This Correct authorship of the Ghurar. lately discovered work of Abú Manṣúr ‘Abdu’l-Malik b. Muḥammad b. Ismá‘íl ath-Tha‘álibí* (b. 350 d. 429 A. H. = 961-1038 A. D.), fully designated as the Ghuraru Akhbári-Mulúki’l-Fursi wa Siyari-him, forms one of the acknowledged* sources of the Jawámi‘ for the chapter “On the Ancient Kings of Persia” (Pt. I, ch. iv. Anecs. 119-193). Before 1900 A. D. it was believed that this work was written by another ath-Tha‘álibí named Abú Manṣúr al-Ḥusayn b. Muḥammad al-Mar‘aní or Mar‘ashí. Probably this mistake arose from the title-page of the Constantinople Ms., and was perpetuated by H. Khalfa* who ascribes it to the aforesaid Mar‘ashí and quotes the beginning line. Prior to him, even Ibn Khallikán was not aware of the existence of this work as that of the famous philologist ath-Tha‘álibí, since he has omitted it from the list of his works and has praised his more famous anthology the Yatímatu’d-Dahr only. It escaped the notice of Prof. Th. Nöldeke in his masterly works ‘Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden’ and ‘Das iranische Nationalepos’. It was Hermann Zotenberg* who, for the first time, after examining the available material, established conclusively the claim of the great philologist as a historian also.

Unfortunately, An account of the work based on Zotenberg’s Préface. only a quarter of the great history of ath-Tha‘álibí has come down to us, and much more interesting and contemporary material is lost, as we can judge from the original Preface of ath-Tha‘álibí (pp. xlvii-l), setting forth the grand scheme of the work. It was written, as shown by Zotenberg in his excellent Préface, probably between 408 and 412 A H. = 1017-21 A. D. and is dedicated to the Prince Abu’l-Muẓaffar Naṣr b. Náṣiru’d-Dín Abú Manṣúr [Sabuktigín], the brother of the great Sultan Maḥmúd of Ghazna. The importance of this source of information about the ancient kings of Persia and their early legends is well established when we consider the period of the composition of the Sháhnáma of Firdawsí, as both these works were written under the patronage of the Ghaznawids, and from almost the same available sources, and even under identical circumstances, — the difference being, that one is the highest expression of the epic in Persian, while the other is a systematic history in classical Arabic prose. All the resemblances to and divergences from the versions adopted by aṭ-Ṭabarí and put into verse by Firdawsí are analysed by Zotenberg in his Préface (pp. xxv-xli) which extends our knowledge about the sources of the Sháhnáma beyond the researches of Prof. Th. Nöldeke.

As al-‘Awfí’s adaptation of the Ghurar. regards the method of utilisation adopted by al-‘Awfí, it can be asserted on the basis of a textual comparison* that either al-‘Awfí has himself abridged the Ghurar in order to provide material for his anecdotes or has used its Persian Translation called the Ra’y-Áráy, discussed above in Notice No. (22). Although he has omitted in this chapter the parallel accounts, detached pieces and episodes given by ath-Tha‘álibí regarding the king-prophets like Yúsuf, Dá’úd and Sulaymán and others, the accounts of the Pharaohs, the rulers of Yaman and Syria, and the wise and pithy sayings of the Persian kings attached to almost every biographical account, and the different versions cited by ath-Tha‘álibí, yet the order, the division of the longer accounts, the main course of the narrative, the exact literal rendering of certain expressions throughout the anecdotes, and the consistent fidelity with which he reproduces the original version of these traditions in a very abridged form, definitely indicate that al-‘Awfí has entirely based this chapter on the Ghurar, though occasionally he has referred to either aṭ-Ṭabarí or Firdawsí or some other source. The following analysis will perhaps illustrate his method precisely: In the very first account of Kayúmarth, ath-Tha‘álibí (Gh. pp. 1-4) quotes aṭ-Ṭabarí and gives various opinions as to whether Adam and Kayúmarth were the same person, and an episode as to who were the kings amongst the prophets; al-‘Awfí omits all these details and gives in brief the story of Kayúmarth (A. f47a. I. iv. 119); and then in the account of Húshang (A. f47a. I. iv. 120) he omits the Arabic verses of Manṣúr al-Faqíh cited by ath-Tha‘álibí and introduces a Persian couplet, the origin of which is uncertain; and further on in the account of Farídún (A. f49a. I. iv. 129) he omits the wise sayings recorded by ath-Tha‘álibí; al-‘Awfí usually compresses lengthy accounts, e. g. the legend of Rustam and Isfandiyár, which covers in the Ghurar about 40 pages (338-78), is abridged in the Jawámi‘ to two folios (A. ff62a-64a. I. iv. 145); and very rarely he brings in a different version of the story, e. g. the account of Manes (A. f70a. I. iv. 163), or enlarges an anecdote, e. g. Fírúz b. Yazdijird’s struggle against Khushunwár (Gh. pp. 579-83), cf. (A. f73b. I. iv. 178). At the end of this chapter there are two anecdotes— one is a sketchy account of the kings of Rúm or Byzantium (A. f81b. I. iv. 194), and the other about Heraclius’ persistence in opening the locked chamber (A. f81b. I. iv. 195)— which are not traceable in the Ghurar, and are probably drawn from the lost portion of the book or some other source. Thus, in short, this chapter is an epitomised Persian translation of the Ghurar.

