Sheykh el Islam, and these are independent of all external influence. If
they meet at all it is at Mecca, but even at Mecca there is no college
of cardinals, no central authority; and though occasionally cases are
referred thither or to Constantinople or Cairo, the fetwas given are not
of absolute binding power over the faithful in other lands. Moreover,
besides these national distinctions, there are three recognized schools
of theology which divide between them the allegiance of the orthodox,
and which, while not in theory opposed, do in fact represent as many
distinct lines of religious thought. These it has been the fashion with
European writers to describe as sects, but the name sect is certainly
inaccurate, for the distinctions recognisable in their respective
teachings are not more clearly marked than in those of our own Church
parties, the high, the low, and the broad. Indeed a rather striking
analogy may be traced between these three phases of English church
teaching and the three so-called "orthodox sects" of Islam. The three
Mohammedan schools are the Hanefite, the Malekite, and the Shafite,
while a fourth, the Hanbalite, is usually added, but it numbers at the
present day so few followers that we need not notice it.[2] A few words
will describe each of these.

The _Hanefite_ school of theology may be described as the school of the
upper classes. It is the high and dry party of Church and State, if such
expressions can be used about Islam. To it belongs the Osmanli race, I
believe without exception, the ruling race of the north, and their
kinsmen who founded Empires in Central and Southern Asia. The official
classes, too, in most parts of the world are Hanefite, including the
Viceregal courts of Egypt, Tripoli, and Tunis, and it would seem the
courts of most of the Indian princes. It is probably rather as a
consequence of this than as its reason that it is the most conservative
of schools, conservative in the true sense of leaving things exactly as