An An account of the merits and contents of al-‘Awfí’s version. account of the composition and transcription of this work, and its priority to Ḥusayn’s translation has been given in detail in the preceding pages (14-19); here a few points about its merits, contents and relation to the original of at-Tanúkhí will be outlined. It appears, firstly, that al-‘Awfí used a much fuller text of the Faraj than is represented in the Cairo edition, as there are a number of genuine anecdotes in this translation which are missing in the latter; secondly, that he originally intended to divide his own version into two Daftars or parts, and to follow the original order of the chapters and anecdotes as closely as possible. Unfortunately both the extant Mss.* which represent this translation are in a very defective condition, as they are marred by lacunae, transposition of folios, wrong numeration of chapters and disarrangement of anecdotes. Moreover the text is very corrupt, authorities of narratives are omitted, proper names are mutilated and citations from Arabic prose and poetry are often wrongly transcribed. The ignorance of the copyist is to a great extent responsible for some of these glaring errors. On comparison of one of the Mss. which is said to be the second half of al-‘Awfí’s translation [Ind. Off. 1432] with the original text of the Faraj*, it is found to contain over three-fourths of the work — the first three chapters and the last one are entirely lacking, apart from the gaps in the middle; thus owing to transpositions or the defective arrangement of the original copy, a fairly large portion of the first part of the Faraj is also included in this Ms.. The contents of both the Mss. enable us to judge accurately the relative merits of al-‘Awfí’s and Ḥusayn’s versions. Each has an advantage over the other, i. e. the classification of chapters and the division of anecdotes in Ḥusayn’s version is very precise and useful; whereas in al-‘Awfí’s version it is very difficult to follow the order of the chapters or of the anecdotes. But al-‘Awfí’s version has one great merit in its favour, that it presents in its essential features an accurate, simple, pure and slightly abridged translation; whereas in Ḥusayn’s version, prolixity, modification of the text, omissions, and insertions of his own poetical pieces in Arabic and Persian have in great measure effaced the merit of an unadulterated and faithful translation.
This Relation of the Qábús-náma to the Jawámi‘. book of moral precepts and rules of conduct written by ‘Unṣuru’l-Ma‘álí Kay-Ká’ús b. Iskandar b. Qábús b. Washmgír for his son Gílánsháh in 475 A. H. = 1082/3 A. D. is vaguely* mentioned by al-‘Awfí in one anecdote concerning the deposition of Qábús* b. Washmgír, the Ziyárid* ruler of Ṭabaristán, who was put to death in 403 A. H. = 1012 A. D.. However, besides this, there are seven anecdotes which are common to the Qábús-náma and the Jawámi‘, some of which are found to agree very closely on textual comparison, whence we can infer that al-‘Awfí utilised this work also. In the Lubáb* he has not mentioned the Qábús-náma at all; but he has referred to the famous compositions of Shamsu’l-Ma‘álí Qábús, the grandfather of Kay-Ká’ús, in prose and verse, collected by the Imám Abu’l-Ḥasan ‘Alí b. Muḥammad al-Yazdádí, known as the [Qará’in-i-Shamsu’l-Ma‘álí wa] Kamálu’l-Balágha*, extracts from which are preserved in the Ta’ríkh-i-Ṭabaristán* of Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan known as Ibn Isfandiyár.
