The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night, vol 10 - Sir Richard Francis Burton (ebook reader with built in dictionary txt) 📗

the want of the clew or plot compels a division into books, which begin for instance with “We worship the elephantine proboscis of Ganesha” (lib. x. i.) a reverend and awful object to a Hindu but to Englishmen mainly suggesting the “Zoo.” The “Bismillah” of The Nights is much more satisfactory.

 

[FN#299] See pp. 5-6 Avertissement des �diteurs, Le Cabinet des F�es, vol. xxxviii: Geneva 1788. Galland’s Edit. of mdccxxvi ends with Night ccxxxiv and the English translations with ccxxxvi and cxcvii. See retro p. 82.

 

[FN#300] There is a shade of difference in the words; the former is also used for Reciters of Traditions—a serious subject. But in the case of Hamm�d surnamed Al-R�wiyah (the Rhapsode) attached to the Court of Al-Walid, it means simply a conteur. So the Greeks had Homerist� = reciters of Homer, as opposed to the Homerid� or School of Homer.

 

[FN#302] Vol. i, Preface p. v. He notes that Mr. Dallaway describes the same scene at Constantinople where the Story-teller was used, like the modern “Organs of Government” in newspaper shape, for “reconciling the people to any recent measure of the Sultan and Vizier.” There are women R�wiyahs for the Harems and some have become famous like the Mother of Hasan al-Basri (Ibn Khall. i, 370).

 

[FN#302] Hence the Persian proverb, “B�ki-e-dast�n fard� = the rest of the tale tomorrow,” said to askers of silly questions.

 

[FN#303] The scene is excellently described in, “Morocco: Its People and Places,” by Edmondo de Amicis (London: Cassell, 1882), a most refreshing volume after the enforced platitudes and commonplaces of English travellers.

 

[FN#304] It began, however, in Persia, where the celebrated Darwaysh Mukhlis, Chief Sofi of Isfahan in the xviith century, translated into Persian tales certain Hindu plays of which a MS.

entitled Alfaraga Badal-Schidda (Al-faraj ba’d al-shiddah = Joy after annoy) exists in the Biblioth�que Nationale, Paris. But to give an original air to his work, he entitled it “Haz�r o yek Ruz” = Thousand and One Days, and in 1675 he allowed his friend Petis de la Croix, who happened to be at Isfahan, to copy it. Le Sage (of Gil Blas) is said to have converted many of the tales of Mukhlis into comic operas, which were performed at the Th��tre Italien. I still hope to see The Nights at the Lyceum.

 

[FN#305] This author, however, when hazarding a change of style which is, I think, regretable, has shown abundant art by filling up the frequent deficiencies of the text after the fashion of Baron McGuckin de Slane in Ibn Khallikan. As regards the tout ensemble of his work, a noble piece of English, my opinion will ever be that expressed in my Foreword. A carping critic has remarked that the translator, “as may be seen in every page, is no Arabic scholar.” If I be a judge, the reverse is the case: the brilliant and beautiful version thus traduced is almost entirely free from the blemishes and carelessness which disfigure Lane’s, and thus it is far more faithful to the original. But it is no secret that on the staff of that journal the translator of Villon has sundry enemies, vrais diables enjuppon�s, who take every opportunity of girding at him because he does not belong to the clique and because he does good work when theirs is mostly sham.

The sole fault I find with Mr. Payne is that his severe grace of style treats an unclassical work as a classic, when the romantic and irregular would have been a more appropriate garb. But this is a mere matter of private judgment.

 

[FN#306] Here I offer a few, but very few, instances from the Breslau text, which is the greatest sinner in this respect. Mas.

for fem., vol. i. p. 9, and three times in seven pages, Ahn� and nahn� for nahn� (iv. 370, 372); An� ba-ashtar� = I will buy (iii.

109): and An� ‘�m�l = I will do (v. 367). Alayk� for Alayki (i.

18), Ant� for Anti (iii. 66) and generally long � for short .

