SECTION THE SECOND: ON THE BOOK OF ADAM.

The Dabistan gives here a Persian translation of the Genesis, from the beginning to chapter VI, verse 8; at the end of which the author says that this is the only portion of the sacred book of the Jews which he had an opportunity of examining. According to Eichhorn (see Einleitung in das alte Testament, 4 th edit., vol. II. p. 329) the five books of Moses were translated into Persian by the rabbi Jacob, son of Joseph, after the ninth century; the translation contained in the Dabistan is said to have been executed by Abhi Chand; we cannot say whether it was made from the Hebrew original, or from the Arabic, or any other language. We are informed by the baron Hammer-Purgstall (see Gemalde­saal moslimisher Herrsher, p. 57) that Werka ben Nafil, a cousin of Khadija, Muhammed's wife, and a Christian priest, translated the Old and New Testament from the Hebrew into Arabic; this translation appears however to have been but little known. Eichhorn says (loco citato, p. 231), that the first certain traces of a translation of the Hebrew sacred books into Arabic are to be found in the tenth century. Pocock mentions (pp. 34, 361) Sâadias, a learned Jew, who lived from 892 to 941 A. D., as translator of all the books of the Old Testament into Arabic; and another Jew (not named) who made a version of the book of Kings into the same language.

The Persian translation of the fragment under our consideration was revised by the author of the Dabistan, and by Sarmed, who was a Jew and a Rabbin, converted to Muham­medism, most probably in the first half of the seventeenth century. As it was undoubtedly executed from another original copy than that which had served to the translators in Europe, it appeared interesting enough to examine whether the Persian version of the Dabistan differs in any material point from the translations known in Europe. For that pur­pose I have consulted the following copies of the Bible:

I. The polyglot Bible, printed at Paris, 1645, in which I chiefly compared the Arabic translation.

II. The Persian translation, published by the Bible Society in 1825.

III. The German Bible, translated by Martin Luther.

IV. The English Bible, appointed to be read in Churches, 1837.

V. The English translation from the original Hebrew, by John Bellamy, 1818.

VI. The French translation from the original Hebrew, by S. Cahen, 1831.

VII. The French translation, by Messrs. Glaire and M. Frank, 1835.

Here follow some variations which I have remarked in the Persian translation compared with the text of the versions just enumerated. (References are made to the respective copies, by repeating the Roman numbers prefixed to each.)

V. 2. II. III. IV. V. VI. read: “the spirit of God;” I. the Arabic translation has “the winds of God;” VI. “un vent violent (divin) agitait la surface des eaux;” the Dabistan,

<Arabic>

“And the wind of God blew upon the face of the water.”

VV. 6 7. 8. I. the Arabic translation has <Arabic>, jeld, “a skin, a volume;” II. <Arabic>, perdah, “veil, curtain, fence;” both Arabic and Persian, only figuratively “heaven;” III. German, “veste;” IV. English, and VI. French, “fir­mament;” V. English, “expanse;” VII. French, “étendue” (atmosphere); the Dabistan, <Arabic>, “an elevation.”

V. 26. V. Mr. Bellamy objects to the translation of this verse by the words: “Let us make man in our image” (in which all the other versions agree), and he substitutes for it: “We will make man;” in the Dabistan we find, in support of Mr. Bellamy, <Arabic>, “I will make man.”

V. 6. All the translations have: “a vapor watered the face of the earth;” the Dabistan says: “covered, decked.”

V. 7. All the copies agree in: “he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life;” the Dabistan translates: “into his body.”

V. 8. Every where we read: “God planted a garden east­ward in Eden;” in the Dabistan: “from old times in Eden;” Mr. Cahen remarks that Onkelos (a Hebrew commentator before our era) interprets in the same man­ner: “in former times.”

V. 11. We read generally: “Pison: that is it which com­passeth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold;” Messrs. Glaire and Frank add: “l'or de ce nom;” in the Dabistan:

<Arabic>

“The land Havemla, where there is the beryl (also crys­tal) and the stone jasper (especially a whitish kind found on mount Imaus).”

V. 12 is not in the Dabistan.

V. 13. In the Dabistan are omitted, after the name of Gihon, the words: “the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.”

V. 14. The Dabistan reads, after the name of the river Hîdî­kel, <Arabic>, “running towards the people of Ashur;” other versions have: “towards the east of Assyria.”

V. 23. VII. Messrs. Glaire and Frank translate: “qu'elle soit nommée Ischâ (femme), parcequ'elle a été tirée de Ish” (homme). This analogous derivation for man and woman does not exist in other languages; we find however, in the old Latin, vir and vira, which words are used in the Latin translation of the Samaritan text; in the Arabic version we find <Arabic> for “virago,” and <Arabic> for “viri­litas;” the translator, in the Dabistan, endeavored to reproduce the same derivation, by ânsán and ânsn:

V. 24. The version in the Dabistan deviates from the other translations by the word

“he will sleep with his wife,” instead of “cleave unto,” “or adhere to, his wife.”

Offers no variation to be pointed out.

V. 13. The translation in the Dabistan deviates from IV. VI. VII. which have: “my punishment is greater than I can bear;” it agrees with I. II. III. and V. which say: “great is my iniquity to be forgiven;”

“Great is my crime to be overlooked” (disregarded).

V. 16. There is coincidence between I. II. III. IV. VI. and VII. which have: “he dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.” V. Mr. Bellamy translates: “he dwelt in the land wandering eastward of Eden;” in the Dabistan:

“He dwelt in the land of vagrancy, before Eden.”

V. 25. All translations have: “Methuselah lived a hundred eighty and seven years, and begat Lamech;” in the Dabistan we read only “eighty-seven years.”

V. 27. All versions agree in the words: “All the days of Mathuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years;” in the Dabistan we find: “the whole life of Manusalah was eight hundred and fifty-nine years” (according to its own text it ought to be 869).

V. 30. According to all versions: “Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years;” accord­ing to the Dabistan, only “five hundred years.”

V. 31. Pursuant to all translations: “the days of Lamech were seven hundred seventy and seven years;” pursuant to the Dabistan: “six hundred eighty and two years.”

V. 3. In the Dabistan we read: “My spirit shall not always take patience with man;” other versions have: “shall not always remain,” or “strive with man.”

V. 5. is omitted in the Dabistan.

The notice given in the Dabistan of the opinions of the Jews will be found very incomplete and inaccurate, inasmuch as it is exhibited without a due distinction of the different Jewish sects, to which they may be attributed. For a far better account of the Jews, see that of Makrisi, given in the “Chres­tomathie arabe” of Silvestre de Sacy (vol. I. pp. 284-369), with the various explanatory notes of that celebrated orien­talist.