A literary history of Persia - The Literary History of Persia, Volume 2

IT seems proper to the perspective of this most interesting and important period that we should begin by considering briefly The Nidhámu'lMulk's Siyásatnáma. the literary work of the Nidhámu'l-Mulk himself, who is its dominant figure. This, so far as we know (for the Waṣáyá, or “Testament,” is notoriously spurious), consists of one work, the Siyásat-náma, or “Treatise on the Art of Government,” of which the Persian text was published by the late M. Charles Schefer in 1891, and the translation into French, with valuable historical notes, in 1893; while a Supplement, containing notices bearing on the life and times of the Nidhámu'l-Mulk extracted from various Persian and Arabic works, was published in 1897. Before the appearance of this edition the book was hardly accessible, manuscripts of it being rare. M. Schefer used three (his own, now in the Bibliothèque Nationale, the British Museum Codex, and another from Berlin, with partial collation of the two St. Petersburg manuscripts). A sixth is to be found in the Pote Collection preserved in the library of King's College, Cambridge, and this, though modern, has been of great service to me in making much-needed corrections in the published text.

The Siyásat-náma comprises fifty sections or chapters treating of nearly every royal duty and prerogative and every department of administration. It was written in A.H. 484 (=A.D. 1091-92), only a year before the author's assassination, in response to a request addressed by Maliksháh to his most able and experienced advisers, ^213a that each of them should compose a treatise on government, pointing out what defects existed in the organisation and administration of his realms, what evil innovations had been suffered to creep in, and what good customs of former times had been allowed to fall into desuetude. Of the treatises composed in response to this request that of the Nidhámu'l-Mulk was most highly approved by Maliksháh, who said: “All these topics he has treated as my heart desired; there is nothing to be added to his book, which I adopt as my guide, and by which I will walk.” It was concluded in A.H. 485 (A.D. 1092-93), only a very short time before the author's assassination, as appears from the following strangely prophetic words occurring in the conclusion: “This is the Book of Government which hath been written. The Lord of the World had commanded his servant to make a compilation on this subject, which was done according to his command. Thirty-nine sections ^213b I wrote at once extempore, and submitted them to that exalted Court, where they met with approval. This was a very brief [outline], but afterwards I added to it, supplementing each chapter with such observations as were appropriate to it, and explaining all in lucid language. And in the year A.H. 485, when we were about to set out for Baghdád, I gave it to the private copyist of the Royal Library, Muḥammad Maghribí, and ordered him to transcribe it in a fair hand; so that should I not be destined to return from this journey, he may lay this book before the Lord of the World. …” The book, therefore, was not published until after the author's death, and probably its appearance was further delayed by the troubles and civil wars which immediately supervened on Maliksháh's decease.^214a

The Siyásat-náma is, in my opinion, one of the most valuable and interesting prose works which exist in Persian, both because of the quantity of historical anecdotes which it contains and because it embodies the views on government of one of the greatest Prime Ministers whom the East has produced—a Minister whose strength and wisdom is in no way better proved than by the chaos and internecine strife which succeeded his death. It is written in a style extraordinarily simple and unadorned, devoid of any kind of rhetorical artifice, at times almost colloquial and even careless, and marked by a good many archaic forms characteristic of this early period. A book so extensive in scope cannot be adequately reviewed in a work like this; and as it is accessible to European readers in M. Schefer's excellent French translation, such review, even were it possible, would be unnecessary. Attention should also be directed to a review of it from the pen of Professor Nöldeke, of Strassburg, which appeared in vol. xlvi (pp. 761-768) of the Zeitschrift der Deutschen Mor-genländischen Gesellschaft for 1892.

Seven chapters (xli-xlvii, pp. 138-205) are devoted to the denunciation of heretics, especially the Isma'ílís and Báṭinís. The author complains bitterly (p. 139) that Jews, Christians, Fire-worshippers (gabrs), and Carmathians are employed by the Government, and praises the greater stringency in this matter observed in Alp Arslán's reign. He argues hotly against the Shí'ites in general and the “Sect of the Seven” in particular, and endeavours to prove that their doctrines are in their essence originally derived from the communist pseudo-prophet Mazdak, whom Anúshirwán the Sásánian slew in the sixth century of the Christian era. ^214b Of Mazdak he gives a long and detailed account (pp. 166-181), and describes how, after the massacre of him and his followers, his doctrine was carried on and revived successively by the Khurramís or Khurram-dínán, ^215a Sindbád the Gabr, ^215b and 'Abdu'lláh b. Maymún al-Qaddáḥ, ^215c who first made the Isma'ílí sect powerful and formidable, and from whom, as their opponents declared, the Fáṭimí, or 'Alawí, Caliphs of Egypt were descended. This portion of the book also comprises a dissertation on the evils wrought by the interference of women in affairs of State, and on the hereditary character of the qualities essential to a great Minister, and there is a good deal of information about the activity of the Isma'ílí propagandists in Sámánid times, especially as to their brief ascendancy during the reign of the ill-starred Naṣr b. Aḥmad (A.D. 913-942), ^215d but little or nothing about the “New Propaganda,” and no explicit allusion to its originator, Ḥasan-i-Ṣabbáh. Implicit references to the growing power of the Báṭinís are, however, numerous, and there is no doubt that the whole of this portion of the book is levelled against Ḥasan-i-Ṣabbáḥ and his followers, as appears pretty clearly from the opening paragraphs of chap. xliii, ^215e which begins thus:—

“I desire to devote a few chapters to the rebellions of schismatics, so that all men may know what compassion for this Dynasty doth inspire me, and what loyalty and zeal I bear towards the Seljúq Kingdom, especially towards the Lord of the World (may God make his kingdom eternal!) and his children and household (may the Evil Eye be remote from his reign!).

“Schismatics have existed at all times, and in every region of the world, from the time of Adam until now, they have revolted against kings and prophets. There is no faction more accursed, more unsound in their religion, or more evil in their deeds than these people. Let [the King] know that behind their walls they meditate evil to this Kingdom, and seek to corrupt religion: their ears are straining for a sound and their eyes for an occasion of ill-doing. If (which God forbid !) any calamitous event (from which God be our refuge !) should befall this victorious dynasty (may God Almighty confirm its endurance !), or if any reverse should happen, these dogs will emerge from their hiding-places, and rise against this Empire to carry out their Shí'ite propaganda. Their power exceeds that of the Ráfiḍís and Khurram-dínís, and all that can be done will be done [by them], nor will they spare aught of sedition, slander or schism. Ostensibly they claim to be Muslims, but in reality their deeds are those of unbelievers, for their hearts (God curse them !) are contrary to their appearance, and their words to their deeds. The religion of Muḥammad the Elect (Muṣṭafá) hath, indeed, no more malignant and accursed foe than these, nor the Empire of the Lord of the World any worse enemy; and those persons who to-day have no power in this Empire, and claim to be Shí'ites are [in reality] of this faction, working to accomplish their aims, and strengthening them and carrying on their propaganda. Therefore they seek to persuade the Lord of the World to overthrow the House of the 'Abbásids; and should I remove the lid from this cauldron, how many disgraceful things would come forth therefrom! But since a certain wealth hath accrued to the Lord of the World through their activities, therefore he is prone to take some step in this direction, by reason of the increased revenue whereof they hold out hopes, making the King eager for wealth. They represent me as a prejudiced advocate, so that my advice on this matter is unlikely to prove acceptable; and their seditious cunning will only become apparent when I shall have departed hence. Then will the King know how great was my loyalty to this victorious Dynasty, and that I was not unacquainted with the character and designs of this faction, which I constantly presented to the Royal judgment (may God exalt it!), and did not conceal; though, seeing that my remarks on this subject were not acceptable, I did not again repeat them.”

The implication contained in the beginning of the italicised portion of the above extract is in striking agreement with a passage (f. 14^a) in the manuscript of the Ráḥatu'ṣ-Ṣudúr, where the author complains that “heretic myrmidons” abound and give rise to the distress and heavy taxation against which he protests. These heretics, he adds, come for the most part from the towns of Qum, Káshán, Ray, Ába, and Faráhán, and gain office by promising the King an increased revenue (tawfír, the very word used by the Nidhámu'l-Mulk in the passage above cited), “under which expression they cloak their exactions.” Some confirmation is hereby afforded to an incident in what I may call the classical legend of the counter-intrigues of the Nidhámu'l-Mulk and Ḥasan-i-Ṣabbáh, where the latter is represented as recommending himself to the King's favour by a fiscal optimism wherein was implied a disparagement of the Nidhámu'l-Mulk's finance.^217a

In concluding this too brief notice of a most interesting and valuable work, I feel bound to add that, though there is no Persian prose work on which I have lectured with so much pleasure and profit to myself—and I hope also to my hearers— as this, yet the historical anecdotes must be accepted with a certain reserve, while serious anachronisms are of constant occurrence. Thus, on p. 12 of the text, Ya'qúb b. Layth is represented as threatening to bring the Fáṭimid rival of the 'Abbásid Caliph al-Mu'tamid (who reigned from A.D. 870 until 892) from Mahdiyya, which was not founded until A.D. 910 at the earliest computation, and perhaps not till ten years later, and similar errors are common, especially in what concerns the “heretics,” with whom, as though by some prophetic instinct of his doom, the author seems to have been so painfully preoccupied as almost to lose his sense of historical proportion and perspective. Indeed, it seems by no means unlikely that his vehement denunciations of their doctrines, practices, and aims may have supplied them with the strongest incentive to his assassination.

I have already briefly alluded in the previous chapter to one of the most remarkable men of this epoch whose literary work we must now consider. I mean Náṣir-i-Khusraw, the poet,

Here is one of the picturesque incidents with which the Pseudo-Autobiography is adorned, and which, in all its essentials, occurs in a manuscript dated A.H. 714 (=A.D. 1314-15) preserved in the India Office Library:—^219a

“After much trouble we reached the city of Níshápúr, there being with us a pupil of mine, an expert and learned metaphysician.

Another fictitious episode in the Pseudo-Autobiography describes how Náṣir-i-Khusraw, having fled from Egypt to Another fiction of the PseudoAutobiography. Baghdád, is made wazír to the 'Abbásid Caliph al-Qádir bi'lláh, and sent by him as an ambassador to the Maláḥida, or “Heretics” (i.e., Assassins), of Gílán, who discover his identity with the philosopher whose works they admire, load him with unwelcome honours, and refuse to let him depart until, to secure his release, he compasses the death of their king by magical means, and afterwards, by the invocation of the planet Mars, destroys the army of his pursuers. One knows not which to admire the more, the supernatural features of this episode, or the gross anachronisms which it involves, for the Caliph al-Qádir died in A.D. 1031, while, as we have seen, the Assassins first established themselves in Gílán in A.D. 1090. One feature of this legend, however, seems to be a misplaced reminiscence of an incident which really belongs to the life of another later philosopher, Naṣíru'd-Dín of Ṭús, who, as is well known, actually did dedicate the original, or first edition, of his celebrated Ethics (the Akhláq-i-Náṣirí) to the Isma'ílí governor of Quhistán, Naṣíru'd-Dín 'Abdu'r-Raḥím b. Abí Manṣúr. Similarity of names, combined with a vague knowledge of Náṣir-i-Khusraw's connection with the Isma'ílí sect, no doubt suggested to the compiler of the Pseudo-Autobiography the idea of making Náṣir-i-Khusraw write a commentary on the Qur'án explaining the sacred text according to the heretical views of his host, which unfortunate undertaking is represented as the cause of the disaster at Níshápúr mentioned above.

Leaving the Pseudo-Autobiography, we must now proceed to consider Náṣir-i-Khusraw's genuine works, the prose Safar-náma , or Narrative of his Travels (edited and translated by Schefer, Paris, 1881); the Díwán, or collected poems (lithographed at Tabríz in A.H. 1280=A.D. 1864); the Raw-

The Safar-náma is written in the same simple and unadorned style as the Siyásat-náma. The author, who gives The Safar-náma. his full name as Abú Mu'íni'd-Dín Náṣir-i-Khusraw al-Qubádiyání al-Marwazí, ^221a says that he was employed for some while in Khurásán as a secretary and revenue-officer under Government, in the time of Chaghrí Beg Dá'úd the Seljúqid. In the autumn of A.D. 1045, being warned by a dream, he determined to renounce the use of wine, to which he had hitherto been much addicted, as being “the only thing capable of lessening the sorrow of the world,” and to undertake the pilgrimage to Mecca. At this time he was about forty years of age. He performed a complete ablution, repaired to the Mosque of Júzjánán, where he then happened to be, registered a solemn vow of repentance, and set out on his journey on Thursday, the sixth of Jumáda II, A.H. 437 (=December 19, A.D. 1045). He travelled by way of Sháburqán to Merv, where he tendered his resignation. Thence he proceeded to Níshápúr, which he quitted in the company of Khwája Muwaffaq (the same, probably, who appears in the 'Umar Khayyám legend as the tutor of the three companions), and, visiting the tomb of the Ṣúfí saint Báyazíd of Bisṭám at Qúmis, came, by way of Dámghán, to Samnán. Here he met a certain Ustád 'Alí Nisá'í, a pupil of Avicenna and a lecturer on arithmetic, geometry, and medicine, of whom he seems to have formed an unfavourable opinion. Passing onwards through Qazwín, he reached Tabríz on Ṣafar 20, A.H. 438 (=August 26, A.D. 1046), and there made the acquaintance of the poet Qaṭrán, to whom he explained certain difficult passages in the poems of Daqíqí and Manjík. From Tabríz he made his way successively to Ván, Akhláṭ, Bitlis, Arzan, Mayáfáraqín, Ámid, Aleppo, and Ma'arratu'n-Nu'mán, where he met the great Arabic philosophical poet Abu'l-'Alá al-Ma'arrí, of whose character and attainments he speaks in the warmest terms. Thence he came to Ḥamá, Tripoli, Beyrout, Sidon, Tyre, Acre, and Ḥayfá. After spending some time in Syria in visiting the tombs of prophets and other holy places, including Jerusalem and Bethlehem, he made his first pilgrimage to Mecca in the late spring of A.D. 1047. From Mecca he returned by way of Damascus to Jerusalem, whence, finding the weather unfavourable for a sea voyage, he decided to proceed by land to Egypt, and finally arrived in Cairo on Sunday, Ṣafar 7, A.H. 439 (=August 3, A.D. 1047).

In Egypt Náṣir-i-Khusraw remained two or three years, and this marks an epoch in his life, for here it was that he Náṣir-iKhusraw in Egypt. became acquainted with the splendour, justice, and wise administration of the Fáṭimid Caliph, al-Mustanṣir bi'lláh, and here it was that he was initiated into the esoteric doctrines of the Isma'ílí creed, and received the commission to carry on their propaganda and to be their “Proof” (Ḥujjat) in Khurásán. In the Safar-náma, which would seem to have been written for the general public, he is reticent on religious matters; but from two passages (pp. 40 and 42 of the text) it is evident that he had no doubt as to the legitimacy of the Fáṭimid pedigree, while as to the excellence of their administration, and the wealth, contentment, and security of their subjects, he is enthusiastic. His description of Cairo, its mosques (including al-Azhar), its ten quarters (ḥára), its gardens, and its buildings and suburbs is admirable; while the details which he gives of the Fáṭimid administration are most valuable. He seems to have been much impressed with the discipline of the army, and the regularity with which the troops were paid, in consequence of which the people stood in no fear of unlawful exactions on their part. The army comprised some 215,000 troops; viz., of cavalry, 20,000 Qayruwánís, 15,000 Bátilís (from Northwest Africa), 50,000 Bedouin from al-Ḥijáz, and 30,000 mixed mercenaries; and of infantry 20,000 black Maṣmúdís (also from North-west Africa), 10,000 Orientals (Masháriqa), Turks and Persians, 30,000 slaves ('abídu'sh-shirá), a Foreign Legion of 10,000 Palace Guards (Sará'ís) under a separate commander-in-chief, and lastly 30,000 Zanj or Æthiopians. The wealth of the bázárs filled him with wonder, and withal, he says, such was the high degree of public safety that the merchants did not deem it necessary to lock up their shops and warehouses.

