Literary History of Persia

(1) Saḥáb (d. 1222/1807-8).
Sayyid Muḥammad of Iṣfahán, poetically surnamed Saḥáb, was the son of that Sayyid Aḥmad Hátif mentioned at the end of the preceding chapter as almost the only notable Persian poet of the eighteenth century. Riḍá-qulí Khán (M.F., ii, 207-11) says that he was held in high honour by Fatḥ-‘Alí Sháh, for whom he composed, besides numerous panegyrics, a book of memoirs (presumably of poets) entitled Rashaḥát-i-Saḥáb, which I have never met with, and that his Díwán comprises only some five thousand verses. The following, censuring the conceit and arrogance of certain poets, are of some interest⁵⁷⁹:

[page 306]

“Wherein save in good nature lies anyone’s ‘perfection⁵⁸⁰,’ and what

‘perfection’ can there be to him who has not good nature?

Poetry is naught, and the poet’s vocation less than naught: I wonder

what is all this quarrel about nothing!

No one will ask about the arrangement of a few words: O fools

devoid of merit, what is all this talk?

On account of one or two hemistichs expressing some one else’s

ideas, what is all this thought of position and hope of wealth?

The root of poetry is phantasy, and its beauty lies in the impossible⁵⁸¹:

what can result from the imagining of all these impossible ideas?

Whoever has discovered what shame and modesty are will not boast

of superiority on account of a few silly words.

What in the eyes of men of judgment and sense are a hundred

sorts of such ‘perfection’ compared with the good nature of an

ordinary well-disposed man?

I grant that the naẓm (arrangement, or verse) of the ocean is pearls

and mines of precious stones: but what is it compared with the

ṇathr (scattering, or prose) of the pen of that Lord whose bounty

is as that of the ocean?”

[page 307]
(2) Mijmar (d. 1225/1810-11).
Sayyid Ḥusayn-i-Ṭabáṭabá’í of Ardistán near Iṣfahán, who earned the title of Mujtahidu’sh-Shu‘ará, is noticed by Riḍá-qulí Khán in all three of his above-mentioned works. He owed his introduction to the Persian Court to his fellow-townsman and fellow-poet Mírzá ‘Abdu’l-Wahháb Nasháṭ, who survived him by eighteen or nineteen years. He appears to have died young, for Riḍá-qulí Khán, after praising his verse, of which but a small collection was left, says that “had he lived longer, he would probably have attained the utmost distinction,” but even as it is he is one of the five poets of this period whom my accomplished old friend Ḥájji Mírzá Yaḥyá of Dawlatábád placed in the first class⁵⁸². Copies of his poems are rare, but the British Museum possesses a manuscript of his Kulliyyát, or collected works⁵⁸³. I can find nothing very noteworthy in Riḍá-qulí Khán’s selections, but the two following riddles, the first on the Wind and the second on the Pen, taken from the Tadhkira i-Dilgushá, may serve as specimens of his work.

[page 308]

“What is that messenger of auspicious advent and fortunate presence

who is moving every day and night and hastening every year

and month?

Who carries musk-pods in his skirt and perfume in his collar,

ambergris in his pocket, and pure musk in his sleeve?

A traveller without foot or head, a madman without sense or reason,

a lover without abode or habitation, a wanderer without food or

sleep.

None knoweth for love of whom he is so restless ; none discovereth

through separation from whom he is so troubled.

Through him water becomes, like the hearts of lovers through the

tresses of their idols, now wreathed in chains, now twisted and

tormented.

Now the earth dies through him, and again the world lives through

him, like the faculties through old age and like the nature

through youth.”

“To the rose-bush of the garden of the reasoning faculty I am a cloud

raining down pearls,

Both pouring forth sugar and diffusing perfume [like] the darling’s

lips and the sweetheart’s tresses.

In scattering pearls and pouring forth jewels I am [like] the nature

of the Minister and the hand of the King.”

[page 309]
(3) Ṣabá (d. 1238/1822-3).
Fatḥ-‘Alí Khán of Káshán, with the pen-name of Ṣabá, was poet-laureate (Maliku’sh-Shu‘ará) to Fatḥ-‘Alí Sháh. Riḍá-qulí Khán, who mentions him in all three of his works, says that no poet equal to him had appeared in Persia for nearly seven hundred years, and that some critics prefer his Shahinsháh-náma to the Sháhnáma of Firdawsí⁵⁸⁴. He also composed a Khudáwand-náma, an ‘Ibrat-náma, and a Gulshan-i-Ṣabá, while his Díwán is said to comprise ten or fifteen thousand verses. He was for a time governor of Qum and Káshán, but latterly devoted himself entirely to the Sháh’s service. In his youth he was the pupil of his fellow-townsman the poet Ṣabáḥí, who was a contemporary of Hátif and Ádhar, and died, according to the Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá, in 12006/1791-2. His eldest son Mírzá Ḥusayn Khán, poetically surnamed ‘Andalíb (“Nightingale”), succeeded him in the laureateship. His poetry, being mostly panegyric, has little attraction for us, but is extraordinarily melodious, as the following extract from a qaṣída quoted in the Tadhkira-i-Dilgúshá (which I think it unnecessary to translate, since the beauty lies in the form only) will show:

