Document Type : علمی- پژوهشی
Author
PhD student, University of Tehran,Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Atamalek Joveini, the author of the history of Jahangoshaye Joveini, has used the poetry of others in writing his book. The recording of many of these poems differs from what is stated in the original sources. In this study, we have studied one of the causes of these differences, which is the intentional manipulation and change of the author. And by examining the examples, we have shown that
This author has sometimes consciously made changes in the poems of others in order to create more harmony between poetry and prose, in accordance with the theme of the word Of course, this is just one of the reasons and so on to other factors Including the difference between Manuscripts and Possibility of memory error and taste manipulation There is also a brief explanation.
Atamalek Joveini, the author of the history of Jahangoshaye Joveini, has used the poetry of others in writing his book. The recording of many of these poems differs from what is stated in the original sources
Highlights
A study of the Poems of Joveini’s Jahângošâ History[1]
Introduction:
Technical prose is one of the most important styles of Persian prose that started in the sixth century AH and was prevalent in the seventh and eighth centuries. One of the masterpieces of Persian literature in this style is the Târix-e Jahân-gošâ-ye Joveini, written by Atâ-Malek Joveini (623-681 AH).
One of the main features of the technical style is the use of Quran verses and famous sayings and poems. Obviously, in this style, choosing beautiful poems and creating a verbal and semantic harmony between poetry and prose is a very important issue, because the more this harmony and proportionality, the more cohesive the text becomes and the more beautiful the writing becomes. Therefore, writers have always tried to choose poems that are compatible with the text in all respects and put them in the text somewhere and in a way that the poem is delicately combined in prose and is not an awkward patch.
In the Târix-e Jahân-gošâ-ye Joveini, recordings of many poems are different from what is mentioned in the main resources. In this study, one of the causes of these differences, which is author’s deliberate manipulation and change, has been studied and by checking the samples, we have shown that this author has sometimes made changes in the poems of others with the aim of creating more harmony between poetry and prose, according to the subject of the word. Of course, this is only one of the reasons, and therefore, there are brief explanations about other factors such as the difference in manuscripts, the possibility of memory errors in quoting poems, and the capture of the author’s taste.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Hasn Jahândâr: Ph.D. Student of Persian Literature; Tehran University
jahandar@ut.ac.ir
Discussion
The main aspect of this research is Persian poems in the Târix-e Jahān-gošâ, all of which have been thoroughly studied, but Arabic poems are very much and their resources are difficult to find and therefore it needs another opportunity to thoroughly investigate it. However, some of these poems were also reviewed using an article by Abd al-rezâ Seif and two essays by Sa’id Wâ’ez, written on the topic of the source of Arabic poems in Târix-e Jahân-gošâ.
Our main theme is to investigate the manipulation of Joveini in the poems of others, and another issue that we have considered in this article has been the effect of memory error on the narration of poems. So far, no independent research has been conducted on these topics, but researchers have made references to this issue or raised the issue among their discussions. The words of five people have been mentioned in the research background section.
There is much verses in Târix-e Jahân-gošâ whose recordings differ from recording of the original manuscripts. As for most of these verses, one cannot be certain that the dispute was intentional or inadvertent. However, in a number of them, the deliberateness of change is obvious and, in some, the possibility of such changes is high. In this article sixteen examples of these differences in Persian poems and four examples in Arabic poems are examined and it is explained what changes the author has made in them and for what purposes. Most of these verses are from Ferdowsi’s Shahnameh, and other than those of Sanâ’i’s, Moulavi (Rumi), Rashid Vatvât, Mas’ud-e Sa’d, Zahir Fâryâbi, Kamâl Ismâ’il, Motanabbi, and other poets.
As we said, another cause of the difference may be that Joveini narrated the poems from memory and got in error. Although there are few examples that can be said in certainty or in a strong possibility of how the poem was narrated, given the sum of possibilities, Joveini seems to have narrated most of the poems from memory.
The reasons for this claim are: one is the author’s own stipulation in two positions that he has narrated a poem from memory. The other is the situation in which Joveini wrote, namely the plight of his important political careers and the long journeys he himself twice referred to as writing the book in such a situation. The other, his goal was to quote poems that beautifies the text, not to obtain an original and errorless version of the poems of others. There are other reasons, including the difference in the quantity of poems in different parts of the book and the frequency of his use of poems of each poet, which we have explained. Finally, there are possible examples of memory errors in narrating poems; four examples of Persian poems and one sample of Arabic poems. In these cases, the difference between recording poems is not due to the difference in manuscripts, and at the same time, the difference between the poem and its original is not so much that little change has been made in the meaning of the word to consider it intentional. As a result, the most likely cause is memory error.
Of course, it is still not possible to speak about this issue decisively; because these differences may have a reason other than the reasons we mentioned; for example, due to the destruction of copies or the seizures of scribes, the correct recording has been completely destroyed and there is no remaining in any of the manuscripts of the Târix-e Jahân-gošâ or the original source. However, with the reasons given, the probability of memory error cannot be ignored.
The results of this study give us a better and more accurate understanding of the style and creed of old writers in using the poems of other people’s works. In addition, knowing these stylistic points will be useful in the science of proofreading of texts. Since the present study shows that text correction using side sources will be useful, correct and flawless when the quotation method of the author is obvious. Because a recording that has been recorded differently due to intentional alteration or memory errors or other causes may be considered the reason for the difference in manuscripts and incorrectly preferred over other recordings and finally enter the proofread text.
References
Bahār, Mohammad Taghi, (1393). Sabk-šenâsi, jeld-e 3, Tehran: Zavvâr.
Ibn Xallekan, Šams al-Din Ahmad, (bi târix). Wafayāt al-A’yân, tashih Ehsân Abbâs, jeld-e 3, Beirut: Dār al-θeqâfa.
Joveini, Atâ-malek, (1388). Târix-e Jahn-gošâi, tashih Habibollâh Abbâsi va Iraj Mehraki, Tehran: Zavvâr.
Joveini, Atâ-malek, (2011). Târix-e Jahn-gošâi, tashih Mohammad Qazvini, Tehran: Donyâye ketâb.
[1] Hasn Jahândâr: Ph.D. Student of Persian Literature; Tehran University
jahandar@ut.ac.ir
Keywords
Main Subjects
', './data/perlit/coversheet/501632326740.jpeg'))