“While I was there,” he says (p. 53), “in the year A.H. 439 (=1047-48), a son was born to the King, and he ordered public rejoicings. The city and bázárs were decorated in such wise that, should I describe it, some men would probably decline to believe me or to credit it. The shops of the cloth-sellers, money-changers, etc., were so [filled with precious things], gold, jewels, money, stuffs, gold-embroidery, and satin garments, that there was no place for one to sit down. And all feel secure in the [justice of the] King, and have no fear of myrmidons or spies, by reason of their confidence in him that he will oppress no one and covet no one's wealth.

“There I saw wealth belonging to private individuals, which, should I speak about it or describe it, would seem incredible to the people of Persia; for I could not estimate or compute their wealth, while the well-being which I saw there I have seen in no other place. I saw there, for example, a Christian who was one of the richest men in Cairo, so that it was said to be impossible to compute his ships, wealth, and estates. Now one year, owing to the failure of the Nile, grain waxed dear; and the King's Prime Minister sent for this Christian and said, ‘The year is not good, and the King's heart is oppressed on account of his subjects. How much corn canst thou give me either for cash or on loan?’ ‘By the blessing of the King and his minister,’ replied the Christian, ‘I have ready so much corn that I could supply Cairo with bread for six years.’ Now at this time there were assuredly in Cairo so many inhabitants that those of Níshápúr, at the highest computation, would equal but one-fifth of them, and whoever can judge of quantities will know how wealthy one must be to possess corn to this amount, and how great must be the security of the subject and the justice of the sovereign in order that such conditions and such fortunes may be possible in their days, so that neither doth the King wrong or oppress any man, nor doth the subject hide or conceal anything.”

Náṣir-i-Khusraw's journey, from the time that he quitted his country until the time when he returned, lasted exactly seven years (from Thursday, 6 Jumáda II, A.H. 437, until Saturday, 26 Jumáda II, A.H. 444=December 19, 1045, until October 23, 1052), and during this time he performed the Pilgrimage five times. He finally returned to his country from the Ḥijáz by way of Tiháma, al-Yaman, Laḥsá, and Qaṭíf to Baṣra, where he remained about two months; and thence by Arraján, Iṣfahán, Ná'in, Ṭabas, Tún, and Sarakhs to Merv.

We must now leave the Safar-náma and pass on to the Díwán. Before doing so, however, it is necessary to advert Disproof of the Dual Theory. to a theory which, though championed by so great a scholar as the late Dr. Rieu, ^224a and also by Pertsch ^224b and Fagnan, ^224c must, I think, in the light of further investigations, especially those of Schefer and Ethé, be definitely abandoned. ^224d According to this theory, there were two distinct persons called Náṣir-i-Khusraw, both bearing the kunya Abú Mu'ín, one the poet, philosopher, and magician; the other the traveller.

“A few facts,” says Dr. Rieu, who puts the case most clearly “will show that we have to do with two distinct persons. Ḥakím Náṣir, as the poet is generally called, was born in Iṣfahán, traced his pedigree to the great Imám 'Alí b. Músá Riḍá, and was known as a poet before the composition of the present work (i.e., the Safar-náma ); his poem, the Rawshaná'í-náma, is dated A.H. 420 (see Pertsch, Gotha Catalogue, p. 13; the date A.H. 343, assigned to the same work in the Leyden copy, Catalogue, vol. ii, p. 108, is probably erroneous). Our author, on the contrary, designates himself by two nisbas which point to Qubádiyán, a town near Balkh, and to Merv, as the places of his birth and of his usual residence, and lays no claim either to noble extraction, or to any fame but that of a skilled accountant. Ḥakím Náṣir was born, according to the Ḥabíbu's-Siyar , Bombay edition, vol. ii, juz 4, p. 67, in A.H. 358, or, as stated in the Dabistán, vol. ii, p. 419, in A.H. 359, while our author appears from his own statement to have been forty years old in A.H. 437.”

Other difficulties are raised as to the identification of the poet and the traveller, but most of them arise from the inaccuracies of late writers, and are at once resolved by an attentive perusal of the Safar-náma and the Díwán side by side. Thus the traveller seems to have been entitled Ḥakím; for the voice which reproaches him in his dream (Safar-náma, p. 3) says to him, when he defends his indulgence in wine, “Insensibility and intoxication are not refreshment; one cannot call him Ḥakím (wise) who leads men to lose their senses.” The notoriously inaccurate Dawlatsháh is responsible for the statement that the poet was a native of Iṣfáhan, a statement conclusively disproved by the following verse from his Díwán (p. 241):—

Garchi mará aṣl Khurásániyast,
Az pas-i-píriyy u mihiyy u sarí
Dústiy-i-'itrat u khána[-i-] Rasúl
Kard mará Yumgí u Mázandarí.

“Although I am originally of Khurásán, after [enjoying] spiritual
leadership, authority and supremacy,
Love for the Family and House of the Prophet have made me
a dweller in Yumgán and Mázandarán.”

And lastly, as regards the date of the poet's birth, we again have his own explicit statement (Díwán, p. 110) that he was born in A.H. 394 (=A.D. 1003-4), and in the same poem, on the same page, four lines lower down, he says that he was forty-two years of age when his “reasonable soul began to seek after wisdom,” while elsewhere (e.g., p. 217), using round numbers, he says, as in the Safar-náma, that he was forty years of age at this turning-point in his life. Nothing, in short, can be more complete than the agreement between the data derived from the Safar-náma and those derived from the Díwán, and the identity of authorship becomes clearer and clearer the more closely we study them. Forty, as we have said, is a round number, elsewhere appearing as forty-two, and in fact the poet must have been nearly forty-three (437-394=43) when he set out on his travels. He was just fifty when he returned from Egypt to Khurásán, and nearly all the poems which compose his Díwán must have been written after that date. Besides the two allusions to his age at the time of his conversion, to which we have already referred, I have notes of some seventeen passages in which he mentions his age at the time of writing. These are: age 50 (pp. 20, 219, 230, 263); age 50 and odd years (p. 78); age 60 (pp. 24, 79, 102, 164, 173, 179, 199, 207, 244); age 60 and odd years (p. 70); and age 62 (pp. 166, 171). In other passages he speaks of his increasing feebleness (p. 5), and of feeling the approach of death (pp. 6, 7), but we have no data wherewith to determine the date of his decease.

Some two years ago I carefully read through the whole Díwán in the Tabríz edition (which comprises 277 pages and, so far as I can reckon, about 7,425 verses), with a view to writing a monograph on the author, taking notes on peculiarities of grammar, vocabulary, and diction; allusions to places, persons, and events; and passages throwing light Study of the Díwán. on the author's religious and metaphysical views, especially as regards his relations to the Isma'ílí sect and the Fáṭimid Caliphs. Some of these results, since I have not yet found time to elaborate them elsewhere, may perhaps with advantage be briefly recorded here.^227a

As regards the diction, it is too technical a matter to be discussed at length in a work not exclusively addressed to Diction. Persian scholars, but the language and grammatical peculiarities are thoroughly archaic, and bear an extraordinary resemblance to those of the Old Persian Commentary which I described at great length in the J.R.A.S. for July, 1894 (pp. 417-524), and which, as I there endeavoured to show, was written in Khurásán during the Sámánid period. Some forty rare words, or words used in peculiar senses, and numerous remarkable grammatical forms and constructions, are common to both works.

The places mentioned include Baghdád, Balkh, Egypt, Gurgán, Ghazna, India, the mythical cities of Jábulqá and Places mentioned. Jábulsá, Kháwarán, Khatlán, Khurásán, Mázan-darán, the Oxus, the Plain of Qipcháq, Ray, Sind, Sístán, Sipáhán (i.e., Iṣfahán), Shushtar, Sodom, Ṭiráz, Tún, Yumgán, and Zábulistán. Of these, Khurásán, the poet's native place (pp. 33, 241), to which he was sent in later life as the “Proof” (Ḥujjat, pp. 169, 178, 181, 221, 232, 247, 256), and wherein he was as “the Ark of Noah” (p. 169) amidst the “beasts” (p. 266) who constituted its ill-ruled (p. 243) and evil (pp. 225, 233, 241) population, is most often addressed, generally with censure (pp. 48, 49), as a spiritual salt-desert (203), wherein the writer was compelled to remain in hiding (p. 185). The name of Yumgán, the place of his final retirement, comes next in frequency; he speaks of a sojourn of fifteen years therein (p. 167), and of his loneliness and exile (pp. 161, 170, 227), but while at one time he speaks of himself as a prisoner there (p. 243), at another he calls himself a king (Shahriyár, pp. 159, 161). Most of the other places are mentioned only once, save Balkh, which is mentioned seven times, and Baghdád, which is mentioned four times. Allusion is also made to the Turks and the Ghuzz (p. 7).

The persons referred to are much more numerous. Of Old Testament patriarchs, prophets, &c., we find mention of Persons mentioned. Adam and Eve, Noah, Shem, Ham, Abraham and Sarah, Moses and Aaron, Joshua the son of Nun, and Daniel. Christ is mentioned (p. 178) with the utmost respect as “that fatherless son, the brother of Simon,” who by the Water of God restored the dead to life. Of the Greeks, Socrates, Plato, Euclid, and Constantine are mentioned; of the old legendary kings of Persia, Jamshíd, Ḍaḥḥák (Azhidaháka), and Ferídún; of the Sásánians, Shápúr II, the son of Ardashír, and the noble Qáren; of Arab poets and orators, an-Nábigha, Saḥbán b. Wá'il, Ḥassán b. Thábit, and al-Buḥturi; and of Persian poets, Rúdagí (p. 273), 'Unṣurí (pp. 11, 12, 172), Kisá'í (pp. 19, 28, 38, 51, 133, 247, 251), Ahwází (p. 249), and the Sháhnáma of Firdawsí (pp. 183, 190).

I do not know on what Dr. Ethé bases his assertion ^228a that Náṣir-i-Khusraw “does not share Kisá'í's hatred for the three first Caliphs, but identifies 'Alí with his predecessors Abú Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthmán, through whom the Divine Incarnation was, as it were, transmitted to him.” In the Díwán I find six allusions to 'Umar, two of which couple his name with that of Abú Bakr, while 'Uthmán seems not to be mentioned at all. Some of these, indeed, imply no condemnation, but surely this can hardly be said of the following:—

“Without doubt 'Umar will give thee a place in Hell if thou
followest the path of those who are the friends of 'Umar”
(p. 62).
“Be not sad at heart because in Yumgán thou art left alone and
art become a prisoner;
'Umar drove Salmán from his home: to-day thou art Salmán in
this land” (p. 263).

And in another place (p. 262) he says: “How dost thou contend so much with me for 'Umar?”

Similarly of 'Á'isha and Fáṭima he says (p. 241):—

“'Á'isha was step-mother to Fáṭima, therefore art thou to me of the
faction (Sḥí'at) of the step-mother;
O ill-starred one! Thou art of the faction of the step-mother;
it is natural that thou should'st be the enemy of the step-
daughter !”

'Alí, Fáṭima, the Imáms, the Fáṭimid Caliphs (especially al Mustanṣir), Salmán the Persian, Mukhtár the Avenger of Kerbelá, and the Shí'ites are, on the other hand, constantly mentioned in terms of warmest praise and commendation; while the 'Abbásid Caliph is termed dív-i-'Abbásí, “the 'Abbásid devil” (p. 261); the Sunnís or “Náṣibís” are vehemently denounced; Abú Ḥanífa, Málik and ash-Sháfi'í, the founders of three of the four orthodox schools, are represented (pp. 115, 119, 209) as sanctioning dice, wine-drinking, and graver crimes; and the orthodox jurisconsults (fuqahá) are mentioned with contempt (pp. 58, 82, 181). Three of the great Ṣúfí Shaykhs—Báyazíd of Bisṭám, Dhu'n-Nún of Egypt, and Ibráhím Adham—are incidentally mentioned (pp. 237, 195, 264) in a manner which implies commendation. Of Muhammadan rulers there is one reference to the Sámánids (p. 191), combined with a scornful allusion to “the servile crew” (qawmí zír-dastán)—presumably the Ghaznawí slave-kings—who succeeded them in Khurásán. The Faríghúniyán, or first dynasty of Khwárazmsháhs, are once mentioned (p. 7), as is Ṭughril the Seljúq (p. 143), and Sulṭán Maḥmúd of Ghazna, the latter four or five times; and there is one allusion to the Sámánid minister Abu'l-Faḍl al-Bal'amí, the translator into Persian of Ṭabarí's history (p. 263).

Of other religions than Islám, Náṣir-i-Khusraw mentions the Jews (pp. 53, 83, 92, 95, 138), Christians (pp. 14, 15, 67,

A good deal of autobiography, besides what has been already noticed, may be gleaned from the Díwán, and the 76th qaṣída

His religious and philosophical views are abundantly illustrated, and, indeed, form the main subject of his verse. Speaking Religious views. generally, they are, as we have seen, typically Isma'ílí or Báṭiní. The favourite doctrine of ta'wíl, or allegorical interpretation, is strongly insisted on; without it the letter of Scripture is bitter as brine (p. 3) and misleading as water running under straw. Paradise, Hell, the Resurrection, the Torment of the Tomb, Antichrist (Dajjál), and the Rising of the Sun from the West, are all allegorically explained. This interpretation is the very Spirit of Religion p. 33), and is necessary (p. 39), but the key to it has been committed by God to the representatives of the Prophet's House (pp. 12, 30, 60, 64, 124, 142), who are its sole custodians (p. 4). Revelation is necessary (p. 29), and the nobility of the Arabic language is due solely to the fact that it was the medium of this revelation (p. 249), but mere parrot-like reading of the Qur'án is useless (p. 214). Piety without knowledge and understanding avails nothing (p. 37), but Knowledge, great as is its honour, is but the handmaid of Religion (pp. 150, 235), which is the fragrance of the world (p. 188). There exists naught but God (p. 193), who can neither be called Eternal nor Temporal (p. 166); phenomena are but an illusory reflection of Him (p. 106), yet are full of significance (p. 197), because the Universal Intelligence is immanent in them (p. 14), and man is the microcosm (p. 232). Space and Time are infinite and unbounded, and the heavens will not perish (p. 4), yet is the world not eternal (pp. 12, 39, 40). The doctrine of Free Will is supported against that of Fatalism by the following amongst other passages:—

“Though God creates the mother, and the breast, and the milk,
the children must draw for themselves the mother's milk”
(p. 56).
“Thy soul is a book, thy deeds are like the writing: write not
on thy soul aught else than a fair inscription:
Write what is wholly good in the book, O brother, for the pen
is in thine own hand!” (p. 149).

The Fáṭimid Caliphs are the only lawful rulers (p. 210), and the keepers of the Garden of God (p. 213), and a Gate (Báb) to the Imám is to be found in every country (p. 87). Allusions also occur to the mystical number Seven (pp. 88, 131), and to the characteristic Isma'ílí doctrine of the Asás (pp. 176-178).

