Текст книги "Literary History of the Arabs "

Автор книги: Reynolds Nicholson

сообщить о нарушении

Текущая страница: 27 (всего у книги 36 страниц)

In 1492 a.d. the last stronghold of the European Arabs opened its gates to Ferdinand and Isabella, and "the Cross The fall of Granada (1492 a.d.). supplanted the Crescent on the towers of Granada." The victors showed a barbarous fanaticism that was the more abominable as it violated their solemn pledges to respect the religion and property of the Moslems, and as it utterly reversed the tolerant and liberal treatment which the Christians of Spain had enjoyed under Muḥammadan rule. Compelled to choose between apostasy and exile, many preferred the latter alternative. Those who remained were subjected to a terrible persecution, until in 1609 a.d., by order of Philip III, the Moors were banished en massefrom Spanish soil.

Spain was not the sole point whence Moslem culture spread itself over the Christian lands. Sicily was conquered by the The Arabs in Sicily. Aghlabids of Tunis early in the ninth century, and although the island fell into the hands of the Normans in 1071 a.d., the court of Palermo retained a semi-Oriental character. Here in the reign of Frederick II of Hohenstaufen (1194-1250 a.d.) might be seen "astrologers from Baghdád with long beards and waving robes, Jews who received princely salaries as translators of Arabic works, Saracen dancers and dancing-girls, and Moors who blew silver trumpets on festal occasions."816 Both Frederick himself and his son Manfred were enthusiastic Arabophiles, and scandalised Christendom by their assumption of 'heathen' manners as well as by the attention which they devoted to Moslem philosophy and science. Under their auspices Arabic learning was communicated to the neighbouring towns of Lower Italy.

CHAPTER X

FROM THE MONGOL INVASION TO THE PRESENT DAY

Before proceeding to speak of the terrible catastrophe which filled the whole of Western Asia with ruin and desolation, General characteristics of the period. I may offer a few preliminary remarks concerning the general character of the period which we shall briefly survey in this final chapter. It forms, one must admit, a melancholy conclusion to a glorious history. The Caliphate, which symbolised the supremacy of the Prophet's people, is swept away. Mongols, Turks, Persians, all in turn build up great Muḥammadan empires, but the Arabs have lost even the shadow of a leading part and appear only as subordinate actors on a provincial stage. The chief centres of Arabian life, such as it is, are henceforth Syria and Egypt, which were held by the Turkish Mamelukes until 1517 a.d., when they passed under Ottoman rule. In North Africa the petty Berber dynasties (Ḥafṣids, Ziyánids, and Marínids) gave place in the sixteenth century to the Ottoman Turks. Only in Spain, where the Naṣrids of Granada survived until 1492 a.d., in Morocco, where the Sharífs (descendants of ‘Alí b. Abí Ṭálib) assumed the sovereignty in 1544 a.d., and to some extent in Arabia itself, did the Arabs preserve their political independence. In such circumstances it would be vain to look for any large developments of literature and culture worthy to rank with those of the past. This is an age of imitation and compilation. Learned men abound, whose erudition embraces every subject under the sun. The mass of writing shows no visible diminution, and much of it is valuable and meritorious work. But with one or two conspicuous exceptions– e.g.the historian Ibn Khaldún and the mystic Sha‘rání—we cannot point to any new departure, any fruitful ideas, any trace of original and illuminating thought. The fifteenth and sixteenth centuries "witnessed the rise and triumph of that wonderful movement known as the Renaissance,... but no ripple of this great upheaval, which changed the whole current of intellectual and moral life in the West, reached the shores of Islam."817 Until comparatively recent times, when Egypt and Syria first became open to European civilisation, the Arab retained his mediæval outlook and habit of mind, and was in no respect more enlightened than his forefathers who lived under the ‘Abbásid Caliphate. And since the Mongol Invasion I am afraid we must say that instead of advancing farther along the old path he was being forced back by the inevitable pressure of events. East of the Euphrates the Mongols did their work of destruction so thoroughly that no seeds were left from which a flourishing civilisation could arise; and, moreover, the Arabic language was rapidly extinguished by the Persian. In Spain, as we have seen, the power of the Arabs had already begun to decline; Africa was dominated by the Berbers, a rude, unlettered race, Egypt and Syria by the blighting military despotism of the Turks. Nowhere in the history of this period can we discern either of the two elements which are most productive of literary greatness: the quickening influence of a higher culture or the inspiration of a free and vigorous national life.818

