Ibn Nubātah’s printed Dīwān is an unreliable source that has led scholars to draw erroneous conclusions, among them the suggestion that we can perceive a difference in Ibn Nubātah’s treatment of his wife’s death and that of his concubine (jāriyah). In fact, the poems on which these conclusions are based were written for the same woman. Equally problematic for scholarship is the existence of poems that occur in multiple versions. This article treats the case of Ibn Nubātah al-Miṣrī’s (686-768/1287-1366) parallel mourning, and includes a critical edition of the texts under discussion based on more than ten manuscript copies of the poet’s Dīwān. It proposes that Ibn Nubātah’s opportunistic mourning is an efficient metaphor for the status of polyontic poetry (i.e. poems which occur in different versions in different contexts) in scholarship. In most cases, the longest version of a poem is granted the status of poetic original while all other instances of a poem, including those that appear in anthologies, are often treated as subsidiary. I argue that if we can learn to tolerate multiple instances of mannered mourning, we ought to be able to read polyontic poems in parallel.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Thomas Bauer, “Jamāl al-Dīn Ibn Nubātah,” in Essays in Arabic Literary Biography, 1350-1850, ed. Joseph Lowry and Devin Stewart (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2009), 184-202 at 194. Acknowledgments: I would like to dedicate this article to Geert Jan van Gelder and Thomas Bauer, whose scholarly enthusiasms inspired this project. Neither this article nor any of my research over the past few years would have been conceivable without their generosity, expertise, and perseverance. I have benefited, too, from the keen criticism and encouragement of audiences at the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin and the Institut français de l’archéologie orientale (Cairo), and I would like to thank my hosts. I would like also to thank the many librarians who facilitate my research and the editorial team at the Journal of Arabic Literature (M. al-Musawi, E. Holt, J. Jurich, A. Giordani and, of course, the anonymous peer reviewers) for their exemplary professionalism.
See Michael Dols, The Black Death in the Middle East (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977).
Salma Khadra Jayyusi, “Arabic Poetry in the post-classical age,” in Arabic Literature in the Post-Classical Period, ed. Roger Allen and D. S. Richards (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 25-59 at 56.
Avner Giladi, “‘The child was small . . . not so the grief for him’: Sources, Structure, and Content of al-Sakhawi’s Consolation Treatise for Bereaved Parents”, Poetics Today 14:2: Cultural Processes in Muslim and Arab Societies: Medieval and Early Modern Periods (Summer 1993): 367-86; idem “‘Ṣabr’ (Steadfastness) of Bereaved Parents: A Motif in Medieval Muslim Consolation Treatises and Some Parallels in Jewish Writings,” The Jewish Quarterly Review n.s. 80:1/2 (July-October, 1989): 35-48. See also idem, “Concepts of Childhood and Attitudes toward Children in Medieval Islam: A Preliminary Study with Special Reference to Reactions to Infant and Child Mortality,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient 32:2 (June, 1989): 121-52, and idem, “Islamic Consolation Treatises for Bereaved Parents: Some Bibliographical Notes”, Studia Islamica 81 (1995), 197-202. Compare these treatises to an early modern English example: Thomas Whitaker, Comfort for Parents mourning over their hopeful children that dye young (London: John Dunton, 1693).
Marlé Hammond, Beyond Elegy: Classical Arabic Women’s Poetry in Context (Oxford: Oxford University Press for the British Academy, 2010). Hammond grants that the association of women with the elegy genre, in particular, is “not entirely arbitrary” but that “it is somewhat misrepresentative” (27). For an overview of women’s poetry, see ibid., 1-28.
Samer Ali, Arabic Literary Salons in the Islamic Middle Ages (Notre Dame: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 2010), 131-50; see also, idem, “Singing Samarra (861-956): Poetry and the Burgeoning of Historiography upon the Murder of al-Mutawakkil,” Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 6 (2005-2006): 1-23; and idem, “Praise for Murder? Two Odes by al-Buḥturī Surrounding an Abbasid Patricide,” in Writers and Rulers: Perspectives on Their Relation from Abbasid to Safavid Times, ed. Beatrice Gruendler and Louise Marlow (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2004), 1-38. Margaret Larkin, “Two Examples of rithāʾ: a comparison between Aḥmad Shawqī and al-Mutanabbī,” Journal of Arabic Literature 16 (1985): 18-39.
Kathryn J. Gutzwiller, “Meleager: from Menippean to Epigrammatist”, in Genre in Hellenistic Poetry, ed. M. A. Harder, et al. (Groningen: Egbert Forsten, 1998), 81-93 at 81.
James E. Montgomery, “Abū Nuwās, The Justified Sinner,” Oriens 39:1 (2011): 75-164 at 80-5.
Geert Jan van Gelder, “Poetry in Historiography: some observations,” in Problems in Arabic Literature, ed. M. Maróth (Piliscsaba: The Avicenna Institute of Middle Eastern Studies, 2004), 1-13.
James E. Montgomery, The Vagaries of the Qasidah: the tradition and practice of early Arabic poetry (Cambridge: Gibb Memorial Trust, 1997).
Geert Jan van Gelder, Beyond the Line: classical Arabic literary critics on the coherence and unity of the poem (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1982). The latest skeptical response to van Gelder’s thesis is Raymond Farrin, Abundance from the Desert: Classical Arabic Poetry (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2011).
Geert Jan van Gelder, “Pointed and Well-Rounded. Arabic Encomiastic and Elegiac Epigrams”, Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica 26 (1995): 101-40.
Thomas Bauer, “Ibn Nubātah al-Miṣrī [. . .] Part II: The Dīwān of Ibn Nubātah”, Mamlūk Studies Review 12:2 (2008): 25-69 at 46.
Bauer, “Ibn Nubātah al-Miṣrī [. . .] Part I: The Life of Ibn Nubātah,” 3.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 355 | 64 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 65 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 54 | 8 | 0 |
Ibn Nubātah’s printed Dīwān is an unreliable source that has led scholars to draw erroneous conclusions, among them the suggestion that we can perceive a difference in Ibn Nubātah’s treatment of his wife’s death and that of his concubine (jāriyah). In fact, the poems on which these conclusions are based were written for the same woman. Equally problematic for scholarship is the existence of poems that occur in multiple versions. This article treats the case of Ibn Nubātah al-Miṣrī’s (686-768/1287-1366) parallel mourning, and includes a critical edition of the texts under discussion based on more than ten manuscript copies of the poet’s Dīwān. It proposes that Ibn Nubātah’s opportunistic mourning is an efficient metaphor for the status of polyontic poetry (i.e. poems which occur in different versions in different contexts) in scholarship. In most cases, the longest version of a poem is granted the status of poetic original while all other instances of a poem, including those that appear in anthologies, are often treated as subsidiary. I argue that if we can learn to tolerate multiple instances of mannered mourning, we ought to be able to read polyontic poems in parallel.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 355 | 64 | 7 |
| Full Text Views | 65 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 54 | 8 | 0 |