The Common and parallel anecdotes. following are the anecdotes common to the Qábús-náma and the Jawámi‘, the purport of which is given according to the version of the latter, while a few points of divergence and similarity are also briefly noticed:
| (1) | Brutal rejoinder of one of the notables of Bukhárá to a poor fellow-pilgrim who had the audacity to challenge the comparative reward for their pilgrimage. (A. f203b. I. xvi. 850) = U. Q. N. ch. iv, pp. 20-1, where the story is in a fuller form and differs in a few minute details. |
| (2) | The Sultan Maḥmúd’s threat to the Caliph (al-Qádir bi’lláh who ruled 381-422 A. H. = 991-1031 A. D.) that he would attack him with elephants, and the latter’s pithy but enigmatic reply by the letters <Arabic> alluding to the verse in the Qur’án (cv. 1) concerning the fate of Abrahatu’l-Ashram, which was correctly interpreted* by Abú Bakr [‘Alí b. al-Ḥasan al-] Qúhistání only. (A. f218b. I. xviii. 996) = U. Q. N. ch. xxxix, pp. 185-7, where the story is given in detail and does not correspond verbally with the Jawámi‘. In the latter work it is told in connection with other attempts of the Sultan to extract titles from the Caliph, whose name is not mentioned. (See above, p. 83). |
| (3) | Plato’s grief at being praised by a fool. (A. f249b. I. xxv. 1155) = U. Q. N. ch. vi, pp. 34-5. |
| (4) | Muḥammad [b.] Zakariyyá ar-Rází the physician’s alarm at being laughed at by a madman, and his endeavour to rid himself of any symptom of madness which the madman may have found in common with his own. (A. f249b. I. xxv. 1156) = U. Q. N. ch. vi, p. 35. These two stories resemble each other very much and in the latter the proverb in Arabic is also quoted. |
| (5) | The fate of the two interpreters of the Caliph Harún’s dream, one of whom is flogged for giving a plain and unvarnished interpretation, whereas the other is rewarded for his euphemistic reply. (D. f123b. II. vi. 1314) = U. Q. N. ch. vii, p. 42. |
| (6) | The deposition and imprisonment of Shamsu’l-Ma‘álí Qábús b. Washmgír attributed by him rather to his own negligence in not murdering his enemies than to his tyranny, as remarked by one of his custodians Abú ‘Abdi’llah [Jammáz]. (D. f150a. II. xv. 1423) = U. Q. N. ch. xx, pp. 87-8. The texts agree very closely, cf. D. T. S. pp. 48-9; also History of Ṭabaristán p. 232. |
| (7) | The shepherd who advised his dishonest master to sell pure milk, and his witty reply when retribution overtook the latter and the flock was swept away by flood. (D. f251a. III. xvi. 1703) = U. Q. N. ch. xxxii, p. 154. |
| (8) | Sayyida the mother of Majdu’d-Dawla’s bold reply to the Sultan Maḥmúd, whereby she prevented Maḥmúd from attacking her capital, Ray. (D. f274a. III. xxii. 1745) = U. Q. N. ch. xxix, pp. 128-9, cf. D. T. S. pp. 43-4. |
The text of anecdotes No. (6) and No. (8), which are typical of the Qabús-náma, is closely followed by al-‘Awfí, but the personal references of the author are omitted, and the original classification of other anecdotes is also ignored.
Among al-Jáḥiẓ’s position as a natural-philosopher. the various works utilised by al-‘Awfí for the compilation of anecdotes in his chapters on natural history (Pt. IV, chs. xxi-xxiv), the above work of Abú ‘Uthmán ‘Amr b. Baḥr al-Jáhiẓ*, the famous prose-writer and natural philosopher and the founder of the Jáḥiẓiyya sect, who was born in 150 A. H. = 767 A. D. and died in 255 A. H. = 869 A. D., is mentioned five times in one connection or another in the Jawámi‘. Before proceeding to discuss the actual merit of the citations from the Kitábu’l-Ḥayawán, the following observation, regarding al-Jáḥiẓ’s position as a scientist, seems appropriate here: “Primarily, our author was a religious thinker belonging to the rationalistic sect of Islám, the Mu‘tazila. His works on natural history are closely connected with theology by his attempt to show the unity of nature and the equal value to the observer of its constituent parts. To conclude, Jáḥiẓ besides representing the stand-point of the educated man of the time was a link between the philosophers proper and those theologians who had to combat with foreign ideas.”