Between the middle of the eleventh century and the end of the fourteenth the nomad tribes dwelling beyond the Oxus The Mongol Invasion. burst over Western Asia in three successive waves. First came the Seljúq Turks, then the Mongols under Chingíz Khan and Húlágú, then the hordes, mainly Turkish, of Tímúr. Regarding the Seljúqs all that is necessary for our purpose has been said in a former chapter. The conquests of Tímúr are a frightful episode which I may be pardoned for omitting from this history, inasmuch as their permanent results (apart from the enormous damage which they inflicted) were inconsiderable; and although the Indian empire of the Great Moguls, which Bábur, a descendant of Tímúr, established in the first half of the sixteenth century, ran a prosperous and brilliant course, its culture was borrowed almost exclusively from Persian models and does not come within the scope of the present work. We shall, therefore, confine our view to the second wave of the vast Asiatic migration, which bore the Mongols, led by Chingíz Khan and Húlágú, from the steppes of China and Tartary to the Mediterranean.

In 1219 a.d. Chingíz Khan, having consolidated his power in the Far East, turned his face westward and suddenly Chingíz Khan and Húlágú. advanced into Transoxania, which at that time formed a province of the wide dominions of the Sháhs of Khwárizm (Khiva). The reigning monarch, ‘Alá’u ’l-Dín Muḥammad, was unable to make an effective resistance; and notwithstanding that his son, the gallant Jalálu ’l-Dín, carried on a desperate guerilla for twelve years, the invaders swarmed over Khurásán and Persia, massacring the panic-stricken inhabitants wholesale and leaving a wilderness behind them. Hitherto Baghdád had not been seriously threatened, but on the first day of January, 1256 a.d.—an epoch-marking date—Húlágú, the grandson of Chingíz Khan, crossed the Oxus, with the intention of occupying the ‘Abbásid capital. I translate the following narrative from a manuscript in my possession of the Ta’ríkh al-Khamísby Diyárbakrí (õ 1574 a.d.):—

In the year 654 (a.h. = 1256 a.d.) the stubborn tyrant, Húlágú, the destroyer of the nations ( Mubídu ’l-Umam), set forth and took Húlágú before Baghdád (1258 a.d.). the castle of Alamút from the Ismá‘ílís819 and slew them and laid waste the lands of Rayy.... And in the year 655 there broke out at Baghdád a fearful riot between the Sunnís and the Shí‘ites, which led to great plunder and destruction of property. A number of Shí‘ites were killed, and this so incensed and infuriated the Vizier Ibnu ’l-‘Alqami that he encouraged the Tartars to invade ‘Iráq, by which means he hoped to take ample vengeance on the Sunnís.820 And in the beginning of the year 656 the tyrant Húlágú b. Túlí b. Chingíz Khán, the Moghul, arrived at Baghdád with his army, including the Georgians ( al-Kurj) and the troops of Mosul. The Dawídár821 marched out of the city and met Húlágú's vanguard, which was commanded by Bájú.822 The Moslems, being few, suffered defeat; whereupon Bájú advanced and pitched his camp to the west of Baghdád, while Húlágú took up a position on the eastern side. Then the Vizier Ibnu ’l-‘Alqamí said to the Caliph Musta‘ṣim Billáh: "I will go to the Supreme Khán to arrange peace." So the hound823 went and obtained security for himself, and on his return said to the Caliph: "The Khán desires to marry his daughter to your son and to render homage to you, like the Seljúq kings, and then to depart." Musta‘ṣim set out, attended by the nobles of his court and the grandees of his time, in order to witness the contract of marriage. The whole party were beheaded except the Caliph, who was trampled to death. The Tartars Sack of Baghdád. entered Baghdád and distributed themselves in bands throughout the city. For thirty-four days the sword was never sheathed. Few escaped. The slain amounted to 1,800,000 and more. Then quarter was called.... Thus it is related in the Duwalu ’l-Islám.824... And on this wise did the Caliphate pass from Baghdád. As the poet sings:—

" Khalati ’l-manábiru wa-’l-asirralu minhumú wa-‘alayhimú hatta ’l-mamáti salámú." " The pulpits and the thrones are empty of them; I bid them, till the hour of death, farewell!"