Lastly we may notice, before giving translations of some of his poems, his profound contempt for Royal Courts (p. 6), courtiers (pp. 151, 230), panegyrists (pp. 7, 11, 80, 141, 144), elegant writers and literary triflers (p. 228), and writers of ghazals and erotic poetry (pp. 108, 141, 145, 171).

The following hundred verses are selected from the first five Translations from the Díwán. poems (ten pages) of the Díwán, and in each poem the omission of verses, wherever it occurs, is signified by asterisks:—

“God's gracious Word in truth is an Ocean of speech, I
ween,
Teeming with gems and jewels, and pearls of luminous
sheen.
Bitter to outward seeming, like the Sea, is the Scripture's
page,
But precious as pearls of price is the Inward Sense to the
sage.
Down in the depths of the Ocean are gems and pearls
galore;
Seek then a skilful diver, and bid farewell to the shore.
Wherefore hath God bestowed in the depths of the Ocean's
brine
All these pearls of price, and jewels so rare and fine?
Wherefore if not for the Prophet, who made the Inward
Sense
The portion of Wisdom's children, but the Letter a Rock
of Offence?
A handful of salt-stained clay hath the Diver offered to
thee
Because in thine heart he beheld but envy and enmity.
Strive from the Outward Form to the Inward Sense to
win
Like a man, nor rest content like an ass with a senseless
din.

Darius, for all his thousands of servants and thanes, alone
Had to depart and abandon the chattels he deemed his
own.
For the world is a thievish game, from which no man may
save
Himself, be he Sultan or subject; his goods, be he master
or slave.
^10. That is the day when all men the guerdon they've earned
shall win;

The just the fruits of his justice, the tyrant his wage of
sin.
In the sight of the Holy Martyrs, in the midst of that
fierce dismay,
Will I grasp the robe of Zahrá ^234a on that fearful Judgement
Day,
And God, the Judge Almighty, shall avenge to the full the
woes
I have suffered so long at the hands of the House of the
Prophet's foes.'

“How can the Heavens rest on thee bestow,
When they themselves nor pause nor peace may know?
This world's the ladder to that world, O Friend;
To mount, thou needs must climb it to the end.
In these two roofs, one whirling and one still, ^234b
Behold that Secret-knowing Power and Skill;
How, unconstrained, in one harmonious whole
He blended Matter gross and subtle Soul;
How He did poise this dark stupendous Sphere
In Heaven's hollow dome of emerald clear.
What say'st thou? ‘Endlessly recurring day
And month at last shall wear that dome away!’
Nay, for he hath exempted from such wear
The circling Sky, the Water, and the Air.
^20. The canvas of His Art are Time and Place;
Hence Time is infinite, and boundless Space. ^234c
Should'st thou object, ‘Not thus the Scriptures tell,’
I answer that thou hast not conned them well.
And o'er the Scriptures is a Guardian set
From whom both man and jinn must knowledge get.
God and His Prophet thus desired: but No!
You ‘much prefer the views of So-and-so.’
Thy meat in man begetteth human power;
To dog-flesh turns the meat that dogs devour.”

“Were the turns of the Wheel of Fortune proportioned to
worth alone
O'er the Vault of the Lunar Heaven would have been my
abode and throne.
But no! For the worth of Wisdom is lightly esteemed in
sooth,
By fickle Fate and Fortune, as my father warned me in
youth.
Yet knowledge is more than farms, and estates, and rank,
and gold;
Thus my dauntless spirit, whispering, me consoled:
‘With a heart more brightly illumined than ever the Moon
can be
What were a throne of glory o'er the Sphere of the Moon
to thee?’
To meet the foeman's falchion and Fate's close-serried
field
Enough for me are Wisdom and Faith as defence and
shield.

^30. My mind with its meditations is a fair and fruitful tree,
Which yieldeth its fruit and blossom of knowledge and
chastity.
Would'st thou see me whole and completed? Then look,
as beseems the wise,
At my essence and not my seeming, with keen and dis-
cerning eyes.
This feeble frame regard not; remember rather that I
Am the author of works which outnumber and outshine
the stars in the sky.
God, to whose name be glory! me hath exempted and freed
In this troubled life of transit from the things that most
men need.
I thank the Lord Almighty, who plainly for me did trace
The way to Faith and Wisdom, and opened the Door of
Grace,
And who, in His boundless mercy, in this world hath made
me one
Whose love for the Holy Household is clear as the noon-
day sun.

O dark and ignoble body, never on earth have I seen
A fellow-lodger so hurtful as thee, or a mate so mean !
Once on a time my lover and friend I accounted thee,
And thou wast my chosen comrade in travel by land and
sea.
But fellest of foes I found thee, spreading thy deadly
snare
To entrap me, whilst I of thy scheming was heedless and
unaware,
Till finding me all unguarded, and free from all fear of
guile,
You strove to take me captive by treachery base and vile.
^40. And surely, but for the Mercy of God and His Gracious
Will,
Thy rascally schemes had wrought me a great and endur-
ing ill.
But not the sweetest nectar could tempt me now, for I
know
What to expect at the hands of so fierce and deadly a foe.
Sleep, O senseless body, and food are thy only care,
But to me than these is Wisdom better beyond compare!
'Tis the life of a brute, say the sages, to dream but of
water and grass,
And shall I, who am dowered with reason, live the life of
a soulless ass?
I will not dwell, O Body, with thee in this World of Sense;
To another abode God calls me, and bids me arise from
hence.
There are talent and virtue esteemed, not food and sleep;
Then enjoy thy food and slumber, and let me my virtue
keep!
Ere me from their earthly casings uncounted spirits have
fled,
And I, though long I linger, may be counted already dead.
Through the lofty vault of Ether with the wings of
obedience I
One day shall soar to the heavens as the sky-lark soars to
the sky.
Fearful of God's Fore-knowledge, quaking at God's Decree,
Is the mass of my fellow-creatures, yet these are as guides
to me:
‘Speak of the first as “Reason,” call the latter “the Word”’—
Such was the explanation that I from a wise man heard.

^50. Being myself in essence a rational, logical soul,
Why should I fear myself? Shall the Part be in fear of
the Whole?
O man who dost rest contented to claim the Determinist's
view,
Though you lack a brute's discernment, must I lack dis-
cernment too?”

“Bear from me to Khurásán, Zephyr, a kindly word,
To its scholars and men of learning, not to the witless
herd,
And having faithfully carried the message I bid thee bear,
Bring me news of their doings, and tell me how they fare.
I, who was once as the cypress, now upon Fortune's wheel
Am broken and bent, you may tell them; for thus doth
Fortune deal.
Let not her specious promise you to destruction lure:
Ne'er was her covenant faithful; ne'er was her pact secure.

Look at Khurásán only: she is crushed and trodden still
By this one and then by that one, as corn is crushed in
the mill.
You boast of your Turkish rulers:^{1 237a} remember the power
and sway
Of the Záwulí Sulṭán Maḥmúd ^237b were greater far in their
day.
The Royal House of Faríghún ^237c before his might did bow,
And abandon the land of Júzján; ^237d but where is Maḥmúd
now?

'Neath the hoofs of his Turkish squadrons the glory of
India lay,
While his elephants proudly trampled the deserts of far
Cathay.

And ye, deceived and deluded, before his throne did sing:
‘More than a thousand summers be the life of our Lord
the King!
Who, on his might relying, an anvil of steel attacks,
Findeth the anvil crumble under his teeth like wax!’
The goal of the best was Záwul, as it seems, but yesterday,
Whither they turned, as the faithful turn to Mecca to pray.
Where is the power and empire of that King who had
deemed it meet
If the heavenly Sign of Cancer had served as a stool for
his feet?
Alas! Grim Death did sharpen against him tooth and claw,
And his talons are fallen from him, and his teeth devour
no more!

Be ever fearful of trouble when all seems fair and clear,
For the easy is soon made grievous by the swift-transform-
ing sphere.
Forth will it drive, remorseless, when it deemeth the time
at hand,
The King from his Court and Castle, the lord from his
house and land.
^70. Ne'er was exemption granted, since the Spheres began to
run,
From the shadow of dark eclipses to the radiant Moon
and Sun.
Whate'er seems cheap and humble and low of the things
of earth
Reckon it dear and precious, for Time shall lend it worth.
Seek for the mean in all things, nor strive to fulfil your
gain,
For the Moon when the full it reacheth is already about
to wane.

Though the heady wine of success should all men drug
and deceive,

Pass thou by and leave them, as the sober the drunkards
leave.
For the sake of the gaudy plumage which the flying pea-
cocks wear,
See how their death is compassed by many a springe and
snare!

Thy body to thee is a fetter, and the world a prison-cell:
To reckon as home this prison and chains do you deem
it well?
Thy soul is weak in wisdom, and naked of works beside:
Seek for the strength of wisdom: thy nakedness strive to
hide.

Thy words are the seed; thy soul is the farmer, the world
thy field:
Let the farmer look to the sowing, that the soil may abun-
dance yield.

Yet dost thou not endeavour, now that the Spring is here,
To garner a little loaflet for the Winter which creepeth
near.
The only use and profit which life for me doth hold
Is to weave a metrical chaplet of coral and pearls and
gold!”

^80. “Though the courts of earthly rulers have shut their doors
in my face,
Shall I grieve, while I still have access to the Court of the
Lord of Grace?
In truth I desire no longer to deal with the mighty and
proud,
Beneath whose burden of favour my back would be bent
and bowed.

To con the Holy Scriptures, to renounce, to strive, to
know—
These are the four companions who ever beside me go.
The Eye, the Heart, and the Ear through the long night-
watches speak,

And with their counsels strengthen my body so frail and
weak.
‘Guard me well, I pray thee, and prison me close,’ saith
the Eye,
‘From gazing on things forbidden, and the lust that comes
thereby.’
‘Close the road against me, and close it well,’ saith the
Ear,
‘To every lying slander, to gossip and spiteful sneer.’
What saith the Heart within me? ‘From Passion's curse
and ban
Keep me pure and unsullied, as befits an upright man.’
Then crieth the Voice of Reason, ‘To me was the watch
and ward
Over the Soul and Body given by God the Lord.
Hold thou nor speech nor commerce with the armies of
Hate and Lust,
For I am there to confront them, and to fight them, if
fight they must.’
Against the commands of Reason can I rebel and revolt,
When I am preferred through Reason alone to the sense-
less dolt?
^90. For the Fiend had caught and constrained me to walk in
his captives' train,
And 'twas Reason who came and saved me, and gave me
freedom again.
Twas Reason who seized my halter and forced me out of
the road
Whereby the Fiend would have led me at last to his own
abode.
Though this Cave of the World is truly a tenement dark
and dire,
If my ‘Friend of the Cave’ ^240a be Reason, what more can
my heart desire?
Deem not the World, O son, a thing to hate and to
flee,
For a hundred thousand blessings it hath yielded even to
me.

Therein is my walk and achievement, my tongue and my
gift of speech;
It yields me a ground of action, and offers me scope for each.
And ever it cries in warning, ‘I am hastening fast away,
So clasp me close to your bosom, and cherish me whilst
you may!’

Reason was ever my leader, leading me on by the hand,
Till it made me famed for Wisdom through the length and
breadth of the land.
Reason it was which gave me the Crown of Faith, I say,
And Faith hath given me virtue, and strength to endure
and obey.

Since Faith at the Last Great Judgement can make my
reckoning light,
Shall I fear, if Faith require it, to lose my life outright?
So the World is now my quarry, and the hunter who hunts
am I,
Though I was once the quarry, in the days that are now
gone by.
^100. Though others it hunt and capture, I stand from its dangers
clear:
My Soul is higher than Fortune: then why should I Fortune
fear?”

I should like, did space allow, to quote other extracts from Náṣir-i-Khusraw's Díwán, which reveals throughout a combination of originality, learning, sincerity, enthusiastic faith, fearlessness, contempt for time-servers and flatterers, and courage hardly to be found, so far as I know, in any other Persian poet. In particular I would like to call the attention of Persian students to a very remarkable poem (No. 102, pp. 146-7), which is, unfortunately, too full of technical terms connected with the Pilgrimage to be easily translated or rendered intelligible without a disproportionate amount of commentary. In this poem Náṣir-i-Khusraw describes how he goes out to meet the pilgrims returning from Mecca, and in particular to welcome a friend who had accompanied the Pilgrimage. After the interchange of greetings, he says to his friend: “Tell me, how didst thou honour that noble Sanctuary? When thou didst array thyself in the iḥrám, ^242a what resolve didst thou make in that consecration (taḥrím)? Didst thou make wholly unlawful (ḥarám) to thyself wrongdoing, and whatever stands between thee and God the Gracious?” “No,” replies his friend. “Didst thou,” continues Náṣir, “when thou didst cry Labbík! ^242b with reverence and understanding, hear the echo of God's Voice, and didst thou answer as Moses answered?” “No,” replies his friend. “And when,” continues Náṣir, “thou didst stand on Mount 'Arafát, and wert permitted to advance, didst thou become a knower ('árif) of God and a denier of self, and did some breath of Divine Wisdom (ma'rifat) reach thee?” “No,” replies his friend. Point by point Náṣir questions him as to his comprehension of the symbolic meanings of the ritual acts he has performed, and finally, having received a negative reply to every question, concludes: “O Friend, then thou hast not [truly] performed the Pilgrimage, nor stood in the station of self-obliteration; thou hast gone, seen Mecca, and come back, having bought the fatigues of the desert for silver. Hereafter, shouldst thou desire to perform the Pilgrimage, do even as I have taught thee!” Here we see in its best light the application of the characteristic Isma'ĺí doctrine of ta'wíl, or allegorical interpretation.

In strong contrast to the essentially devout spirit which pervades the poems included in the lithographed edition and in Blasphemous verses ascribed to Náṣir-iKhusraw. most manuscripts of the Díwán, are certain freethinking and almost blasphemous verses ascribed to Náṣir-i-Khusraw, which are widely known in Persia even at the present day, and are contained in a few manuscripts of his poetical works. Of two of the most celebrated of these pieces I published translations at p. 480 of my Year amongst the Persians, and I reproduce them here. The first is given by Jámí in his Baháristán in the short notice consecrated to Náṣir-i-Khusraw. Its purport is as follows:—

“O God, although through fear I hardly dare
To hint it, all this trouble springs from Thee!
Hadst Thou no sand or gravel in Thy shoes
What made Thee suffer Satan willingly?
'Twere well if Thou hadst made the lips and teeth
Of Tartar beauties not so fair to see.
With cries of ‘On!’ Thou bid'st the hound pursue;
With cries of ‘On!’ Thou bid'st the quarry flee!”

The second is cynical rather than blasphemous:

“Dead drunk, not like a common sot, one day
Náṣir-i-Khusraw went to take the air.
Hard by a dung-heap he espied a grave
And straightway cried, ‘O ye who stand and stare,
Behold the world! Behold its luxuries!
Its dainties here—the fools who ate them there!’”

A third piece scoffing at the resurrection of the body is given by Schefer in his Introduction to the Safar-náma, together with the two couplets in which Naṣíru'd-Dín Ṭúsí is said to have replied to it. The sense of this third piece (which I have also heard quoted in Persia) is as follows:—

“Some luckless wretch wolves in the plain devour;
His bones are picked by vulture and by crow.
This casts his remnants on the hills above;
That voids its portion in the wells below.
Shall this man's body rise to life again?
Defile the beards of fools who fancy so!”

Naṣíru'd-Dín's reply is as follows:—

“Shall this man's body rise to life again
When thus resolved to elements? I trow
God can remake as easily as make:
Defile the beard of Náṣir-i-Khusraw!”

