page 502 note 2 See Yatīmat ad-Dahr (Damascus, 1302 a.h.), vol. ii, p. 27, where ‘Adud ad-Daula's threat to have Ibrāhīm trampled to death by elephants is attributed, not, as stated in his life by Ibn 
allikān (Sl. Eng., i, 31), to his acts when in the service of ‘Izz ad-Daula Batiyār, but to his sarcastic reference to the history of the Dailamites, which he was writing ‘by command,’ as a tissue of folly and lies.
To the same effect is the account given by Yāqūt in the Mu‘jam al-Udabā, of which the portion at Oxford—Bodl. Or. 753, fol. 84b—contains a life of Ibrāhīm as-Ṣabī, with full details of his career and its vicissitudes. Much of it, and in particular the story of the treatment he underwent from ‘Aḍud ad-Daula, is quoted from Hilāl's history, and his account throws some light on what seemed to Ibn al-Aīr so inexplicable, namely, that Ibrāhīm was punished for his zeal in the service of his sovereign, ‘Izz ad-Daula, which ought to have been accounted a merit by his successor (see vol. ix, p. 11). But it appears that on the occasion of ‘Aḍud ad-Daula's first expedition to ‘Irāq in 364 a.h., undertaken ostensibly in order to support ‘Izz ad-Daula against his mutinous Turkish soldiery, Ibrāhīm had received great favours at his hands. He even wished to accompany him on his return to Fars, but was debarred from so doing by fears for the fate of his family, who would be left behind. ‘Aḍud ad-Daula did his best to ensure Ibrāhīm's safety by making express mention of him in the stipulations entered into with ‘Izz ad-Daula, but nevertheless, after his departure, Ibrāhīm thought it prudent to remain in hiding until the Qāḍi Ibn Ma‘rūf had obtained for him a promise of immunity from ‘Izz ad-Daula and his vizier, Ibn Baqiyyah. In spite of this he was later arrested at the instigation of a personal enemy, Ibn as-Sirāj, but a seasonable quarrel which followed between the latter and the led to the arrest of his enemy, and, adds Hilal, either as a statement of fact or as a touch of word painting, “ The fetters on the limbs of Abu Ishaq were transferred to the limbs of lbn as-Sirāj ” Ibrāhīm thereupon re-entered the service of ‘Izz ad-Daula as secretary. It was in this capacity that he wrote the letters which roused the resentment of ‘Adud ad-Daula, and which, as coming from his pen, may have seemed to him an act of ingratitude. Nevertheless, on his arrival in Baghdad in 367 a h. he confirmed Ibrāhīm in his salary and property, and it was only on reaching Mosul that he wrote to his vizier, Abu al-Qāsim al-Mutahhar b. ‘Abd Allah, ordering his arrest. Ililāl's explanation of this is, that among the State documents at Mosul were found letters written by Ibrahmi, in the name of ‘Izz ad-Daula, to Abu Taghlib the Hamdanid, and that it was the sight of these that prompted ‘Adud ad-Daula's order. When his letter arrived, Ibrāhim happened to be in the company of the vizier, whose concern on becoming aware of the contents was apparent to all present, and he executed the order with reluctance. Later, on the occasion of his dispatch against the ruler of the Batīhah, he begged ‘Adud ad-Daula, not merely to set Ibrahīm at liberty, but to appoint him to act as deputy for him during his absence. ‘Adud ad-Daula so far relented as to order the release of Ibrāhīm's two sons, who had been arrested with him, and to allow the vizier to supply Ibrāhīm's personal wants. Further, he signified his pleasure that his prisoner should compose a work on the glories of the ruling house, and Ibrāhīm accordingly set about his work on the Dailamite dynasty—the Kitab al-Tqi It is noticeable that the story of his having described it to a friend as “ a tissue of folly and lies.” though mentioned earlier by Yāqūt—probably on the authority of the Yatīmat ad-Dahlādoes not appear in Hilal's narrative He says that, as the work progressed, the author waited on ‘Adud ad-Daula with its several portions, which were read over and considered, and additions and alterations made thereto, and that when finished to the satisfaction of ‘Adud ad-Daula it was copied out, a few weeks sufficing for its completion. For a year longer Ibrahim remained m prison, until the vizier seized a favourable moment to induce ‘Adud ad-Daula to give the order for his release, which he acted on forthwith, knowing from experience that his master's mind was subject to change.
Hilāl further relates that his grandfather was intended for the profession of medicine, which was hereditary in the family, and held an appointment at the hospital at the monthly stipend of twenty dinars. But his literary vocation, proving irrepressible, was allowed to prevail, and he became Kātib to the vizier al-Muhallabi (who died in 352 a.h.; see his life by lbn allikan, SI. Eng., I, 410). His abilities were noticed and recognized by the vizier, who attached him to his person, and he soon found a special occasion for the display of his powers. A social gathering at the vizier's house was interrupted by a sudden order from Mu‘izz ad-Daula for the dispatch of a letter to Muhammad b. IIyās, the ruler of Kuman, to ask his daughter in marriage for ‘Izz ad-Daula. Both Kātibs and guests were for the time quite unequal to the task of preparing such a letter—indeed, one of the latter, Abu ‘Ah al-Hasan b. Muhammad al-Anbāri, was personally appealed to by his host, and had to decline—ut Ibrāhīm wrote the letter forthwith, and the vizier on reading it said that had it been written with deliberation it would remain a wonderful effort. This led to fresh favours on the vizier's part, and to his appointing Ibrāhīm to government posts of such importance that they were officially communicated by the Caliph to the minor independent rulers. The passage runs thus: —
Anecdotes follow of Ibrahim's relations with eminent persons, such as the Sāhib ibn ‘Abbād, the arif ar-Radī, and the poet al-Mutanabbi, and specimens are given of Ibrāhīm's verse. Hilal adds a personal reminiscence. He once asked his grandfather the reason why he seemed so discontented, seeing that they were all leading a prosperous life. The old man smiled, and told him that his case was that of the worm who, accustomed to honey, had been shifted to vinegar, and who, sensible of its acidity, regretted the honeved past, whereas the rest of them were like worms whose original lot was cast in vinegar, and who had never tasted sweetness nor known the charm of vinegar's opposite. Ibrāhīm's ailment was, in fact, “remembering happier things,” and it may be hoped that the statement of Ibn al-Athīr (ix, 74), that in his old age he suffered from poverty, is incorrect. He died in 384 a h., aged 71 years.
Yaqut concludes with the statement that Ibrāhīm was the author of the following works —The well-known letters, about a thousand sheets in all, the Taji, on the history of the Buwaih family; his own family history, a selection from the poetry of al-Muhallabi, and the Diwan of his own verse. It is to be noticed that this list does not include the “de Triangulis ” attributed to him by Wustenfeld, Gesch., No. 149, on the authority of Casiri, nor the Abar an-Nuhāh, attributed to him by Fluegel in “Die Grammatischen Schuler der Araber,” infra, and which was probably written by his grandson Hilāl.
īr, where, all that seemed capable of omission having been discarded, little beyond the dry bones of history remains. But of histories of this type few have survived.
