[FN#434] He called himself “Nabiyun ummi” = illiterate prophet; but only his most ignorant followers believe that he was unable to read and write.  His last words, accepted by all traditionists, were “Aatini dawata wa kalam” (bring me ink-case and pen); upon which the Shi’ah or Persian sectaries base, not without probability, a theory that Mohammed intended to write down the name of Ali as his Caliph or successor when Omar, suspecting the intention, exclaimed, “The Prophet is delirious; have we not the Koran?” thus impiously preventing the precaution.  However that may be, the legend proves that Mohammed could read and write even when not “under inspiration.”  The vulgar idea would arise from a pious intent to add miracle to the miraculous style of the Koran.

[FN#435] I cannot but vehemently suspect that this legend was taken from much older traditions.  We have Jubal the semi-mythical who, “by the different falls of his hammer on the anvil, discovered by the ear the first rude music that pleased the antediluvian fathers.”  Then came Pythagoras, of whom Macrobius (lib. ii ) relates how this Graeco-Egyptian philosopher, passing by a smithy, observed that the sounds were grave or acute according to the weights of the hammers; and he ascertained by experiment that such was the case when different weights were hung by strings of the same size.  The next discovery was that two strings of the same substance and tension, the one being double the length of the other, gave the diapason-interval, or an eighth; and the same was effected from two strings of similar length and size, the one having four times the tension of the other.  Belonging to the same cycle of invention-anecdotes are Galileo’s discovery of the pendulum by the lustre of the Pisan Duomo; and the kettle-lid, the falling apple and the copper hook which inspired Watt, Newton and Galvani.

[FN#436] To what an absurd point this has been carried we may learn from Ibn Khallikan (i. 114).  A poet addressing a single individual does not say “My friend!” or “My friends!” but “My two friends!” (in the dual) because a Badawi required a pair of companions, one to tend the sheep and the other to pasture the camels.

[FN#437] For further details concerning the Sabab, Watad and Fasilah, see at the end of this Essay the learned remarks of Dr. Steingass.

[FN#438] e.g., the Mu’allakats of “Amriolkais,” Tarafah and Zuhayr compared by Mr. Lyall (Introduction to Translations) with the metre of Abt Vogler, e.g.,

     Ye know why the forms are fair, ye hear how the tale is told

[FN#439] e.g., the Poem of Hareth which often echoes the hexameter

[FN#440] Gladwin, p. 80.

[FN#441] Gladwin (p. 77) gives only eight, omitting F ’ l which he or his author probably considers the Muzahaf, imperfect or apocoped form of F ’ l n, as M f ’ l of M f ’ l n.  For the infinite complications of Arabic prosody the Khafif (soft breathing) and Sahih (hard breathing); the Sadr and Aruz (first and last feet), the Ibtida and Zarb (last foot of every line); the Hashw (cushion-stuffing) or body part of verse, the ’Amud al-Kasidah or Al-Musammat (the strong) and other details I must refer readers to such specialists as Freytag and Sam.  Clarke (Prosodia Arabica), and to Dr. Steingass’s notes infra.