This The career and work of al-Muḥassin at-Tanúkhí. Arabic original of the Qádhí Abú ‘Alí al-Muḥassin* b. Abi’l-Qásim ‘Alí b. Muḥammad b. Abi’l-Fahm Dá’úd b. Ibráhím b. Tamím at-Tanúkhí, who was born in Baṣra in 327 or 329 A. H. = 938 or 940 A. D. and died in Baghdád in 384 A. H. = 994 A. D., is one of the acknowledged* sources of al-‘Awfí, which has somewhat increased the value of the Jawámi‘ in the field of historical anecdotes and considerably in bulk. al-Muḥassin at-Tanúkhí, a Mesopotamian judge, a poet, a Mu‘tazilite traditionist, and an eminent prose-writer, was one of the distinguished members of his family, in which learning was cultivated assiduously, literature flourished, and the greatest historical movements found an echo. Like his father, ‘Alí, he was occasionally employed on political missions, held various offices, chiefly as a Qádhí, had travelled through the lands of the Caliphate, had associated intimately with the most eminent men of his times, and had obtained an exceptional insight into the various aspects of life. As a judge, he was fully aware of the social circumstances in which enmity, jealousy, disgrace, imprisonment and flight took their origin. As a literary man, he had read largely in Tradition, history and other branches of literature both in Arabic and Persian, and had obtained the Ijáza of the Kitábu’l-Aghání of Abu’l-Faraj al-Iṣfahání and possessed a very retentive memory. And as a student of current politics, he had studied history, and in many cases taken part in contemporary events; but he has not given us the result of his experiences in the form of a systematic chronicle. Therefore, his literary achievements entitle him to be ranked only as one of the most talented gatherers of historical anecdotes. His works throw sufficient light upon the internal history of the declining period of the ‘Abbásid Caliphate and afford us, in parts, details which cannot be had anywhere else in such a graphic form; even Miskawayh and Hilál b. Muḥassin aṣ-Ṣábí are indebted to him in certain respects. And, in fact, as Prof. Margoliouth* remarks, the Nishwáru’l-Muhádhara or his “Table-talk, of which only one volume out of eleven has been discovered, is a mine of information about the customs of the time and the conduct of his contemporaries.” And again the Professor adds in his preface to the English translation of his Nishwár: “It was his purpose to record interesting facts which had come to his knowledge by personal experience or by hearsay; in general he avoided matter which had already appeared in books. He admits that there are exceptions to this rule to be found in his work, and indeed several of the stories already published in the Deliverance after Stress* are repeated here”*.