We must now speak briefly of Náṣir-i-Khusraw's remaining works. Those which Time has spared to us are three, two Náṣir-i-Khusraw's remaining works. of which—the Rawshaná'í-náma and the Sa'ádat-náma —have been printed, while one—the Zádu'l-Musáfirín —exists, so far as I know, only in the MS. formerly belonging to M. Schefer, and now preserved in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris. Another, the Iksír-i-A' dham, is mentioned by Ḥájji Khalífa. Less reliable authors, such as Dawlatsháh and the Átash-kada, mention a Kanzu'l-Ḥaqá'iq (“Treasury of Verities”), a Qánún-i-A'dham (“Greatest Law”), a work on the Science of the Greeks, a treatise on Magic, two works entitled Dastúr-i-A'dham and al-Mustawfí, and the Commentary on the Qur'án stated in the Pseudo-Autobiography to have been composed for the Maláḥida, or “Heretics” of the Isma'ílí sect. It is doubtful how many of the last-mentioned works ever really existed, ^244a since no mention of them occurs in any book written within four centuries or so of Náṣir's death.

The Rawshaná'í-náma, or “Book of Light,” is a mathnawí poem containing (in Ethé's edition) 579 verses, and The Rawshaná'ínáma. written in the hexameter hazaj metre. There are two manuscripts in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris (one formerly in the possession of M. Schefer), one at Leyden, one at Gotha, and one in the India Office. A line in this poem (l. 555 in Ethé's edition) giving the date of its composition forms the basis of the most serious (indeed, the only serious) argument in favour of the view already discussed that there were two separate Náṣir-i-Khusraws. The reading adopted by Ethé gives the date A.H. 440 (= A.D. 1048-49), and this most plausible conjecture (for it does not occur in any known manuscript) he supports by many strong arguments (Z.D.M.G., xxxiii, pp. 646-649, and xxxiv, p. 638, n. 5). But the date is variously given in the different MSS. The Leyden and the two Paris MSS. give A.H. 343 (= A.D. 954-55), the Gotha MS. A.H. 420 (= A.D. 1029), and the India Office MS. A.H. 323 (= A.D. 934-35). The lines giving the first two dates do not scan, and may therefore be rejected on metrical grounds, and the latter is entirely at variance with all the facts known to us about Náṣir-i-Khusraw. For it is quite certain that the Safar-náma and the Díwán are by the same author, of whose life the main outline and principal dates are perfectly well known; and as he was born, as stated explicitly in the Díwán and by implication in the Safar-náma, in A.H. 394 (= A.D. 1003-4), he evidently cannot have written the Rawshaná'í-náma either in A.H. 323 or 343. And to suppose that there were two poets with the same name—Náṣir—the same kunya—Abú Mu'ín—the same pen-name—Ḥujjat— and the same patronymic, both of whom were connected with Yumgán in Khurásán, and both of whom wrote moral and didactic verse in exactly the same style, is a hypothesis which hardly any one will venture to maintain. I have therefore no doubt that Dr. Ethé's ingenious conjecture is correct, and that, as he supposes, the Rawshaná'í-náma was concluded in Cairo on the Feast of Bayrám, A.H. 440 (= March 9, A.D. 1049). For the fuller discussion of this matter, I must refer the reader to Dr. Ethé's exhaustive monograph.

So much space has already been devoted to Náṣir-i-Khusraw, and so much remains to be said of other important writers of this period, that I cannot discuss either the Rawshaná'í-náma or the Sa'ádat-náma in this place as I should wish, but this is of less importance, since the European reader has at his disposal Dr. Ethé's metrical German translation of the first and M. Fagnan's French prose translation of the second. Both are didactic and ethical mathnawí poems written in the same hazaj metre; and both appear to me far inferior in poetic merit to the Díwán. The Sa'ádat-náma is divided into thirty short chapters, and comprises 287 verses, and deals almost exclusively with practical ethics, while the Rawshaná'í-náma discusses also various metaphysical and teleological matters, and includes a very characteristic section (ll. 513-523) in reprobation of secular poets “whose verses have no other object than to gain silver and gold.”

Leaving Náṣir-i-Khusraw, we must now pass to the consideration of four poets, all of whom achieved celebrity in one The four quatrain-writers of this period. special form of verse—a form, as we have seen, typically Persian—the rubá'í or quatrain. These four are, first, the famous Astronomer-Poet of Níshápúr, 'Umar Khayyám; secondly, the dialect-poet—the Persian Burns, as he may be termed—Bábá Ṭáhir of Hamadán; thirdly, the celebrated Ṣúfí, or mystic, Abú Sa'íd b. Abi'l-Khayr; and lastly the pious Shaykh al-Anṣárí, or Pír-i-Anṣár, who, as Ethé says (Neupers. Litt., p. 282), “through his numerous half-mystical, half-ethical writings, which are composed sometimes in rhymed prose, sometimes in prose mingled with actual ghazals and rubá'ís, contributed more than any one else to the gradual fusion of mystical and didactic poetry, and prepared the way for the great Saná'í.”

Let us begin first with 'Umar Khayyám (or al-Khayyámí, as he is called in Arabic), who, thanks to the genius of Fitz- 'Umar Khayyám. Gerald, enjoys a celebrity in Europe, especially in England and America, far greater than that which he has attained in his own country, where his fame rests rather on his mathematical and astronomical than on his poetical achievements. The oldest accounts which we possess of him are contained in the Chahár Maqála, or “Four Discourses,” of Nidhámí-i-'Arúḍí of Samarqand, and, be it noted, not in that section of the work which treats of Poets, but that which treats of Astrologers and Astronomers. This Nidhámí (not to be confounded with the later and more celebrated Nidhámí of Ganja) wrote his “Four Discourses” in the latter half of the twelfth century of our era, and in Anecdote xxvii (pp. 100-101 of my translation) relates as follows:—

“In the year A.H. 506 (= A.D. 1112-13) Khwája Imám 'Umar Khayyám and Khwája Imám Mudhaffar-i-Isfizárí had alighted in Account of 'Umar Khayyám from the Chahár Maqála. the city of Balkh, in the Street of the Slave-sellers, in the house of Amír Abú Sa'd, and I had joined that assembly. In the midst of that friendly gathering I heard that Proof of the Truth (Ḥujjat-i-Ḥaqq) 'Umar say, ‘My grave will be in a spot where the trees will shed their blossoms on me twice a year.’ This thing seemed to me impossible, though I knew that one such as he would not speak idle words.

“When I arrived at Níshápúr in the year A.H. 530 (= A.D. 1135-36), it being then some years ^247a since that great man had veiled his countenance in the dust, and this lower world had been bereaved of him, I went to visit his grave on the eve of a certain Friday ^247b (seeing that he had the claim of a master on me), taking with me a guide to point out his tomb. So he brought me out to the Ḥíra (or Ḥírí) Cemetery; I turned to the left, and his tomb lay at the foot of a garden-wall, over which pear-trees and peach-trees thrust their heads, and on his grave had fallen so many flower-leaves that his dust was hidden beneath the flowers. Then I remembered that saying which I had heard from him in the city of Balkh, and I fell to weeping, because on the face of the earth, and in all the regions of the habitable globe, I nowhere saw one like unto him. May God (blessed and exalted is He) have mercy upon him, by His Grace and His Favour! Yet although I witnessed this prognostication on the part of that Proof of the Truth 'Umar, I did not observe that he had any great belief in astrological predictions; nor have I seen or heard of any of the great [scientists] who had such belief.”

The next anecdote in the Chahár Maqála (No. xxviii) also refers to 'Umar, and runs as follows:—

“In the winter of A.H. 508 (= A.D. 1114-15) the King ^247c sent a messenger to Merv to the Prime Minister Ṣadru'd-Dín Muḥammad b. al-Mudhaffar (on whom be God's Mercy), bidding him tell Khwája Imám 'Umar to select a favourable time for him to go hunting, such that therein should be no snowy or rainy days. For Khwája Imám 'Umar was in the Minister's company, and used to lodge at his house.

“So the Minister sent a message to summon him, and told him what had happened. The Khwája went and looked into the matter for two days, and made a careful choice; and he himself went and superintended the mounting of the King at the auspicious moment. When the King was mounted and had gone but a short distance, the sky became overcast with clouds, a wind arose, and snow and mist supervened. All present fell to laughing, and the King desired to turn back; but Khwája Imám ['Umar] said: ‘Have no anxiety, for this very hour the clouds will clear away, and during these five days there will be not a drop of moisture.’ So the King rode on, and the clouds opened, and during those five days there was no wet, and no cloud was seen.

“But prognostication by the stars, though a recognised art, is not to be relied on, and whatever the astrologer predicts, he must leave [its fulfilment] to Fate.”

These earliest notices of 'Umar show us that he was alive and well in A.H. 508 [A.D. 1114-15], that his grave was at Níshápúr, and that the idea prevalent in the 'Umar Khayyám Society that he was buried under a rose-bush is a delusion based on the double meaning of the word gul, which means a flower in general as well as the rose in particular, the context in the full form of the original anecdote, as here given, showing clearly that not rose-leaves, but the blossoms of peach-trees and pear-trees, are here meant.

Until the year 1897 the numerous biographical notices of 'Umar published in Europe were, almost without exception,

The notices of 'Umar given by Zhukovski in the original, with Russian translation, and by Ross in English, are, four from books composed in the thirteenth century of our era, one of the fourteenth, and one of the fifteenth and one of the late sixteenth or early seventeenth, the two latter being inserted, in spite of their late date, on account of their intrinsic interest. Many others from late biographers might be added to this list, but most of them do but repeat, and generally embellish or distort, their sources. It is worth remarking, however, that 'Awfí, the author of the oldest biography of Persian poets, the Lubálu'l-Albáb (early thirteenth century), does not so much as mention 'Umar Khayyám; while even Dawlatsháh (who completed his book in A.D. 1487) does not accord him a separate notice, but merely mentions him incidentally (p. 138 of my edition) in speaking of his descendant, Sháhfúr-i-Ashharí.

The oldest reference to him, after the two cited from the Chahár Maqála on pp. 247-8 supra, appears to be that contained The Mirṣádu'l'Ibád. in the Mirṣádu'l-'Ibád, or “Observatory of God's Servants,” composed in A.D. 1223 by Najmu'd-Dín Rází (Zhukovski, loc. cit., pp. 341-2; Ross, loc. cit., pp. 361-2), and its importance, as Zhukovski points out, lies in the fact that the author, a fervent Ṣúfí mystic, speaks of 'Umar as “an unhappy philosopher, atheist and materialist,” adducing in proof of this assertion two of his quatrains, the first expressing his complete agnosticism, the second reproaching the Creator for suffering His imperfect creatures to exist, or His perfect creatures to perish (Whin-field, No. 126), which quatrains, says Najmu'd-Dín, demonstrate “the height of confusion and error.”

The next notice occurs in al-Qifṭí's History of the Philosophers (pp. 243-4 of Dr. Julius Lippert's recent edition, Leipzig,

“How long, how long [will ye talk of] the Philosophy of the
Greeks?
Study also the Philosophy of those of the Faith.”

“The later Ṣúfís,” says al-Qifṭí, “have found themselves in agreement with some part of the apparent sense of his verse, and have transferred it to their system, and discussed it in their assemblies and private gatherings; though its inward meanings are to the [Ecclesiastical] Law stinging serpents, and combinations rife with malice.” Here also, in short, he is represented as “without an equal in astronomy and philosophy,” but as an advanced freethinker, constrained only by prudential motives to bridle his tongue. The notice concludes with the citation of four of 'Umar's Arabic verses from a poem of which six verses (three of these four and three others) are quoted in the work next to be mentioned.

The Nuzhatu'l-Arwáḥ (“Recreation of Souls”) of ash-Shahrazúrí was also compiled in the thirteenth century, and ash-Shahrazúrí's Nuzhatu'lArwáḥ. exists both in an Arabic and a Persian version. The notice of 'Umar which it contains is printed in both versions at pp. 327-329 of Zhukovski's article. He translates the Persian into Russian, while Ross in his English translation follows the Arabic. Each version quotes verses by him in the language in which it is written. The Persian version cites the quatrains numbered 193 and 230 in Whinfield, while the Arabic cites three fragments of his Arabic verse, the first containing four, the second six, and the third three couplets. The second of these three pieces is the same from which a shorter extract is given in the work last mentioned. Shahrazúrí's account is a good deal fuller than Al-Qifṭí's. It describes 'Umar as a follower of Avicenna, but ill-tempered and inhospitable, and mentions the titles of two of his philosophical works otherwise unknown. His memory is stated to have been so good that, having read a certain book seven times through at Iṣfahán, he afterwards wrote it out almost word for word at Níshápúr. His knowledge of Arabic philology and the seven readings of the Qur'án was remarkable. He was disliked by the great theologian Abú Ḥámid Muḥammad al-Ghazálí, who conversed with him on at least one occasion, and, it is said, by Sanjar, but was held in high honour by Maliksháh. Immediately before his death he was reading in the Shifá of Avicenna the chapter treating of the One and the Many, and his last words were: “O God! Verily I have striven to know Thee according to the range of my powers, therefore forgive me, for indeed such knowledge of Thee as I possess is my [only] means of approach to Thee.”

The next notice in point of time is that occurring in al-Qazwíní's Átháru'l-'Bilád (“Monuments of Countries”), s.v. Níshápúr, p. 318 of Wüstenfeld's edition. Here also 'Umar is described as “versed in all kinds of philosophy, especially Al-Qazwíní's Átháru'l Bilád. mathematics,” and as favoured by Sulṭán Malik-sháh. He is also credited with the invention of clay scare-crows, and an account is given of the method which he once adopted to cover with shame and confusion a certain theologian who, while denouncing him from the pulpit as a freethinker and atheist, used privately to come to him early in the morning to take lessons in philosophy.

We have now come to the end of the thirteenth century authorities, and before passing on to those of a later date we Character of 'Umar as it appears in thirteenth-century writings. may note that these earlier records consistently represent 'Umar Khayyám as essentially a philosopher, astronomer, and mathematician, and that, so far from his being represented as a mystic, he is denounced by the Ṣúfí Najmu'd-Dín Rází as the arch-freethinker of his time, while al-Qifṭí speaks of the later Ṣúfís being deceived by the outward appearance of some of his words and adapting them to their own ideas.

Our one fourteenth-century authority of weight is the Jámi'u't-Tawáríkh of Rashídu'd-Dín Faḍul'lláh, a great history The Jámí'u'tTawáríkh. of the Mongols, including a section on General History, composed in the first quarter of the fourteenth century, and still, unfortunately, in spite of its vast importance, unpublished. ^252a In this book we first find what is now generally known as the Story of the Three Friends, already discussed on pp. 190-193 supra. Part of this I published in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for April, 1899 (pp. 409-411), in a short article entitled ??et more Light on 'Umar Khayyám, and, since this is the oldest form of a legend which has attracted a good deal of attention amongst the admirers of the Astronomer-Poet and his interpreter Fitz-Gerald, it seems to me desirable to reprint this translation here, so far as it concerns 'Umar. This narrative runs as follows:—^253a

“Now the cause of the enmity and mistrust which existed between the Nidhámu'l-Mulk and Ḥasan-i-Ṣabbáḥ was that they and 'Umar Khayyám were at school together in Níshápúr, and there, in boyish fashion, conceived for one another a devoted friendship which culminated in their partaking of each other's blood and registering a solemn vow that whichever of them should attain to high rank and lofty degree should protect and help the others.

