Though less highly appreciated in his own country than in Turkey and India, 'Urfí is probably on the whole the 'Urfí of Shíráz (d. 999/1590-1). most famous and popular poet of his century. * Though born and brought up in Shíráz, his short life was chiefly spent in India, where he died in 999/1590-1 at the early age of thirty-six, some say of dysentery, others of poison. He is one of the three poets of this century (A.D. 1500-1600) discussed by Shiblí Nu'mání in his Shi'ru'l-'Ajam, * the other two being his fellow-townsman Bábá Fighání, already mentioned, * and Fayḍí (Fayẓí), brother of Akbar's celebrated minister Abu'l-Faḍl (Abu'l-Faẓl), who, in Shiblí's opinion, was one of the two Indian poets who wrote Persian verse which would pass as the work of a genuine Persian. * 'Abdu'l-Qádir Badá'úní says * that 'Urfí and Thaná'í were the two most popular Persian poets in India in his time, and that manuscripts of their works were to be found in every bazaar and book­shop, while Fayḍí's poems, in spite of the large sums of money which he had expended in having them beautifully copied and illuminated, were little sought after. Gibb says*

Great popularity of 'Urfí and Fayḍí in Turkey and India. that, after Jámí, 'Urfí and Fayḍí were the chief Persian influences on Turkish poetry until they were superseded by Ṣá'ib, and that “the novelty in this style lay, apart from the introduction of a number of fresh terms into the conventional vocabulary of poetry, in the deposition of rhetoric from the chief seat, and the enthronement of loftiness of tone and stateliness of language in its stead.” * Ẓiyá (Ḍiyá) Pasha, in that portion of his metrical Introduction to the Kharábát which discusses the Persian poets, after praising Jámí, proceeds to speak of 'Urfí and Fayḍí as follows:

<text in Arabic script omitted>

“Fayḍí and 'Urfí run neck-and-neck; they are the leaders of the later
time.
In Fayḍí is eloquence and freshness, in 'Urfí sweetness and fluency.
In Fayḍí are fiery exhortations, while 'Urfí is strong in elegies.
But if pre-eminence he sought, excellence still remains with Fayḍí.
Fayḍí is clear throughout: no dots need be added to his commen-
tary.
But that paragon of excellence suffered martyrdom at his pupil's
hands.”

I can find no evidence in support of the last statement, which, indeed, is at variance with Badá'úní's exultant de- Fayḍí's miser­able death in 1004/1595. scription * of his painful and unpleasant death, * though perhaps the swollen face and blackened lips, which his bitter enemy describes with un­concealed Schadenfreude, may have aroused suspicions of poison. The same fanatical writer gives a series of most uncomplimentary chronograms composed by the orthodox to commemorate the death of an arch-heretic, such as:

<text in Arabic script omitted>

“When infidel Fayḍí died, Faṣíḥ said as the date of his death, ‘A dog
departed from the world in a foul fashion.’”

The simplest of them all are “Fayḍí was a heretic” (<text in Arabic script omitted>), “he died like a dog-worshipper” (<text in Arabic script omitted>), and “the rule of heresy broke” (<text in Arabic script omitted>), all of which yield the required date A.H. 1004 (A.D. 1595). Badá'úní also says that, with a view to restoring his shattered religious reputation, he composed a commen­tary on the Qur'án consisting entirely of undotted letters, adding unkindly that he was drunk and in a state of legal uncleanness when he wrote it. The author of the Majma'u'l- Fuṣaḥá * in alluding to this book (which he only knew by repute) says that the author “troubled himself to no purpose” (<text in Arabic script omitted>), and has no word of praise for his poems, on which the author of the Átash-kada has the tepid encomium that “they are not bad.” The fullest and most appreciative account of him which I have met with is that given by Shiblí Nu'mání in his Shi'ru'l-'Ájam. * He composed a Khamsa (“Quintet”) in imitation of Niẓámí, the titles of these five poems being Markaz-i-Adwár, Sulaymán u Bilqís, Nal u Daman (the most celebrated), Haft Kishwar, and Akbar-náma, but some of them remained incomplete. He also wrote many qaṣídas and ghazals, and produced several translations from the Sanskrit. None of his verses quoted by Shiblí appear to me so affecting as the following on the death of his child:

<text in Arabic script omitted>

Fayḍí's verses on the death of his child. “O brightness of my bright eyes, how art thou? Without
thee my days are dark; without me how art thou?
My house is a house of mourning in thine absence;
thou hast made thine abode beneath the dust: how
art thou?
The couch and pillow of thy sleep is on thorns and
brambles: O thou whose cheeks and body were as
jasmine, how art thou?”

Fayḍí was a man of varied learning and a great lover of books. His library contained four thousand six hundred Fayḍí's library. choice manuscripts, mostly autographs or copied during the authors' lifetimes. * He was generous and hospitable, and amongst those who enjoyed his hospi­tality was 'Urfí of Shíráz, to whom we now turn.

'Urfí, whose proper name was Jamálu'd-Dín Muḥammad and whose father was named Badru'd-Dín, was born and Account of 'Urfí. educated at Shíráz, but at an early age migrated to India, and, as already mentioned, attached himself to Fayḍí, with whom, however, he presently quar­relled. Badá'úní says * that one day he called on Fayḍí and found him caressing a puppy, whereupon he enquired what the name of “the young master” (makhdúm-záda) might be. “'Urfí,” replied Fayḍí, to which 'Urfí promptly replied, “Mubárak báshad!” which means “May it be fortunate!” but may be taken as alluding to Fayḍí's father Shaykh Mubárak and as meaning, “It should be Mubárak!”

'Urfí next won the favour of the Ḥakím Abu'l-Fatḥ of Gílán, * by whom he was introduced to that great nobleman and patron of letters 'Abdu'r-Raḥím, who succeeded to the title of Khán-khánán borne by his father Bayram Khán on the assassination of the latter in 968/1560-1. In due course he was presented to the Emperor Akbar himself, whom he accompanied on his march to Cashmere in 997/1588-9.

In spite of his opportunities and undoubted talents, 'Urfí's intolerable conceit and arrogance prevented him Unamiable character of 'Urfí. from being popular, and made him many ene­mies. Riḍá-qulí Khán accords him but a brief notice, * and observes that “the style of his poems is not admired by the people of this age.” Criticism and disparagement are, indeed, courted by a poet who could write: * <text in Arabic script omitted>

“Wherefore did Sa'dí glory in a handful of the earth of Shíráz
If he did not know that it would be my birthplace and abode?”

Nor is this an isolated example of his conceit, for in like fashion he vaunts his superiority to Anwarí, Abu'l-Faraj, Kháqání, and other great Persian poets, and this unamiable practice may have conduced to his unpopularity amongst his compatriots, who do not readily tolerate such disparage­ment of the national heroes. In Turkey, on the other hand, he had, as we have seen, a great influence and reputation, and likewise in India, so that Shiblí devotes to him fifty-two pages (pp. 82-133) of his Shi'ru'l-'Ajam, rather more than he devotes to Fayḍí, and much more than he gives to any other of the seven poets he mentions in the third volume of his work. But even Shiblí admits that his arrogance made him generally unpopular, a fact of which he was fully aware, as appears from the following poem, * wherein he complains of the hypocritical sympathy of the so-called “friends” who came to visit him when he was confined to bed by a severe illness: