Of the quatrains of 'Umar Khayyám included in M. Nicolas' edition, no fewer than eighty-two were found by Zhukovski The “wandering quatrains.” ascribed on at least equally good authority to one or other of the following poets: 'Abdu'lláh Anṣárí, Abú Sa'íd b. Abi'l-Khayr, Afḍal-i-Káshí, 'Ákif, 'Alá'u'd-Dawla Simnání, Anwarí, 'Asjadí, Athíru'd-Dín, 'Aṭṭár, Avicenna (Ibn Síná), Awḥadí-i-Kirmání, Badíhí-i-Sajáwandí, Bákharzí (Sayfu'd-Dín), Fakhru'd-Dín Rází, Firdawsí, Ghazálí (Aḥmad), Ḥáfidh-i-Shírází, Jalálu'd-Dín Rúmí, Jamálu'd-Dín Qazwíní, Kháqání, Kamálu'd-Dín Isma'íl, Majdu'd-Dín Hamkar, Maghribí, Malik Shamsu'd-Dín, Najmu'd-Dín Rází, Naṣíru'd-Dín Ṭúsí, Ni'matu'lláh­i-Kirmání, Riḍá'u'd-Dín, Sa'du'd-Dín Ḥamawí, Salmán-i-Sáwají, Sháhí, Siráju'd-Dín Qumrí, and Ṭálib-i-Ámulí. This list could, with a little trouble, be greatly increased. I have myself noticed (without searching for) a few more instances. Thus the quatrains ascribed by Whinfield (Nos. 144 and 197) and by Nicolas (Nos. 116 and 182) to 'Umar, and by Zhukovski (Nos. 26 and 27) to Naṣíru'd-Dín Ṭúsí and Ṭálib-i-Ámulí, are attributed in the Ta'ríkh-i-Guzída (composed in A.D. 1330) to Siráju'd-Dín Qumrí and 'Izzu'd-Dín Karachí respectively; * and, since they represent diametrically opposite points of view, it is at least certain that they are not by the same author. A useful tabulated con­cordance of these quatrains, showing their correspondence with the editions of Whinfield and Nicolas, and the Bodleian manuscript, is appended by Ross to his translation of Zhu-kovski's article. The upshot of the whole inquiry is that, while it is certain that 'Umar Khayyám wrote many quatrains, it is hardly possible, save in a few exceptional cases, to assert positively that he wrote any particular one of those ascribed to him. The oldest known manuscript of 'Umar's Rubá'iyyát (Bodleian, No. 525) dates from the year A.H. 865 (= A.D. 1460-1461), and was therefore transcribed nearly three centuries and a half after his death. It contains only 158 quatrains, and has been published in fac-simile, with literal prose translation, Introduction, and other matter, by Mr. Edward Heron Allen (London, 1898), who in a later publication on the same subject (Edward FitzGerald's Rubá'iyyát of 'Omar Khayyám with their Original Persian Sources, London, 1899), enumerates, on pp. xv-xvi, the manuscripts and editions known to him, with the number of quatrains contained in each. This varies from 76 in one of the older Paris MSS. (dated A.H. 937 = A.D. 1530-1531) to 604 in the Bankipúr MS., 770 in the edition lithographed at Lucknow in A.H. 1312 (= A.D. 1894-95), and 845 in John Payne's metrical trans­lation, while Miss Jessie E. Cadell succeeded in collecting from all available sources over twelve hundred quatrains attributed to 'Umar Khayyám. It is, of course, always possible that an ancient and authoritative manuscript may some day be discovered in one of the unexplored libraries of Asia, but, failing this, it must, save in a few isolated cases, remain uncertain which of the many quatrains ascribed to 'Umar are really his. Both external and internal evidence fail us; the former because we possess no manuscript which even approaches the poet's time, the latter because nearly all quatrains are so similar in form, metre, style, and diction, so brief in extent, so much more prone to treat of the Universal than of the Particular, and so easy to make or paraphrase, that not even the most accomplished Persian man of letters could seriously pretend to decide by their style as to their authorship, which, indeed, if I may be pardoned the somewhat irreverent comparison, is often as uncertain as that of an English “Limerick.”