“Now it happened, by a train of circumstances fully set forth in the History of the House of Seljúq, that the Nidhámu'l-Mulk attained to the position of Prime Minister. 'Umar Khayyám waited upon him and reminded him of the vows and covenants of their boyish days. The Nidhámu'l-Mulk, recognising these old claims, said, ‘I give thee the government of Níshápúr and its dependencies.’ But 'Umar, who was a great man, and withal a philosopher and a man of sense, replied, ‘I have no desire to administer a province or to exercise authority over the people. Rather assign to me a stipend or pension.’ So the Nidhámu'l-Mulk assigned him an allowance of ten thousand dínárs from the treasury of Níshápúr, to be paid over to him annually without deduction or tax.”

The narrative continues with the arrival of Ḥasan-i-Ṣabbáh to claim his share of the Nidhámu'l-Mulk's favours, and describes how he refuses the government of Ray or Iṣfahán, and will be satisfied with nothing less than a high post at Court, which position he abuses by trying to compass the downfall of his benefactor, whom he hopes to succeed as Prime Minister. How he failed in his attempt, was covered with disgrace, and, fleeing from Khurásán, made his way to Iṣfahán and thence to the Court of the Fáṭimid Caliph al-Mustanṣir at Cairo, where he espoused the cause of Nizár, and returned to Persia to carry on the “New Propaganda” in his name, are matters which have been already discussed in the last chapter, and will be found set forth with many embellishments in the Ta'ríkh-i-Guzída (ed. and trans. Gantin, pp. 486-497), Dawlatsháh's Memoirs (pp. 138-141 of my edition) and other later writers.

The next notice of 'Umar Khayyám cited by Zhukovski is from the Firdawsu't-Tawáríkh, or “Paradise of Histories,”

The last notice which Zhukovski gives is from a very modern work, the Ta'ríkh-i-Alfí, or “Millennial History,”

“It appears from numerous books that he (i.e., 'Umar Khayyám) held the doctrine of Metempsychosis. It is related that there was in Níshápúr an old College, for the repairing of which donkeys were bringing bricks. One day, while the Sage (Ḥakím, i.e., 'Umar) was walking with a group of students, one of the donkeys would on no account enter (the College). When 'Umar saw this, he smiled, went up to the donkey, and extemporised [the following quatrain]:—

Ay rafta, wa báz ámada “Bal hum” gashta,
Nám-at zi mayán-i-nám-há gum gashta,
Nákhun hama jam' ámada, u sum gashta
Rísh uz pas-i-kún dar amáda dum gashta.

“O lost and now returned ‘yet more astray,’ ^254a
Thy name from men's remembrance passed away,
Thy nails have now combined to form thy hoofs,
Thy tail's a beard turned round the other way!”

The donkey then entered, and they asked 'Umar the reason of this. He replied, ‘The spirit which has now attached itself to the body of this ass [formerly] inhabited the body of a lecturer in this college, therefore it would not come in until now, when, perceiving that its colleagues had recognised it, it was obliged to step inside.’”

It is impossible here to enumerate all the late accounts of 'Umar Khayyám, many of which contain anecdotes obviously invented to explain the production of certain quatrains. He is strangely ignored by the great biographer Ibn Khallikán, and by Ibn Shákir, who strove in his Fawátu'l-Wafayát to supply the omissions of his predecessor. Ḥájji Khalífa, the great Turkish bibliographer, mentions him three times (ii, 584; iii, 570; vi, 273), once in connection with the science of Algebra, once in connection with Maliksháh's reformed Calendar, and once as contemporary with another author whom he is discussing, but omits to mention the year of his death, which was therefore presumably unknown to him. The date ordinarily given for his decease ^255a is A.H. 517 (= A.D. 1123-24), but I cannot find any strong authority for it. It is, however, certain from the Chahár Maqála that he died between A.D. 1115 and 1135, and “some years” before the latter date, and that his father's name was Ibráhím. Although described as indolent and averse from writing or teaching, Ross ^255b has compiled a list of ten books (including the Persian quatrains, and the Zíj-i-Maliksháhí, for which he was only in part responsible) ascribed to him by various authorities. Most of these were scientific or philosophical treatises in Arabic, one of which, his Treatise on Algebra, was edited by Woepcke with a French translation in 1851, while another, containing some observations on Euclid's definitions, exists in manuscript in the Leyden Library.

It is, of course, in the Quatrains that the interest of most readers centres, but with the appalling mass of literature which “Omarian” literature. the popularity of FitzGerald's rendering has produced in Europe and America it is quite impossible to deal in a book like the present. This literature contains some of the best and some of the worst literary work which I have ever seen, and the judicious bibliography which forms Appendix xlix (pp. 438-594) of Nathan Haskell Dole's beautiful “Multi-variorum edition” (Boston and London, 1898) should suffice to satisfy the most insatiable “Omarian,” though at the end the diligent compiler is fain to admit (p. 594) that “certainly all the extant references to Omar in all languages would require a lifetime [to elucidate], and make a library in itself.” With every desire for brevity, however, we must add a few more words on Zhukovski's researches as to the “wandering quatrains” (i.e., quatrains commonly attributed to 'Umar, but ascribed on older and better authority to other poets), and Heron Allen's careful and exhaustive analysis of the relation existing between Fitz-Gerald's rendering and the originals on which it was based.

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; ^257a 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. ^259a 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, ^260a 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,

The meeting here described probably took place about A.H. 447 or 450 (A.D. 1055-58), so that we may safely reject the date (A.H. 410 = A.D. 1019-20) assigned to Bábá Ṭáhir's death by Riḍá-qulí Khán in the Riyáḍu'l-'Árifín, while the statement cited by Zhukovski in the article alluded to in a preceding footnote, that Bábá Ṭáhir conversed with Avicenna (who died in A.D. 1036) contains no inherent improbability. The anecdote cited above is quite in character both with the little we know of Bábá Ṭáhir from other sources, and with the consideration and respect still shown by the highest and noblest in Muhammadan countries to half-crazy (majdhúb) dervishes with a reputation for sanctity. Such I have myself seen wander at will into Turkish Government offices, where they always met with a kind and even deferential reception.

We now pass on to the third great quatrain-writer, Abú Sa'íd b. Abi'l-Khayr (born at Mahna, in the district of Abú Sa'íd b. Abi'l-Khayr. Kháwarán, on December 7, A.D. 967, died on January 12, A.D. 1049), whom Ethé describes as the first master of theosophic verse, the first to popularise the quatrain as a vehicle of religious, mystic, and philosophic thought, and to make it “the focus of all mystic-pantheistic irradiations,” and the first “to give the presentations and forms of the Ṣufí doctrine those fantastic and gorgeous hues which thenceforth remained typical of this kind of poetry.” Like Bábá Ṭáhir, Abú Sa'íd is said to have come into personal relations with Avicenna, and when they separated after their first interview, according to the popular story, the mystic said, “What I see he knows,” while the philosopher said, “What I know he sees.” ^261a But Ethé has shown that (as, indeed, was to be expected) they were on important points of belief (e.g., the efficacy of faith without works) in direct antagonism (pp. 52-53 of the article mentioned in n. 1 ad calc).

The materials for Abú Sa'íd's biography are exceptionally complete, for, besides the usual hagiologies and anthologies,

The first volume contains the texts of two Persian works, the Asráru't-Tawḥíd fí Maqámáti'sh-Shaykh Abí Sa'íd (“Mysteries of the Divine Unity, treating of the Stations of Shaykh Abú Sa'íd”), and the short Risála-i-Ḥawrá'iyya (“Treatise of the Houri”). The former, a lengthy work of 485 pages, was compiled by the Saint's great-great-grandson, Muḥammad b. al-Munawwar b. Abí's-Sa'íd b. Abí Ṭáhir b. Abí Sa'íd b. Abi'l-Khayr of Mayhana, ^262b and, as Zhukovski has shown in his learned preface, between the years A.H. 552 and 599 (A.D. 1157 and 1203), for it alludes to the death of Sanjar the Seljúq, which took place in the former year, and is dedicated to Ghiyáthu'd-Dín Muḥammad b. Sám, King of Ghúr, who died in the latter year. Zhukovski's text is based on two MSS., those of St. Petersburg and Copenhagen, and the importance of the work lies, as he points out, in the fact that it is one of the original sources used by 'Aṭṭár, Jámí, and other later compilers, and that it rests almost entirely on the statement of contemporaries transmitted either orally or in the form of notes and memoranda. Besides being one of the oldest monographs on Ṣúfí saints, and giving a very clear picture of the dervish life of that period, it is also of considerable philological interest, and the editor has wisely preserved unchanged the archaic forms in which it abounds. Both manuscripts date from the eighth century of the Flight (fourteenth of our era).

The Risála-i-Ḥawrá'iyya is a short treatise of five pages written by 'Abdu'lláh b. Maḥmúd of Shásh (or Chách) in Transoxiana to explain one of Shaykh Abú Sa'íd's quatrains.

The second volume published by Zhukovski comprises the text of an ancient and unique manuscript in the British Museum (dated A.D. 1299) whereof the greater part treats of “the spiritual teachings and supernatural powers” of Shaykh Abú Sa'íd. The author of this work, which amounts to seventy-eight pages of printed text, and was written somewhat earlier than the Asráru't-Tawḥíd, was also a great-great-grandson of the Saint, and a son, as Zhukovski conjectures, of Abú Rawḥ Luṭfu'lláh.

Besides these ample materials, to do justice to which would require in itself a volume, we have numerous notices of the Saint's life in later biographical works like the Haft Iqlím (cited by Ethé), Ta'ríkh-i-Guzída, Nafaḥátu'l-Uns (ed. Nassau Lees, pp. 339-347), &c., as well as Oriental editions of his Rubá'iyyát, which are sometimes combined in one volume with those of 'Umar Khayyám and Bábá Ṭáhir, and other kindred matter. His life, however, seems to have been uneventful, his experiences lying, to make use of the idiom of the Persian mystics, rather in the “World of Souls” than in the “World of Horizons.” In this respect he differs essentially from the writers and poets to whom the first part of this chapter was devoted.

To Dr. Ethé, I think, belongs the credit of establishing Shaykh Abú Sa'íd's pre-eminent importance in the history of Persian Mysticism—an importance hardly recognised even by his own countrymen, who, following the well-known saying of their greatest theosophical writer, Jalálu'd-Dín Rúmí, commonly reckon Saná'í and 'Aṭṭár, both of whom were subsequent to Abú Sa'íd, as the first and second of their three arch-mystagogues. Yet, as Dr. Ethé has amply shown in the selection of the Saint's quatrains which he published (and the same holds good of his sayings, whereof an abundance is recorded by his biographers), all the characteristics of Persian mystical thought and diction now for the first time present themselves in a combination which has ever since remained typical of Persian, Turkish, and Indian Ṣúfí poets. The following quatrains, selected from Dr. Ethé's monograph, and numbered with the numbers which he there assigns to them, will, I think, suffice to prove the truth of this assertion:—

(1)

“To gladden one poor heart of man is more,
Be sure, than fanes a thousand to restore:
And one free man by kindness to enslave
Is better than to free of slaves a score.”

(2)

“O Thou whose Visage makes our world so fair,
Whose union, night and day, is all man's prayer,
Art kinder unto others? Woe is me!
But woe to them if they my anguish share!”

(5)

“In search of martyrdom the Gházís go ^264a
To fight Faith's battles: do they then not know
That martyred lovers higher rank, as slain
By hand of Friend, and not by hand of Foe?”

(6)

“Let no one of Thy boundless Grace despair;
Thine own elect shall ever upward fare:
The mote, if once illumined by Thy Sun,
The brightness of a thousand suns shall share.”

(10)

“Till Mosque and College fall 'neath Ruin's ban,
And Doubt and Faith be interchanged in man,
How can the Order of the Qalandars ^265a
Prevail, and raise up one true Musulmán?”

(13)

“Sir, blame me not if wine I drink, or spend
My life in striving Wine and Love to blend;
When sober, I with rivals sit; but when
Beside myself, I am beside the Friend.”

(17)

“Said I, ‘To whom belongs thy Beauty!’ He
Replied, ‘Since I alone exist, to Me;
Lover, Beloved and Love am I in one,
Beauty, and Mirror, and the Eyes which see!’”

(18)

“I sought the Leech and told my inward Pain:
Said he, 'From speech of all but Him refrain;
As for thy diet, Heart's-blood shall it be,
And from both Worlds thy thoughts shalt thou restrain.”

(19)

“Those men who lavish on me titles fair
Know not my heart, nor what is hidden there;
But, if they once could turn me inside out,
They'd doom me to the Burning, that I'll swear!”

(20)

“Thou bid'st me love, and midst Thy lovers pine,
Of Sense and Reason strip'st this Heart of mine;
Devout and much revered was I, but now
Toper, and gad-about, and libertine.”

(21)

“That Moon in Beauty rich and Constancy,
Beauty's high Zenith is His least Degree;
Gaze on His Sun-bright Face; or, can'st thou not,
On those dark curls which bear it company.”

(27)

“My countenance is blanched of Islám's hue;
More honour to a Frankish dog is due!
So black with shame's my visage that of me
Hell is ashamed, and Hell's despairing crew.”

(28)

“When me at length Thy Love's Embrace shall claim
To glance at Paradise I'd deem it shame,
While to a Thee-less Heaven were I called,
Such Heaven and Hell to me would seem the same.”

(30)

“What time nor Stars nor Skies existent were,
Nor Fire nor Water was, nor Earth, nor Air,
Nor Form, nor Voice, nor Understanding, I
The Secrets of God's One-ness did declare.”

(32)

“Brahmin, before that cheek rose-tinted bow
Of fourteen-year-old beauty, for I vow
That, failing eyes God-seeing, to adore
Fire is more fit than to adore a cow!”^266a

(33)

“O God, I crave Thy Grace for hapless me!
For hapless me enough Thy Clemency!
Each some protector, some defender claims;
But I, poor friendless I, have none but Thee!”

(38)

“By whatsoever Path, blesséd the Feet
Which seek Thee; blesséd He who strives to meet
Thy Beauty; blesséd they who on it gaze,
And blessed every tongue which Thee doth greet!”

(54)

“The Gnostic, who hath known the Mystery,
Is one with God, and from his Self-hood free:
Affirm God's Being and deny thine own:
This is the meaning of ‘no god but HE.’”

(55)

“Last night I passed in converse with the Friend,
Who strove to break the vows which I would mend:
The long Night passed: the Tale was scarce begun:
Blame not the Night, the Tale hath ne'er an end!”

(61)

“Since first I was, ne'er far from Thee I've been;
My lucky star hath served me well, I ween;
Extinguished in Thine Essence, if extinct,
And if existent, by Thy Light I'm seen.”

And here, to conclude, is the quatrain ascribed to Avicenna, with the reply of Shaykh Abú Sa'íd. The former runs:—

“'Tis we who on God's Grace do most rely,
Who put our vices and our virtues by,
For where Thy Grace exists, the undone done
Is reckoned, and the done undone thereby.”

This is Abú Sa'íd's reply:—

“O steeped in sin and void of good, dost try
To save thyself, and thy misdeeds deny?
Can sins be cancelled, or neglect made good?
Vainly on Grace Divine dost thou rely!”