An Identification of the Kitáb Tafdhíli'l-Kalbi etc. illustration of this fact can indirectly be noticed from one of the citations in the Jawámi‘. al-‘Awfí mentions a treatise of al-Jáḥiẓ which is hitherto not known to exist separately. It is designated the Kitáb Tafdhíli’l-Kalbi ‘ala’s-Siflati mina’n-Nás*, which the present writer regards as a first instalment of the Kitábu’l-Ḥayawán, as it appears to be no other than the “Controversy of the Dogs and the Cocks”, representing two schools of thought amongst the Mutakallimún of his day. Parts I and II of the Kitábu’l-Ḥayawán are entirely devoted to this diatribe, which al-Jáḥiẓ aims at certain theologians whose names he carefully omits; and under this allegorical treatment of the subject and veiled attack, he describes the virtues of a dog and its utility to mankind. al-‘Awfí, not being concerned with the controversy, has selected only that small portion dealing with the varieties of the best hunting dogs, (D. f88b. IV. xxii. 2048 = J. K. H. Pt. I, p. 105; Pt. II, pp. 15-6) which is most appropriate from the natural history point of view.
Citations Citations from the Kitábu’l-Ḥayawán in the Jawámi‘ with acknowledgement directly traceable to the Kitábu’l-Ḥayawán are:
| (1) | A few particulars about the elephant, which al-Jáḥiẓ quotes from the observations of the Indian philosophers (D. f80b. IV. xxi. 2009) = J. K. H. Pt. VII, pp. 29, 31, 32, 33. |
| (2) | Another observation of al-Jáḥiẓ on the greediness of pigs. (D. f88b. IV. xxii. 2047) = J. K. H. Pt. IV, p. 17. |
| (3) | Argument against the theory of “Khalq-i-Murakkab” (hybrid) as applied to the giraffe. (D. f91b. IV. xxiii. 2059) = J. K. H. Pt. I, p. 65; VII, p 76. |
Other unidentified citations either with the name of al-Jáḥiẓ or his Tabá’i‘u’l-Ḥayawán are as follows:
| (1) | Opinion of al-Jáḥiẓ about the influence of wine on different temperaments, (D. f193b. III. i. 1541). |
| (2) | Anecdote related by al-Jáḥiẓ about a stammerer, ‘Abdu’llah ‘Amí (?) who grew eloquent after taking plenty of wine at a party given by the sons of ‘Abdu’l-Malik Riyáshí (?), (D. f194a. III. i. 1542). |
| (3) | al-Jáḥiẓ’s incredible story of the animals trained by Aswad b. Iyádh al-Jabalí (?) for hunting, (D. f86b. IV. xxii. 2037). |
| (4) | al-Jáḥiẓ on the scarcity of the rhinoceros, (D. f91a. IV. xxiii. 2056). |
The References to other authors in connection with the anecdotes on natural hisory. following are the anecdotes in which vague references either to the ancient authors or to their works occur:
| (1) | Sinán* b. Thábit al-Ḥarrání the famous physician’s observation on a deformed woman, (D. f60a. IV. xiv. 1938). |
| (2) | ‘Ubaydu’llah* [b. Bukht-Yishú‘ b.] Jibrá’il’s similar observation in his book about a deformed man whom he had seen in Hurmuza (?). (D. f60b. IV. xiv. 1941). |
| (3) | Hippocrates’* explanation of abnormities, (D. f60b. IV. xiv. 1943). |
| (4) | Dioscorides* on the medicinal value of the parts of an antelope, (D. f83b. IV. xxi. 2023). |
| (5) | Ptolemy’s* account of a famous breed of war-horses, (D. f84a. IV. xxi. 2025). |
| (6) | Abú Rayḥán [al-Bírúní’s] account of strange animals presented to the Sámánids in 339 or 337 A. H., (D. f84b. IV. xxi. 2027), (D. f89b. IV. xxii. 2050). |
| (7) | Dioscorides and Ibn Mása* on the medicinal properties of the various parts of an ass, (D. f85b. IV. xxi. 2033). |
| (8) | A Kitáb-i-Sumúm (?) cited regarding the fat of a leopard as a cure for paralysis, (D. f86b. IV. xxii. 2040). |
| (9) | Aristotle’s book* cited: as to how a fox keeps a wolf away from its lair by means of wild onion, (D. f89a. IV. xxii. 2050). |
