But the case baffles all such advocacy.  The real question is, what was the drift of the prophet’s character?  What was the influence of his professed principles on his own life?  It cannot be denied that his moral trend was downward.  If we credit the traditions of his own followers, he had lived a virtuous life as the husband of one wife,[106] and that for many years.  But after the death of Kadijah he entered upon a career of polygamy in violation of his own law.  He had fixed the limit for all Moslems at four lawful wives; and in spite of the arguments of R. Bosworth Smith, we must regard it as a most damning after-thought that made the first and only exception to accommodate his own weakness.  By that act he placed himself beyond the help of all sophistry, and took his true place in the sober judgment of mankind.  And by a law which is as unerring as the law of gravitation, he became more and more sensual as age advanced.  At the time of his death he was the husband of eleven wives.  We are not favored with a list of his concubines:[107] we only know that his system placed no limit upon the number.[108] Now, if a prophet claiming direct inspiration could break his own inspired laws for his personal accommodation; if, when found guilty of adultery, he could compel his friend and follower to divorce his wife that he might take her; if upon each violation of purity and decency he did not shrink from the blasphemy of claiming a special revelation which made God the abettor of his vices, and even represented Him as reproving and threatening his wives for their just complaints—­if all this does not stamp a man as a reckless impostor, what further turpitude is required?

At the same time it is evident that constant discrimination is demanded in judging of the character of Mohammed.  It is not necessary to assume that he was wholly depraved at first, or to deny that for a time he was the good husband that he is represented to have been, or that he was a sincere and enthusiastic reformer, or even that he may have interpreted some of his early hallucinations as mysterious messages from heaven.  At various times in his life he doubtless displayed noble sentiments and performed generous acts.  But when we find him dictating divine communications with deliberate purpose for the most villainous objects, when we find the messages of Gabriel timed and graded to suit the exigencies of his growing ambition, or the demands of his worst passions, we are forced to a preponderating condemnation.  The Mohammed of the later years is a remorseless tyrant when occasion requires, and at all times the slave of unbridled lust.  Refined and cultivated Mohammedan ladies—­I speak from testimony that is very direct—­do not hesitate to condemn the degrading morals of their prophet, and to contrast him with the spotless purity of Jesus; “but then,” they add, “God used him for a great purpose, and gave him the most exalted honor among men.”  Alas! it is the old argument so often employed in many lands.  Success, great intellect, grand achievements gild all moral deformity, and win the connivance of dazzled minds.  In this case, however, it is not a hero or a statesman, but an alleged prophet of God, that is on trial.