The The sources of the Faraj. Faraj ba‘da’sh-Shidda, a less original work than its successor the Nishwár, which also differs from it essentially in its object*, design*, sources* and subject-matter, forms one of the most important contributions to the Faraj ba‘da’sh-Shidda-Literature. It is a collection of anecdotes of sensational character depicting “Relief after Distress”, containing 14 chapters of different headings bearing loosely on the central theme and illustrating thrilling human experiences. It is partly based on the earlier collections of the same title, viz., by Abu’l-Ḥasan ‘Alí b. Muḥammad al-Madá’iní (d. 225 A. H. = 839/40 A. D.), by Abú Bakr ‘Abdu’llah b. Muḥammad Ibn Abi’d-Dunyá (d. 281 A. H. = 894/5 A. D.) and by the Qádhí Abu’l-Ḥusayn ‘Umar b. Abí ‘Amr Muḥammad b. Yúsuf (d. 328 A. H. = 939/40 A. D.). It is partly borrowed from several Histories of the Wazírs, like the Kitábu’l-Wuzará’ of Abú ‘Abdi’llah Muḥammad b. ‘Abdús al-Jahshiyárí* (d. 331 A. H. = 942/3 A. D.) that of Abú Bakr Muḥammad b. Yaḥyá aṣ-Ṣúlí* (d. 335 A. H. = 946/7 A. D.) and that of Abú ‘Abdi’llah Muḥammad b. Dá’úd b. al-Jarráḥ* (executed 296 A.H. = 908/9 A.D.), the Wazír of the Caliph ‘Abdullah Ibnu’l-Mu‘tazz, and the Manáqibu’l-Wuzará’ of Abu’l-Ḥasan ‘Alí b. al-Fatḥ al-Muṭawwaq al-Kátib* (who survived the Caliphate of al-Qáhir bi’llah 320-2 A. H. = 932-4 A.D.) and from several other sources* which are recorded in the admirable article of Herr Alfred Wiener in Der Islam. Other accounts in the Faraj are either indirectly taken from the author’s predecessors or directly from his teachers and other eminent contemporaries like the famous historian Abú Bakr aṣ-Ṣúlí from whom he obtained the Ijáza of his Kitábu’l-Wuzará’* and of the Kitábu’l-Awráq* also, Abu’l-‘Abbás Muḥammad* b. Aḥmad b. Ḥammád al-Athram al-Muqrí al-Khayyáṭ al-Baghdádí (d. 336 A. H. = 947/8 A. D.), his father Abu’l-Qásim ‘Alí* b. Muḥammad b. Abil-Fahm Dá’úd at-Tanúkhí (d. 342 A. H. = 953 A. D.), his preceptor Abu’l-Faraj ‘Alí* b. Ḥusayn al-Iṣfahání, the famous author of the Kitábu’l-Agháni’l-Kabír (d. 356 A. H. = 967 A. D.) from whom he obtained the Ijáza of this book*, Abu’l-Ḥasan Aḥmad* b. Yúsuf al-Azraq al-Kátib b. Ya‘qúb b. Isḥáq b. al-Buhlúl at-Tanúkhí (alive in 361 A. H. = 971/2 A. D.) and Abu’l-Faraj ‘Abdu’l-Waḥíd* b. Naṣr al-Makhzúmí al-Ḥinṭí known as al-Babbaghá’ (d. 398 A. H. = 1007/8 A. D.).

The The nature of the Faraj. nature and subject-matter of the anecdotes in the Faraj varies according to the sources and authorities referred to in the book. In the earlier part, it is full of quotations from the Qur’án, and other traditional forms of prayers used for “Faraj”, which are mostly borrowed from the earlier Farajs. In the middle, various important details about the declining period of the Caliphate, and about the sudden changes in the office of the Wizárat are reported on the personal authority of the various secretaries who were in direct touch with the political affairs of the time. In handing down these anecdotes al-Muḥassin took every opportunity of gaining his material from every source. Now his authorities are Shi‘a and ‘Alid, now Christian, now an inhabitant of Ahwáz and now a trader from Baghdád; and wherever possible he imparted an extraordinary personal colour to these accounts. At the end of the book, ludicrous and strange incidents are told, which are a curious combination of grim realities and uncanny horrors (such as are found in the Tales of Edgar Allan Poe) with accidental escapes and quasi-miraculous rescues and a juxtaposition of “Whirlpools” and “Safety-zones”, failures and successes and misadventures and bold risks in various perilous undertakings. The scenes of most of these stories are laid in Baghdád, Kúfa, Baṣra, Ahwáz and other social centres. The state of society as revealed in some of these anecdotes is rather perplexing. There existed side by side benevolent despotism and severest tyranny; patronage of talents, whimsical emoluments and shameful bribes and decay of genius, swift dismissals and painful extortions; and the greatest possible fear of and trust in God together with outrageous crimes and villanies.

As Utilisation of the Faraj by al-‘Awfí. regards the utilisation of the Faraj by al-‘Awfí, nearly three-fourths of the work have been freely incorporated in one chapter or another of the Jawámi‘*. As remarked previously*, al-‘Awfí had prepared a Persian translation of the Faraj, and from that very translation he has actually copied* these anecdotes and arranged them arbitrarily* under different headings*, often regardless of the design of at-Tanúkhí. At times anecdotes from one single chapter of the Faraj are scattered over different chapters of the Jawámi‘, and at others, a few chapters are retained in extenso; e. g. the first thirteen chapter-headings in Pt. IV of the Jawámi‘ are directly taken from those of the Faraj, and in some of these, anecdotes after anecdotes follow in the same order. In these borrowed anecdotes, the authorities and verses cited by at-Tanúkhí are often omitted, and a few details are suppressed; but the translation is uniform, accurate and simple.