It seemed as if all Muḥammadan Asia lay at the feet of the pagan conqueror. Resuming his advance, Húlágú occupied Mesopotamia and sacked Aleppo. He then returned to the East, leaving his lieutenant, Ketboghá, to complete the reduction of Syria. Meanwhile, however, an Egyptian army under the Mameluke Sultan Muẓaffar Quṭuz was hastening to oppose the invaders. On Friday, the 25th of Ramaḍán, 658 a.h., a decisive battle was fought at ‘Ayn Jálút (Goliath's Spring), west of the Jordan. Battle of ‘Ayn Jálút (September, 1260 a.d.). The Tartars were routed with immense slaughter, and their subsequent attempts to wrest Syria from the Mamelukes met with no success. The submission of Asia Minor was hardly more than nominal, but in Persia the descendants of Húlágú, the Íl-Kháns, reigned over a great empire, which the conversion of one of their number, Gházán (1295-1304 a.d.), restored to Moslem rule. We are not concerned here with the further history of the Mongols in Persia nor with that of the Persians themselves. Since the days of Húlágú the lands east and west of the Tigris are separated by an ever-widening gulf. The two races—Persians and Arabs—to whose co-operation the mediæval world, from Samarcand to Seville, for a long time owed its highest literary and scientific culture, have now finally dissolved their partnership. It is true that the Arabic ceases to be the language of the whole Moslem world. cleavage began many centuries earlier, and before the fall of Baghdád the Persian genius had already expressed itself in a splendid national literature. But from this date onward the use of Arabic by Persians is practically limited to theological and philosophical writings. The Persian language has driven its rival out of the field. Accordingly Egypt and Syria will now demand the principal share of our attention, more especially as the history of the Arabs of Granada, which properly belongs to this period, has been related in the preceding chapter.

The dynasty of the Mameluke825 Sultans of Egypt was founded in 1250 a.d. by Aybak, a Turkish slave, who The Mamelukes of Egypt (1250-1517 a.d.). commenced his career in the service of the Ayyúbid, Malik Ṣáliḥ Najmu ’l-Dín. His successors826 held sway in Egypt and Syria until the conquest of these countries by the Ottomans. The Mamelukes were rough soldiers, who seldom indulged in any useless refinement, but they had a royal taste for architecture, as the visitor to Cairo may still see. Their administration, though disturbed by frequent mutinies and murders, was tolerably prosperous on the whole, and their victories over the Mongol hosts, as well as the crushing blows which they dealt to the Crusaders, gave Islam new prestige. The ablest of them all was Baybars, Sultan Baybars (1260-1277 a.d.). who richly deserved his title Malik al-Ẓáhir, i.e., the Victorious King. His name has passed into the legends of the people, and his warlike exploits into story-tellers to this day.827 The violent and brutal acts which he sometimes committed—for he shrank from no crime when he suspected danger—made him a terror to the ambitious nobles around him, but did not harm his reputation as a just ruler. Although he held the throne in virtue of having murdered the late monarch with his own hand, he sought to give the appearance of legitimacy to his usurpation. He therefore recognised as Caliph a certain Abu ’l-Qásim Aḥmad, a pretended scion of the ‘Abbásid house, invited him to Cairo, and took the oath of allegiance to him in due form. The Caliph on his part invested the Sultan with sovereignty over Egypt, The ‘Abbásid Caliphs of Egypt. Syria, Arabia, and all the provinces that he might obtain by future conquests. This Aḥmad, entitled al-Mustanṣir, was the first of a long series of mock Caliphs who were appointed by the Mameluke Sultans and generally kept under close surveillance in the citadel of Cairo. There is no authority for the statement, originally made by Mouradgea d'Ohsson in 1787 and often repeated since, that the last of the line bequeathed his rights of succession to the Ottoman Sultan Selím I, thus enabling the Sultans of Turkey to claim the title and dignity of Caliph.828