‘Amm�l (from ‘amala = he did) tahlam = certainly thou dreamest, and ‘Amm�l�n yaakul� = they were about to eat (ix. 315): Ayw� for Ay wa’ll�h� = yes, by Allah (passim). Bit�’ = belonging to, e.g.

S�ra bit�‘k = it is become thine (ix. 352) and Mat�’ with the same sense (iii. 80). D� ‘l-khurj = this saddle-bag (ix. 336) and D� (for hazah) = this woman (iii. 79) or this time (ii. 162).

Fayn as r�ha fayn = whither is he gone? (iv. 323). Kam� badri =

he rose early (ix. 318): Kam�n = also, a word known to every European (ii. 43): Katt = never (ii. 172): Kaw�m (pronounced ‘aw�m) = fast, at once (iv. 385) and Rih �sif kaw� (pron. ‘aw�) =

a wind, strong very. Laysh, e.g. bi tasaln� laysh (ix. 324) = why do you ask me? a favourite form for li ayya shayyin: so M�fish =

m� fihi shayyun (there is no thing) in which Herr Landberg (p.

425) makes “Sha, le pr�sent de pouvoir.” Min ajali = for my sake; and Li ajal al-taud�‘a = for the sake of taking leave (Mac. Edit.

i. 384). Rij�l nautiyah = men sailors when the latter word would suffice: Shuwayh (dim. of shayy) = a small thing, a little (iv.

309) like Moyyah (dim. of M�) a little water: Wadd�n� = they carried me (ii. 172) and lastly the abominable W�hid ghar�b = one (for a) stranger. These few must suffice: the tale of Judar and his brethren, which in style is mostly Egyptian, will supply a number of others. It must not, however, be supposed, as many have done, that vulgar and colloquial Arabic is of modern date: we find it in the first century of Al-Islam, as is proved by the tale of Al-Hajj�j and Al-Shabi (Ibn Khallikan, ii. 6). The former asked “Kam ataa-k?’ (= how much is thy pay?) to which the latter answered, “Alfayn!” (= two thousand!). “Tut,” cried the Governor, “Kam atau-ka?” to which the poet replied as correctly and classically, “Alf�ni.”

 

[FN#307] In Russian folk-songs a young girl is often compared with this tree e.g.—

 

Ivooshka, ivooshka zelonaia moia!

(O Willow, O green Willow mine!) [FN#308] So in Hector France (“La vache enrag�e”) “Le sourcil en accent circonflexe et l’oeil en point d’interrogation.”

 

[FN#309] In Persian “�b-i-r�” in India pronounced �br�.

 

FN#310] For further praises of his poetry and eloquence see the extracts from Fakhr al-Din of Rayy (an annalist of the xivth century A.D.) in De Sacy’s Chrestomathie Arabe, vol. i.

 

[FN#311] After this had been written I received “Babylonian, das reichste Land in der Vorzeit und das lohnendste Kolonisationsfeld f�r die Gegenwart,” by my learned friend Dr. Aloys Sprenger, Heidelberg, 1886.

 

[FN#312] The first school for Arabic literature was opened by Ibn Abbas, who lectured to multitudes in a valley near Meccah; this rude beginning was followed by public teaching in the great Mosque of Damascus. For the rise of the “Madrasah,” Academy or College’ see Introduct. to Ibn Khallikan pp. xxvii-xxxii.

 

[FN#313] When Ibn Abb�d the S�hib (Wazir) was invited to visit one of the Samanides, he refused, one reason being that he would require 400 camels to carry only his books.

 

[FN#314] This “Salmagondis” by Francois Beroalde de Verville was afterwards worked by Tabarin , the pseudo-Bruscambille d’Aubign�

and Sorel.

 

[FN#315] I prefer this derivation to Strutt’s adopted by the popular, “mumm is said to be derived from the Danish word mumme, or momme in Dutch (Germ. = larva), and signifies disguise in a mask, hence a mummer.” In the Promptorium Parvulorum we have “Mummynge, mussacio, vel mussatus”: it was a pantomime in dumb show, e.g. “I mumme in a mummynge;” “Let us go mumme (mummer) to nyghte in women’s apparayle.” “Mask” and “Mascarade,” for persona, larva or vizard, also derive, I have noticed, from an Arabic word—Maskharah.