The verses above cited illustrate most of the salient peculiarities of Ṣúfí thought and diction. There is the fundamental conception of God as not only Almighty and All-good, but as the sole source of Being and Beauty, and, indeed, the one Beauty and the one Being, “in Whom is submerged whatever becomes non-apparent, and by Whose light whatever is apparent is made manifest.” Closely connected with this is the symbolic language so characteristic of these, and, indeed, of nearly all mystics, to whom God is essentially “the Friend,” “the Beloved,” and “the Darling”; the ecstasy of meditating on Him “the Wine” and “the Intoxication”; His self-revelations and Occultations, “the Face” and “the Night-black Tresses,” and so forth. There is also the exaltation of the Subjective and Ideal over the Objective and Formal, and the spiritualisation of religious obligations and formulæ, which has been already noticed amongst the Isma'ílís, from whom, though otherwise strongly divergent, the Ṣúfís probably borrowed it. Last, but not least, is the broad tolerance which sees Truth in greater or less measure in all Creeds; recognises that “the Ways unto God are as the number of the souls of men”; ^268a and, with the later Ḥáfidh, declares that “any shrine is better than self-worship.”^268b

Innumerable sayings and anecdotes of Abú Sa'íd are recorded by his diligent biographers. A very few examples of these must suffice. Being once asked to define Ṣúfíism, he said, “To lay aside what thou hast in thy head (such as desires and ambitions), and to give away what thou hast in thy hand, and not to flinch from whatever befalls thee.” “The veil between God and His servant,” he observed on another occasion, “is neither earth nor heaven, nor the Throne nor the Footstool: thy selfhood and illusions are the veil, and when thou removest these thou hast attained unto God.” They described to him how one holy man could walk on the water, how another could fly in the air, and how a third could in the twinkling of an eye transport himself from one city to another. “The frog can swim and the swallow skim the water,” he replied; “the crow and the fly can traverse the air, and the Devil can pass in a moment from East to West. These things are of no great account: he is a man who dwells amongst mankind, buys and sells, marries, and associates with his fellow-creatures, yet is never for a single moment forgetful of God.”

It is said that one of Abú Sa'íd's favourite verses, forming part of an Arabic poem addressed by Kuthayyir to his beloved 'Azza, was this:—

“I would answer thy voice did'st thou call me, though over my
body lay
Heavy the earth of the grave-yard, and my bones were crumbled
away”;

a verse which strongly recalls Tennyson's beautiful lines in Maud:—

“She is coming, my own, my sweet;
Were it ever so airy a tread,
My heart would hear her and beat,
Were it earth in an earthy bed;
My dust would hear her and beat,
Had I lain for a century dead;
Would start and tremble under her feet,
And blossom in purple and red.”

On his tombstone was engraved the following verse in Arabic:—

“I ask thee, nay, command thee, when comes my time to die,
To carve upon my tombstone, ‘Here doth a lover lie.’
That perchance some other lover, who Passion's laws doth
know,
May halt his feet at my grave, and greet the lover who lies
below.”^269a

Of Shaykh Abú Isma'íl 'Abdu'lláh Anṣárí of Herát, chiefly known for his Munáját, or Supplications, and his Rubá'iyyát,

“O God! Two pieces of iron are taken from one spot, one becomes a horse-shoe and one a King's mirror. O God! Since From the Munáját. Thou hadst the Fire of Separation, why didst Thou raise up the Fire of Hell? O God! I fancied that I knew Thee, but now I have cast my fancies into the water. O God! I am helpless and dizzy; I neither know what I have, nor have what I know!”

This well-known quatrain is attributed to him:—

“Great shame it is to deem of high degree
Thyself, or over others reckon thee:
Strive to be like the pupil of thine eye—
To see all else, but not thyself to see.”

The following is also typical:—

“I need nor wine nor cup: I'm drunk with Thee;
Thy quarry I, from other snares set free:
In Ka'ba and Pagoda Thee I seek:
Ka'ba, Pagoda, what are these to me?”

Ethé (loc. cit., p. 282) enumerates the following works of Shaykh 'Abdu'lláh Anṣárí: the Naṣíhat, or “Advice,” dedi- Other works of Shaykh-iAnṣárí. cated to the Nidhámu'l-Mulk; the Iláhí-náma, or “Divine Book”; the Zádu'l-'Árifín, or “Gnostics' Provision”; the Kitáb-i-Asrár, or “Book of Mysteries”; a new and enlarged redaction of Sullamí's Ṭabaqát-i-Ṣúfíyya, or Biographies of Ṣúfí Saints; and a prose Romance of Yúsuf and Zulaykhá entitled Anísu'l-Muríaín wa Shamsu'l-Majális, or “The Companion of Disciples and Sun of Assemblies.”

We must now pass on to some of the chief non-mystical poets of this period, of whom four at least deserve mention,

“In Tabríz I saw a poet named Qaṭrán. He wrote good poetry, but did not know Persian well. He came to me bringing the Díwáns of Manjík and Daqíqí, which he read with me, questioning me about every passage in which he found difficulty. Then I explained, and he wrote down the explanation. He also recited to me some of his own poems.”

Both 'Awfí (Lubáb, vol. ii of my edition, pp. 214-221) and Dawlatsháh (pp. 67-69) consecrate separate notices to Qaṭrán, but both are meagre in biographical details. According to the former he was a native of Tabríz, according to the latter, of Tirmidh, while Schefer conjectures that he was born in the mountains of Daylam, between Qazwín and the Caspian Sea. Dawlatsháh speaks of him as the founder of a school of poetry which included such distinguished poets as Anwarí, Rashídí of Samarqand, Rúḥí of Walwálaj, Shams-i-Símkash, 'Adnání, and Pisar-i-khum-khána (“the Son of the Tavern”), and adds that the eminent secretary and poet, Rashídu'd-Dín Waṭwáṭ, used to say: “I consider Qaṭrán as incontestably the Master of Poetry in our time, and regard the other poets as being so rather by natural genius than by artistic training.” And it is certainly true that with him poetry becomes infinitely more artificial and rhetorical than with most of his predecessors, while, as Dawlatsháh adds, he especially cultivated the more difficult verse-forms, such as the murabba' (foursome), mu-khammas (fivesome), and double rhyme (dhu'l-qáfiyatayn). In this latter device he is especially skilful, and, though imitated by some later poets, is surpassed by few. Amongst his imitators in this respect was Sanjar's Poet-Laureate Mu'izzí, who has a celebrated poem in double rhyme ^272a beginning:—

“Fresh as rose-leaves freshly fallen dost thou on my breast rest;
Didst thou erst in Heaven's embraces as a nursling pressed
rest?”

This ingenious artifice is very difficult to imitate in English, and as it is the special characteristic of nearly all his verse, ^272b which depends for its beauty rather on form than idea, it must be left to those who can read it in the original to judge of its merit. The above attempt to reproduce this artifice in a single verse of English is, indeed, inadequate; each line should end with a word which in spelling and pronunciation exactly corresponds with the last syllable of the preceding word, like farsang (parasang) and sang (stone), nárang (orange) and rang (colour), Ámúy (the Oxus) and múy (hair), and so on; and to produce the effect in English it would be necessary to compose verses of which each line should, besides observing the ordinary laws of rhyme and metre, end with pairs of words like “recoil, coil,” “efface, face,” “refuse, use,” and the like. But in Persian the figure, though very artificial, is pretty enough when skilfully handled.

Asadí the younger, named 'Alí, who concluded his heroic poem, the Garshásp-náma (one of the numerous imitations of Asadí the younger, of Ṭús. the Sháhnáma), in A.D. 1066, must be carefully distinguished from his father Abú Naṣr Aḥmad, the teacher of Firdawsí and author of the “strife-poems” (munádharat) discussed at pp. 149-152 supra, who died in the reign of Sulṭán Mas'úd, i.e., before A.D. 1041. One point of great interest connected with the younger Asadí is that we possess a complete manuscript—and that the oldest known Persian manuscript, dated Shawwál, A.H. 447 (= December, 1055, or January, 1056)—entirely written in his own handwriting. This manuscript is in the Vienna Library, and has been beautifully edited by Dr. Seligmann (Vienna, 1859), while a German translation by 'Abdu'l-Kháliq (“Abdul Chalig Achundow”) was printed, without date, at Halle. It is a copy of a work on Pharmacology, entitled Kitábu'l-abniya 'an ḥaqá'iqi'l-adwiya (“The Book of Principles on the True Nature of Drugs”), composed by Abú Manṣúr Muwaffaq b. 'Alí of Herát, and the copyist in the colophon calls himself “'Alí b. Aḥmad al-Asadí of Ṭús, the Poet.”

Asadí's Garshásp-náma, an epic poem describing the adventures and achievements of Garshásp, an old legendary hero of The Garsháspnáma. Sístán, contains some nine or ten thousand verses. It is very similar in style to its prototype, the Sháhnáma, but as I have not had access to any one of the ten manuscripts enumerated by Ethé, ^273a and have only at my disposal the portions published by Turner Macan in vol. iv of his edition of the Sháhnáma (pp. 2099 et seqq.), I am unable to say anything more about it

Of greater interest and importance is his Persian Lexicon (Lughat-i-Furs), preserved in the Vatican MS., the publication The Lughat-iFurs. of which in Göttingen in 1897 is, perhaps, the greatest of the many services rendered to Persian letters by Dr. Paul Horn. Ethé has since that time discovered another MS. in the India Office (No. 2,516 = No. 2,455 of his Catalogue), and has indicated the most important variants. The Vatican MS. is an ancient one, bearing a date equivalent to September 30, A.D. 1332. The Lexicon appears to have been composed by Asadí towards the end of his life (p. 31 of Horn's Preface), but at what precise epoch is not certain. It only explains rare and archaic Persian words, but its great value lies in the fact that each word is illustrated and vouched for by a citation from one of the old poets, including many otherwise unknown to us. The total number of poets thus cited is seventy-six, and the citations include passages from Rúdagí's lost Kalíla and Dimna, and other poems hitherto known to us either not at all, or only by name. One of the most remarkable omissions is the name of Náṣir-i-Khusraw, whom, as we have seen, 'Awfí also ignores. The explanation of this lies, I have no doubt, in the hatred and terror inspired in the minds of the orthodox by the Isma'ílís.

Fakhru'd-Dín As'ad of Jurján (or Gurgán) is scarcely known to us except as the author of the romantic poem of Wís and

“O happy, happy Wísa, who dost lie
At Rámín's feet, and with bewitchéd eye
Gazest on him, as partridge doomed to die
Its gaze upon the hawk doth concentrate!

“O happy, happy Wísa, who dost hold
Clasped in thy hand the jewelled cup of gold,
Filled to the brim with nectar rare and old,
Which like thy beauty doth intoxicate!

“O happy Wísa, whose red lips confess
With smiles their love, ere Rámín's lips they press,
Whom with desire's fulfilment Heaven doth bless,
And Múbad's fruitless passion doth frustrate!”

The Romance of Wámiq and 'Adhrá, first versified in Persian The Romance of Wámiq and 'Adhrá. by 'Unṣurí, and later (after A.D. 1049) by Faṣíḥí of Jurján, is also said to be based on a Pahlawí original, concerning which Dawlatsháh (p. 30, ll. 3-12) writes as follows:—

“They likewise relate that the Amír 'Abdu'lláh b. Ṭáhir (A.D. 828-844), who was Governor of Khurásán in the time of the 'Abbásid Caliphs, was residing at Níshápúr when one day a man brought a book and offered it to him as a present. He inquired what book it was. The man replied that it was the Romance of Wámiq and 'Adhrá, a pleasant tale which wise men had compiled for King Núshirwán. The Amír said: ‘We are men who read the Qur'án, and we need nothing beside the Qur'án and the Traditions of the Prophet. Of such books as this we have no need, for they are compilations of the Magians, and are objectionable in our eyes.’ Then he ordered the book to be thrown into the water, and issued orders that wherever in his dominions there should be any books composed by the Persians and Magians, they should all be burned. Hence till the time of the House of Sámán, no Persian poems were seen, and if now and then poetry was composed [in Persian], it was not collected.”

All the six versions of this poem enumerated by Ethé (p. 240) as having been composed in Persian seem to be lost, and its contents are only known from the Turkish version by Lámi'í of 'Unṣurí's redaction, which latter (the earliest) is merely mentioned by 'Awfí (vol. ii, p. 32, l. 9). Dawlatsháh (p. 69), in his brief notice of Faṣíḥí of Jurján, says that he had seen a few mutilated leaves of the version made by that poet, from which he quotes one verse, written in the same metre as the Sháhnáma (the hexameter mutaqárib), and endeavours to make up for the scantiness of his information concerning the poet by giving a short account of his patron, 'Unṣuru'l-Ma'álí Kay-ká'ús, the grandson of Qábús b. Washmgír, Prince of Ṭab-aristán, himself a man of high literary attainments, and author of the Qábús-náma, which we must now briefly consider.

The Qábús-náma is a book of moral precepts and rules of conduct, composed in A.D. 1082-83 by the above-mentioned The Qábús-náma. Kay-ká'ús, then sixty-three years of age, for his son Gílánsháh. Manuscripts of it exist in the British Museum (Or. 3,252), Leyden, and Berlin; the text has been lithographed in Ṭihrán by Riḍá-qulí Khán in A.H. 1285 (= A.D. 1868-69); and there is a French translation by Querry (Paris, 1886), and three Turkish versions (the oldest apparently lost), discussed by Dr. Rieu at p. 116 of his Turkish Catalogue The book, therefore, has enjoyed a pretty wide popularity, which it unquestionably deserves; for it is full of wit and wisdom, rich in anecdote and illustration, and withal a royal book, written with a frank directness out of a ripe experience; and, in this respect, comparable to the Siyásat-náma already discussed in this chapter.

The Qábús-náma contains forty-four chapters, preceded by a preface, in which the royal author laments the decline of filial Contents of the Qábús-náma. obedience, and exhorts his son to live virtuously, remembering that on his father's side he is descended from the old Persian King of Gílán, Argh-ash Farhádwand, who is mentioned in the Sháhnáma of Abu'l-Mu'ayyad of Balkh, and, through his father's grandmother, from Marzubán b. Rustam b. Sharwín, author of the Marzubán-náma , whose thirteenth ancestor was Kay-ká'ús b. Qubád, the brother of Núshirwán, the Sásánian King, while his mother was the daughter of Sulṭán Maḥmúd of Ghazna, and his great-grandmother on his father's side the daughter of Ḥasan b. Fírúzán, King of Daylam. The preface is followed by the table fo contents. The first four chapters deal with God, creation, and religious duties; the fifth with duty towards parents; the sixth and seventh with the cultivation of the mind and the powers of expression; and the eighth with the maxims inscribed in Pahlawí on the tomb of Núshirwán. Then follow chapters on age and youth (ix); self-restraint in eating (x); wine-drinking (xi); entertaining (xii); chess, backgammon, and light jesting (xiii); love (xiv); enjoyment of life (xv); the use of the hot bath (xvi); sleeping and resting (xvii); hunting (xviii); polo (xix); war (xx); accumulation of wealth (xxi); keeping faith in trusts (xxii); buying slaves (xxiii); buying immovable property (xxiv); buying quadrupeds (xxv); marriage (xxvi); education of children (xxvii); choice of friends (xxviii); precautions against enemies (xxix); pardon, punishment, and granting of favours (xxx); study and legal functions (xxxi); mercantile pursuits (xxxii); the Science of Medicine (xxxiii); Astrology and Mathematics (xxxiv); the Poetic Art (xxxv); the Minstrel's Art (xxxvi); on the service of kings (xxxvii); on the qualities of the courtier (xxxviii); on Secretaries of State and the Secretarial Art (xxxix); on the qualities and duties of a wazír (xl); on the qualities and duties of a general (xli); on the qualities and duties of the King (xlii); on farmers and agriculture (xliii): and, lastly, on generosity.

