No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
The Baghdad of the “Arabian Nights” has ever been associated with the “goodly time and golden prime of good Haroun Alraschid,” and his name, like that of his contemporary Charlemagne, has attracted and annexed many a tale belonging to other periods. That this is true of one of the Baghdad tales is shown by its appearing as an actual occurrence in the “Munṭaẓam” of Ibn al-Jauzi at a date some 120 years later than the death of al-Ra
īd. The time was no longer ‘goodly,’ and the Caliphate was past its prime. Muqtadir, during whose reign it had declined apace, had died a violent death in 321 a.h., and his mother, 
a
ab, did not long survive him. His filial affection, which throughout his reign had allowed her an extent of influence prejudicial to his rule, continued unabated to its close, and his chief concern on starting for his fatal march against Mūnis was for what might be in store for her in the event of his perishing. According to the story of a female astrologer, his fears were prophetic in their accuracy. aab, though suffering from a mortal complaint and prostrated by her son's death, was called upon by his brother and successor, Qāhir, to disclose her hidden wealth. She disclaimed possessing more than a moderate sum, saying that any money of hers would have been used to save her son.
page 273 note 1 In the Berlin MS., Ahlwardt No. 9,436, at fol. 46a. The liberality of the Director of the Hof Bibliothek has recently enabled me to peruse this fine MS. at the Library of the India Office. It is described in the catalogue as “perhaps” Ibn al-Jauzi's History, but it has abundant internal evidence of being the work of this author and a part of his “Munṭaẓam.” For in the notice of Ibn al-Jassās (fol. 34a) the author says that he had given many anecdotes about him in his “Kitāb al-Muaffalīn,” and again, in the notice of Muḥammad b. 
alaf b. Jiyyān, under 371 a.h. (fol. 119a), he speaks of having discussed his views in his “Talbīs Iblīs,” and both these works are by Ibn al-Jauzi (see Brock., Gesch. Arab. Lit., i, 503, Nos. 9 and 38). Further, statements said by other historians to be derived from the “Munṭaẓam” are to be found in the MS. The curious story told by Ibn al-A
īr (ix, 255) of the vizier al-Maribi's scheme for his burial at the tomb of ‘Ali is given in the notice of the vizier (fol. 176a), and it is given also by the historian's grandson, the Sibṭ ibn al-Jauzi, in the Mir’āt al-Zamān (B.M. Or. 4,619, 216b), as “told by my grandfather in the Munṭaẓam” ; the date 367 a.h. for the death of Abu Firas, the Hamdanid (fol. 106b), 
ahabi quotes in the Ta'rī
al-Islām (B.M. Or. 48, 81b), describing it as evidently erroneous; and his account of Bahā, al-Daula'a vizier al-Muwaffaq, who died in 394 a.h. (ib., fol. 239a), is likewise quoted from the “Munṭaẓam,” and occurs in the MS. (fol. 150a). On the dispute as to the lawfulness of conferring the title āhānāh on Jalāl al-Daula in 429 a.h. (B.M. Or. 49, fol. 20a), when the objections of al-Māwardi were overruled by the other legists, ahabi says that Ibn al-Jauzi adhered to the opinion of al-Māwardi. And the author of the Berlin MS. states therein that such was his opinion on the controversy.
page 274 note 1 Ibn al-Aīr, viii, 147–8 and 180–1; and ‘Arīb, 181, 1. 3.
page 274 note 2 ‘Arīb, 183–4, on the authority of al-Farāni, a continuator of Ṭabari, died 362 a.h. (ahabi, Or. 48, 79b).
page 274 note 3 Died 384 a.h. (Ibn hallikān, Sl. Eng., ii, 564; and Brock., Gesch. Arab. Lit., i, 155).
page 274 note 4 Referring to Muqtadir's generous treatment of Qāhir after his two days' Caliphate in 317 a.h. (Ibn al-Aīr, viii, 152).
page 274 note 5 “‘Omar b. Muḥammad b. Yūsuf b. Yā‘qūb” ; his father and grandfather had both held the same office.
page 274 note 6 The account given by Ibn al-Aīr, viii, 182, makes it appear that on aab refusing to revoke her charitable endowments the Caliph did his own act and before legal witnesses. The transaction is so understood by A. v. Kremer, “Ueber das Einnahmebudget des Abbasiden Reichs Tom Jahre 306” (Denkschr. d. phil. hist. Cl. d. Wiener Akad., Bd. xxxvi, pp. 283–82, on p. 299), but this account limiting the sale to her own property is the more probable one, as the proceeding purports to be strictly legal.
page 275 note 1 By the interposition of the vizier Ibn Muqla and the Chamberlain Ibn Yalbaq, aab, and other members of the Caliph's house, were later with drawn from his custody, and aab was honourably lodged in the Chamberlain's house, where in ten days time she died. (Ibn al-Jauzi, op. cit., fol. 45a; ‘Arīb, p. 186; and Ibn al-Aīr, viii, 186.)
page 276 note 1 The story occurs also iu the Schefer MS. of the “Munṭaẓam” (Paris, Arabe, No. 5,909, Ms. 175–179). In the “Gids” (Amsterdam, 1886, iii, 385–413) Professor de Goeje has pointed out the similarity of the two stories, and has given a Dutch translation of this text. He also considers another story in the “Nights” to be derived from this source, viz. “The Baghdad Moneychanger” (Calcutta text, ed. Macnaughten, iv, 557; Cairo, 1297, iv, 252; and Kosegarten, Chrest. Arab., 1–21), where a man in love with an inmate of the harim of Mutawakkil (232–247 a.h.) procures admission to the palace through a Court tailor, and in the disguise of the Caliph reaches the lady. On leaving in a woman's disguise the Caliph detects him, but ends by forgiving and marrying the couple.
page 276 note 2 In the “Nights” the dish is called ‘Zīrbāja.’ In the Schefer MS. of the “Munṭaẓam” the word appears to be spelt ‘Dīkarīkīya,’ and it is so read by Professor de Goeje, loc. cit., who says that it is to be found neither in the dictionaries nor in books on cooking. And he adds that in the original Calcutta edition the term used is “Maqādīm,” an equally unknown one. By Professor D. S. Margoliouth the word is considered to be the Persian 
meaning ‘a concoction in a pot.’
page 277 note 1 The amount was paid in “old dinars,” weighed out with, 
see Lane, 1,904b. In the Calcutta text, i, 220–221, the term used is 
but in the Breslau text, ii, 172, on the second payment, 
page 284 note 1 The question is fully discussed in a paper by F. Solly-Flood, 1885, in the Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, new series, iii, 47.
page 285 note 1 
Schefer MS. 
page 285 note 2 Schefer MS. 
page 287 note 1 Schefer Ms. 