As regards the relations between FitzGerald's translation or paraphrase and the original, this point has been exhaustively and conscientiously worked out by Mr. Edward Heron Allen in the second of the two books mentioned on the preceding page, and it is sufficient here to quote in his own words the final conclusion at which, after much labour, he arrived (pp. xi-xii of his Preface):—

“Of Edward FitzGerald's quatrains, forty-nine are faithful and beautiful paraphrases of single quatrains to be found in the Ouseley or Calcutta MSS., or both.

“Forty-four are traceable to more than one quatrain, and may therefore be termed the ‘composite’ quatrains.

“Two are inspired by quatrains found by FitzGerald only in Nicolas' text.

“Two are quatrains reflecting the whole spirit of the original poem.

“Two are traceable exclusively to the influence of the Manṭiqu'ṭ-Ṭayr of Farídu'd-Dín 'Aṭṭár.

“Two quatrains primarily inspired by 'Umar were influenced by the Odes of Ḥáfidh.

“And three, which appeared only in the first and second editions, and were afterwards suppressed by Edward FitzGerald himself, are not—so far as a careful search enables me to judge—attributable to any lines of the original texts. Other authors may have inspired them, but their identification is not useful in this case.”

Only the veriest tyros need to be reminded that in Persian the quatrain is always an absolutely complete and isolated unit, that there is no such thing as a poem composed of a number of quatrains, and that in collections of quatrains the only order observed or recognised is the alphabetical, according to the final letter of the three rhyming half-verses.

Of Bábá Ṭáhir, of Hamadán, nick-named “the Naked” ('Uryán), the second of the four famous quatrain-writers of Bábá Ṭáhir 'Uryán of Hamadán. this period, I shall speak but briefly, since his quatrains have been published by M. Clément Huart in the Journal Asiatique for Nov.-Dec., 1885 (ser. viii, vol. 6), with a French translation and notes, and again by Mr. Edward Heron Allen in his Lament of Bábá Ṭáhir (Quaritch, 1902), with Introduction, literal prose trans­lation and notes, to which is added an English verse-translation by Mrs. Elizabeth Curtis Brenton. I have also devoted several pages (83-87) in the Prolegomena to this volume to a discussion of the dialects and dialect-poetry of Persia in general, and Bábá Ṭáhir in particular, and gave the text and metrical translations of three of his most popular quatrains. * These, and most other dialect-quatrains, are written not in the usual rubá'í metres but in the apocopated hexameter hazaj, i.e., the foot six times repeated in the bayt, but “docked” to in the third and sixth feet. They are naturally, as being the work of simple and provincial men, usually of a less introspective and philosophical character than those of quatrain-writers like 'Umar Khayyám.

Of Bábá Ṭáhir's life we know but little, and very various dates, ranging from the beginning of the eleventh to the latter part of the thirteenth century of our era, have been assigned to him by different Persian writers. By far the oldest mention of him which I have met with occurs in the already-mentioned Ráḥatu'ṣ-Ṣudúr, * on f. 43 of the unique Paris MS., and runs as follows:—

“I have heard that when Sulṭán Ṭughril Beg came to Hamadán, there were three elders of the saints (i.e., the Ṣúfís), Bábá Ṭáhir,

Oldest notice of Bábá Ṭáhir, written in A.D. 1202-3. Bábá Ja'far, and Shaykh Ḥamshá. Now there is by the gate of Hamadán a little mountain called Khiḍr, and there they were standing. The Sulṭán's eyes fell upon them; he halted the vanguard of his army, alighted, approached, and kissed their hands. Bábá Ṭáhir, who was some­what crazy in his manner, said to him, ‘O Turk, what wilt thou do with God's people?’ ‘Whatever thou biddest me,’ replied the Sulṭán. ‘Do [rather] that which God biddeth thee,’ replied Bábá; ‘“Verily God enjoineth Justice and Well-doing.”’ * The Sulṭán wept and said, ‘I will do so.’ Bábá took his hand and said, ‘Dost thou accept this from me?’ ‘Yes,’ replied the Sulṭán. Bábá had on his finger the top of a broken ibríq * wherewith he had for many years performed his ablutions. This he took off and placed on the Sulṭán's finger, saying, ‘Thus do I place on thy hand the empire of the world: be thou just!’ The Sulṭán used to keep this amongst his amulets, and, when a battle was impending, used to put it on his finger. Such was his pure faith and sincere belief; for in the Muhammadan religion there was none more devout or watchful than he.”