Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T14:03:08.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Art. X.—Some Account of the Arabic Work entitled “Niháyatu'l-irab fí akhbári'l-Furs ua'l-‘Arab,” particularly of that part which treats of the Persian Kings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 March 2011

Edward G. Browne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

To the curious book of which the full title stands at the head of this article, I have already alluded in my communication to the Journal of January, 1899, on The Sources of Dawlatsháh, pp. 51–53. I now propose to give such account of its contents as is possible within the limits here prescribed. For this purpose I have made use of the Cambridge Codex (belonging to the Burckhardt Collection) marked QQ. 225. Though the book is a rare one, at least three other manuscripts are known — two in the British Museum (see the old Arabic Catalogue, pp. 418 and 581) and one (marked A. 1741) at Gotha. The last was used by Professor Nöldeke, in his reference to the Niháyat, at pp. 475–476 of his excellent Geschichte … der Sasaniden. He describes it as “in the main a quite arbitrary recension of Dínawarí, though here [namely, in the Romance of Bahrám Chúbin] it had before it an essentially fuller text than this,” and briefly characterizes it as “das seltsame, ziemlich schwindelhafte Werk.”

Type
Original Communications
Information
Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , April 1900 , pp. 195 - 259
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Asiatic Society 1900

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 195 note 1 These MSS., marked Add. 18,505 and Add. 23,298, I have only examined superficially, but enough to satisfy myself as to their identity. The former is a poor and inaccurate text, and is incomplete, the end corresponding with f. 185b of the Cambridge Codex. It presents a rather different text in places, and is entitled in the colophon Ta'ríkhu'l-Aṣma'í. The other, dated a.h. 1043, more closely agrees with our codex, and is entitled in the colophon “Kitábu'n-Nihá;tat, which is the Siyaru'l-Mulúk.”

page 197 note 1 A distinguished Arabic philologist, born A.D. 740, died a.d. 831. See De Slane's, translation of Ibn Khallikán, vol. ii, pp. 123–127Google Scholar.

page 196 note 2 .

page 197 note 1 .

page 197 note 2 , “quires,” generally of 16 pages each.

page 197 note 3 The MS. has , “al-Aṣma'í says,” or “continues,” but the sense seems to require some such emendation ( or ) as I have made.

page 197 note 4 MS. . See Qutayba's, IbnKitábu'l-Ma'árif (ed. Wüstenfeld, , p. 258)Google Scholar, who states that he died in A.H. 200 (a.d. 815–816), and describes him as a weak authority in traditions.

page 198 note 1 Cf. Dínawarí, ed. Guirgass, p. 3, 1. 10.

page 199 note 1 His full name was Abú ’Amr ‘Ámr b. Sharaḥbíl. His mother was one of the prisoners captured by the Arabs at Jalúlá (a.h. 12). He died in A.H. 104 or 105, aged 77. See Ibn Qutayba, p. 229; Fihrist, pp. 73, 74 of the notes.

page 199 note 2 See Ibn Qutayba, pp. 46 and 206. He was noted for his eloquence, and was put to death by al-Ḥajjáj because he was suspected of inclining to the party of Ibnu'l-Ash'ath.

page 200 note 1 See al-Mas'ús, Kilábu't-tanbíh wa'l-ishráf, ed. De Goeje, , p. 76Google Scholar.

page 201 note 1 Cf. Nöldeke's, Gesch. d. Sasaniden, p. 76, n. 2 ad calcGoogle Scholar.

page 201 note 2 I have since found an allusion to this anccdote in Nöldeke's above-mentioned work, p. 226, n. 2. It occurs in Qutayba's, Ibn'Uyúnu'l-akhbár (Petersburgcodex)Google Scholar.

page 202 note 1 Cf. Nöldeke, , op. laud., p. 72, n. 4 ad calcGoogle Scholar.

page 202 note 2 This passage I have collated with the British Museum MSS., Add. 18,605 (here called A.) and Add. 23,298 (called B.), and the variants from these are here given.

page 202 note 3 A om. [].

page 202 note 4 A., B. om.[].

page 202 note 5 A. om. [].

page 203 note 1 A. ,; B. ,.

page 203 note 2 A. (sic!).

page 203 note 3 B. om. [

page 203 note 4 A. . B. .

page 203 note 5 A. om. [].

page 203 note 6 A. ; B. .

page 203 note 7 Cf. Nöldeke's, Iranische Nationalepos (separate reprint from Geiger and Kuhn's Grundriss d. Irmischen Phifologie), pp. 5 and 10Google Scholar.

page 204 note 1 Even the slight examination of the two British Museum MSS. which I have been able to make sufficed to convince me that the Cambridge codex is far superior to them in point of accuracy.

page 206 note 1 = Dínawarí, p. 27. The passages which occur in D. are here placed in italics.

page 206 note 2 This epithet, of course, as well as the summary account of the Zoroastrian creed, is an addition of Muḥammadan origin.

page 207 note 1 = D., p. 28, which ends the sentence “to a new religion.”

page 208 note 1 He is called in Persian , i.e. “having a body of [i.e. strong and tough as] brass.

page 208 note 2 For these two sentences D. substitutes: “And Rustam came forth to meet him, and they met between the countries of Sajistán and Khurásán.”

page 208 note 3 In D. the remainder of the narrative occupies only seven lines. The words “And the Persians tell many tales about this” (i.e. the combat between R. and I.) stand for the elaborate details here given.

page 210 note 1 = D., 28, 11. 13–15, which continues: “And when Bustam returned unto his ahode in the land of Sajistán it was not long ere he died.

page 224 note 1 By Ibn Hishám (ed. Wöstenfeld, p. 20) lie is called Faymiyún, .

page 230 note 1 The most satisfactory interpretation of this inscription with which I am acquainted is that given by Möller, Friedrich in the Vienna Oriental Journal for 1892 (vol. vi, pp. 71–75)Google Scholar.

page 236 note 1 The form Juráb-zán appears to be correct. Cf. Nöldeke's, Sasaniden, p. 289,Google Scholar n. 1 ad calc.