(1) That some of his verses are meaningless, or that, if Defence of Ḥáfiẓ against his critics they have any meaning, it is very far-fetched and enigmatical. The following instance is given:

<text in Arabic script omitted>

“Cease your recriminations and return, for the pupil of my eye
Hath pulled off the cloak over its head and burned it as a thank-
offering.”*

(2) That some of his verses are evidently secular and profane, and refer to the pleasures of the senses in a manner which cannot be explained as allegorical, as for instance:

<text in Arabic script omitted>

“My heart, in love with Farrukh's face, is agitated like Farrukh's hair.”

And again:

<text in Arabic script omitted>

“A thousand blessings be on the red wine which hath removed the sallow complexion from my face!”

(3) That many of his verses smack of the Ash'arí (Sunní) doctrines, which are repudiated and execrated by the Imámí (Shí'a) doctors, e.g.:

<text in Arabic script omitted>

“They did not suffer me to pass through the street of good repute:
If thou dost not approve, then change Destiny.” * <text in Arabic script omitted>

“This borrowed life which the Friend hath entrusted to Ḥáfiẓ—
One day I shall see His Face and shall yield it up to Him.”*

Although manuscripts of Ḥáfiẓ offer as many variants as is usually the case with Persian texts, there exists of Why the Turks are better editors of Persian poetry than the Indians this poet's works an established and generally accepted text which we owe, I think, to the Turkish commentator Súdí, and which has been popularized in Europe by the editions of Brockhaus and Rosenzweig-Schwannau, so that it is usual to refer to the odes of Ḥáfiẓ by the numbers they bear in the latter edition. Turkish editions of Persian poetry, such as the Mathnawí of Jalálu'd-Dín Rúmí, the Díwán of Háfiẓ, etc., are generally more accurate and trustworthy than those produced in India, which commonly contain many spurious and interpolated lines composed by the editors, lines which a Persian would be ashamed and a Turk unable to produce; for the Persian editor has in most cases enough taste (dhawq) to know that he cannot produce verses likely to be accepted as those of the master whom he is editing; while the Turkish editor is generally conscientious and laborious, but incapable of producing any Persian verses at all. The Indian editor, on the other hand, often has a certain facility of versifying without much critical taste.

This “authorized version” of the Díwán of Ḥáfiẓ (which could probably be much improved by a fresh and careful Translations of Ḥáfiẓ collation of all the best and oldest manuscripts) contains in all 693 separate poems; to wit, 573 odes (ghazaliyyát); 42 fragments (muqaṭṭa'át); 69 quatrains (rubá'iyyát); 6 mathnawís; 2 qaṣídas, and one “five-some” or mukhammas. Of all of these poems German verse-translations are given by Rosenzweig-Schwannau, and English prose translations by Wilberforce Clarke. There exist also many translations of individual odes or groups of odes in English, German, Latin, French, etc., either in verse or prose. * Of English verse translations the largest and most sumptuous collection is that of Herman Bicknell, who was born in 1830, studied Medicine at St Bartholo­mew's Hospital and took the degree of M.R.C.S. in 1854, entered the Army Medical Service, went through the Indian Mutiny, travelled widely in Europe, Asia, Africa and America, made the pilgrimage to Mecca under the name of 'Abdu'l-Waḥíd in 1862, and spent some time at Shíráz “with the object of clearing up doubtful points [in the Díwán], and of becoming personally acquainted with the localities mentioned by the Poet.” He died in 1875, and his posthumous work was brought out with loving care by his brother, A. S. Bicknell, in the same year. It contains, besides the Preface, Introduction, Appendix and Indices, and nine illustrations, translations, complete or partial, of 189 ghazaliyyát, all the 42 muqaṭṭa'át and 69 rubá'iyyát, 2 out of the 6 mathnawís, and the one muk-hammas .

Of most of these translations of Ḥáfiẓ, from the Latin renderings of Meninski (1680), Thomas Hyde (1767) and Revisky (1771); the French (1799) and English (1792) versions of Sir William Jones; the numerous German versions from Wahl (1791) to Bodenstedt (1877); and the later English efforts of Payne, Justin McCarthy and Wilber-force Clarke, I do not propose to speak here; but I shall say something of three of the English verse-translations which seem to me the most worthy of attention. Of the oldest of these three, that of Herman Bicknell, published in 1875, I have already spoken above. The next in point of time is that of Miss Gertrude Lowthian Bell (London, 1897), which contains, besides an admirable Introduction on the life, times and character of the poet, verse-translations of 43 of the odes. These, though rather free, are, in my opinion, by far the most artistic, and, so far as the spirit of Ḥáfiẓ is concerned, the most faithful renderings of his poetry. Lastly, in 1898 Mr Walter Leaf published 28 “Versions from Ḥáfiẓ,” in which he endeavoured to re­produce the form as well as the sense of the original poems, with as much success, probably, as is attainable under these conditions. The existence of these three versions exonerates me from attempting, as I have done in the case of other less known Persian poets, to produce versions of my own. In their different ways they are all good: Herman Bicknell's are accurate as regards the sense, and often very ingenious, especially the chrono-grams; Walter Leaf's give an excellent idea of the form; while Miss Bell's are true poetry of a very high order, and, with perhaps the single exception of FitzGerald's paraphrase of the Quatrains of 'Umar Khayyám, are probably the finest and most truly poetical renderings of any Persian poet ever produced in the English language; for, though some of Sir William Jones's verse-translations are pretty enough, they can hardly be dignified by the name of poetry, and are, moreover, so free that they can scarcely be called translations.