[page 310]
⁵⁸⁵
[page 311]
(4) Nasháṭ (d. 1244/1828-9).
Passing over Mírzá Muḥammad-qulí Afshár Ulfat (d. 1240/1824-5) and Áqá ‘Alí Ashraf Ágáh (d. 1244/1828-9), the younger brother of the poet Bismil, both of whom were personally known to Riḍá-qulí Khán, we come to Mírzá ‘Abdu’l-Wahháb of Iṣfahán, celebrated as a calligraphist as well as a poet, and master of the three languages, Arabic, Persian and Turkish. After nearly ruining himself by his prodigal hospitality and liberality to poets, mystics and men of letters, he gained the favour of Fatḥ-‘Alí Sháh, who conferred on him the title of Mu‘tamadu’d-Dawla. He excelled in the ghazal, and his best-known work is entitled Ganjína (the “Treasury”). The following chronogram gives the date of his death (A.H. 1244):

“Nasháṭ (joy) hath departed from the heart of the world.”

(5) Mírzá Abu’l-Qásim Qá`im-maqám (put to death in 1251/1835).
Two eminent men, father and son, bore this title (of which the literal meaning is exactly equivalent to “lieutenant,” in the sense of vicar or deputy), Mírzá ‘Ísá of Faráhán, called Mírzá Buzurg, who acted as Deputy Prime Minister to Prince ‘Abbás Mírzá and died in 1247/1831-2; and his son Mírzá Abu’l-Qásim, who, on the death of Fatḥ-‘Alí Sháh, fell into disgrace, and was put to death by his successor Muḥammad Sháh on June 26, 1835⁵⁸⁶. The latter was, from the literary point of view, the more remarkable, but though he wrote

[page 312]

poetry under the pen-name of Thaná’í, he is more celebrated as a prose-writer, his numerous published letters being regarded by his countrymen as models of good style. I possess a collection of his writings, both prose and verse, compiled at the instance of the late Prince Farhád Mírzá in 1281/1864-5, and lithographed at Tabríz in 1282/1865-6, of which the letters, addressed to various more or less eminent contemporaries but only occasionally bearing dates⁵⁸⁷, occupy by far the larger portion. Many of them are diplomatic documents of some historical importance, e.g. the apology addressed to the Tsar of Russia for the murder of the Minister Grebaiodoff and his staff at Ṭihrán on February 11, 1829⁵⁸⁸, which is here given as a specimen of the Qá’im-maqám’s much admired style.

[page 313]

[page 314]

“The Royal Letter to the Most Great Emperor concerning the

reparations for the murder of the Envoy in such wise as was desired.
“The beginning of the record is in the Name of the All-Knowing God,

The Living and, All-Powerful Creator and Provider, —
— that Peerless and Incomparable Being, exempt from every ‘how’

and ‘how much⁵⁸⁹,’ Who is just and wise, and subdueth every wrong-

doer, Who hath set a measure and limit to the recompense of every

good and evil deed, and Who, by His far-reaching wisdom, reproveth

and punisheth the doers of evil, and rewardeth and recompenseth the

well-doers. And countless blessings be upon the spirits of the righteous

Prophets and beneficent Leaders⁵⁹⁰.

But to proceed. Be it not bidden and concealed from the truth-

discerning judgment of that most eminent, equitable, and just King,

that brilliant and glorious Sovereign, that Lord of land and sea, my

noble-natured and fortunate-starred brother, the Emperor of the

Russian domains and their dependencies, whose rule is mighty and

glorious, and whose standards are triumphant and victorious, that a

disaster hath overtaken the Envoy of that State in the capital of this,

by impulse of the vicissitudes of the time and the quarrels of his people

with certain ignorant townsfolk, for which it is incumbent and obli-

gatory on the acting officials of this Government to make reparation

and give satisfaction. Therefore, in order to express our preliminary

apologies and to satisfy the self-respect and honour of that esteemed

brother, I have sent my dearly beloved son Khusraw Mírzá⁵⁹¹ to the

capital of the glorious Russian State. In the course of a friendly letter

we have expressed and explained the truth as to the suddenness of
[page 315]
this tragedy and the non-complicity of those responsible for the con-

duct of our Government; and secondly, having regard to the perfect

accord and agreement existing between these two Heaven-high Courts,

we have recognized it as incumbent on Our Royal Person to avenge

the above-mentioned Envoy, and, according to his deserts, have

chastised, punished or expelled from the country everyone of the in-

habitants and dwellers in our Capital who was suspected of having

participated in the slightest degree in this foul deed and improper

action. We have even reprimanded and dismissed the chief constable

of the city and the headman of the quarter, merely for the crime of

being informed too late and of not having established a firmer control

over the town before the occurrence of this catastrophe. Beyond all

this was the retribution and punishment which befel His Reverence

Mírzá Masíḥ, notwithstanding the rank of mujtahid which he holds in

the religion of Islám and the respect and influence which he enjoys

alike with gentle and simple, by reason of the assembly made by the

townsfolk in his circle. Having regard to the concord of our two

Governments, we have regarded as improper any overlooking of, or

connivance at, such matters, nor hath the intercession or intervention

of anyone been admitted in regard to him. Wherefore, since it was

necessary to make known this procedure to that brother of goodly

disposition, we have applied ourselves to the writing of this friendly

letter, committing the elucidation of the details of these events to our

divinely aided and favoured son Prince ‘Abbás Mírzá, our Viceroy.

