بررسی دو پاره از یک جُنگ کهن و رباعیات فارسی آن (دستنویس شمارۀ 3775 کتابخانۀ اسماعیل صائب و نسخۀ شمارۀ F.738 کتابخانۀ دانشگاه استانبول)

Introduction

Throughout the history of Persian language and literature, the rubāʿī (quatrain) has enjoyed special popularity among both the lay and literati. This popularity has also introduced certain challenges and complexities to this poetic form over time. One such challenge is the issue of “wandering” rubāʿīs, that is, quatrains attributed to more than one poet. Studying these wandering rubāʿīs is only feasible with the aid of all available ancient sources.
At various times, literature enthusiasts in Persian-speaking communities have compiled anthologies of different types of poetry and prose. The rubāʿī has often held a special place in such collections and anthologies. In addition to collections exclusively dedicated to rubāʿīs of various poets, many safīne compilers have allocated sections to rubāʿīs. The abundance and significance of scattered rubāʿīs in ancient safīnes necessitate independent research on them.
The two manuscripts examined in this study are valuable examples of such sources. These two manuscripts, namely Manuscript No. 3775 from the Esma’il Sa’ib Library in Turkey and Manuscript No. F.738 from the Istanbul University Library, are originally two parts of the same Jung. According to the Esma’il Sa’ib manuscript, the Jung was transcribed in 681 AH (1282/83) by a literary figure, likely from Anatolia, named Yunus ibn Abi Bakr.

Literature Review

Both fragments of this Jung have previously been introduced in detail and separately, with references to the connection between these two manuscripts. The Esma’il Sa’ib manuscript is one of the sources used by J. Bashari in his edition of Poetic Translation of Imam Ali’s Will to Imam Husayn, where he extensively introduces this manuscript in the introduction (Seyyed Hasan Ghaznavi, 681AH/1282-83: XXXVI-XLIV). Furthermore, S. A. Mirafzali, discussing a quatrain attributed to Khayyam found in this source, briefly describes and mentions this manuscript (Mirafzali, 1382/2003: 49). The manuscript from Istanbul University Library has been meticulously introduced by Mohammad Afshin Vafaee in his note on Ferdowsi’s satire in this Jung (Afshin Vafaee, 1400/2021: 163-172).

Research Methodology

In the present study, all rubāʿīs from the two fragments of this Jung have been edited and compared with other ancient sources to provide a comprehensive report on their attributions. Finally, an analysis of the status of these rubāʿīs from this ancient source is presented based on the collected information.

Discussion

In total, the two parts of this Jung contain 59 rubāʿīs (excluding those in Niṣāb al-Ṣibyān), with only four rubāʿīs in the first part (the Esma’il Sa’ib manuscript) having attributed authors. Among known rubāʿī collections, this Jung shows the closest affinity to Nuzhāt al-Majālis, sharing 16 rubāʿīs out of 59.
As mentioned, the Jung contains four rubāʿīs with attributed authors, each of significant importance. Apart from the rubāʿī attributed to Khayyam, the other three which are attributed to Mahsati, Ayyuqi, and Kamal Isma’il do not appear in other ancient sources by these poets’ names, making this Jung unique in this regard.
The scribe (compiler) of the Jung has generally refrained from naming the poets of the rubāʿīs, transferring most without attribution. In this study, the authorship of some of these rubāʿīs has been identified with the help of other sources, with Kamal Isma’il contributing the most with 15 rubāʿīs. Nonetheless, many rubāʿīs appear only in this source and are absent in other ancient texts. Recording and preserving these rubāʿīs in this Jung, even without the names of the poets, is valuable.
The Jung contains rubāʿīs that share one or more half-verses with rubāʿīs in other sources, indicating that poets might have borrowed from each other—a practice common among early Persian poets, though more prominent and problematic in the rubāʿī form due to its brevity. These borrowings often led to confusion and uncertainty among literary scholars regarding the correct attribution of these rubāʿīs.

Conclusion

Compiling and editing collections of Persian and Arabic poetry and prose was widespread in Anatolia during the 7^th, 8^th, and 9^th centuries AH (13^th-15^th centuries AD). The numerous surviving collections from this period and region suggest that the rubāʿī had a particular appeal among literature enthusiasts in that area. The number of rubāʿīs in the two parts of the Jung under study is significant relative to the remaining folios of the collection.
The number of shared rubāʿīs between the studied Jung and Nuzhat al-Majālis may indicate Yunus ibn Abi Bakr’s use of this Jung. However, discrepancies in attribution and recording of some shared rubāʿīs prevent a definitive conclusion.
As discussed, the attributions in this Jung are all significant and mostly unique. Additionally, the unnamed rubāʿīs found exclusively in it are noteworthy and important. Some of these rubāʿīs might be the work of local poets from the region where the Jung was compiled (Anatolia).