CHAPTER VII.
THE SITUATION IN PERSIA (1896).
I.
—Shrine of Shah Abdul Azim
—Death of Nasr-ed-Din Shah
—Jemal-ed-Din in Tehran
—Shiahs and Sunnis
—Islam in Persia.
The famous shrine and sanctuary of Shah Abdul Azim, about five miles from Tehran, is a very popular place of pilgrimage with the inhabitants of the town, and its close neighbourhood to the crowded capital makes it a great holiday, as well as religious, resort. This shrine has been specially favoured by many sovereigns, and particularly by those of the present dynasty. On the Mohammedan special weekly day of prayer and mosque services, Friday, called Juma, or the day of the congregation, Shah Abdul Azim is visited by great numbers of people.
On Friday, May 1, this sanctuary was the scene of one of the saddest events which has ever happened in Persia—the murder within its sacred precincts of Nasr-ed-Din Shah, a monarch who was about to celebrate the jubilee of a reign which will always be remembered, not only for its remarkable length, but also for its peaceful character and general popularity. The proof of this popularity is that Nasr-ed-Din Shah was able to leave his country on three occasions for visits to Europe, and returned each time to receive a welcome from his subjects. This in itself is unprecedented in Eastern history.
I little thought when I had the honour of conversing with him in October last that it was possible that a King so admired and loved by his people, and then looking forward with pride and pleasure to the celebration of his approaching jubilee, should perish in their midst by the hand of an assassin within five days of the event.
Passing over what in the early years of his reign, through the exigencies of the times and the pitfalls of intrigue, led to the shedding of blood, we see in his later years a reluctance to inflict capital or severe punishment which almost amounted to a serious fault. I remember an instance of this in the case of a notorious highway robber, guilty of many murders, who was spared so long, that it was only on the bad effect of leniency becoming prominently dangerous to traders and travellers that the extreme penalty was sanctioned. I have already mentioned how the people had learnt to put their trust in the late Shah's desire to protect them against oppressive government in the provinces, and how he had made himself popular with the military and nomad tribes. The crime which has caused his death will undoubtedly be regarded as sacrilege, both with reference to the life which was taken and the sanctuary which it violated. And the abhorrence of the crime will strengthen what it was intended to end or weaken, viz., the influence and power of the Kajar dynasty. With the impressionable Persians there will be but one feeling, of shuddering horror that such a thing could be done by one of their own faith, who was a subject of their Sovereign.
A criminal of the deepest dye can abide with perfect impunity in the Mohammedan sanctuary, and the tranquillity of this sacred safety, we are told, brings reflection and repentance to work the redemption of many from evil ways. Thus we can understand how horror-struck the nation must be at the thought of the Shah being mortally wounded while in the pious act of kneeling in reverence on passing the chain which marks the actual line where the 'bast' or sanctuary begins.
The murder is said to have been prompted by the well-known agitator, Jemal-ed-Din, who, though called an Afghan, is really a native of Hamadan, in Western Persia; but having travelled and resided a short time in Afghanistan, the term 'Afghani' was added to his name. He was well known in Tehran in 1891 for his vehement and violent public speaking against all Western innovations. I have seen it stated that it was owing to him the tobacco monopoly was withdrawn, as he had roused the Moullas throughout Persia, and wellnigh brought about a revolution. Jemal-ed-Din no doubt took a strong part at Tehran in the agitation, but he was in no way such a prominent leader of it as has been represented. The sudden introduction of systematic labour and Excise regulations under foreign direction, by which it was said a few depots were to displace the numerous retail shops and stalls, at once created a hostile army of unemployed small owners of hereditary businesses, who worked on the fears and feelings of the mass of the people. The Moullas and guild-masters then took the lead, and brought about the cancelment of the concession. All this I have previously described. It suited well the nature of a stormy petrel like Jemal-ed-Din to find himself in Tehran at that time, and he became an inflammatory public orator of the hottest kind. At first he confined himself to speaking against the tobacco monopoly and all European enterprise, and on his violent speeches being made the subject of some remonstrance, the Shah said that the Persians had long enjoyed great liberty of speech, and with them words generally took the place of deeds. But this freedom was misunderstood by Jemal, who gradually grew bolder, until his revolutionary utterances went beyond all endurance. He scarcely veiled his contempt for the Crown, and his opinion that all should combine to rid Persia of the rule of the Shah and the continuance of the Kajar dynasty. He was warned, but would not listen to reason; he was then arrested, and informed of the decision to deport him from Persia. On the day of his departure from Tehran under escort, he managed to make his escape, and took sanctuary in the same shrine of Shah Abdul Azim where the Shah was mortally wounded on May 1 by his follower, Mirza Mohamed Reza. Jemal opened negotiations with the Government from his asylum, and was finally persuaded to leave Persia quietly. It was said that he received generous treatment in the matter of his leaving, but I am aware that he stated he had cause for complaint on this head. We must bear in mind, however, that he was a hot hater of the Shah, and a thorough 'irreconcilable.' On quitting Persia he went to Constantinople, where he appeared to be allowed such free expression of disrespect to his Sovereign that the Shah addressed a remonstrance to the Sultan, who stated in reply that Jemal was leaving for some remote place to employ himself in literary work.