The hope which we cherish from the Court of God is that every

moment the extent of the mutual affection of these two States of ancient

foundation may expand and increase, and that the bonds of friendship

and unity of these two Courts may be continually confirmed and multi-

plied by the interchange of messengers and messages: and may the

end be in welfare!

“Written in the month of the First Rabí’, 1245” (September, 1829).
This letter, although professedly from Fatḥ-‘Alí Sháh, was, of course, really written by the Qá’im-maqám. It must have been gall and wormwood to him to be compelled to write so civilly, indeed so humbly, to the Russians, of whom he says in a poem commemorating a Persian victory by ‘Abbás Mírzá over them and the Turks⁵⁹²:
[page 316]

“The unlucky Turks and the ill-starred Russians on either side

attempted the subjugation of Ádharbáyján,”

and in one of his letters to Mírzá Buzurg of Núr, written after the conclusion of peace with Russia (probably in 1243/1828), he laments that he no longer dares speak of the “Rús-i-manḥús” (the “sinister” or “ill-starred Russians”):

A later, greater, and more virtuous, but equally unfortunate, Persian Prime Minister, Mírzá Taqí Khán Amír-i-Kabír⁵⁹³, still further simplified the style of official correspondence; but the Qá’im-maqám’s letters, though they may not strike one unused to the flowery effusions of the preceding age as very simple, mark an immense advance on the detestable rhodomontades which had for too long passed as eloquent and admirable, and probably deserve the high esteem in which, as already mentioned, they are held by the best contemporary Persian taste and judgment. A critical annotated edition of these letters would be of considerable literary and historical value, and might with advantage engage the attention of some Persian scholar whose interests are not confined to a remote past.

(6) Wiṣál (d. 1262/1846) and his sons.
I have already mentioned Wiṣál, some of whose gifted sons and grandsons I was privileged to meet at Shíráz in the spring of 1888. He is generally regarded by his countrymen as one of the most eminent of the modern poets, and both Riḍá-qulí Khán who devotes lengthy notices to him in all three of his works:
[page 317]
and the poet Bismil, the author of the Tadhkira-i-Dilgushá, were personally acquainted with him, the latter intimately. His proper name was Mírzá [Muḥammad] Shafí‘, but he was commonly entitled “Mírzá Kúchuk,” and he was a native of Shíráz. Bismil speaks in the most glowing terms of his skill in calligraphy and music as well as in verse, wherein he holds him “incomparable” (‘adímu’l-mithál), and praises his lofty character and fidelity in friendship, but describes him as “rather touchy” (andak zúd-ranj), a description illustrated by Riḍá-qulí Khán’s remark (in the Rawḍatu’ṣ-Ṣafá) that he was much vexed when the Sháh, meaning to praise him, told him that he was “prodigal of talents⁵⁹⁴.” He is said to have written twelve thousand verses, which include, besides qaṣídas and ghazals, the Bazm-i-Wiṣál and the continuation and completion of Waḥshí’s Farhád u Shírín, described as “far superior to the original⁵⁹⁵.” He also translated into Persian the Aṭwáqu’dh-Dhahab (“Collars of Gold”) of Zamakhsharí. Bismil, who professes to have read all his poems, only cites the relatively small number of 213 couplets, of which the following are fairly typical, and afford a good instance of what Persian rhetoricians call the “attribution of praise in the form of blame,” for the qaṣída begins:
“The sea, the land, heaven and the stars —

Each one of them declares the King a tyrant —

an opening calculated to cause consternation to courtiers, until it is stated that the sea considers itself wronged by his liberality, the mountain because he has scattered its hoarded gold like dust, the stars because they are eclipsed in number and splendour by his hosts, and so forth. As
[page 318]
such far-fetched conceits can hardly be made attractive in translation, I again confine myself to quoting a few lines of the original:

[page 319]

Wiṣál’s Farhád u Shírín has been lithographed, and ample selections from his poems are given by Riḍá-qulí Khán in his Riyáḍu’l-‘Árifín (pp. 337-50) and Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá (ii, pp. 528-48), which latter work also contains (pp. 548-58) an ample notice of his eldest son Wiqár, who was presented to Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh in 1274/1857-8 at Ṭihrán, where his biographer met him again “after twenty years’ separation.” The same work contains notices of Wiqár’s younger brothers, Mírzá Maḥmúd the physician, poetically named Ḥakím (d. 1268/1851-2: pp. 102-5), and Mírzá Abu’l-Qásim Farhang, of whom I have already spoken (p. 300 supra), but not of the three other brothers Dáwarí, Yazdání and Himmat. The following fine musammaṭ by Dáwarí, describing one of the Sháh’s hunting parties, I copied for myself in the house of the late Nawwáb Mírzá Ḥasan ‘Alí Khán at Ṭihrán early in the year 1888, and, as it has never been published, and I know of no other copy in Europe, I cannot resist the temptation of here assuring a survival hitherto so precarious, for it was copied on a loose half-sheet of note-paper which I only accidentally came across just now while searching for something else.

