EDRISI, or ALmuss, the most eminent of the geographers who have written in the Arabic lan guage. There is no individual of equal eminence over whose life there bangs a deeper vell of mYs tery, the various parts of it affording rather sub jects of oontrovers/4 learned than of precise =formation to the ' . The place, and even the country in which was born, compose the first subject of disputation. Sionita and Hezronita, who published a Latin trimalation of his work at Paris, make him a Nubian, and gave to their work the title of Geograpkia Nubiearis; the " Nubian Geo graphy." They proceeded upon the expression there used, " The Nile of Egypt, which cuts oar land." Hartmann was at once led to suspect the correctness of this inference, by observing that Nu bia was one of the countries of which Edrisi gives the most meagre and imperfect account. His sus picions were confirmed by learning that Ockley, on examining two manuscripts in the Bodleian library, had found in both " that land," instead of " our land." It seems now generally agreed, therefore, that there is no reason to suppose him of Nubian origin. Others have given him an Egyptian one, which seems more probable, yet rests solely u . the erroneous reading above referred to In 1 13, Bochart stated that he had found, in a manuscript of Leo Africanus, that Edrisi was born at Mazara, in Sicily, in 1098. Next year, however, the manu script was edited by Hottinger, in an Appendix to his work, entitled 13e6holhecarias Quadripartibus, when it appeared, that the person supposed to be Edrisi was there named Essenff Esuchalli. Esseriff, or Scheriff, is indeed an usual appellation of Edrisi, but it is common to many, and is rather a title than a name. The rest of the name, and the date of birth, are materially different, so that there seems very little reason to doubt that Bochart was here mis taken.
The most positive statement on the subject is that of Casiri, who says (Bilgiolkeea Arabico-Hispanica, II. 9.) that if Ednsi, as appeared probable, were the person designated by the Mahommedan writers un der the long Ration of Abu Abdallah Mohamed Ben M Ben Abdallah Ben Edris, he was born at Septa (Ceuta) on the coast of Morocco, in the year of the Hegira 493 (A. D. 1099). Casiri not only qualifies his statement with this condition, but he does not state the authorities from which it is de rived; so that it rests only upon the confidence re posed in his learning and accuracy. Edrisi was long a mighty name in Northern Africa; but, in 919, the was subverted by Mabedi Abdallah, and the - ' wrecks of the family, according to D'Her lot, sought refuge in Sicily. This, certainly,
tends to strengthen the Sicilian origin dour author ; though it is probable that many would seek refuge by concealment in their native county.
If we may trust the information of Casiri, Edrisi pursued his studies at Cordova, then equally famed as a seat of Moorish empire and a seminary of Ara bic learning. From the accurate and particular de scription he has given of Spain, it is probable that he travelled through a great part of that country. Various circumstances prove that he removed to Sicily, and began to compose his great work under the patronage, and indeed at the express desire, of Roger II. king of that island. It was completed about the year 1153. (Heg. 548.) It has been a subject of pretty warm controversy among the learned, whether Edrisi was a Mahome tan or Christian. Sionita, who ad Vs the latter opi nion, observes that he repeatedly calls our Saviour the Lord Jesus, and on one occasion simply " the Lord," a title which is said never to be applied by Mahomet ans unless to Mahomet, while they merely say " Je sus, to whom be peace," or " Jesus, to whom be safety." He also speaks with profound respect of the holy Virgin, and of various saints,.usin' g, in re gard to the latter, the Italian expression instead of the Arabic. These arguments are strenuously re pelled by Hartmann, though not, as appears to us, on very solid grounds. He justly remarks, indeed, that the Mahometans speak always with the highest respect of every thing connected with the origin of Christianity. But though this may impair the force of Sionita's arguments, there seems nothing of any importance to place in the opposite scale. Hartmann lays much stress on the circumstance that Edrisi, among his numerous names, bears that of Mahomed, which he says was never born by any Christian; but, though this may imply that he was a Mahometan by birth, it does not authorize us to infer that he may not have become a convert to the opposite faith. He evidently wishes to offend persons of neither profession, and thus writes in a style from which no positive inference can be drawn. But, considering how high religious differences ran in that age, it does not appear very probable that he could have resided in Sicily, or been in such high favour with Roger, without adopting the religion of the monarch and country.