The poets of this period are almost unknown in Europe, and until they have been studied with due attention it would be Arabic poetry after the Mongol Invasion. premature to assert that none of them rises above mediocrity. At the same time my own impression (based, I confess, on a very desultory and imperfect acquaintance with their work) is that the best among them are merely elegant and accomplished artists, playing brilliantly with words and phrases, but doing little else. No doubt extreme artificiality may coexist with poetical genius of a high order, provided that it has behind it Mutanabbí's power, Ma‘arrí's earnestness, or Ibnu ’l-Fáriḍ's enthusiasm. In the absence of these qualities we must be content to admire the technical skill with which the old tunes are varied and revived. Let us take, for example, Ṣafiyyu ’l-Dín al-Ḥillí, who was born at Ḥilla, a large town on the Ṣafiyyu ’l-Dín al-Ḥillí. Euphrates, in 1278 a.d., became laureate of the Urtuqid dynasty at Máridín, and died in Baghdád about 1350. He is described as "the poet of his age absolutely," and to judge from the extracts in Kutubí's Fawátu ’l-Wafayát829 he combined subtlety of fancy with remarkable ease and sweetness of versification. Many of his pieces, however, are jeux d'esprit, like his ode to the Prophet, in which he employs 151 rhetorical figures, or like another poem where all the nouns are diminutives.830 The following specimen of his work is too brief to do him justice:—

"How can I have patience, and thou, mine eye's delight, All the livelong year not one moment in my sight? And with what can I rejoice my heart, when thou that art a joy Unto every human heart, from me hast taken flight? I swear by Him who made thy form the envy of the sun (So graciously He clad thee with lovely beams of light): The day when I behold thy beauty doth appear to me As tho' it gleamed on Time's dull brow a constellation bright. O thou scorner of my passion, for whose sake I count as naught All the woe that I endure, all the injury and despite, Come, regard the ways of God! for never He at life's last gasp Suffereth the weight to perish even of one mite!"831

We have already referred to the folk-songs ( muwashshaḥand zajal) which originated in Spain. These simple ballads, Popular poetry. with their novel metres and incorrect language, were despised by the classical school, that is to say, by nearly all Moslems with any pretensions to learning; but their popularity was such that even the court poets occasionally condescended to write in this style. To the zajaland muwashshaḥwe may add the dúbayt, the mawáliyyá, the kánwakán, and the ḥimáq, which together with verse of the regular form made up the 'seven kinds of poetry' ( al-funún al-sab‘a). Ṣafiyyu ’l-Dín al-Ḥillí, who wrote a special treatise on the Arabic folk-songs, mentions two other varieties which, he says, were invented by the people of Baghdád to be sung in the early dawn of Ramaḍán, the Moslem Lent.832 It is interesting to observe that some few literary men attempted, though in a timid fashion, to free Arabic poetry from the benumbing academic system by which it was governed and to pour fresh life into its veins. A notable example of this tendency is the Hazzu ’l-Quḥúf833 by Shirbíní, who wrote in 1687 a.d. Here we have a poem in the vulgar dialect of Egypt, but what is still more curious, the author, while satirising the uncouth manners and rude language of the peasantry, makes a bitter attack on the learning and morals of the Muḥammadan divines.834 For this purpose he introduces a typical Fellah named Abú Shádúf, whose rôle corresponds to that of Piers the Plowman in Longland's Vision. Down to the end of the nineteenth century, at any rate, such isolated offshoots had not gone far to found a living school of popular poetry. Only the future can show whether the Arabs are capable of producing a genius who will succeed in doing for the national folk-songs what Burns did for the Scots ballads.

