SPECIAL INTRODUCTION

A certain amount of romantic interest has always attached to Persia.

With a continuous history stretching back into those dawn-days of

history in which fancy loves to play, the mention of its name brings to

our minds the vision of things beautiful and artistic, the memory of

great deeds and days of chivalry. We seem almost to smell the fragrance

of the rose-gardens of Tus and of Shiraz, and to hear the knight-errants

tell of war and of love. There are other Oriental civilizations, whose

coming and going have not been in vain for the world; they have done

their little bit of apportioned work in the universe, and have done it

well. India and Arabia have had their great poets and their great

heroes, yet they have remained well-nigh unknown to the men and women of

our latter day, even to those whose world is that of letters. But the

names of Firdusi, Sa'di, Omar Khayyám, Jami, and Háfiz, have a place in

our own temples of fame. They have won their way into the book-stalls

and stand upon our shelves, side by side with the other books which

mould our life and shape our character.

Some reason there must be for the special favor which we show to these

products of Persian genius, and for the hold which they have upon us. We

need not go far to find it. The under-current forces, which determine

our own civilization of to-day, are in a general way the same forces

which were at play during the heyday of Persian literary production. We

owe to the Hellenic spirit, which at various times has found its way

into our midst, our love for the beautiful in art and in literature. We

owe to the Semitic, which has been inbreathed into us by religious forms

and beliefs, the tone of our better life, the moral level to which we

aspire. The same two forces were at work in Persia. Even while that

country was purely Iránian, it was always open to Semitic influences.

The welding together of the two civilizations is the true signature of

Persian history. The likeness which is so evident between the religion

of the Avesta, the sacred book of the pre-Mohammedan Persians, and the

religion of the Old and New Testaments, makes it in a sense easy for us

to understand these followers of Zoroaster. Persian poetry, with its

love of life and this-worldliness, with its wealth of imagery and its

appeal to that which is human in all men, is much more readily

comprehended by us than is the poetry of all the rest of the Orient.

And, therefore, Goethe, Platen, Rückert, von Schack, Fitzgerald, and

Arnold have been able to re-sing their masterpieces so as to delight and

instruct our own days--of which thing neither India nor Arabia can

boast.

Tales of chivalry have always delighted the Persian ear. A certain

inherent gayety of heart, a philosophy which was not so sternly vigorous

as was that of the Semite, lent color to his imagination. It guided the

hands of the skilful workmen in the palaces of Susa and Persepolis, and

fixed the brightly colored tiles upon their walls. It led the deftly

working fingers of their scribes and painters to illuminate their

manuscripts so gorgeously as to strike us with wonder at the assemblage

of hues and the boldness of designs. Their Zoroaster was never deified.

They could think of his own doings and of the deeds of the mighty men of

valor who lived before and after him with very little to hinder the free

play of their fancy. And so this fancy roamed up and down the whole

course of Persian history: taking a long look into the vista of the

past, trying even to lift the veil which hides from mortal sight the

beginnings of all things; intertwining fact with fiction, building its

mansions on earth, and its castles in the air.

The greatest of all Eastern national epics is the work of a Persian. The

"Sháh Námeh," or Book of Kings, may take its place most worthily by the

side of the Indian Nala, the Homeric Iliad, the German Niebelungen. Its

plan is laid out on a scale worthy of its contents, and its execution is

equally worthy of its planning. One might almost say that with it

neo-Persian literature begins its history. There were poets in Persia

before the writer of the "Sháh Námeh"--Rudagi, the blind (died 954),

Zandshi (950), Chusravani (tenth century). There were great poets during

his own day. But Firdusi ranks far above them all; and at the very

beginning sets up so high a standard that all who come after him must

try to live up to it, or else they will sink into oblivion.