[page 320]

[page 321]

[page 322[

This poem is simple, sonorous and graphic; the court page, who has just returned from accompanying the Sháh on a winter hunting-expedition, and is in so great a hurry to visit his friend the poet that he enters in his riding-breeches and boots (bá chakma wa shalwár), with hair still disordered and full of dust, and eyes bloodshot from the glare of the sun, the hardships of exposure, and lack of sleep, bringing only as a present from the journey (raháward-i-safar) roses and hyacinths (his cheeks and hair), rubies of Badakhshán (his lips), and a casket of pearls (his teeth), is a vivid picture; and if a description of the Royal massacre of game reminds us of the immortal Mr Bunker’s Bavarian battue⁵⁹⁶, we must remember that the wholesale slaughters of game instituted by Chingíz Khán the Mongol in the thirteenth century, whereof the tradition still survives to some extent, were on a colossal scale, altogether transcending any European analogy⁵⁹⁷.

In 1887, the year before I met Dáwarí’s brother Farhang at Shíráz, two of his unpublished poems were shown to and copied by me in London. One was a qaṣída in praise of Queen Victoria, composed on the occasion of her Jubilee, which I was asked to translate so that it might perhaps be brought to her notice, a hope not fulfilled. The other, composed in May of the same year (Sha‘bán, 1304), contained a quaint description

[page 323]
of Paris, laudatory for the most part, but concluding with some rather severe reflections on the republican form of government. It differs widely from the poems of Farhang cited in the Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá (ii, pp. 384-8), is full of French words, and produces, as was probably intended, a somewhat comic and burlesque effect. It contains 78 verses and is too long to be cited in full, but I here give the opening and concluding portions:
^{598 599 600 601}
[page 324]
⁶⁰²
[page 325]

Lack of space compels me to pass over several poets of some note, such as Áqá Muḥammad Ḥasan Zargar (“the Goldsmith”) of Iṣfahán, who died in 1270/1853-4⁶⁰³; Áqá Muḥammad ‘Áshiq, a tailor, also of Iṣfahán, who died at the age of seventy in 1281/1864⁶⁰⁴; Mírzá Muḥammad ‘Alí Surúsh of Sidih, entitled Shamsu’sh-Shu‘ará, who died in 1285/1868-9⁶⁰⁵; and Áqá Muḥammad ‘Alí Jayḥún of Yazd, of whose life I can find no particulars save such as can be gleaned from his verses, but who composed, besides numerous poems of
[page 326]
various types, a prose work entitled Namakdán (“the Salt-cellar”) on the model of the Gulistán, and whose complete works were lithographed at Bombay in 1316/1899, making a volume of 317 pp. Others who are reckoned amongst the poets were more distinguished in other fields of literature, such as the historians Riḍá-qulí Khán Hidáyat⁶⁰⁶, so often cited in this chapter (born 1215/1800, died 1288/1871-2), and Mírzá Muḥammad Taqí Siphir of Káshán⁶⁰⁷, entitled Lisánu’l-Mulk (“the Tongue of the Kingdom”), author of the Násikhu’t-Tawáríkh (“Abrogator of Histories”) and of another prose work entitled Baráhínu’l-‘Ajam (“Proofs of the Persians”); the philosopher Ḥájji Mullá Hádí of Sabzawár, who was born in 1212/1797-8, wrote a small amount of verse under the pen-name of Asrár (“Secrets”), and died in 1295/1878⁶⁰⁸; and others. Of the remaining modern representatives of the “Classical School” Qá’ání is by far the most important, and after him Yaghmá, Furúghí and Shaybání, of whom some account must now be given.

(7) Qá’ání (d. 1270/1853-4).
Qá’ání is by general consent the most notable poet produced by Persia in the nineteenth century. He was born at Shíráz about 1222/1807-8, for, according to his own statement at the end of the Kitáb-i-Paríshán, he completed that work on Rajab 20, 1252 (October 31, 1836), being then two or three months short of thirty years of age:
[page 327]

[page 328]
His proper name was Ḥabíb, under which he originally wrote, and which he uses as his takhalluṣ, or nom de guerre, in many of his earlier poems. Later when he and Mírzá ‘Abbás of Bisṭám, who originally wrote under the pen-name of Miskín, had attached themselves to Ḥasan ‘Alí Mírzá Shujá‘u’s-Sulṭana, for some time Governor of Khurásán and Kirmán, that prince changed their pen-names respectively to Qá’ání and Furúghí, after his two sons Ogotáy Qá’án and Furúghu’d-Dawla⁶⁰⁹.

Qá’ání was born at Shíráz. His father, Mírzá Muḥammad ‘Alí, was also a poet who wrote under the pen-name of Gulshan. Though Qá’ání was but a child when he died, his statement in the Kitáb-i-Paríshán⁶¹⁰ that “though thirty complete years have elapsed since the death of my father, I still imagine that it was but two weeks ago” cannot be reconciled with the other statement quoted above that he was not yet thirty when he completed the book in question. The Tadhkira-i-Dilgushá consecrates articles to both father and son, but unfortunately in my manuscript the last two figures of the date of Gulshán’s death are left blank, while it is also omitted in the notice contained in the Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá⁶¹¹, which is very meagre.

