Stories may be collected among the peasantry which are evidently garbled versions of Scriptural episodes. The actors are sometimes local worthies, such as Sheikh Samat, whose tomb seems to be the supposed sepulchre of Samson, which was shown by the Jews in the fourteenth century; in other cases they are the companions of the Prophet, and especially Imâm ’Aly, while the enemies of the Faithful are represented as Christians.
It has been thought by some that these tales are really ancient and of value; but I believe that a much more probable origin is to be found in the teachings of mediæval monks. In more than one case the sites connected with these stories were also recognised in the middle ages; as, for instance, the so-called tomb of Samson—not in Zoreah, but in Gaza—now called by the Moslems “Aly the Enslaved,” and corresponding to the mediæval tomb of Samson also at one time shown in Gaza. The site of the Tomb of David in Jerusalem can also be traced to a Christian tradition of late date, and so with many others too numerous to mention; and there is, as far as I have been able to find, no proof that any of these garbled versions of Bible events are genuinely ancient or derived from native tradition. Even the legend of the Fenish, or Philistines, which seems to be the most probably genuine tradition yet collected, is of dubious origin, for the peasants say that the Fenish were Christians, and the sites connected with the name are invariably Crusading towns or fortresses.
The very general preservation of mediæval and Byzantine sacred places among the peasantry is evidence of the great influence which the monks in the middle ages must have possessed. Jerome speaks of the “great number of the brethren” living in Palestine in his days, and the ruins found in every part of the country show that from the fifth to the thirteenth centuries it must have literally swarmed with monks and hermits. The peasantry seem to retain almost an affectionate memory of the convents; the titles “Monastery of Good Luck,” “Charitable Convent,” etc., show the appreciation in which these institutions were formerly held; and perhaps the sincere efforts of many good men for the conversion of the heathen may still be traced in the blind veneration which is bestowed by Moslems, who “know not what they worship,” on sanctuaries which were, as their modern names show, originally dedicated to the patron saints of the now despised and hated Christians, who once ruled the land.
The Mukâms may be divided into the following six groups. First, there are the places Sacred to well-known Scriptural characters, the sites being generally derived from Jewish tradition, and apparently authentic—as, for instance, the tombs of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Eleazar, and Phinehas. Noah also has many Mukâms in Palestine; and to one, at least, is attached a curious tradition of the Flood, which is supposed to have welled up from a spring near the sacred place. Seth, Shem and Ham have also Mukâms in Philistia, and the twelve patriarchs have places sacred to them, with the exception of Gad, Issachar, Asher, and Naphtali. The tomb of Joshua seems also to be preserved, as noticed in a former chapter.
The second class of Mukâms consists of sacred places derived from Christian tradition, which, as above shown, is a very large one.
The third includes many saints who cannot easily be identified, as the Prophets Kamil, ’Anîn, Baliân, and Nurân, with many others. In this class many pairs of saints may be included, as “the Sheikh of the Olive” and his mother; Sheikh Waheb (“the devoted”) with his sister S’adeh, and many others, survivals perhaps of the old Phœnician duads and triads: to this class we may add a number of female saints who have descriptive names.
The fourth class consists of well-known historical characters now held in high veneration, including the various Companions of the Prophet, and many yet more modern personages, such as Sheikh Shibleh and Sheikh Abu Ghôsh, who were famous bandits in 1700 and 1813 respectively.
The fifth class of Sheikhs, consisting of those with descriptive titles, is, perhaps, in some respects the most important; for from these we learn most of the common ideas of the peasantry as to their saints. Thus we have among them Sheikhs called the Persian, the Median, the Æthiopian, the raingiver, the healer, the inspired, the madman, the idiot, the protector, the just, the wise, the serpent-charmer, the pilgrim, and the champion, with a host of others, showing how varied are the supposed characters and powers of these invisible guardians.
The sixth class includes those Sheikhs with common names, such as Abraham, David, Joseph, Mohammed, etc., which, as a rule, are of but little importance.
We have, then, in this great Pantheon of local deities, a jumble of traditions, Jewish, Christian and Moslem, showing the various influences which have successively acted on the peasantry. There are, indeed, indications of possibly ancient traditions, but the large majority at least of those current among the peasantry are probably traceable to monkish origin, and in many cases are evidently not older than the middle ages.