The times in which Firdusi lived were marked by strange revolutions. The

Arabs, filled with the daring which Mohammed had breathed into them, had

indeed conquered Persia. In A.D. 657, when Merv fell, and the last

Sassanian king, Yezdegird III, met his end, these Arabs became nominally

supreme. Persia had been conquered--but not the Persian spirit. Even

though Turkish speech reigned supreme at court and the Arabic script

became universal, the temper of the old Arsacides and Sassanians still

lived on. It is true that Ormuzd was replaced by Allah, and Ahriman by

Satan. But the Persian had a glorious past of his own; and in this the

conquered was far above the conqueror. This past was kept alive in the

myth-loving mind of this Aryan people; in the songs of its poets and in

the lays of its minstrels. In this way there was, in a measure, a

continuous opposition of Persian to Arab, despite the mingling of the

two in Islam; and the opposition of Persian Shiites to the Sunnites of

the rest of the Mohammedan world at this very day is a curious survival

of racial antipathy. The fall of the only real Arab Mohammedan

dynasty--that of the Umayyid caliphs at Damascus--the rise of the

separate and often opposing dynasties in Spain, Sicily, Egypt, and

Tunis, served to strengthen the Persians in their desire to keep alive

their historical individuality and their ancient traditions.

Firdusi was not the first, as he was not the only one, to collect the

old epic materials of Persia. In the Avesta itself, with its ancient

traditions, much can be found. More than this was handed down and

bandied about from mouth to mouth. Some of it had even found its way

into the Kalam of the Scribe; to-wit, the "Zarer, or Memorials of the

Warriors" (A.D. 500), the "History of King Ardeshir" (A.D. 600), the

Chronicles of the Persian Kings. If we are to trust Baisonghur's preface

to the "Sháh Námeh," there were various efforts made from time to time

to put together a complete story of the nation's history, by Farruchani,

Ramin, and especially by the Dihkan Danishwar (A.D. 651). The work of

this Danishwar, the "Chodainameh" (Book of Kings), deserves to be

specially singled out. It was written, not in neo-Persian and Arabic

script, but in what scholars call middle-Persian and in what is known as

the Pahlavi writing. It was from this "Chodainameh" that Abu Mansur,

lord of Tus, had a "Sháh Námeh" of his own prepared in the neo-Persian.

And then, to complete the tale, in 980 a certain Zoroastrian whose name

was Dakiki versified a thousand lines of this neo-Persian Book of Kings.

In this very city of Tus, Abul Kasim Mansur (or Ahmed) Firdusi was born,

A.D. 935. One loves to think that perhaps he got his name from the

Persian-Arabic word for garden; for, verily, it was he that gathered

into one garden all the beautiful flowers which had blossomed in the

fancy of his people. As he has draped the figures in his great epic, so

has an admiring posterity draped his own person. His fortune has been

interwoven with the fame of that Mahmud of Ghazna (998-1030), the first

to bear the proud title of "Sultan," the first to carry Mohammed and the

prophets into India. The Round Table of Mahmud cannot be altogether a

figment of the imagination. With such poets as Farruchi, Unsuri,

Minutsheri, with such scientists as Biruni and Avicenna as intimates,

what wonder that Firdusi was lured by the splendors of a court life! But

before he left his native place he must have finished his epic, at least

in its rough form; for we know that in 999 he dedicated it to Ahmad ibn

Muhammad of Chalandsha. He had been working at it steadily since 971,

but had not yet rounded it out according to the standard which he had

set for himself. Occupying the position almost of a court poet, he

continued to work for Mahmud, and this son of a Turkish slave became a

patron of letters. On February 25, 1010, his work was finished. As poet

laureate, he had inserted many a verse in praise of his master. Yet the

story goes, that though this master had covenanted for a gold dirhem a

line, he sent Firdusi sixty thousand silver ones, which the poet spurned

and distributed as largesses and hied him from so ungenerous a master.

It is a pretty tale. Yet some great disappointment must have been his

lot, for a lampoon which he wrote a short time afterwards is filled with

the bitterest satire upon the prince whose praises he had sung so

beautifully. Happily, the satire does not seem to have gotten under the

eyes of Mahmud; it was bought off by a friend, for one thousand dirhems

a verse. But Firdusi was a wanderer; we find him in Herat, in

Taberistán, and then at the Buyide Court of Bagdad, where he composed

his "Yusuf and Salikha," a poem as Mohammedan in spirit as the "Sháh

Námeh" was Persian. In 1021, or 1025, he returned to Tus to die, and to

be buried in his own garden--because his mind had not been orthodox

enough that his body should rest in sacred ground. At the last

moment--the story takes up again--Mahmud repented and sent the poet the

coveted gold. The gold arrived at one gate while Firdusi's body was

being carried by at another; and it was spent by his daughter in the

building of a hospice near the city. For the sake of Mahmud let us try

to believe the tale.