About Qá’ání’s seemingly uneventful life there is not much to be said. He appears to have spent most of it at Shíráz, where in the spring of 1888 I had the honour of occupying the room in the house of the Nawwáb Mírzá Ḥaydar ‘Alí Khán which he used to inhabit and, as we have seen, he resided for some time at Kirmán. The latter part of his life, when he had established himself as a recognized Court poet, was spent at Ṭihrán, where he died in
[to face p. 328]
[Ḥájji Mírzá Áqásí]
Or. 4938 [Brit. Mus.), 9
[page 329]
1270/1853-4. Two of his latest poems must have been those which he wrote to celebrate the escape of Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh from the attempt on his life made by three Bábís on August 15, 1852, quoted in my Traveller’s Narrative⁶¹².

Qá’ání’ is one of the most melodious of all the Persian poets, and his command of the language is wonderful, but he lacks high aims and noble principles. Not only does he flatter great men while they are in power, and turn and rend them as soon as they fall into disgrace, but he is prone to indulge in the most objectionable innuendo and even the coarsest obscenity. In numerous qaṣídas he extols the virtues and justice of Ḥájji Mírzá Áqásí⁶¹³, the Prime Minister of Muḥammad Sháh, but in a qaṣída in praise of his successor Mírzá Taqí Khán Amír-i-Kabír he alludes to the fallen minister thus:

“In the place of a vile tyrant is seated a just and God-fearing man,

In whom pious believers take pride.”

Of his innuendo the following is a good specimen:

[page 330]

The beauty of Qá’ání’s language can naturally only be appreciated by one who can read his poems in the original, which is fortunately easily accessible, as his works have been repeatedly published⁶¹⁴. I have chiefly used the Ṭihrán lithographed edition of 1302/1884-5, and in a lesser degree the Tabríz lithographed edition f 1273/1857, and the “Selections…recommended for the Degree of Honour
[page 331]
Examination in Persian” printed at Calcutta in A.D. 1907. Like most of the Qájár poets, he excels chiefly in the qaṣída, the musammaṭ and the tarkíb-band, but the following ghazal⁶¹⁵ is extraordinarily graceful and melodious:

[page 332]

Wonderful also is the swing and grace of the poem in praise of the Queen-mother (Mahd-i-‘Ulyá) beginning⁶¹⁶:

[page 333]

“Are these violets growing from the ground on the brink of the streams,

Or have the houris [of Paradise] plucked strands from their tresses?

If thou hast not seen how the sparks leap from the rock,

Look at the petals of the red anemones in their beds

Which leap forth like sparks from the crags of the mountains!”
Not inferior to this is another similar poem in praise of Mírzá Taqí Khán Amír-i-Kabír, beginning⁶¹⁷:

Instead of the far-fetched and often almost unintelligible conceits so dear to many Persian poets, Qá’ání prefers to draw his illustrations from familiar customs and common observances, as, for example, in the following verses⁶¹⁸, wherein allusion is made to various popular ceremonies connected with the Naw-rúz, or Persian New Year’s Day:
⁶¹⁹
[page 334]
^{620 621}
[page 335]
Qá’ání is also one of the very few Persian poets who has condescended to reproduce actual peculiarities of speech or enunciation, as in his well-known dialogue between an old man and a child both of whom are afflicted with a stammer. This poem, which may more conveniently be transcribed into the Roman character, is as follows⁶²²:
“Pírakí lál saḥar-gáh bi-ṭiflí alkan

Mí-shunídam ki badín naw‘ hamí-ránd sukhan:

‘K’ay zi zulfat ṣa-ṣa-ṣubḥam sha-sha-shám-i-tárík,

W’ay zi chihrat sha-sha-shámam ṣa-ṣa-ṣubḥ-i-rawshan!

Ta-ta-tiryákiyam, u az sha-sha-shahd-i-la-labat

Ṣa-ṣa-ṣabr u ta-ta-tábam ra-ra-raft az ta-ta-tan.’

Ṭifl guftá, ‘Ma-ma-man-rá tu-tu taqlíd ma-kun!

Ga-ga-gum shaw zi baram, ay ka-ka-kamtar az zan!

Mi-mí-khwáhí mu-mu-mushtí bi-ka-kallat bi-zanam,

Ki biyuftad ma-ma-maghzat ma-mayán-i-da-dihan?’

Pír guftá, ‘Wa-wa-wa’lláhi ki ma‘lúm-ast ín

Ki-ki zádam man-i-bíchára zi mádar alkan!

Ha-ha-haftád u ha-hashtád u si sál-ast fuzún

Ga-ga-gung u la-la-lálam ba-bi-Khalláq-i-Zaman!’

Ṭifl guftá: ‘Kha-khudá-rá ṣa-ṣa-ṣad bár sha-shukr

Ki bi-rastam bi-jahán az ma-la-lál u ma-miḥan!

Ma-ma-man ham ga-ga-gungam ma-ma-mithl-i-tu-tu-tú:

Tu-tu-tú ham ga-ga-gungí ma-ma-mithl-i-ma-ma-man!”

