Page:Muhammad Diyab al-Itlidi - Historical Tales and Anecdotes of the Time of the Early Khalîfahs - Alice Frere - 1873.djvu/94

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
THE ELOQUENCE OF HÁSAN-IBN-ʾALY.
65

and the accession of ʾOmar, Khâlid was deposed, and Abu-ʾObaidah appointed in his stead. Under him ʾAmru held command at the siege of Jerusalem. In A.H. 16, that city surrendered to the Khalîfah in person (see Note *, page 11); after which ʾOmar despatched ʾAmru to invade Egypt. He was, however, delayed in Syria, in order to reduce certain towns and fortresses which still held out; and it was not until A.H. 18 that he entered Egypt.[1] Having conquered that country, he was made its governor, but was, in A.H. 24, dis-
  1. Now that the energy and indomitable perseverance of Mons. de Lesseps has accomplished the great work of cutting the Suez Canal, it is interesting to note that rather more than twelve centuries ago a design to cut a channel through the present Isthmus of Suez, and thereby open a communication between the Arabian Gulf and the Mediterranean Sea, was formed by ʾAmru-ibn-el-ʾAs. It did not, however, meet with the Khalîfah's approval, for he considered that the execution of it would facilitate the entrance of Christians into Arabia.

    It was ʾAmru who, by the order of ʾOmar, destroyed the noble and most valuable library at Alexandria. It was in the Serapœum and suburb Rhacotis, and was called the daughter of that founded by Ptolemy Philadelphus. The latter was burnt, and the four hundred thousand volumes it contained entirely consumed, in the time of Julius Cæsar; and the former, which contained when the other perished at least five hundred thousand MSS., and was afterwards greatly increased, was destroyed, as stated, by ʾAmru-ibn-el-ʾAs, in accordance with 'Omar's fanatical order which said that if these books agreed in all points with the Book of God (el-Kurân), the latter would still be perfect without them, and they would therefore be superfluous; but that if they contained anything repugnant to the doctrine of that book, they ought to be condemned as pernicious, and destroyed. And thus was caused an irreparable loss to science, philosophy, and history.