Even in the Umayyad period, as we have seen, the maxim that Knowledge is Power was strikingly illustrated by the immense social influence which Persian divines exerted in the Muḥammadan community.[509] Nevertheless, true Arabs of the old type regarded these _Mawálí_ and their learning with undisguised contempt. To the great majority of Arabs, who prided themselves on their noble lineage and were content to know nothing beyond the glorious traditions of heathendom and the virtues practised by their sires, all literary culture seemed petty and degrading. Their overbearing attitude towards the _Mawálí_, which is admirably depicted in the first part of Goldziher's _Muhammedanische Studien_, met with a vigorous response. Non-Arabs and Moslem pietists alike appealed to the highest authority--the Koran; and since they required a more definite and emphatic pronouncement than was forthcoming from that source, they put in the mouth of the Prophet sayings like these: "He that speaks Arabic is thereby an Arab"; "whoever of the people of Persia accepts Islam is (as much an Arab as) one of Quraysh." This doctrine made no impression upon the Arabian aristocracy, but with the downfall of the Umayyads the political and social equality of the _Mawálí_ became an accomplished fact. Not that the Arabs were at all disposed to abate their pretensions. They bitterly resented the favour which the foreigners enjoyed and the influence which they exercised. The national indignation finds a voice in many poems of the early ‘Abbásid period, _e.g._:--
"See how the asses which they used to ride They have unsaddled, and sleek mules bestride! No longer kitchen-herbs they buy and sell,[510] But in the palace and the court they dwell; Against us Arabs full of rage and spleen, Hating the Prophet and the Moslem's _dín_."[511]
The side of the non-Arabs in this literary quarrel was vehemently espoused by a party who called themselves the Shu‘úbites (_al-Shu‘úbiyya_),[512] while their opponents gave them the name of Levellers (_Ahlu ’l-Taswiya_), because they contended for the equality of all Moslems without regard to distinctions of race. I must refer the reader who seeks information concerning the history of the movement to Goldziher's masterly study,[513] where the controversial methods adopted by the Shu‘úbites are set forth in ample detail. He shows how the bolder spirits among them, not satisfied with claiming an _equal_ position, argued that the Arabs were absolutely inferior to the Persians and other peoples. The question was hotly debated, and many eminent writers took part in the fray. On the Shu‘úbite side Abú ‘Ubayda, Bírúní, and Ḥamza of Iṣfahán deserve mention. Jáḥiẓ and Ibn Durayd were the most notable defenders of their own Arabian nationality, but the 'pro-Arabs' also included several men of Persian origin, such as Ibn Qutayba, Baládhurí, and Zamakhsharí. The Shu‘úbites directed their attacks principally against the racial pride of the Arabs, who were fond of boasting that they were the noblest of all mankind and spoke the purest and richest language in the world. Consequently the Persian genealogists and philologists lost no opportunity of bringing to light scandalous and discreditable circumstances connected with the history of the Arab tribes or of particular families. Arabian poetry, especially the vituperative pieces (_mathálib_), furnished abundant matter of this sort, which was adduced by the Shu‘úbites as convincing evidence that the claims of the Arabs to superior nobility were absurd. At the same time the national view as to the unique and incomparable excellence of the Arabic language received some rude criticism.