they sometimes also use red caps or takie (called in Syria tarboush), and under those they wear a smaller cap of camel’s hair, called maaraka (in Syria arkye, where it is generally made of fine cotton stuff).

A BEDOUIN (BADAWI) OF THE DESERT.

The Aenezes are distinguished at first sight from all the Syrian Bedouins by the long tresses of their hair. They never shave their black hair, but cherish it from infancy, till they can twist it in tresses, that hang over the cheeks down to the breast: these tresses are called keroun. Some few Aenezes wear girdles of leather, others tie a cord or a piece of rag over the shirt. Men and women wear from infancy a leather girdle around the naked waist, it consists of four or five thongs twisted together into a cord as thick as one’s finger. I heard that the women tie their thongs separated from each other, round the waist. Both men and women adorn the girdles with pieces of ribands or amulets. The Aenezes called it hhakou; the Ahl el Shemal call it bereim. In summer the boys, until the age of seven or eight years, go stark naked; but I never saw any young girl in that state, although it was mentioned that in the interior of the desert the girls, at that early age, were not more encumbered by clothing than their little brothers. In winter, the Bedouins wear over the shirt a pelisse, made of several sheep-skins stitched together; many wear these skins even in summer, because experience has taught them that the more warmly a person is clothed, the less he suffers from the sun. The Arabs endure the inclemency of the rainy season in a wonderful manner. While everything around them suffers from the cold, they sleep barefooted in an open tent, where the fire is not kept up beyond midnight. Yet in the middle of summer an Arab sleeps wrapt in his mantle upon the burning sand, and exposed to the rays of an intensely hot sun. The ladies’ dress is a wide cotton gown of a dark colour, blue, brown, or black; on their heads they wear a kerchief called shauber or mekroune, the young females having it of a red colour, the old of black. All the Ranalla ladies wear black silk kerchiefs, two yards square, called shale kās; these are made at Damascus. Silver rings are much worn by the Aeneze ladies, both in the ears and noses; the ear-rings they call terkie (pl. teraky), the small nose-rings shedre, the larger (some of which are three inches and a half in diameter), khezain. All the women puncture their lips and dye them blue; this kind of tattooing they call bertoum, and apply it likewise in spotting their temples and foreheads. The Serhhān women puncture their cheeks, breasts, and arms, and the Ammour women their ankles. Several men also adorn their arms in the same manner. The Bedouin ladies half cover their faces with a dark-coloured veil, called nekye, which is so tied as to conceal the chin and mouth. The Egyptian women’s veil (berkoa) is used by the Kebly Arabs. Round their wrists the Aeneze ladies wear glass bracelets of various colours; the rich also have silver bracelets and some wear silver chains about the neck. Both in summer and winter the men and women go barefooted.

Captain Burton, in his account of Zanzibar, (vol. i. p. 382), says:—

The Arab’s head-dress is a kummeh or kofiyyāh (red fez), a Surat calotte (afiyyah), or a white skull-cap, worn under a turban (kilemba) of Oman silk and cotton religiously mixed. Usually it is of fine blue and white cotton check, embroidered and fringed with a broad red border, with the ends hanging in unequal lengths over one shoulder. The coiffure is highly picturesque. The ruling family and grandees, however, have modified its vulgar folds, wearing it peaked in front, and somewhat resembling a tiara. The essential body-clothing, and the succedaneum for trousers is an izor (nguo yaku Chini), or loin-cloth, tucked in at the waist, six to seven feet long by two to three broad. The colours are brickdust and white, or blue and white, with a silk border striped red, black, and yellow. The very poor wear a dirty bit of cotton girdled by a hakab or kundāvi, a rope of plaited thongs; the rich prefer a fine embroidered stuff from Oman, supported at the waist by a silver chain. None but the western Arabs admit the innovation of drawers (sūrū­wali). The jama or upper garment is a collarless coat, of the best broad-cloth, leek-green or some tender colour being preferred. It is secured over the left breast by a silken loop, and the straight wide sleeves are gaily lined. The kizbāo is a kind of waistcoat, covering only the bust; some wear it with sleeves, others without. The dishdashes (in Kisawahili Khanzu), a narrow-sleeved shirt buttoned at the throat, and extending to midshin, is made of calico (baftah), American drill and other stuffs called doriyāh, tarabuzun, and jamdani. Sailors are known by khuzerangi, a coarse cotton, stained dingy red-yellow, with henna or pomegranate rind, and rank with wars (bastard saffron) and shark’s oil.

Respectable men guard the stomach with a hizâm, generally a Cashmere or Bombay shawl; others wear sashes of the dust-coloured raw silk, manufactured in Oman. The outer garment for chilly weather is the long tight-sleeved Persian jubbeh, jokhah, or caftān, of European broad-cloth. Most men shave their heads, and the Shafeis trim or entirely remove the moustaches.

