are living under direct Moslem rule, namely: under the Turkish government, 15,528,800; under the Sultan of Morocco, 5,600,000; under the Emir of Afghanistan, 4,500,000; under the Shah of Persia, 8,000,000; and under independent rulers in Arabia, outside the Turkish Empire, 3,500,000. Once Moslem empire was coextensive with the Moslem faith. In 911 A. D. the caliphate included Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Tunis, Tripoli, Egypt, Asia Minor, Syria, Arabia, Persia, Turkestan, Afghanistan, Baluchistan, and the region around the Caspian Sea. To-day the empire of the caliphs has shrunk to such small proportions that it covers only Turkey, Tripoli, and scarcely one-fifth of the area of Arabia, including a population of less than 16,000,000. The balance of political power in the Mohammedan world rests with England, France, Russia and the Netherlands. Each of these powers has more Moslem subjects than there are in the whole Turkish Empire. In regard to the remaining states under independent Moslem rule, it does not require the gift of prophecy to see yet greater political changes, with the possible result of adding still more millions to the number of Moslems under Christian rule and to the burden of responsibility thrust upon Christian rulers by God's providence for the evangelization of His Moslem world.

We turn next to the social and intellectual movements in the Moslem world since the Cairo Conference.

III. SOCIAL AND INTELLECTUAL MOVEMENTS The one great characteristic of the Moslem world to-day is unrest. Like the prodigal son in the parable, Islam is coming to itself and is becoming conscious of its need. Three great movements in the Moslem world at the present time are all of them indicative of this unrestthe development of the great dervish orders, the growth

of the pan-Islamic spirit, and the attempt of the new Islam to rationalize the old orthodoxy-all of them due to the same cause, namely, the readjustment of Islam to the progress of modern thought and Western civilization, either by way of protest and defiance, or of accommodation and compromise. As Ismael Bey Gasprinsky expressed it in the Tartar paper Terjumen, "The world is constantly changing and progressing, and the Moslems are left behind for many, many miles. We need to create a general awakening of the hitherto sleeping Mohammedans.' Or in the words of Sheikh Ali Yusef, the editor of the leading Moslem journal in Cairo, before a large assembly of Moslems, "The Christians have left the Mohammedans behind in every walk of life. The latter can hardly boast the possession of a single steamship or bank, because the Moslem is not alive to his duty, is not united in his endeavour, and is too content to follow a leader without attempting to rise to the same place as the other nations." Similar voices are heard in India from time to time.

We shall hear more of these social and intellectual movements in Islam when they are specially dealt with on the fifth day of our Conference, but a general survey of the Moslem world must make mention of some of them. Beginning with Western Asia, we find a movement which can broadly be described as one towards freedom, first political and then intellectual, yet it is worthy of remark that the revolutionary parties both in Persia and Turkey were at first not anti-Islamic nor panIslamic, neither professedly religious nor irreligious in character. They were the voice of the people crying for liberty, and the expression of general social discontent. For many years the better class of Persians, Turks and Arabs had freely acknowledged the ignorance, injustice and weakness of the Moslem world, and were groping

for a remedy. The fuel was ready in the educated classes who had learned to think. The American missionaries helped to wake up Turkey. The victory of Japan over Russia had its influence throughout all Asia and proved to Turkey and Persia, at least to their own satisfaction, that Asiatics can hold their own against Europe, and that a new nationalism is the only remedy against threatened foreign occupation. The question then arose, How shall the new nationalism deal with the old religion?

"One

The brief history of constitutional government in Persia, and the reaction which has already begun in Turkey prove the reality and the intensity of this coming conflict. The Persian Constitution was ready for adoption when the leaders were compelled to preface the document with an article accepting the authority of the religious law of Islam as final, including the traditional law of Shiah interpretation, as well as the Koran. might as well bind together the American Constitution and the Talmud," says Dr. Shedd, "and make the latter supreme and inviolable." It has yet to be proved, according to Lord Cromer in his "Modern Egypt," whether Islam can assimilate civilization without succumbing in the process; his belief is that "Reformed Islam is Islam no longer."

The great political question in Persia, Turkey, Egypt and Algiers to-day is simply whether the old Koran or the new democratic aspirations shall have the right of way. Although the Sheikh-el-Islam has publicly declared that "The Turkish Parliament is the most exact application of the Koranic law, and constitutional government is the highest possible illustration of the caliphate," we have a right to doubt his assertion—remembering Adana and the thirteen centuries of Moslem intolerance and despotism. Those who read the Koran in Morocco, Eastern Turkey and Arabia have not yet

discovered its constitutional principles, and the reaction against the new Sultan and the new parliament is already deep and wide-spread. One of the prominent dailies in Cairo was lately advocating the restoration of Abd ul Hamid, while in Yemen a new Mahdi has appeared, whose followers number twenty-five thousand and who is overrunning the province. He preaches the old religion; by his authority liars are punished by the pulling out of the tongue and thieves by the amputation of the hand.

The conflict between the old and the Young Turkish Party is not only inevitable, but is irreconcilable. Both parties are animated by the same patriotism, but their ideals are wholly different and contradictory. For the Old Turks Islam is an end; for the New Turks it is not an end, but only a means. The New Turks are hoping to put the new wine into the old bottles by carefully diluting it, while the Old Turks have no use for the new wine at all. In the present Turkish Parliament out of two hundred and fifty-six members, two hundred and thirteen are Moslems, and it would be safe to say that those who are true believers are opposed to radical reform and will fight to the end to make Islam the only religion of the state. Dr. Martin Hartmann, who is surely an unprejudiced witness, sees no future for a reformed Islam in Turkey.'

The clash of modern civilization with the teachings of Islam is evident on every hand. When it was proposed to adopt the Gregorian calendar and European time for Turkey, the clerical party made such an uproar that the President of the Chamber was compelled to leave the House and the motion was withdrawn. So the days con

In his recent book he says: 'Bei den Turken tritt an Stelle des Islams ein Nichts, Kopf und Herz sind leer. Die Osmanlis sind keine Stutze des Islams den sie auserlich vertreten denn sie entbehren selbst der

Stutze."

tinue to begin at sunset and watches must be reset every day because of the Koran. The new railway to Mecca is fitted up with a chapel car in the shape of a mosque. This car allows pilgrims to perform their devotions during the journey and has a minaret six feet high. Around the sides are verses from the Koran; a chart at one end indicates the direction of prayer, and at the other end are vessels for the ritual ablutions. But the orthodox Arabs do not consider such prayer de luxe in accord with Mohammed's teachings and are tearing up the railway! As long as Mohammed and his teachings are the ideals of conduct and the standard of character there must be this clash between modern civilization and the unchangeable standards of Arabian medievalism. If it is impossible as it seems to change the curriculum of El Azhar University in Cairo without a riot, will that institution or Christian colleges control the future thought of Western Asia? Or to take another illustration: A large section of the Egyptian press defended the conduct of the Sultan of Morocco in his mutilation of prisoners against the protest of European consulates, because they said it was in full accord with the religious law of Islam. The wind blew from the opposite quarter when a committee of Young Turks protested against the Vali of Salonica because of his excessive zeal in enforcing the state religion in the matter of the use of the veil and the observance of the month of fasting. While the official pronouncement of the Grand Mufti in the case of Wardani, the murderer of Boutros Pasha, seemed to indicate that even in the intellectual capital of the Moslem world jurisprudence can make no progress, but is tied to the procrustean bed of Tradition and the Koran.

The modernist movement, as Mr. Gairdner showed in his address at the Edinburgh Conference, touches every Moslem who receives education on Western lines, whether