Persian Letters

Rhedi writes to Usbek on the decline in the world’s population, especially in Europe and Asia: “It’s as if I am witnessing the aftermath of plague, and of famine” (150). Usbek replies by delineating the creationist concept of time and ponders “that such cataclysms have occurred frequently on earth, ever since the creation of the world” (152). He next writes about how the Muslim precept that a man will have at least four wives—“who are more likely to exhaust than to satisfy” (153)—must enfeeble his virility, rendering him less productive. Additionally, eunuchs and virginal female slaves all contribute to lower reproduction. In his succeeding letter, Usbek notes that Christian slaves were encouraged to reproduce and organize communities, each having a trade, thus enabling both master and slave to pursue their sexual desires without having to keep women hidden or retain many guards to watch them.

Usbek next talks about the Catholic tenet of forbidding divorce, which has negatively influenced populations as couples are forced to spend their whole life “burdened with each other” (155) instead of pursuing other people once their match is spent. He claims the Spartan practice of exchanging wives would be quite beneficial and writes that the many priests, monks, and nuns vowed to chastity in Catholicism are another cause for decreased population. This he contrasts with Protestant countries and the changes made by reviewing the roots of the common Christian religion in allowing priests to marry. Thus, “the Protestants will become richer and more powerful, and the Catholics weaker” (158). Protestant countries are better populated, gather more tax, and better cultivate their lands. In Catholic countries, the clergy own most of the land and wealth, which renders it useless: “No longer is there any circulation, or any commerce, or any arts and science, or any manufacturing” (159).

In his next letter, Usbek turns to Africa. He associates selling people into American slavery with reduced population, which he compares with the fact that America does not gain much because the slaves die by the thousands there. He condemns the American desire to mine for gold and silver, which are useless and only symbolic of stature. His next letter turns to the Jews and how their religious hope of begetting a second Lord keeps them from vanishing, although many peoples have persecuted them throughout history. China is populated because the children “look upon their parents as gods” (160). Muslims see themselves as travelers and rarely stay in one place. In Europe the rule of primogeniture makes people care only for the first-born child. Furthering the argument, Usbek looks at the savage peoples and their reluctance to do any work, which often causes famines. Their villages are additionally very isolated, and women have a “brutal habit” (161) of aborting children. He then speaks against colonization. Usbek’s idea is to send Indians to Spain instead of the opposite, to eliminate the vacuum left by the Moors leaving Spain. As to “distant conquests” (163), he describes how Spaniards have killed most American Indians, which allows them to retain the now empty territories. The Portuguese were benevolent but soon chased out of the countries they colonized. The Dutch urged locals to rebel and used that against them. In his final letter on population, Usbek continues with examples of Holland and Switzerland, where liberty, tolerance, equality, and wealth are conducive to the “propagation of the species” (164). He claims “such is not the case in countries subject to an arbitrary power” (165).

After his detailed thoughts on declining population, Usbek writes a brief note to Mehemet Ali, asking about the separation of Muslims into Sunnis and Shiites and expressing hope that such divisions can be healed. He also sends a letter to Rhedi on monarchs and insatiable men who seek their favor. Usbek voices a sarcastic idea that to satisfy the greed of many, food for the poor must be rationed, lands should not be cultivated, and coats should only be bought every four years.

Rica writes to *** that it is a “delicate matter to portray the pleasures” (166) of heavenly rewards in religions. He recounts a story of an Indian woman who wants to immolate herself after her husband’s death, even though the custom was abolished when the Muslims took over that part of the country. In conversation with a Muslim priest and governor, she learns that her reward for continuing to live will be reunion with her husband. She quickly reconsiders and becomes Muslim instead. In a note to Usbek, Rica avers that princes in power require respect and not affection; sympathy is for when they fall from grace. He then writes to Ibben about the persuasive and corruptive role of ministers, since “if the prince commits an evil deed, it has almost always been suggested to him” (169). Ministers use the princes’ passions to misguide them according to their own devious plans.

To Usbek, Rica relates meeting a geometer who is so preoccupied with his craft that he never cares about the human implications of seeking precision and perfection, nor does he respect the efforts of others who possess different skills. Where one sees a beautiful castle, the geometer sees a lack of proportions; as another complains of ruin by flood, the geometer is satisfied that he was proven right. In the final instance, the geometer criticizes a translator for using his own words to express other people’s thoughts, comparing him to a copper version of a gold coin.

To ***, Rica talks of “newsmongers”—sophisticated gossips who handwrite news they like and exchange papers in the park. He attaches one such letter to a minister from a newsmonger who claims to have predicted all the major events occurring in Europe.

Rhedi writes to Rica on the origins of republicanism. In the melting pot of nations “arose, out of the debris of many monarchies, those republics that brought such glory to Greece” (175). As opposed to Europe, “Asia and Africa have always been oppressed by despotism” (175). Rome and Carthage are examples of once powerful republics.

Rica’s next letter is to *** details meeting an assortment of men in a coffee house: a landowner with no ready cash; a man with money but no lands; one who borrowed money and is desperate now he has it back, as paper money has depreciated. Rica also sees a genealogist who “imagines he’s going to create as many gentlefolk as he chooses” (177), a pessimistic journalist, and a similar philosopher.

In his five succeeding letters to ***, Rica describes a monastery library and a monk surrounded by many books that he never reads or cares about, but who keeps a “useless” librarian who does no work for the monastery but study these books. The next day Rica gets the librarian to tell him about the books in the library. The librarian first mentions interpretations of the holy book: “There are nearly as many points in doubt as there are lines” (179)—all attempts by interpreters to confirm their own beliefs. There are also books by casuists, ethicists, and mystics. The rest of the library contains books by grammarians, glossarists, exegetes, orators, and geometers. Topics covered include metaphysics, physics, medicine, anatomy, chemistry, science (“occult ignorance” [181]), and astrology. All these are somewhat ridiculed in the librarian’s speech. In the next room there are books on modern history (church and popes), the Roman Empire, Germany, France, Spain, England, Holland, Italy, Switzerland, Venice, Genoa, and Poland. Again, the librarian has ironic comments for most of these texts. Then come the poets: epic poetry, dramatic poetry (“masters of the passions” [184]), comic and tragic, lyric poets, writers of idylls and eclogues, and the most dangerous—writers of epigrams, “tiny, sharp arrows that inflict deep wounds” (184). Finally there are novels (they are the worst—unnatural).