Not of a nature to court female influence.

The permission Mahomet granted to men to have many wives, and to whip them when they were not obedient, and to divorce them upon any displeasure, was a law very prejudicial to the female sex. He took care to deny women the liberty of having many men, neither would be allow them to part from their husbands, though they were troublesome, at least unless they consented. He ordained, “that a woman divorced could not marry more than twice; and that if she were divorced from the third husband, and the first would not take her again, she should never marry all her life time.” He was so far from permitting them to show their bosoms, or at least their necks, that he would not suffer their feet to be seen, except by their husbands. It is true, that in this he only retained

the custom observed in Arabia; for we learn from. TertuIlian, that the women of that country did thus cover their face, so that they could make use but of one eye. “Judicabunt vos Arabiœ fœminæ Ethnicæ, quæ non caput, sed faciem quoque ita totam tegunt, ut ano oculo liberato contentæ sint dimidiam frui lucem, quàm totam faciem prostituere.” I believe it is a mistake to say, that Mahomet permitted men to marry as many women as they would; for he does so moderate and limit his proposal, that it plainly appears he had no mind that they should marry above four, and that he allowed them so many, provided they thought themselves capable of keeping them peaceably. But it is no mistake to affirm that he set no bounds to the number of their concubines; and indeed the Turks may have as many as they are capable of maintaining. Is not the condition of the four wives deplorable, under a law which gives the husband power to divert what is their due to as many handsome slaves as he can purchase? Does not this diversion of the matrimonial stock reduce them to the greatest want, and to an extreme indigence? Let none tell me of the provision the law has made for them, by appointing the four wives to lie once every week with their husband. “So that, if any one be found that has not enjoyed this privilege for a whole week, she has a right to demand it on Thursday night in the following week, and she may prosecute her husband in case of a refusal, in the courts of justice;”—for notwithstanding this privilege, the law is very harsh. What pleasure can any one take in a matter of this nature, when it is obtained only in the execution of a sentence from a magistrate? This ought not to be a work that is commanded; when it is done only by way of duty, there can be no great satisfaction in it. We must therefore confess that Mahomet did not use the sex well.

But as to women, he taught many other strange

things: for he not only made them miserable in this world, but deprived them of the joys of paradise. He not only excluded them from that place, but he turned its joy into an occasion of sorrow; for it is pretended that he taught, that the pleasures of marriage which men shall enjoy after this life, shall be furnished them by virgins of a ravishing beauty, whom God creates in Heaven, and who are destined for them from all eternity; and as to women, that they shall not enter into paradise, nor approach nearer to it than is necessary to discover across the pallisadoes what shall be done there. Thus their eyes shall be witnesses of the happiness of men, and of the pleasure they shall take with these celestial maids. What can be imagined more grievous? Is not this to be ingenious in mortifying our neighbours? Lucretius tells us, that it is pleasant to see a shipwreck when it is not feared; but all things are quite contrary in Mahomet’s system for women; the sight of a happiness of which they are deprived must needs afflict them, and it will be so much the more grievous to them, as well because it will discover the pleasures which another enjoys, as because they will see the happiness which they want; for the torment of jealousy proceeds not so much from the want of a thing, as from knowing that others enjoy it. I have heard many people say, and I think I have read it, that the damned shall have a very exact idea of the happiness of paradise, that so the knowledge of the great joys which they have missed, may augment their despair; and that the devil shall make use of this artifice to render them more miserable. This is to understand very well the way of heightening the pains of the miserable: and therefore we may say in a word, that Mahomet could not have discovered his cruelty more maliciously; for he would have women see at a distance, that which can only create unprofitable temptation, and insupportable grief.

However to declare the matter as it is indeed, I must acquaint you, that neither the Koran, nor learned Mahometans say, that the women are excluded from paradise; yet I thought I might relate what so many authors have asserted on the subject.

There is some occasion to wonder why the Mahommetan religion should be so unkind to the female sex, since it was founded by a man so excessively lascivious, and since his laws were deposited in the hands of a woman, and another was to give the interpretation of them as she pleased. We have already shown that Ayesha was looked upon as a prophetess and an oracle; and that she was indeed a pope among the Mahometans. Mr Herbelot relates, “that she had among them a very great authority, even in matters of doctrine and religion, and that they often had recourse to her to learn some tradition of Mahomet, and that she undertook to condemn the Caliph Othman for impiety.” She might then have settled matters upon a footing very suitable to women. Whence then came it to pass, that she did not do it? Was she of the humour of certain women, who are the first and most fierce in defaming their own sex? May this be looked upon as a proof of that which is sometimes said, “that the authority of men is never greater than when a woman is seated on the throne, and that the authority of women is never greater than when the sceptre is in the hands of a man?” For my part, I know nothing of the matter; let speculative men exercise their wit as much as they please upon this question; but consider, I pray you, the influence of the fair sex upon the foundation of Mahomet, and how the passions of a woman very quickly spread in it the seeds of discord. Follow the tracks of Ali’s schism, and you will find the lewdness of Ayesha whom he accused, to be the source of it; this woman never forgave him: she hindered him three times successively from arriving at the dignity of caliph, and after he had obtained it,

she made a league against him, and put herself at the head of 30,000 men. She lost the battle, and was taken, and sent back to Medina, where she died, and was buried near to Mahomet; but the league she had made to revenge the death of Othman, died not with her. Ali was at last killed upon this pretence, and thence arose a great schism, which still continues.