The palms are reddened with henna, which is either brought from El Hejāz, or gathered in the plantations. The only ring is a plain cornelian seal and the sole other ornament is a talisman (hirz, in Kisawahili Hirizi). The eyes are blackened with kohl, or antimony of El Shām—here, not Syria, but the region about Meccah—and the mouth crimsoned by betel, looks as if a tooth had just been knocked out.

Dr. Eugene Schuyler, in his work on Turkestan (vol. i. p. 122), says:—

AN AFGHAN CHIEF. (A.F. Hole.)

The dress of the Central Asiatic is very simple. He wears loose baggy trousers, usually made of coarse white cotton stuff fastened tightly round the waist, with a cord and tassel; this is a necessary article of dress, and is never or rarely taken off, at all events not in the presence of another. Frequently, when men are at work, this is the only garment, and in that case it is gradually turned up under the cord, or rolled up on the legs, so that the person is almost naked. Over this is worn a long shirt, either white or of some light-coloured print, reaching almost to the feet, and with a very narrow aperture for the neck, which renders it somewhat difficult to put the head through. The sleeves are long and loose. Beyond this there is nothing more but what is called the chapan, varying in number according to the weather, or the whim of the person. The chapan is a loose gown, cut very sloping in the neck, with strings to tie it together in front; and inordinately large sleeves, made with an immense gore, and about twice as long as is necessary; exceedingly inconvenient, but useful to conceal the hands, as Asiatic politeness dictates. In summer, these are usually made of Russian prints, or of the native alatcha, a striped cotton material, or of silk, either striped or with most gorgeous eastern patterns, in bright colours, especially red, yellow, and green. I have sometimes seen men with as many as four or five of these gowns, even in summer; they say that it keeps out the heat. In winter, one gown will frequently be made of cloth, and lined with fine lamb-skin or fur. The usual girdle is a large handkerchief, or a small shawl; at times, a long scarf wound several times tightly round the waist. The Jews in places under native rule are allowed no girdle, but a bit of rope or cord, as a mark of ignominy. From the girdle hang the accessory knives and several small bags and pouches, often prettily embroidered, for combs, money, &c. On the head there is a skull-cap; these in Tashkent are always embroidered with silk; in Būkhārā they are usually worked with silk, or worsted in cross-stitch in gay patterns. The turban, called tchilpetch, or “forty turns,” is very long; and if the wearer has any pretence to elegance, it should be of fine thin material, which is chiefly imported from England. It requires considerable experience to wind one properly round the head, so that the folds will be well made and the appearance fashionable. One extremity is left to fall over the left shoulder, but is usually, except at prayer time, tucked in over the top. Should this end be on the right shoulder, it is said to be in the Afghān style. The majority of turbans are white, particularly so in Tashkent, though white is especially the colour of the mūllāhs and religious people, whose learning is judged by the size of their turbans. In general, merchants prefer blue, striped, or chequered material.

AN AFGHAN MULLAH.

At home the men usually go barefooted, but on going out wear either a sort of slippers with pointed toes and very small high heels, or long soft boots, the sole and upper being made of the same material. In the street, one must in addition put on either a slipper or golosh, or wear riding-boots made of bright green horse hide, with turned-up pointed toes and very small high heels.

The dress of the women, in shape and fashion, differs but little from that of the men, as they wear similar trousers and shirts, though, in addition, they have long gowns, usually of bright-coloured silk, which extend from the neck to the ground. They wear an innumerable quantity of necklaces, and little amulets, pendents in their hair, and ear-rings, and occasionally even a nose-ring. This is by no means so ugly as is supposed: a pretty girl with a turquoise ring in one nostril is not at all unsightly. On the contrary, there is something piquant in it. Usually, when outside of the houses, all respectable women wear a heavy black veil, reaching to their waists, made of woven horse-hair, and over that is thrown a dark blue, or green khalat, the sleeves of which, tied together at the ends, dangle behind. The theory of this dull dress is, that the women desire to escape observation, and certainly for that purpose they have devised the most ugly and unseemly costume that could be imagined. They are, however, very inquisitive, and occasionally in bye-streets one is able to get a good glance at them before they pull down their veils.

The dress of the citizens of Persia has been often described, both by ancient and modern travellers. That of the men has changed very materially within the last century. The turban, as a head-dress, is now worn by none but the Arabian inhabitants of that country. The Persians wear a long cap covered with lamb’s wool, the appearance of which is sometimes improved by being encircled with a cashmere shawl. The inhabitants of the principal towns are fond of dressing richly. Their upper garments are either made of chintz, silk, or cloth, and are often trimmed with gold or silver lace; they also wear brocade; and in winter their clothes are lined with furs, of which they import a great variety. It is not customary for any person, except the king, to wear jewels; but nothing can exceed the profusion which he displays of these ornaments; and his subjects seem peculiarly proud of this part of royal magnificence. They assert that when the monarch is dressed in his most splendid robes, and is seated in the sun, that the eye cannot gaze on the dazzling brilliancy of his attire.