Besides his poems, Qá’ání wrote a collection of stories and maxims in the style of Sa‘dí’s Gulistán entitled Kitáb-i-Paríshán, comprising one hundred and thirteen anecdotes, and concluding with thirty-three truly Machiavellian counsels to Kings and Princes. This book, which contains a certain amount of autobiographical material, occupies pp. 1-40 of the Ṭihrán lithographed edition of Qá’ání’s works, and numerous other editions exist, several of which are mentioned by Mr Edwards in his Catalogue⁶²³.
[page 336]
(8) Furúghí (d. 1274/1858).
Mention has already been made of Mírzá ‘Abbás, son Áqá Músá of Bisṭám, who wrote verse first under the pen-name of Miskín and later of Furúghí. He is said to have written some twenty thousand verses, of which a selection of some five thousand is placed at the end (pp. 4-75) of the Ṭihrán edition (1302/1884-5) of the works of Qá’ání, with whom he was so closely associated. Unlike him, however, he seems to have preferred lyric to elegiac forms of poetry; at any rate the selections in question consist entirely of ghazals. According to the brief biography prefixed to them he adopted the Ṣúfí doctrine in the extremer forms which it had assumed in ancient times with Báyazíd of Bisṭám and Ḥusayn ibn Manṣúr al-Ḥalláj, and so incurred the suspicion and censure of the orthodox. Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh, in the beginning of whose reign he was still flourishing, once sent for him and said, “Men say that like Pharaoh thou dost advance the claim ‘I am your Lord the Supreme⁶²⁴,’ and that thou dost openly pretend to Divinity.” “This assertion,” replied Furúghí, touching the ground with his forehead, “is sheer calumny…. For seventy years I have run hither and thither, and only now have I reached the Shadow of God!⁶²⁵” The first three verses from the first ode cited seem to me as good and as typical as any others. They run as follows:

[page 337]
“When didst thou depart from the heart that I should crave for Thee?

When wert thou hidden that I should find Thee?

Thou hast not disappeared that I should seek Thy presence:

Thou hast not become hidden that I should make Thee apparent.

Thou hast come forth with a hundred thousand effulgences

That I may contemplate Thee with a hundred thousand eyes.”

(9) Yaghmá of Jandaq.
Mírzá Abu’l-Ḥasan of Jandaq, chiefly celebrated for his abusive and obscene verses (Hazaliyyát), and commonly known, from his favourite term of coarse invective, as Zan-qaḥba, is the last poet mentioned by the author of the Majma‘u’-Fuṣaḥá⁶²⁶ before the autobiography with which he concludes. He was for some time secretary to a very violent and foul-mouthed nobleman named Dhu’l-Fiqár Khán of Samnán, for whose amusement he is said to have written these offensive poems, collectively known as the Sardáriyya⁶²⁷. Though he wrote a quantity of serious verse and a number of elegant letters in prose, which are included in the large Ṭihrán edition of his works lithographed in 1283/1866-7, it is on his Hazaliyyát, or “Facetiae,” that his fame or infamy is based. The author of the Tadhkira-i-Dilgushá⁶²⁸ devotes but three lines to him, and was not personally acquainted with him, but had heard him well spoken of as “an amiable and kindly man and a good-natured and eloquent youth, who did not believe in making a collection of his poems.” Qá’ání attacked him in his own style in the following abusive verses⁶²⁹:

[page 338]

Yaghmá’s Kulliyyát, or Complete Works, as represented in the Ṭihrán lithographed edition above mentioned, comprise the following:

A. Prose writings (pp. 2-145), consisting of numerous letters written to friends and acquaintances, unfortunately, so far as I have seen, undated. A careful examination of these letters would undoubtedly furnish abundant materials for the poet’s biography. Many of them are addressed to unnamed friends, acquaintances or patrons, but some were written to his sons, Mírzá Isma‘íl who wrote poetry under the pen-name of Hunar, Mírzá Aḥmad Ṣafá’í, Mírzá Muḥammad ‘Alí Khaṭar, and Mírzá Ibráhím. Dastán, while others were written to men of more or less note whose names are given. In many of these letters he elects to write in pure Persian (Pársí-nigárí), avoiding all Arabic words, while others, called náma-i-basíṭ, are written in a very simple style.

B. Verse.

1. Early odes (ghazaliyyát-i-qadíma), pp. 46-183.

2. Later odes (ghazaliyyát-i-jadída), pp. 184-203.

3. The Sardáriyya mentioned above (pp. 204-217), written in the ghazal form with the pen-name Sardár.

[to face p. 338]

Autograph of the poet Yaghmá
Or. 4936 (Brit. Mus.), 19
[page 339]
4. The Qaṣṣábiyya (pp. 218-231), similar to the last-mentioned work in form and contents, but with the pen-name Qaṣṣáb (“Butcher”).

5. The Kitáb-i-Aḥmad (pp. 232-247), similar to the two last, but with the pen-name Aḥmad.

6. The Khuláṣatu’l-Iftiḍáḥ (“Quintessence of Disgrace,” pp. 248-265), an account in mathnawí verse of a scandalous incident fully described in a marginal note on p. 248.

7. The Kitáb-i-Ṣukúku’d-Dalíl (pp. 266-280), another mathnawí in the metre of the Sháhnáma outwardly praising but inwardly satirizing a certain Sayyid Qanbar-i-Rawḍa-khwán, entitled, by Yaghmá Rustamu’s-Sádát.

