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 main object of this paper is to propose some emendations of the text which have occurred to me in reading through ‘Omārah's History of Yemen and the other anecdoton, Al-Janadī's account of the Carmathians of Yemen, with which Mr. Kay has enriched our collection of Arabian histories. Incidentally I shall take occasion to remark on some passages in the accompanying translation which seem to be open to criticism, and I have also a few observations to make on the Introduction and Notes. As the paper will thus be occupied almost exclusively with matters in which the editor's work appears to me to admit of supplement or call for correction, I may be allowed at the outset to express my hearty recognition of all the loving labour that Mr. Kay has spent on his authors. For each of the texts but one MS. was available, and those who have handled Arabic codices know how difficult it is to produce a satisfactory edition on such a basis.
page 181 note 1 Mr. Kay has also reprinted the relevant section of Ibn Khaldūn's General History, with readings from two MSS.; but this text will not be dealt with in the present paper.
page 184 note 1 Mr. Kay writes this name Ruzayk; but Ibn Khallikān gives the full spelling and vocalization, and moreover the name occurs in verses of ‘Omārah, where the metre requires a doubled z.
page 188 note 1 Mr. Kay justly observes (Tr., p. 76) that we must read 547 for 549 at p. 56, l. 12 (and also at p. 95, l. 5) of the Arabic text. Abulfeda's copy of our history had the correct date: see Reiske's ed. vol. iii. p. 176.
page 190 note 1 See the precise statement quoted by Shihāb, i. 216, from Ibn Abī Ṭayy, with the verses that accompany it.
page 190 note 2 Some interesting details of the plot are to be found in a despatch by the Secretary of State, Al-Cāḍī al-Fāḍil, quoted by Shihāb, p. 220 sq.
page 191 note 1 Shihāb, i. 217, compared with his remark at p. 220, where he quotes ‘Imād ad-Dīn; Ibn Khaldūn, iv. 80 sq. Ibn Khaldūn says that Shams ad-Dawlah himself reported the poem to his brother Saladin, who could hardly fail to be angry at it, apart from the supposed blasphemy, as it encourages Tūrānshāh to found an independent kingdom. It must be added that in speaking of Ibn Tūmert as founder of a religion (dīn), and not merely of a sect, ‘Omārah laid himself open to misconstruction. But this is hardly a reason for doubting the genuineness of the line, since in other cases also he was not scrupulous about using phrases that might offend zealots. The famous opening “Praised be the camels,” in the first poem that made his success in Egypt, was condemned as a sort of parody of the common “Praised be Allah” (Shihāb, 227).
page 192 note 1 In this very poem ‘Omārah says, evidently with allusion to himself, that the Fatimites did not confine their favours to the members of their own sect. Cf. the verse preserved in Calcashandi, p. 195, and in its context in Shihāb, p. 223, 1. 4, where he says that the generosity of the Fatimites was orthodox though their Shiite faith was heretical. In this connection I do not attach much weight to the occasional use of Shiite formulae in the History. It is true that a good Shiite ought not to have called the heretical creed al-madhhab aẓ-ẓahir, and still less ought he to have spoken of “the late Fatimite Caliph” as “the Imam on whom be peace.” But residence at the Fatimite court doubtless involved certain compliances witli the official style which can hardly be regarded as more than conventional.