Biography and History were cultivated with ardour by the savants of Egypt and Syria. Among the numerous Ibn Khallikán (1211-1282 a.d.). compositions of this kind we can have no hesitation in awarding the place of honour to the Wafayátu ’l-A‘yán, or 'Obituaries of Eminent Men,' by Shamsu ’l-Dín Ibn Khallikán, a work which has often been quoted in the foregoing pages. The author belonged to a distinguished family descending from Yaḥyá b. Khálid the Barmecide (see p. 259 seq.), and was born at Arbela in 1211 a.d. He received his education at Aleppo and Damascus (1229-1238) and then proceeded to Cairo, where he finished the first draft of his Biographical Dictionary in 1256. Five years later he was appointed by Sultan Baybars to be Chief Cadi of Syria. He retained this high office (with a seven years' interval, which he devoted to literary and biographical studies) until a short time before his death. In the Preface to the WafayátIbn Khallikán observes that he has adopted the alphabetical order as more convenient than the chronological. As regards the scope and character of his Dictionary, he says:—

"I have not limited my work to the history of any one particular class of persons, as learned men, princes, emirs, viziers, or poets; His Biographical Dictionary. but I have spoken of all those whose names are familiar to the public, and about whom questions are frequently asked; I have, however, related the facts I could ascertain respecting them in a concise manner, lest my work should become too voluminous; I have fixed with all possible exactness the dates of their birth and death; I have traced up their genealogy as high as I could; I have marked the orthography of those names which are liable to be written incorrectly; and I have cited the traits which may best serve to characterise each individual, such as noble actions, singular anecdotes, verses and letters, so that the reader may derive amusement from my work, and find it not exclusively of such a uniform cast as would prove tiresome; for the most effectual inducement to reading a book arises from the variety of its style."835

Ibn Khallikan might have added that he was the first Muḥammadan writer to design a Dictionary of National Biography, since none of his predecessors had thought of comprehending the lives of eminent Moslems of every class in a single work.836 The merits of the book have been fully recognised by the author's countrymen as well as by European scholars. It is composed in simple and elegant language, it is extremely accurate, and it contains an astonishing quantity of miscellaneous historical and literary information, not drily catalogued but conveyed in the most pleasing fashion by anecdotes and excerpts which illustrate every department of Moslem life. I am inclined to agree with the opinion of Sir William Jones, that it is the best general biography ever written; and allowing for the difference of scale and scope, I think it will bear comparison with a celebrated English work which it resembles in many ways—I mean Boswell's Johnson.837

To give an adequate account of the numerous and talented historians of the Mameluke period would require far more Historians of the Mameluke period. space than they can reasonably claim in a review of this kind. Concerning Ibn Khaldún, who held a professorship as well as the office of Cadi in Cairo under Sultan Barqúq (1382-1398 a.d.), we have already spoken at some length. This extraordinary genius discovered principles and methods which might have been expected to revolutionise historical science, but neither was he himself capable of carrying them into effect nor, as the event proved, did they inspire his successors to abandon the path of tradition. I cannot imagine any more decisive symptom of the intellectual lethargy in which Islam was now sunk, or any clearer example of the rule that even the greatest writers struggle in vain against the spirit of their own times. There were plenty of learned men, however, who compiled local and universal histories. Considering the precious materials which their industry has preserved for us, we should rather admire these diligent and erudite authors than complain of their inability to break away from the established mode. Perhaps the most famous among them is Taqiyyu ’l-Dín al-Maqrízí (1364-1442 a.d.). A native of Cairo, he devoted himself to Egyptian history and antiquities, on which subject he composed several standard works, such as the Khiṭaṭ838 and the Sulúk.839 Although he was both unconscientious and uncritical, too often copying without acknowledgment or comment, and indulging in wholesale plagiarism when it suited his purpose, Maqrízí. these faults which are characteristic of his age may easily be excused. "He has accumulated and reduced to a certain amount of order a large quantity of information that would but for him have passed into oblivion. He is generally painstaking and accurate, and always resorts to contemporary evidence if it is available. Also he has a pleasant and lucid style, and writes without bias and apparently with distinguished impartiality."840 Other well-known works belonging to this epoch are the Fakhríof Ibnu ’l-Ṭiqṭaqá, a delightful manual of Muḥammadan politics841 which was written at Mosul in 1302 a.d.; the epitome of universal history by Abu ’l-Fidá, Prince of Ḥamát (õ 1331); the voluminous Chronicle of Islam by Dhahabí (õ 1348); the high-flown Biography of Tímúr entitled ‘Ajá’ibu ’l-Maqdúr, or 'Marvels of Destiny,' by Ibn ‘Arabsháh (õ 1450); and the Nujúm al-Záhira('Resplendent Stars') by Abu ’l-Maḥásin b. Taghríbirdí (õ 1469), which contains the annals of Egypt under the Moslems. The political and literary history of Muḥammadan Spain by Maqqarí of Tilimsán (õ 1632) was mentioned in the last chapter.842