8. Maráthí or Elegies on the deaths of the Imáms (pp. 282-301).

9. Tarjí‘-bands and Tarkíb-bands (pp. 302-33 1), mostly of a ribald character.

10. Qiṭa‘át or Fragments (pp. 332-355), mostly ribald and satirical.

11. Rubá‘iyyát or Quatrains (pp. 356-389). also ribald.

The odes, old and new, and the elegies (Nos. 1, 2 and 8 in the above list) constitute the respectable, part of Yaghmá’s verse, in all about one-third of the whole. As for the. rest, with the possible exception of No. 7, it is for the most part not fit to print, much less to translate. The poet’s favourite term of abuse Zan-qaḥba, by which he himself is commonly known, is by no means a nice expression, but, it is delicacy itself compared with much of the language he employs. On the other hand, his serious odes and elegies show that he can write fine poetry, while his command of language is almost greater than that of Qá’ání, even though the melody of his verse be less. He also appears to have invented a type of marthiya or elegy which he calls Núḥa-i-Sína-zaní, or Lamentation accom-
[page 340]
panied by beating of the breast. This I supposed till lately to have been one of the new models which sprang into existence after the Revolution of 1905-6, and I gave several specimens of it in my Press and Poetry of Modern Persia⁶³⁰. The following are the initial lines of eight of Yaghmá’s elegies of this type:

[page 341]

[page 342]

[Page 343]

This last poem in form most closely approaches No. 19 in my Press and Poetry of Modern Persia.

The above poems are interesting as regards their form. The following, an ordinary Núḥa, or “Lamentation,” without refrain, partly in colloquial dialect, is simple and rather beautiful. I quote only the first six of the nineteen verses which it comprises:

“My heart is very weary of life; however soon I die, it is still too late.

The women’s hearts are the abode of grief and mourning; the men’s

bodies are the target of swords and arrows.

Their sons welter in their blood; their daughters mourn; the brother

is slain; the sister is a captive.

The morsel in the mothers’ mouths is their own heart’s blood; the

milk in the children’s throats is liquid gore.
[page 344]
The captives, in place of tears and lamentations, have sparks in

their eyes and fire in their souls.

The outcry of the thirsty reaches down and up from the dark earth

to the Sphere of the Ether.”

It is curious to find in two such ribald poets as Yaghmá and Qá’ání⁶³¹ so deep a religious sense and sympathy with the martyrs of their faith as are manifested in a few of their poems. Verlaine, perhaps, offers the nearest parallel in modern European literature.

Of the remaining poets who flourished during the long reign of Náṣiru’d-Dín Sháh, whose assassination on May 1, 1896, may be regarded as the first portent of the Revolution which bore its full fruit ten years later, two, Mírzá Muḥammad Taqí of Káshán with the pen-name of Sipihr, and Mírzá Riḍá-qulí Khán Hidáyat, are better known as historians and will be mentioned as such in a later chapter, though notices of both are given by the latter in his often-quoted Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá⁶³². Another poet of some note is Abu’n-Naṣr Fatḥu’lláh Khán Shaybání of Káshán, a copious selection of whose poems was printed by the Akhtar Press at Constantinople in 1308/1890-1⁶³³, and of whom a long notice (pp. 224-245) is also given in the Majma‘u’l-Fuṣaḥá. The list might be increased almost indefinitely, did space permit, but the most notable names have been mentioned, and even to them it has been impossible to do justice.

[to face p. 344]
[MUẒAFFARU’D-DÍN MÍRZÁ (afterwards SHÁH) seated, with his tutor (Lala-báshí) RIḌÁ QULÍ KHÁN, poet and historian, standing on his right (the reader’s left)]
Or. 4938 (Brit. Mus.), 14
[page 345]
Of the new school of poets produced by the Revolution in 1906 and the succeeding, years I have treated in a separate work, the Press and Poetry in Modern Persia⁶³⁴, more fully than would have been possible in this volume. The most eminent of these contemporary poets are, perhaps, Dakhaw (Dih-Khudá) of Qazwín, ‘Árif of Qazwín, Sayyid Ashraf of Gílán, and, Bahár of Mashhad. Dakhaw is probably the youngest and the most remarkable of them, though I do not think he has produced much verse lately. The versatility of his genius is illustrated by two of his poems (Nos. 3 and 14) cited in my above-mentioned work, on the one hand the riotous burlesque of “Kabláy,” and on the other the delicate and beautiful In Memoriam addressed to his former colleague Mírzá Jahángír Khán of Shíráz, editor of the Ṣúr-i-Isráfíl, of which the former was published in that admirable paper on November 20, 1907, and the latter on March 8, 1909. Bahár, entitled Maliku’sh-Shu‘ará, “King of the Poets,” or Poet Laureate, was the editor of the Naw Bahár (which after its suppression reappeared under the title of Táza Bahár), and was the author of several fine poems (Nos. 20, 34 and 36-47) published in my book, while ‘Árif is represented by No. 33, and Ashraf by Nos. 4-7, 9-13, 16-19, and 27. I do not think that the works of these or any others of the post-Revolution poets have been published in a collected form. They appeared from time to time in various newspapers, notably the Ṣúr-i-Isráfíl, Nasím-i-Shimál and Naw Bahár, and must be culled from their pages. Many of the now numerous Persian papers contain a literary corner entitled Adabiyyát in which these poems appear. The importance of the fact that their aim must now be to please
[page 346]
the increasing public taste and reflect the growing public opinion, not to gratify individual princes, ministers and noblemen, has been already emphasized⁶³⁵.