We know much about the genesis of this great epic, the "Sháh Námeh"; far

more than we know about the make-up of the other great epics in the

world's literature. Firdusi worked from written materials; but he

produced no mere labored mosaic. Into it all he has breathed a spirit of

freshness and vividness: whether it be the romance of Alexander the

Great and the exploits of Rustem, or the love scenes of Zál and Rodhale,

of Bezhan and Manezhe, of Gushtásp and Kitayim. That he was also an

excellent lyric poet, Firdusi shows in the beautiful elegy upon the

death of his only son; a curious intermingling of his personal woes with

the history of his heroes. A cheerful vigor runs through it all. He

praises the delights of wine-drinking, and does not despise the comforts

which money can procure. In his descriptive parts, in his scenes of

battle and encounters, he is not often led into the delirium of

extravagance. Sober-minded and free from all fanaticism, he leans not

too much to Zoroaster or to Mohammed, though his desire to idealize his

Iránian heroes leads him to excuse their faith to his readers. And so

these fifty or more thousand verses, written in the Arabic heroic

Mutakarib metre, have remained the delight of the Persians down to this

very day--when the glories of the land have almost altogether departed

and Mahmud himself is all forgotten of his descendants.

Firdusi introduces us to the greatness of Mahmud of Ghazna's court. Omar

Khayyám takes us into its ruins; for one of the friends of his boyhood

days was Nizam al-Mulk, the grandson of that Toghrul the Turk, who with

his Seljuks had supplanted the Persian power. Omar's other friend was

Ibn Sabbah, the "old Man of the Mountain," the founder of the Assassins.

The doings of both worked misery upon Christian Europe, and entailed a

tremendous loss of life during the Crusades. As a sweet revenge, that

same Europe has taken the first of the trio to its bosom, and has made

of Omar Khayyám a household friend. "My tomb shall be in a spot where

the north wind may scatter roses" is said to have been one of Omar's

last wishes. He little thought that those very roses from the tomb in

which he was laid to rest in 1123 would, in the nineteenth century,

grace the spot where his greatest modern interpreter--Fitzgerald--lies

buried in the little English town of Woodbridge!

The author of the famous Quatrains--Omar Ibn Ibrahim al-Khayyám--not

himself a tent-maker, but so-called, as are the Smiths of our own

day--was of the city of Níshapúr. The invention of the Rubáiyát, or

Epigram, is not to his credit. That honor belongs to Abu Said of

Khorasan (968-1049), who used it as a means of expressing his mystic

pantheism. But there is an Omar Khayyám club in London--not one bearing

the name of Abu Said. What is the bond which binds the Rubáiyát-maker in

far-off Persia to the literati of modern Anglo-Saxondom?

By his own people Omar was persecuted for his want of orthodoxy; and yet

his grave to this day is held in much honor. By others he was looked

upon as a Mystic. Reading the five hundred or so authentic quatrains one

asks, Which is the real Omar? Is it he who sings of wine and of

pleasure, who seems to preach a life of sensual enjoyment? or is it the

stern preacher, who criticises all, high and low; priest, dervish, and

Mystic--yea, even God himself? I venture to say that the real Omar is

both; or, rather, he is something higher than is adequately expressed in

these two words. The Ecclesiastes of Persia, he was weighed down by the

great questions of life and death and morality, as was he whom people so

wrongly call "the great sceptic of the Bible." The "_Weltschmerz_" was

his, and he fought hard within himself to find that mean way which

philosophers delight in pointing out. If at times Omar does preach

_carpe diem_, if he paint in his exuberant fancy the delights of

carousing, Fitzgerald is right--he bragged more than he drank. The

under-current of a serious view of life runs through all he has written;

the love of the beautiful in nature--a sense of the real worth of

certain things and the worthlessness of the Ego. Resignation to what is

man's evident fate; doing well what every day brings to be done--this is

his own answer. It was Job's--it was that of Ecclesiastes.