Incidentally the Qábús-náma contains, like the Siyásat-náma, numerous (about fifty) anecdotes, introduced to illustrate his counsels, and largely drawn from his personal recollections. A good many of these commonly found in collections of Persian stories (such as that contained in Forbes' Persian Grammar) in a vague and impersonal form are here ascribed to definite persons, and vice versâ, some here told indefinitely having been appropriated by later writers to some famous man. Of the first class I will only mention the anecdote (pp. 143-146 of the Ṭihrán lithograph) of the Qáḍí Abu'l-'Abbás Rúyání's sagacity, and how he cites a tree as witness, which occurs also, told of the same personage, in Ibn Isfandiyár's History of Ṭabaristán (India Office MS. No. 1,134, f. 59^a), and, in an impersonal and garbled form, in Forbes' Grammar (No. 71 of the Persian stories, pp. 28-29 of the texts). Of the second class, I may cite the allusion (p. 210) to an alleged rule adopted by the Greeks that none might strike one whom their King had smitten, out of respect for the subject of such royal chastisement, which practice Dawlatsháh (p. 7 of my edition) attributes to the Court of Sulṭán Maḥmúd of Ghazna. Daw-latsháh is, indeed, without doubt considerably indebted to the Qábús-náma, though he only mentions it once (p. 69), for he has evidently taken from it (Qábús-náma, pp. 87-88) his account of the deposition and murder of Qábús b. Washmgír (pp. 48-49), and of the bold answer whereby the Sayyida, the mother of Majdu'd-Dawla, succeeded in preventing Sulṭán Maḥmúd from attacking her capital, Ray (see pp. 159-160 supra, and Qábús-náma, pp. 128-129 = Dawlatsháh, pp. 43-44). The celebrated story of Sulṭán Maḥmúd's threat which was answered by the letters “A.L.M.” (see pp. 79-80 supra) also occurs on pp. 185-187 of the Qábús-náma, but the returner of this answer is here stated to have been the Caliph al-Qádir bi'lláh instead of the King of Ṭabaristán, the solution of the enigma is credited to Abú Bakr Kuhistání, who thereby gained promotion, and Firdawsí's name is not connected with the matter at all.

It may, I think, be interesting or useful to some of my readers if I append here a list of the Anecdotes occurring in the Qábús-náma, with a reference to the chapter and page in the Ṭihrán lithograph of A.H. 1285 in which they occur.

1. Brutal rejoinder of a rich pilgrim to a poor one (ch. iv,
p. 20).
2. How the Caliph al-Mutawakkil's favourite slave Fatḥ was
saved from drowning (ch. vi, p. 28).
3. Anecdote of Plato, and his grief at being praised by a fool
(ch. vi, p. 34).
4. Muḥammad b. Zakariyyá ar-Rází, the physician, is alarmed
because a madman smiles at him (ch. vi, p. 45).
5. Anecdote of Núshirwán and his Minister Buzurjmihr (ch. vi,
p. 37).
6. Autobiographical, on the inexpediency of making improbable
statements, even if they be true, unless they are susceptible
of speedy proof (ch. vii, p. 39).
7. On the importance of phraseology: Hárúnu'r-Rashíd's dream
and the two interpreters thereof (ch. vii, p. 42).
8. On the same subject: remonstrance of a favourite slave to a
libertine master (ch. vii, p. 42).
9. Repartee of Buzurjmihr to an old woman who blamed him
for not being able to answer her question (ch. vii, p. 43).
10. How a young 'Alawí of Zanján is discomfited by an old Sunní
(ch. vii, p. 45).
11. The tailor and his jar (ch. ix, p. 52).
12. The old hunchback's reply to a youth who mocked him
(ch. ix, p. 53).
13. The old chamberlain and the horse (ch. ix, p. 56).
14. The Ṣáḥib Isma'íl b. 'Abbád and his guest (ch. x, p. 59).
15. Anecdote of Ibn Muqla and Naṣr b. Manṣúr at-Tamímí
(ch. xii, p. 65).
16. How a criminal condemned to death by al-Mu'taṣim saves
his life by means of a cup of water (ch. xii, p. 67).
(The same story is commonly told of the Persian Hur-
muzán and the Caliph 'Umar. See Ṭabarí's Annals, Ser. i,
vol. 5, pp. 2558-9.)
17. The Prophet and the old woman (ch. xiii, p. 70).
18. Anecdote of Shamsu'l-Ma'álí Qábús b. Washmgír, the author's
grandfather (ch. xiv, p. 74).
19. Anecdote of Sulṭán Mas'úd of Ghazna (ch. xiv, p. 75).

20. Anecdote of 'Amr b. Layth (ch. xx, p. 85).
21. The deposition and murder of Qábús b. Washmgír (ch. xx,
p. 87).
22. Instance of honour in thieves (ch. xxii, p. 94).
23. Anecdote of Aḥmad-i-Faríghún (ch. xxv, p. 111).
24. Autobiographical, on the advantages of swimming (ch. xxvii,
p. 115).
25. Anecdote of Gushtásp (ch. xxvii, p. 118).
26. Anecdote of Shahrbánúya and al-Ḥusayn (ch. xxvii, p. 120).
27. The death of Socrates (ch. xxviii, p. 125).
28. Anecdote of al-Muhallab (ch. xxix, p. 127).
29. Sayyida, the mother of Majdu'l-Mulk, and Sulṭán Maḥmúd
(ch. xxix, p. 128).
30. Dhu'l-Qarnayn's instructions as to his burial (ch. xxix, p. 131).
31. Anecdote of Mu'áwiya (ch. xxx, p. 135).
32. How the Qáḍí Abu'l-'Abbás Rúyání cites a tree as witness
(ch. xxxi, p. 143).
33. Anecdote of a merchant and a dealer (ch. xxxii, p. 150).
34. How retribution overtakes a dishonest milkman (ch. xxxii,
p. 154).
35. Anecdote of Faḍlún, King of Ganja (ch. xxxvii, p. 177).
36. Another anecdote of Faḍlún (ch. xxxvii, p. 179).
37. Anecdote of al-Ma'mún and the Qáḍí 'Abdu'l-Malik of 'Abkara
(ch. xxxix, p. 184).
38. Anecdote of the Ṣáḥib Isma'íl b. 'Abbád (ch. xxxix, p. 184).
39. Reply of the Caliph al-Qádir bi'lláh to Sulṭán Maḥmúd's threats
(ch. xxxix, p. 185).
40. Anecdote of Abú 'Alí Símjúr's discerning secretary 'Abdu'l-
Jabbár Khújání (ch. xxxix, p. 187).
41. Anecdote of Rabí' b. al-Muṭahhar al-Qaṣrí (ch. xxxix, p. 191).
42. Anecdote of a Persian King and his Minister (ch. xl, p. 193).
43. Anecdote of Fakhru'd-Dawla and Isma'íl b. 'Abbád (ch. xl,
p. 195).
44. Anecdote of Abu'l-Faḍl al-Bal'amí and Sahl of Khujand
(ch. xl, p. 197).
45. Anecdote of Ṭughril the Seljúq (ch. xlii, p. 204).
46. Anecdote of Sulṭán Maḥmúd and Abu'l-Faraj al-Bustí
(ch. xlii, p. 206).
47. Anecdote of Sulṭán Mas'úd of Ghazna (ch. xlii, p. 207).
48. Anecdote of Fakhru'd-Dawla and 'Aḍudu'd-Dawla (ch. xlii,
p. 210).
49. Anecdote of Alexander the Great (ch. xlii, p. 213).
50. A problem for thieves (ch. xliv, p. 220).
51. Anecdote of two Ṣúfís (ch. xliv, p. 223).

Besides these anecdotes, many of which are at once apposite, original, and entertaining, the Qábús-náma contains many verses Verses cited in Qábús-náma. of poetry, most of which are quatrains composed by the author. Amongst the other poets cited are Abú Sa'íd b. Abi'l-Khayr, Abú Shukúr of Balkh, Abú Salík (of Gurgán, who is cited as the inventor of a certain musical air or mode), 'Asjadí, Farrukhí, Labíbí, and Qumrí of Gurgán. One verse in the Ṭabarí dialect is also quoted (p. 86), with a Persian rendering by the author.

The style of the Qábús-náma affords an excellent example of simple, straightforward Persian prose, being less rugged and Style of the Qábús-náma. unpolished than the Siyásat-náma, but much less ornate than books like the Gulistán. It has a good deal of character and humour, and abounds in pithy proverbial sayings, of which the following may serve as specimens: “Every bird flies with its like” (p. 45); “A man within his own four walls is like a king in his own dominion” (p. 61); “A daughter is best unborn; if she be born, either give her to a husband or to the grave” (p. 120: this proverb is still current); “The house with two mistresses is unswept”; “A sparrow in the hand is better than a peacock on promise”; “No man dies till his time is come, but till his time is come he does not go to Barda' ^282a in summer” (p. 179); “It is a very shameful thing if the watcher should need a watcher” (p. 199); “Into whatever affair thou desirest to enter, look first how thou may'st emerge therefrom” (p. 202); “One cannot all at once trust the cat with the fat” (p. 204). The author's ideas display a curious mixture of craft and simplicity, of scepticism and piety. Thus he dwells on the ethical, as apart from the spiritual, value of prayer, fasting, and other religious exercises as means to cleanliness, humility, and temperance; and advocates conformity with the laws of Islám “because there is no State stronger than the Commonwealth of Islám.” The prescription of the Pilgrimage to the rich seems to him a valuable method of compelling persons of condition to see the world, and in concluding his observations on religious observances he recommends his son not to inquire too deeply into the fundamental doctrines of the faith, “for,” says he, “with the why and wherefore thou hast nothing to do.” Excellent also is his advice to consider one's poor rather than one's rich neighbours, since this will conduce to thankfulness to God instead of breeding envy.

His worldly maxims are shrewd, and wonderfully modern at times. He expatiates on the advantages of a smooth tongue,

His social maxims are generally sound. A host, says he, should never apologise to his guests for the entertainment Social maxims. which he offers them, as it only makes them ill at ease; nor should he ever find fault with his servants in their presence. He bids his son avoid playing games of chance for money, or with notorious gamblers; confirming his words with an oath; or lending money to friends, unless he is prepared to make the loan a gift. His advice as to drinking wine is tinged with a delicate irony. He admits that to drink wine at all is contrary to religion, “but I know,” he continues, “that you will not refrain from it for any words of mine, or hearken to what I say.” Therefore he confines himself to recommending his son not to drink in the morning, or at least not often, for thereby he will be tempted to omit his prayers, and will fill his head with fresh fumes of wine ere those of the previous evening's debauch be dissipated. He also counsels him to get drunk in his own house, so as to avoid scandal; not to drink on the eve of Friday, out of respect for the day, so that men, seeing this, may forgive his drinking on other evenings; and not to behave, when drunk, in a riotous and offensive manner. “To drink wine,” says he, “is a sin, and if you must sin, let it at least be pleasantly and gracefully. So let the wine which you drink be of the best, and likewise the music to which you listen; and if you jest with any one, do it well, so that, if you are to be punished in the next world, you may at least not be blamed and censured in this.” He also recommends that favours should be asked of stingy and avaricious persons only when they are drunk, and therefore in a more generous humour.

After interesting chapters on the purchase of slaves and horses, and the good and bad points of different kinds of each, and on hunting and falconry, the author passes to marriage. Love at first sight he considers to be absurd and impossible. He discusses the qualities which go to the making of a good wife, and emphasises the importance of allying oneself by marriage with powerful and influential families. Girls, in his opinion, should not be taught to read and write, but should not be “sold” to rich but undesirable suitors. Children should be beaten if they are idle or naughty, and liberally rewarded with pocket-money if they are industrious and well-behaved; and on no account should boys omit to learn the art of swimming. The wise man will be outwardly friendly and polite even to persons he dislikes, and will avoid putting himself in the power of a friend, lest his friend should become hostile to him, and should use this power against him. He will refrain also from rejoicing over the death of an enemy, since only the assurance that he himself is secure against death could justify such exultation. Honesty is the merchant's best policy. Poets should be discriminating in their praise, and, even if they exaggerate, should not say that one who has never even had a knife in his belt “overthrows lions with his sword, and overturns Mount Bísitún ^284a with his spear”; or that the steed of one who has never even ridden a donkey “resembles Duldul, Buráq, or Rakhsh.” ^285a Satire should be indulged in but sparingly, “for the pitcher does not always return unscathed from the water”; and the poet “should not lie overmuch in his verse.” A flying foe should not be pursued or too hotly pressed, lest he turn at bay in desperation. If letters be written in Persian, they should be written with an admixture of Arabic, “for unmixed Persian is distasteful.” One should not be over-eager for the service of kings, and should avoid the society of soldiers.

In conclusion, I give the following extracts from the Specimens of the Qábús-náma. ninth chapter, “on Old Age and Youth,” as a specimen of the style of this interesting book.

“O son, though thou art young, be old in understanding. I do not bid thee not to play the youth, but be a youth self-controlled, not one of those worn-out ^285b youths; for the young are ever high-spirited, as Aristotle says: ‘Youth is a kind of madness.’ Moreover, be not one of the foolish youths, for harm comes of folly, not of high spirits. Take thy pleasure of life, for when thou art old, thou wilt assuredly be unable so to do, even as a certain aged man said, ‘For many years I vainly sorrowed because, when I should grow old, the pretty ones would not care for me; but now that I am old, I do not care about them.’ And indeed, even though he be capable thereof, such dalliance ill beseems an old man. And even though thou art young, never forget God Almighty, nor deem thyself secure against Death for Death regards neither youth nor age, as 'Asjadí says:—

‘Gar bi-juwání u bi-pírístí,
Pír bi-murdí u juwán zístí.’

‘In youth or age did the question lie,
The young would live and the old would die.’

“I have heard that in a certain city lived a tailor, who had a shop hard by the city gate; and he had hung a pitcher on a nail, because it pleased his fancy to cast therein a pebble for every corpse which was borne forth from the city. And once a month he used to count these stones, to see how many had thus been borne forth, after which he would empty the pitcher and again hang it on the nail, and continue to cast stones into it until another month had elapsed. When some while had thus elapsed, it happened that the tailor died. And a certain man, who had not heard of the tailor's death, came to look for him, and, finding his shop closed, inquired of a neighbour where he was, since he was not there. ‘The tailor,’ replied the neighbour, ‘hath gone into the pitcher!’

“But do thou, O my son, be watchful: be not deceived by thy youth. In obedience or disobedience, wherever thou art, remember God, and seek forgiveness, and fear Death, lest thou fall suddenly into the pitcher! … Respect the aged, and address them not with mockery, lest their answer silence thee.

“I have heard that an old man, whose back was bent double with the weight of a hundred years, was going along leaning on a staff, when a young man, wishing to mock him, said, ‘Aged sir, for how much didst thou buy this pretty bow [meaning his back], for I too would buy one for myself?’ ‘If thou livest,’ answered the old man, ‘and art patient, it will be given to thee for nothing!’ … Be more careful to observe a virtuous old age than a virtuous youth, for youths have hope of old age, but the aged have naught to hope for save death, and it is impossible for them to look for aught else. For when the corn is white, if it be not reaped, it will fall of itself, and so likewise fruit which is mature, if it be not gathered, will of itself drop from the tree, without its being shaken… They say in Arabic:—

‘Idhá tamm^a amr^un daná naqṣuhu:
Tawaqqá' zawál^an idhá qíl^a, “tamm!”’

‘When aught is completed, its waning is nigh:
When they say, “'Tis completed!” then look for decline.’