Of one other poet, lately deceased, who is very highly esteemed by his countrymen, but whose writings are not yet readily accessible, something more must be said. This is Mírzá Ṣádiq Khán, a great-grandson of the celebrated Qá’im-maqám⁶³⁶, best known by his title Adíbu’l-Mamálik, who died on the 28th of Rabí‘ ii, 1335 (Feb. 21, 1917). Three sources of information about him are at my disposal, viz. (1) a notice in my ms. marked J. 19⁶³⁷ on modern Persian poets (pp. 39-50); (2) an obituary notice in No. 20 of the old Káwa of April 15, 1917; and (3) a pamphlet published at the “Kaviani Press” in 1341/1922 by Khán Malik-i-Ḥusayní-i-Sásání, a cousin of the poet, announcing his intention of collecting and publishing his poems, and asking help from those who possess copies of verses not in his possession. Some particulars concerning him are also given in my Press and Poetry of Modern Persia in connection with the various papers he edited or wrote for at different times, viz. the Adab of Tabríz (pp. 37-8)) Mashhad (p. 38) and Ṭihrán (p. 39), which extended over the period 1316-1322/1898-1905; the Turco-Persian Irshád (p. 39), which he edited in conjunction with Aḥmad Bey Aghayeff of Qarábágh at Bákú in 1323/1905-6; the Rúz-náma-i-Írán-i-Sulṭání (pp. 88-91), to which he contributed in 1321/1903-4; the ‘Iráq-i-‘Ajam (pp. 118-19), which he edited in 1325/1907; and the Majlis (pp. 132-3), for

[page 347]
which he wrote in 1324/1906. One of the most celebrated of his poems is also given on pp. 300-302 of the same work.

The Adíbu’l-Mamálik was born in 1277/1860-1, and was a descendant in the third degree of Mírzá ‘Ísá Qá’im-maqám, and in the thirty-fifth degree of the Imám Zaynu’l-‘Ábidín. In 1307/1889-90 he was at Tabríz in the service of the Amír Niẓám (Ḥasan ‘Alí Khán-i-Garrúsí), in honour of whom he changed his pen-name from Parwána (“Moth”) to Amírí. In 1311/1893-4 he followed the Amír Niẓám to Kirmánsháh and Kurdistán. During the two following years (1894-6) he was employed in the Government Translation Office (Dáru’t-Tarjuma-i-Dawlatí) in Ṭihrán, but in Ṣafar 1314/July-August, 1896, he returned with the Amír Niẓám to Ádharbáyján, where, in 1316/1898-9, he adopted the turban in place of the kuláh, became Vice-master of the Luqmániyya College at Tabríz, and founded the Adab newspaper, which, as stated above, he afterwards continued at Mashhad and Ṭihrán. During the years 1318-20/1900-02 he travelled in the Caucasus and Khwárazm (Khiva), whence he came to Mashhad, but at the end of A.H. 1320 (March, 1903) he returned to Ṭihrán, and for the next two years, 1321-2/1903-5, was the chief contributor to the Rúz-náma-i-Írán-i-Sulṭání. In 1323/1905-6 he was joint editor of the Irshád at Bákú; in 1324/1906 he became chief writer for the Majlis. edited by Mírzá Muḥammad Ṣádiq-i-Ṭabáṭabá’í; and in 1325/1907 he founded the ‘Iráq-i-‘Ajam. In July, 1910, he took part in the capture of Ṭihrán by the Nationalists, and subsequently held the position of President of the High Court of Justice (Ra’ís-i-Adliyya) in ‘Iráq and afterwards at Samnán. He lost his only daughter in 1330/1912. Two years later he was appointed editor of the semi-official newspaper Áftáb (“the Sun”). In 1335/1916-17 he was appointed President of the High Court of Justice at

[page 348]
Yazd, but soon afterwards, as we have seen, he died at Ṭihrán, aged fifty-eight⁶³⁸.

The special value and interest of his poems, according to Khán Malik, his cousin and intimate friend, lie not only in their admirable and original style, but in their faithful reflection of the varying moods of the Persian people during the fateful years 1906-1912. In satire it is said that no Persian poet has equalled him since the time of old Súzaní of Samarqand⁶³⁹, who died in 569/1173-4. In his pamphlet Khán Malik gives the opening verses of all the poems in his possession, with the number of verses in each, and invites those who possess poems lacking in his collection to communicate them to him before Jumáda i, 1342 (December, 1923), when be proposes to publish as complete an edition as possible. The Káwa quotes the following verses from one of his poems on the Russian aggressions in Persia, which it compares with the celebrated poems of Sa‘dí on the destruction of the Caliphate by the Mongols⁶⁴⁰, Anwarí on the invasion of the Ghuzz Turks⁶⁴¹, and Ḥáfiẓ on Tímúr’s rapacity⁶⁴²:

[page 349]

“Since the poor lamb did not forgather with its shepherd, through

fear it neither slept nor rested in the plain.

A bear came forth to hunt, and bound its limbs: our lamb became

the prey of that high-handed bear.

Alas for that new-born and bemused lamb! Alack for that aged and

greedy bear!”

My manuscript J. 19⁶⁴³ (p. 44) enumerates twelve of his works, which include an Arabic and a Persian Díwán, a collection of Maqámát, a rhymed vocabulary, a volume of travels, and several books on Astronomy, Geography, Prosody, and other sciences.