This same "_Weltschmerz_" is ours to-day; therefore Omar Khayyám is of

us beloved. He speaks what often we do not dare to speak; one of his

quatrains can be more easily quoted than some of those thoughts can be

formulated. And then he is picturesque--picturesque because he is at

times ambiguous. Omar seems to us to have been so many things--a

believing Moslem, a pantheistic Mystic, an exact scientist (for he

reformed the Persian calendar). Such many-sidedness was possible in

Islam; but it gives him the advantage of appealing to many and different

classes of men; each class will find that he speaks their mind and their

mind only. That Omar was also tainted by Sufism there can be no doubt;

and many of his most daring flights must be regarded as the results of

the greater license which Mystic interpretation gave to its votaries.

By the side of Firdusi the epic poet, and Omar the philosopher, Sa'di

the wise man, well deserves a place. His countrymen are accustomed to

speak of him simply as "the Sheikh," much more to his real liking than

the titles "The nightingale of the groves of Shiraz," or "The

nightingale of a Thousand Songs," in which Oriental hyperbole expresses

its appreciation. Few leaders and teachers have had the good fortune to

live out their teachings in their own lives as had Sa'di. And that life

was long indeed. Muharrif al-Din Abdallah Sa'di was born at Shiraz in

1184, and far exceeded the natural span of life allotted to man--for he

lived to be one hundred and ten years of age--and much of the time was

lived in days of stress and trouble. The Mongols were devastating in the

East; the Crusaders were fighting in the West. In 1226 Sa'di himself

felt the effects of the one--he was forced to leave Shiraz and grasp the

wanderer's staff, and by the Crusaders he was taken captive and led away

to Tripoli. But just this look into the wide world, this thorough

experience of men and things, produced that serenity of being that gave

him the firm hold upon life which the true teacher must always have. Of

his own spiritual condition and contentment he says: "Never did I

complain of my forlorn condition but on one occasion, when my feet were

bare, and I had not wherewithal to shoe them. Soon after, meeting a man

without feet, I was thankful for the bounty of Providence to myself, and

with perfect resignation submitted to my want of shoes."

Thus attuned to the world, Sa'di escapes the depths of misanthropy as

well as the transports of unbridled license and somewhat blustering

swagger into which Omar at times fell. In his simplicity of heart he

says very tenderly of his own work;--

"We give advice in its proper place,

Spending a lifetime in the task.

If it should not touch any one's ear of desire,

The messenger told his tale; it is enough."

That tale is a long one. His apprenticeship was spent in Arabic Bagdad,

sitting at the feet of noted scholars, and taking in knowledge not only

of his own Persian Sufism, but also of the science and learning which

had been gathered in the home of the Abbaside Caliphs. His

journeyman-years took him all through the dominions which were under

Arab influence--in Europe, the Barbary States, Egypt, Abyssinia, Arabia,

Syria, Palestine, Asia Minor, India. All these places were visited

before he returned to Shiraz, the "seat of learning," to put to writing

the thoughts which his sympathetic and observing mind had been evolving

during all these years. This time of his mastership was spent in the

seclusion almost of a recluse and in producing the twenty-two works

which have come down to us. An Oriental writer says of these periods of

his life: "The first thirty years of Sa'di's long life were devoted to

study and laying up a stock of knowledge; the next thirty, or perhaps

forty, in treasuring up experience and disseminating that knowledge

during his wide extending travels; and that some portion should

intervene between the business of life and the hour of death (and that

with him chanced to be the largest share of it), he spent the remainder

of his life, or seventy years, in the retirement of a recluse, when he

was exemplary in his temperance and edifying in his piety."

Of Sa'di's versatility, these twenty-two works give sufficient evidence.

He could write homilies (Risalahs) in a Mystic-religious fashion. He

could compose lyrics in Arabic and Turkish as well as in Persian. He was

even led to give forth erotic verses. Fondly we hope that he did this

last at the command of some patron or ruler! But Sa'di is known to us

chiefly by his didactic works, and for these we cherish him. The

"Bustan," or "Tree-Garden," is the more sober and theoretical, treating

of the various problems and questions of ethics, and filled with Mystic

and Sufic descriptions of love.

His other didactic work, the "Gulistan," is indeed a "Garden of Roses,"

as its name implies; a mirror for every one alike, no matter what his

station in life may be. In prose and in poetry, alternating; in the form

of rare adventures and quaint devices; in accounts of the lives of kings

who have passed away; in maxims and apothegms, Sa'di inculcates his

worldly wisdom--worldly in the better sense of the word. Like Goethe in

our own day, he stood above the world and yet in it; so that while we

feel bound to him by the bonds of a common human frailty, he reaches out

with us to a higher and purer atmosphere. Though his style is often

wonderfully ornate, it is still more sober than that of Háfiz. Sa'di is

known to all readers of Persian in the East; his "Gulistan" is often a

favorite reading-book.