 

[FN#316] The Pre-Adamite doctrine has been preached with but scant success in Christendom. Peyrere, a French Calvinist, published (A.D. 1655) his “Praadamit�, sive exercitatio supra versibus 12, 13, 14, cap. v. Epist. Paul. ad Romanos,” contending that Adam was called the first man because with him the law began. It brewed a storm of wrath and the author was fortunate to escape with only imprisonment.

 

[FN#317] According to Socrates the verdict was followed by a free fight of the Bishop-voters over the word “consubstantiality.”

 

[FN#318] Servetus burnt (in A.D. 1553 for publishing his Arian tractate) by Calvin, whom half-educated Roman Catholics in England firmly believe to have been a pederast. This arose I suppose, from his meddling with Rabelais who, in return for the good joke Rabie l�sus, presented a better anagram, “Jan (a pimp or cuckold) Cul” (Calvinus).

 

[FN#319] There is no more immoral work than the “Old Testament.”

Its deity is an ancient Hebrew of the worst type, who condones, permits or commands every sin in the Decalogue to a Jewish patriarch, qu� patriarch. He orders Abraham to murder his son and allows Jacob to swindle his brother; Moses to slaughter an Egyptian and the Jews to plunder and spoil a whole people, after inflicting upon them a series of plagues which would be the height of atrocity if the tale were true. The nations of Canaan are then extirpated. Ehud, for treacherously disembowelling King Eglon, is made judge over Israel. Jael is blessed above women (Joshua v. 24) for vilely murdering a sleeping guest; the horrid deeds of Judith and Esther are made examples to mankind; and David, after an adultery and a homicide which deserved ignominious death, is suffered to massacre a host of his enemies, cutting some in two with saws and axes and putting others into brick-kilns. For obscenity and impurity we have the tales of Onan and Tamar, Lot and his daughters, Amnon and his fair sister (2

Sam. xiii.), Absalom and his father’s concubines, the “wife of whoredoms” of Hosea and, capping all, the Song of Solomon. For the horrors forbidden to the Jews who, therefore, must have practiced them, see Levit. viii. 24, xi. 5, xvii. 7, xviii. 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 17, 21, 23, and xx. 3. For mere filth what can be fouler than 1st Kings xviii. 27; Tobias ii. 11; Esther xiv. 2, Eccl. xxii. 2; Isaiah xxxvi. 12, Jeremiah iv. 5, and (Ezekiel iv.

12-15), where the Lord changes human ordure into “Cow-chips!” Ce qui excuse Dieu, said Henri Beyle, c’est qu’il n’existe pas,—I add, as man has made him.

 

[FN#320] It was the same in England before the “Reformation,” and in France where, during our days, a returned priesthood collected in a few years “Peter-pence” to the tune of five hundred millions of francs. And these men wonder at being turned out!

 

[FN#321] Deutsch on the Talmud: Quarterly Review, 1867.

 

[FN#322] Evidently. Its cosmogony is a myth read literally: its history is, for the most part, a highly immoral distortion, and its ethics are those of the Talmudic Hebrews. It has done good work in its time; but now it shows only decay and decrepitude in the place of vigour and progress. It is dying hard, but it is dying of the slow poison of science.

 

[FN#323] These Hebrew Stoics would justly charge the Founder of Christianity with preaching a more popular and practical doctrine, but a degradation from their own far higher and more ideal standard.

 

[FN#324] Dr. Theodore Christlieb (“Modern Doubt and Christian Belief,” Edinburgh: Clark 1874) can even now write:—“So then the ‘full age’ to which humanity is at present supposed to have attained, consists in man’s doing good purely for goodness sake!

Who sees not the hollowness of this bombastic talk. That man has yet to be born whose practice will be regulated by this insipid theory (dieser grauen theorie). What is the