If we were asked to select a single figure who should exhibit as completely as possible in his own person the literary Jalálu ’l-Dín al-Suyúṭí (1445-1505 a.d.). tendencies of the Alexandrian age of Arabic civilisation, our choice would assuredly fall on Jalálu ’l-Dín al-Suyúṭí, who was born at Suyúṭ (Usyúṭ) in Upper Egypt in 1445 a.d. His family came originally from Persia, but, like Dhahabí, Ibn Taghríbirdí, and many celebrated writers of this time, he had, through his mother, an admixture of Turkish blood. At the age of five years and seven months, when his father died, the precocious boy had already reached the Súratu ’l-Taḥrím(Súra of Forbidding), which is the sixty-sixth chapter of the Koran, and he knew the whole volume by heart before he was eight years old. He prosecuted his studies under the most renowned masters in every branch of Moslem learning, and on finishing his education held one Professorship after another at Cairo until 1501, when he was deprived of his post in consequence of malversation of the bursary monies in his charge. He died four years later in the islet of Rawḍa on the Nile, whither he had retired under the pretence of devoting the rest of his life to God. We possess the titles of more than five hundred separate works which he composed. This number would be incredible but for the fact that many of them are brief pamphlets displaying the author's curious erudition on all sorts of abstruse subjects– e.g., whether the Prophet wore trousers, whether his turban had a point, and whether his parents are in Hell or Paradise. Suyúṭí's indefatigable pen travelled over an immense field of knowledge—Koran, Tradition, Law, Philosophy and History, Philology and Rhetoric. Like some of the old Alexandrian scholars, he seems to have taken pride in a reputation for polygraphy, and his enemies declared that he made free with other men's books, which he used to alter slightly and then give out as his own. Suyúṭí, on his part, laid before the Shaykhu ’l-Islám a formal accusation of plagiarism against Qasṭallání, an eminent contemporary divine. We are told that his vanity and arrogance involved him in frequent quarrels, and that he was 'cut' by his learned brethren. Be this as it may, he saw what the public wanted. His compendious and readable handbooks were famed throughout the Moslem world, as he himself boasts, from India to Morocco, and did much to popularise the scientific culture of the day. It will be enough to mention here the Itqánon Koranic exegesis; the Tafsíru ’l-Jalálayn, or 'Commentary on the Koran by the two Jaláls,' which was begun by Jalálu ’l-Dín al-Maḥallí and finished by his namesake, Suyúṭí; the Muzhir( Mizhar), a treatise on philology; the Ḥusnu ’l-Muḥáḍara, a history of Old and New Cairo; and the Ta’ríkhu ’l-Khulafá, or 'History of the Caliphs.'