The heroic and the didactic are, however, not the only forms in which

the genius of Persian poetry loved to clothe itself. From the earliest

times there were poets who sung of love and of wine, of youth and of

nature, with no thought of drawing a moral, or illustrating a tale. From

the times of Rudagi and the Samanide princes (tenth century), these

poets of sentiment sang their songs and charmed the ears of their

hearers. Even Firdusi showed, in some of his minor poems, that joyous

look into and upon the world which is the soul of all lyric poetry. But

of all the Persian lyric poets, Shams al-Din Mohammed Háfiz has been

declared by all to be the greatest. Though the storms of war and the

noise of strife beat all about his country and even disturbed the peace

of his native place--no trace of all this can be found in the poems of

Háfiz--as though he were entirely removed from all that went on about

him, though seeing just the actual things of life. He was, to all

appearance, unconcerned: glad only to live and to sing. At Shiraz he was

born; at Shiraz he died. Only once, it is recorded, did he leave his

native place, to visit the brother of his patron in Yezd. He was soon

back again: travel had no inducement for him. The great world outside

could offer him nothing more than his wonted haunts in Shiraz. It is

further said that he put on the garb of a Dervish; but he was altogether

free of the Dervish's conceit. "The ascetic is the serpent of his age"

is a saying put into his mouth.

He had in him much that resembled Omar Khayyám; but he was not a

philosopher. Therefore, in the East at least, his "Divan" is more

popular than the Quatrains of Omar; his songs are sung where Omar's name

is not heard. He is substantially a man of melody--with much mannerism,

it is true, in his melody--but filling whatever he says with a wealth of

charming imagery and clothing his verse in delicate rhythms. Withal a

man, despite his boisterous gladsomeness and his overflowing joy in what

the present has to offer, in whom there is nothing common, nothing low.

"The Garden of Paradise may be pleasant," he tells us, "but forget not

the shade of the willow-tree and the fair margin of the fruitful field."

He is very human; but his humanity is deeply ethical in character.

Much more than Omar and Sa'di, Háfiz was a thorough Sufi. "In one and

the same song you write of wine, of Sufism, and of the object of your

affection," is what Sháh Shuja said to him once. In fact, we are often

at an entire loss to tell where reality ends and Sufic vacuity

commences. For this Mystic philosophy that we call Sufism patched up a

sort of peace between the old Persian and the conquering Mohammedan. By

using veiled language, by taking all the every-day things of life as

mere symbols of the highest transcendentalism, it was possible to be an

observing Mohammedan in the flesh, whilst the mind wandered in the

realms of pure fantasy and speculation. While enjoying Háfiz, then, and

bathing in his wealth of picture, one is at a loss to tell whether the

bodies he describes are of flesh and blood, or incorporeal ones with a

mystic background; whether the wine of which he sings really runs red,

and the love he describes is really centred upon a mortal being. Yet,

when he says of himself, "Open my grave when I am dead, and thou shalt

see a cloud of smoke rising out from it; then shalt thou know that the

fire still burns in my dead heart--yea, it has set my very winding-sheet

alight," there is a ring of reality in the substance which pierces

through the extravagant imagery. This the Persians themselves have

always felt; and they will not be far from the truth in regarding Háfiz

with a very peculiar affection as the writer who, better than anyone

else, is the poet of their gay moments and the boon companion of their

feasts.

Firdusi, Omar, Sa'di, Háfiz, are names of which any literature may be

proud. None like unto them rose again in Persia, if we except the great

Jami. At the courts of Sháh Abbas the Great (1588-1629) and of Akbar of

India (1556-1605), an attempt to revive Persian letters was indeed made.

But nothing came that could in any measure equal the heyday of the great

poets. The political downfall of Persia has effectually prevented the

coming of another spring and summer. The pride of the land of the Sháh

must now rest in its past.

[Illustration: (Signature of Richard Gottheil)]

Columbia University, June 11, 1900.

The Persian Literature, Comprising The Shah Nameh, The Rubaiyat, The Divan, and The Gulistan, Volume 1 · 第 3 / 115 题