“Know, then, that they will not let thee be when thy senses have declined from their use. When the doors of speech, sight, hearing, touch, and taste are all shut on thee, neither wilt thou be able to enjoy life, nor can thy life give enjoyment to others. Thou wilt become a trouble to all, therefore death is better than such a life. But when thou art old, avoid the extravagances of youth, for the nearer one comes to death, the further should he be from extravagance. Man's life is like the sun, and thou mayest regard the sun which is on the western horizon as already set; as I say:—

‘In Age's clutch Kay-Ká'ús helpless see:
Prepare to go, for years three-score and three
Press hard. Thy day to Vesper-time draws nigh,
And after Vespers Night comes suddenly.’

Therefore an old man should not be in intelligence and actions as are the young. But be thou ever compassionate towards the old, for age is a sickness cheered by no visits, and a disease which no physician can heal save Death alone; seeing that the old man can find no relief from the troubles of age till he dies. For whatever sickness befalleth man, if he dieth not, he hath each day some hope of improvement; save in the case of the sickness of age, since herein he waxeth ever older, and hath no hope of betterment. Thus I have read in some book that up to thirty-four years man waxeth daily in strength and robustness. After thirty-four years he remains the same, neither waxing nor waning, just as when the sun stands in the midst of heaven, it moveth slowly until it begins to sink. From forty to fifty years, every year he sees in himself some decrease which he did not notice the year before. From fifty to sixty years, every month he sees in himself some decrease which he did not notice in the previous month. From sixty to seventy years, every week he sees in himself some decrease which he did not notice in the previous week. From seventy to eighty years, every day he sees in himself some decrease which he did not see in himself the day before. And if he outlives eighty, every hour he is sensible of some pain or ache which he did not perceive the previous hour. The pleasure of life is until forty years of age: when thou hast ascended forty rungs of the ladder, thou shalt without doubt descend, and must needs come to that place whence thou didst set out. So he must needs be dissatisfied who is hourly afflicted with some pain or ache which had not befallen him in the previous hour. Therefore, O my son, and the Delight of mine Eyes, I have complained to thee at length of old age, because I have against it a grievous indictment; nor is this strange, for old age is an enemy, and of enemies do we make complaint.”

Before bidding farewell to the Persian writers of this period, mention must be made of one or two other prose works, which Other prose works of this period. are either not at present accessible to me, or, being accessible, must for lack of space be dismissed with a very brief notice. Amongst these is the Nuzhat-náma-i-'Alá'í, an encyclopædia composed by Shahmardán b. Abi'l-Khayr towards the end of the eleventh century for 'Alá'u'd-Dawla Kháṣṣ-beg, Prince of Ṭabaris-tán, of which the contents are fully described by Pertsch at pp. 30-36 of the Gotha Persian Catalogue, and more briefly by Ethé in columns 906-908 of the Bodleian Persian Catalogue. The similar but earlier Dánish-náma-i-'Alá'í, composed by Avicenna, has been already mentioned (p. 115 supra). The Bayánu'l-Adyán, or account of different religions, written by Abu'l-Ma'álí Muḥammad 'Ubaydu'lláh in A.D. 1092, has been made known by Schefer in vol. i of his Chrestomathie persane, pp. 132-189 (pp. 132-171 of the text). A very important historical work, especially in what concerns Khurásán, is Kardízí's Zaynu'l-Akhbár, composed about the middle of the eleventh century of our era, of which the only known manuscript (and even this is defective) is described by Ethé in columns 9-11 of the Bodleian Persian Catalogue. Equally important is the rare and unpublished Kashfu'l-Maḥjúb (“Revelation of the Occult”), a work treating of the lives and doctrines of the Ṣúfís, and composed by 'Alí b. 'Uthmán al-Jullábí al-Hujwírí in the latter part of the eleventh century. In connection with this, mention should also be made of the Treatise (Risála) on Ṣufíism compiled in Arabic in A.D. 1046-47 by Abu'l-Qásim 'Abdu'l-Karím b. Hawázin al-Qushayrí (died A.D. 1072-73), a work containing fifty-four chapters, which has been printed twice at least at Buláq, and of which there exists in the British Museum a Persian translation (Or. 4,118) made at an unknown but certainly early epoch, this manuscript being dated A.D. 1205.

Three more writers of greater importance remain to be mentioned, though it is, unfortunately, impossible in this place Al-Máwardí. to accord them anything approaching adequate treatment. Of these, Abu'l-Ḥasan 'Alí al-Máwardí (died A.D. 1058) may be taken first, since he can be most briefly dismissed. Nine of his works (all of which are in Arabic) are enumerated by Brockelmann (Gesch. d. Arab. Litt., i, p. 386), but only two of these are so celebrated as to need mention here. The first is the Kitábu'l-Aḥkámi's-Sulṭániyya, or “Constitutiones politicæ” (printed at Bonn and Cairo), which “depicts the ideal of Muslim Public Law, as it certainly can never have really existed, or at least not in the author's time.” The second is the Adabu'd-Dunyá wa'd-Dín, an ethical work still widely studied in the higher schools of Turkey and Egypt.

The second of the three, though he has nothing to do with Persia, is too great a figure in the world of Muslim Abu'l-'Alá al-Ma'arrí. thought and literature to be passed over in silence. This is the blind ^289a poet, sceptic and philosopher, Abu'l-'Ala al-Ma'arrí, so called from the little Syrian town of Ma'arratu'n-Nu'mán, where he was born, and in which he spent the greater part of his life. Náṣir-i-Khusraw visited him there during the three days which he spent in Ma'arra (January 12-15, A.D. 1047), and thus speaks of him in his Safar-náma (pp. 10-11 of Schefer's edition):—

“There dwelt a man called Abu'l-'Alá al-Ma'arrí, the chief man of the city, but blind. He was very wealthy, and had many servants and workmen; indeed all the town's folk were as servants to him. But he had adopted the ascetic life, wearing a coarse cloak, sitting in his house, and allowing himself half a maund of bread daily, beyond which he ate nothing. I heard that he kept open house, and that his agents and stewards managed the affairs of the town, save in matters involving a general principle, which they referred to him. He refuses his beneficence to none, but himself observes perpetual fast and nightly vigils, and occupies himself with no worldly business. And in poetry and literature he holds so high a rank that the greatest scholars of Syria, the Maghrib (i.e., the Moorish States and Spain) and 'Iráq admit that in this age no one hath been or is of like degree. He had composed a book entitled al-Fusúl wa'l-Gháyát, wherein he set forth, in eloquent and wondrous words, riddles and parables which men cannot understand, save a little here and there, even such as had studied it with him. And they found fault with him for writing this book, declaring that he had intended therein to travesty the Qur'án. ^290a There are always at least some two hundred persons who have come from all parts of the world to study poetry and literature with him. I heard that he had composed more than a hundred thousand verses of poetry. A certain person asked him why, seeing that God had bestowed on him all this wealth and riches, he gave it all away to other people, and did not enjoy it himself, to which he replied, ‘I can take possession of no more than what I eat.’ And when I arrived there (i.e., at Ma'arratu'n-Nu'mán) this man was still alive.”^290b

To Baron A. von Kremer chiefly belongs the credit of bringing home to European scholars the greatness and originality of al-Ma'arrí, to whom he devotes nine pages (pp. 386-394) in the second volume of his admirable Culturgeschichte des Orients, and on whom he has also published a series of excellent monographs. ^290c The three following specimens of al-Ma'arrí's verse are cited by Dawlatsháh in the short notice which he consecrates to the poet (p. 25 of my edition):—

“O thou Abu'l-'Alá, Sulaymán's son,
Surely thy blindness hath been good to thee;
For, wert thou able to behold mankind,
No man amongst them would thy pupil ^291a see!”

Here is the second specimen:—

“The days are but one parent's progeny,
The nights are sisters of one family:
Then seek not, either from the days or nights,
For aught that hath not been in years gone by!”

And here is the third:—

“Who is he whom aught can fright or startle,
Any marvel fill with doubts or fears?
I at least have never seen a marvel,
Though I've watched and waited eighty years:
Still Time's Time, men men, the days one pattern;
Still the World's success to strength adheres!”

The following is from Goldziher's article (Z.D.M.G., xxix, pp. 637-8):—

“Within Jerusalem was rife 'Twixt Christ and Aḥmed bitter
strife:
This with adhán and that with blare Of bell doth summon
men to prayer:
Each seeks to prove his doctrine true; But which is right?
Ah, would I knew!”

According to Muhammadan law a theft exceeding a quarter of a dínár is punished by amputation of the thief's hand, while the compensation for the loss of a hand under other circumstances is fixed at five hundred dínárs. On this al-Ma'arrí says (Goldziher, loc. cit., p. 639):—

“Why for a quarter do they amputate A hand five hundred
serve to compensate?
Such contradictions silent awe compel. Lord God, deliver us
from Fires of Hell!”

The next specimen is given by Von Kremer (Z.D.M.G., xxix, p. 305 ad calc.):—

“We laugh, but foolish is our joyless mirth;
Tears best befit all dwellers upon earth!
'Neath Fortune's Wheel we break like brittle glass,
Which no fresh mould shall e'er restore, alas!”

Al-Ma'arrí, as I have said, had no connection with Persia, either by birth or residence, and I have only mentioned him because he is so great and original a poet and thinker, and because further researches may very probably show that he was not without influence on the pessimist and sceptic poets of that country. In his peculiar line of thought he somewhat recalls 'Umar Khayyám, but is incomparably greater and more systematic, both as a poet and as an agnostic. His best-known works are the Siqṭu'z-Zand, which comprises his earlier poems; the Luzúmiyyát, or Luzúmu má la yalzam, which embodies his later philosophical and pessimistic verse; his Letters, admirably edited and translated by Professor Margoliouth of Oxford, and published in the Anecdota Oxoniensia (1898); and his Risálatu'l-Ghufrán, a sort of prose Paradiso and Inferno, in which the author describes an imaginary visit to the World of Shades, and the conversations which he held with various heathen and other poets of the Arabs. Some account of this last, with extracts, has been published by Mr. R. A. Nicholson, in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society for 1900 (pp. 637-720) and 1902 (pp. 75-101; 337-362; 813-847). This last-mentioned work also is of equal interest and difficulty, especially the latter portion, which deals with the heretics and Zindíqs, with whom the author, however much he may have felt by expediency compelled to censure them, must be supposed to have had considerable sympathy. His most impious work, from the Muslim point of view, was probably the parody of the Qur'án which, like al-Mutanabbí, he composed. This he named Kitábu'l-Fuṣúl wa'l-Gháyát, and a specimen of it was published by Goldziher in the article entitled Abu'l-'Alá al-Ma'arrí als Freidenker in vol. xxix (1875) of the Z.D.M.G., pp. 637-641. An excellent sketch of his life will be found prefixed by Professor Margoliouth to his above-mentioned edition of al-Ma'arrí's Letters (pp. xi-xliii), while Von Kremer's numerous notices, which contain many of his poems with German verse renderings, will afford the European reader abundant material for further study of this original and powerful thinker.

I have left till the last in this chapter one of the most influential, if not one of the greatest, thinkers of this period,

Al-Ghazálí was born at Ṭús in Khurásán in A.H. 450 (= A.D. 1058-59) or A.H. 451 (= A.D. 1059-60), about the time of Alp Arslán's accession to the Seljúq throne, and, being left an orphan at a comparatively early age, was, together with his brother, educated first by a Ṣúfí friend of his father's, and afterwards at one of the colleges of his native city. “We sought knowledge,” he used afterwards to say, “otherwise than for God, but it refused to be otherwise than for God.” He also studied for a while in Gurgán with the Imám Abú Naṣr al-Isma'ílí, and, while returning thence, was, it is said, robbed by highwaymen of all his possessions. He followed them to crave the return of his lecture-notes, “for which,” said he, “I left my home, and which contain my knowledge.” Thereat the chief robber laughed and said, “How dost thou pretend to have learned the knowledge contained in them, for, we having taken them from thee, thou art robbed of thy knowledge and left knowledgeless?” And thereafter al-Ghazálí, having recovered his note-books, did not rest till all their contents had been learned and digested, “so that,” as he said, “should I again be robbed, I should not be deprived of my knowledge.”

Thereafter al-Ghazálí went to Níshápúr, where he continued his studies and began to attract attention by his writings, which finally brought him to the notice of the great minister, Nidhámu'l-Mulk, who, in A.H. 484 (= A.D. 1091-92), appointed him a Professor in the Nidhá-miyya College which he had founded and endowed twenty-five years before at Baghdád. After he had held this post with all distinction and honour for four years, “his soul soared above the mean things of the world, … and he cast all this behind his back”; and, appointing his brother as his deputy, he made the Pilgrimage to Mecca, and thence visited Syria, where he composed his great work, the Iḥyá'u 'ulúmi'd-Dín, or “Revivification of the Religious Sciences.” This work, written in Arabic, was subsequently epitomised in a more popular form in Persian, under the title of Kímiyá-yi-Sa'ádat, “The Alchemy of Happiness”; and it served as the text for a series of sermons which the author preached on his return to Baghdád. Thence al-Ghazálí returned to Níshápúr and taught for a while in the Nidhámiyya College in that city, but ere long came back once more to his native Ṭús, where he died on Monday, 14 Jumáda II, A.H. 505 (= December 18, A.D. 1111). His writings were numerous (some seventy are enumerated by Brockelmann), and include, besides those already mentioned, a refutation of the Báṭinís or Isma'ílís, the “Saviour from Error” (al-Munqidh mina'ḍ-Ḍalál), and the celebrated “Destruction of the Philosophers” (Taháfutu'l-Falásifa ), which at a later date called forth the “Destruction of the ‘Destruction’” (Taháfutu't-Taháfut) of Averroes (Ibn Rushd) of Cordova.

The following passage from the Munqidh is interesting as showing how deeply al-Ghazálí had tasted that religious experience which he so highly valued ere he attained to the spiritual peace and conviction whereunto he finally won.

“In the prime of my youth,” says he, “when, ere I was yet twenty years of age, I attained to discretion, until now, when my age approaches fifty, I ceased not to dare the depths of this deep sea, and to plunge into its midst as plunges the bold, not the fearful and cautious, diver, and to penetrate into its every dark recess, and to confront its every difficulty, and to breast its every eddy; investigating the creed of every sect, and discovering the secrets of every creed, that I might distinguish between the holders of true and false doctrine, and between the orthodox and the heretical. Therefore I never left an Esoteric [Báṭiní, i.e., an Isma'ílí, Carmathian, or “Assassin”] without desiring to acquaint myself with his Esotericism; nor an Exoteric [Dháhirí, or Formalist] without wishing to know the outcome of his Exotericism; nor a Philosopher without aiming at a comprehension of the essence of his Philosophy; nor a Scholastic Theologian without striving to understand the aim of his Scholasticism and his dialectic; nor a Ṣúfí without longing to stumble on the secret of his Ṣúfíism; nor a devotee without wishing to ascertain in what his devotion resulted; nor an infidel [Zindíq, properly a Manichæan] or atheist without spying through him to discern the causes which had emboldened him to profess his atheism or infidelity. For a thirst to comprehend the true essences of all things was, from my earliest days and the prime of my life, my characteristic idiosyncrasy, a natural gift of God and a disposition which He had implanted in my nature, by no choice or devising of mine own; until there was loosed from me the bond of conformity, and my inherited beliefs were broken down when I was yet but little more than a lad.”

From such early strugglings after truth and dark accesses of doubt did al-Ghazálí win to a bright faith, a sure conviction, and a power of leading others to the haven reached by himself, which not only earned for him the illustrious title of “The Proof of Islám,” but caused the learned Suyúṭí to exclaim, “Could there be another Prophet after Muḥammad, surely it would have been al-Ghazálí!”