In spite of Abd el Hamid's pious appeals to the Sheriat they look upon
him as one who troubleth Islam. He is the representative of the party
most bitterly opposed to all of good. They know that as long as there is
an Ottoman Caliph, whether his name be Abd el Aziz or Abd el Hamid,
moral progress is impossible, that the ijtahad cannot be re-opened, and
that no such reformation of doctrine and practice can be attempted as
would alone enable their faith to cope with modern infidelity. They see
moreover that, notwithstanding his affected legality, Abd el Hamid's
rule is neither juster nor more in accordance with the Mussulman law
than that of his predecessors. The same vices of administration are
found in it, and the same recklessness for his Mussulman subjects'
welfare. Of all the lands of Islam his own are probably those where Abd
el Hamid has now the most scanty following. Constantinople is after all
his weak point, for the Young Turkish school is far from dead, the
vicissitudes of life and death follow each other closely on the
Bosphorus, and the liberal party can better afford than the reactionary
to wait. The death or fall of Abd el Hamid, whenever it may happen,
would immediately decide a movement counter to the Ottoman Caliphate.
Pages:
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102