| (10) | Galen* arranges a fight between a weasel and a serpent and cures the weasel by an antidote, (D. f90b. IV. xxiii. 2054). |
| (11) | Rufus* of Ephesus witnesses a fight between a weasel and a serpent and discovers Ḥabbu’l-Fár as an antidote, (D. f91a. IV. xxiii. 2055). |
| (12) | Abú Rayḥán [al-Bírúní’s] description of the animal Shérú of the rhinoceros type, (D. f91b. IV. xxiii. 2057). See above, Notice No. (1)b. |
| (13) | Aristotle’s description of a strange animal*, (D. f92a. IV. xxiii. 2060). |
| (14) | A Greek author’s* description of a curious animal* with a tail like a peacock’s. (D. f92b. IV. xxiii. 2064). |
| (15) | A Greek musician* who devised a musical instrument that produced the cry of a young Burṣul and thereby collected olives. (D. f95a. IV. xxiv. 2074). |
In Subject-matter of the chapters on natural history in the Jawámi‘. the introductory remarks (D. f80b. IV. xxi. Int. 2009) al-‘Awfí states, that, since he has treated at length of the nature and temperament of mankind throughout the entire work, he thinks proper to devote a few chapters to the animal kingdom also. Therefore, in this chapter (xxi) he starts with a description of domestic quadrupeds and gives a few of their peculiarities; in the next chapter (xxii) he takes up wild beasts; and in the following chapter (xxiii) he mentions some strange and uncommon animals, the accounts of which are found in the works of Greek authors on natural history, and briefly records their peculiarities, properties and special medicinal uses. Lastly, he closes the chapters on natural history with an account of strange birds (ch. xxiv), which is partly based on mythical and traditional accounts.
Although Importance of these chapters, and a notice of other works. al-‘Awfí does not claim to deal with the subject of natural history as a science and has selected only very peculiar and uncommon features of the animal kingdom for illustrating his chapters, yet we find that he has incidentally touched upon many problems connected with it, e. g., instinct, natural affinity and animosity, preservation of species, struggle for existence, animal habits and tactics, coupling, cross-breeding, effect of environments at the time of conception, and of music on animals, and other problems. Similarly, as it was the custom of ancient writers on natural history to record the medicinal properties of the various parts of animals, he has also given us some information, which may appear to us very crude and elementary. The importance of some of these anecdotes can only be realised when we consider that they are probably the earliest remains in Persian of the works of some of the most important authors mentioned above. It is rather difficult to trace and identify these passages from ancient sources, as it is not known whether al-‘Awfí drew all his information from Persian* and secondary sources* which contained these quotations or directly from Arabic translations of the older works; but there is no reason to doubt the genuineness of their contents, when we find him faithful as regards other sources which we possess, e. g. the Kitábu’l-Ḥayawán of al-Jáḥiẓ. There is another work entitled the Na‘tu’l-Ḥayawán wa Manáfi‘ihi [Or. 2784 Br. Mus.] which is said to have been compiled from the Kitábu’l-Ḥayawáns of Aristotle and that of ‘Ubaydu’llah b. Jibrá’íl b. [‘Ubaydu’llah b.] Bukht-Yishú‘, which in parts agrees with the accounts given by al-‘Awfí*. Thus, these chapters on natural history follow the works of the ancient authors, though much of accuracy is lost during transition, and pave the way for works like the ‘Ajá’ibu’l-Makhlúqát of Zakariyyá Qazwíní, to which many accounts of semi-scientific nature are common*.