To dwell longer on the literature of this period would only be to emphasise its scholastic and unoriginal character. A passing mention, however, is due to the encyclopædists Nuwayrí (õ 1332), author of the Niháyatu ’l-Arab, and Ibnu ’l-Wardí (õ 1349). Ṣafadí (õ 1363) compiled a gigantic biographical dictionary, the Wáfí bi ’l-Wafayát, in twenty-six volumes, and the learned traditionist, Ibn Ḥajar of Ascalon Other scholars of the period. (õ 1449), has left a large number of writings, among which it will be sufficient to name the Iṣába fí tamyíz al-Ṣaḥába, or Lives of the Companions of the Prophet.843 We shall conclude this part of our subject by enumerating a few celebrated works which may be described in modern terms as standard text-books for the Schools and Universities of Islam. Amidst the host of manuals of Theology and Jurisprudence, with their endless array of abridgments, commentaries, and supercommentaries, possibly the best known to European students are those by Abu ’l-Barakát al-Nasafí (õ 1310), ‘Aḍudu ’l-Dín al-Íjí (õ 1355), Sídí Khalíl al-Jundí (õ 1365), Taftázání (õ 1389), Sharíf al-Jurjání (õ 1413), and Muḥammad b. Yúsuf al-Sanúsí (õ 1486). For Philology and Lexicography we have the Alfiyya, a versified grammar by Ibn Málik of Jaen (õ 1273); the Ájurrúmiyyaon the rudiments of grammar, an exceedingly popular compendium by Ṣanhájí (õ 1323); and two famous Arabic dictionaries, the Lisánu ’l-‘Arabby Jamálu ’l-Dín Ibn Mukarram (õ 1311), and the Qámúsby Fírúzábádí (õ 1414). Nor, although he was a Turk, should we leave unnoticed the great bibliographer Ḥájjí Khalífa (õ 1658), whose Kashfu ’l-Ẓunúncontains the titles, arranged alphabetically, of all the Arabic, Persian, and Turkish books of which the existence was known to him.

The Mameluke period gave final shape to the Alf Layla wa-Layla, or 'Thousand and One Nights,' a work which is far more popular in Europe than the Koran or any other masterpiece of Arabic literature. The modern title, 'Arabian Nights,' tells only a part of the truth. Mas‘údí (õ 956 a.d.) mentions an old Persian book, the Hazár Afsána('Thousand Tales') which "is generally called the Thousand and One Nights; it is the story of the King and his Vizier, and of the The 'Thousand and One Nights.' Vizier's daughter and her slave-girl: Shírázád and Dínázád."844 The author of the Fihrist, writing in 988 a.d., begins his chapter "concerning the Story-Tellers and the Fabulists and the names of the books which they composed" with the following passage (p. 304):—

"The first who composed fables and made books of them and put them by in treasuries and sometimes introduced animals as speaking Persian origin of the 'Thousand and One Nights.' them were the Ancient Persians. Afterwards the Parthian kings, who form the third dynasty of the kings of Persia, showed the utmost zeal in this matter. Then in the days of the Sásánian kings such books became numerous and abundant, and the Arabs translated them into the Arabic tongue, and they soon reached the hands of philologists and rhetoricians, who corrected and embellished them and composed other books in the same style. Now the first book ever made on this subject was the Book of the Thousand Tales ( Hazár Afsán), on the following occasion: A certain king of Persia used to marry a woman for one night and kill her the next morning. And he wedded a wise and clever princess, called Shahrázád, who began to tell him stories and brought the tale at daybreak to a point that induced the king to spare her life and ask her on the second night to finish her tale. So she continued until a thousand nights had passed, and she was blessed with a son by him.... And the king had a stewardess ( qahramána) named Dínárzád, who was in league with the queen. It is also said that this book was composed for Ḥumání, the daughter of Bahman, and there are various traditions concerning it. The truth, if God will, is that Alexander (the Great) was the first who heard stories by night, and The Hazár Afsán. he had people to make him laugh and divert him with tales; although he did not seek amusement therein, but only to store and preserve them (in his memory). The kings who came after him used the 'Thousand Tales' ( Hazár Afsán) for this purpose. It covers a space of one thousand nights, but contains less than two hundred stories, because the telling of a single story often takes several nights. I have seen the complete work more than once, and it is indeed a vulgar, insipid book ( kitáb ^unghathth ^unbáridu ’l-hadíth).845