For the sake of comparison I gave elsewhere * five different English verse-translations of one of the best-known of the odes of Ḥáfiẓ, that beginning: * <text in Arabic script omitted>

which has been rendered into English verse by Sir William Jones, Herman Bicknell, Miss Bell, Walter Leaf, and myself. I cannot find so many English verse-renderings of any other of the odes of Ḥáfiẓ, for, though many of those translated by Miss Bell are also to be found in Herman Bicknell's translation, only three or four of the former are included amongst the 28 published by Walter Leaf. The one fault to be found with Miss Bell's versions is that they are not arranged in any order, nor is any indication given of the opening words of the original, nor reference to its position in the text of Rosenzweig-Schwannau which she has followed; and only after I had succeeded, with considerable labour, in identifying the originals of all but nine or ten of her translations did I ascertain that my friend Mr Guy le Strange possessed an annotated copy of her book con­taining all the references I required save one (No. xv), which was wrongly given, and which I am still unable to identify. For the convenience, therefore, of other readers of her admirable book, I give below the reference to each Comparative table of odes translated by Miss Bell and other translators. original in Rosenzweig-Schwannau's edition, specifying the volume, page, and number under each rhyming letter, and adding a reference to Bicknell and Leaf in cases where an ode has also been rendered by them.

(No. in Miss Bell's transl.)	(Reference to original in Rosenzweig's ed.)	(Reference to H. Bicknell's transl.)
1No. i (p. 67)	vol. i, p. 2 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 1)	No. i (p. 3)
No. ii (p. 68)	vol. i, p. 194 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 58)	No. li (p. 83)
No. iii (p. 69)	vol. i, p. 204 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 63)	No. liv (p. 85)
No. iv (p. 70)	vol. i, p. 100 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 19)	——
2No. v (p. 71)	vol. i, p. 24 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 8)	No. viii (p. 20)
No. vi (p. 73)	vol. ii, p. 86 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 6)	No. cxxvi (p. 172)
No. vii (p. 74)	vol. i, p. 152 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 41)	——
No. viii (p. 75)	vol. i, p. 110 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 24)	No. xxxi (p. 60)
No. ix (p. 76)	vol. i, p. 8 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 3)	No. iii (p. 9)
3No. x (p. 78)	omitted	No. clxxii (p. 240)
No. xi (p. 79)	vol. i, p. 138 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 36)	No. xxxix (p. 71)
No. xii (p. 80)	vol. i, p. 32 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 12)	No. xii (p. 29)
No. xiii (p. 81)	vol. i, p. 276 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 90)	No. lxv (p. 99)
No. xiv (p. 83)	vol. i, p. 302 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 3)	No. lxx (p. 107)
No. xv (p. 84)
No. xvi (p. 85)	vol. i, p. 222 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 69)	No. lvi (p. 88)
No. xvii (p. 86)	vol. i, p. 148 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 40)	No. xliii (p. 75)
No. xviii (p. 88)	vol. i, p. 360 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 23)	——
No. xix (p. 89)	vol. i, p. 368 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 26)	——
No. xx (p. 90)	vol. ii, p. 18 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 6)	——
No. xxi (p. 91)	vol. i, p. 374 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 28)	——
No. xxii (p. 93)	vol. i, p. 410 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 41)	No. lxxx (p. 122)
No. xxiii (p. 94)	vol. i, p. 596 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 113)	No. ciii (p. 147)
No. xxiv (p. 95)	vol. iii, p. 86 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 31)	——
No. xxv (p. 97)	vol. i, p. 502 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 78)	——
No. xxvi (p. 98)	vol. i, p. 520 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 85)	No. xc (p. 133)
No. xxvii (p. 100)	vol. i, p. 256 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 82)	——
No. xxviii (p. 101)	vol. i, p. 490 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 73)	——
No. xxix (p. 102)	vol. ii, p. 8 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 3)	No. cxv (p. 158)
No. xxx (p. 103)	vol. ii, p. 104 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 7)	No. cxxviii (p. 176)
No. xxxi (p. 104)	vol. i, p. 560 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 99)	No. xcvii (p. 140)
No. xxxii (p. 106)	vol. ii, p. 32 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 11)	No. cxvii (p. 162)
No. xxxiii (p. 107)	vol. i, p. 576 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 105)	——
No. xxxiv (p. 108)	vol. i, p. 584 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 108)	No. ci (p. 144)
No. xxxv (p. 109)	vol. i, p. 662 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 139)	No. cvii (p. 151)
No. xxxvi (p. 110)	vol. ii, p. 78 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 2)	——
No. xxxvii (p. 111)	vol. ii, p. 68 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 10)	No. cxxi (p. 166)
No. xxxviii (p. 112)	vol. i, p. 650 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 135)	——
No. xxxix (p. 114)	vol. i, p. 416 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 44)	No. lxxxi (p. 123)
No. xl (p. 115)	vol. ii, p. 120 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 15)	——
No. xli (p. 116)	vol. iii, p. 296 (qiṭ'a No. 33)	Qiṭ'a xxxiii (p. 292)
No. xlii (p. 117)	vol. i, p. 586 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 109)	——
No. xliii (p. 118)	vol. ii, p. 398 (<text in Arabic script omitted> 74)	No. clxiii (p. 227)

*