چكيده لاتين :
1. Introduction
Samak-e Ayyar by Faramarz ibn Khodadad Arrajani is a Persian folk
tale. The exact date of writing this story is unknown; Mohammad
Jafar Mahjoub introduces this story as “the oldest Iranian myth that
emerged in the sixth century” (Mahjoub, 2007: 593). Only one
manuscript of this oldest legend has survived and is kept in Bodleian
Library, Oxford University. Based on this manuscript, Parviz Natel-
Khanlari wrote a textual criticism of Samak-e Ayyar and published it
in five volumes. In a separate volume entitled The City of Samak, he
discusses the cultural and social issues of the book. Finally, the
meanings of many words and combinations of this story are recorded
under the “Glossary” in the final part of The City of Samak.
In the only manuscript of this story, there are slips in recording some
words. The book’s textual critic has corrected some of these slips and
included the face in the footnotes. However, several errors remain in
the textually criticized text that has not been addressed in any article.
In this article, these errors are corrected. In addition, the meaning of
some words that have been missed from The City of Samak is
presented.
2. Methodology
The errors and slips in Samak-e Ayyar’s manuscript are either
mentioned in prose expressions or in the verses quoted by the writer,
Faramz Ibn Khodadad, from Persian language poets. Since this book does not have more than one manuscript, a deductive correction was
used to correct the slips observed in prose expressions. In correcting
the erroneous verses, reference was made to the corrected Diwan of
the narrators of these verses. This method has been accepted in the
tradition of correcting Persian texts, and the commentators and textual
critics of Persian texts, including Khanlari, have used it to correct
erroneous verses.
3. Discussion
Samak-e Ayyar has undergone textual criticism only once until today,
and there are no different corrections. This textual criticism is based
on its only manuscript, which is in three volumes and is preserved in
Bodleian Library, Oxford University. The manuscript is not
complete, and the final pages are fallen off. In addition to the final
pages, between the second and third volumes of this manuscript,
many pages are missed, and the story’s connection is cut.
There is a Turkish version of Samak-e Ayyar in the Library of the
British Museum. The events link the second and third volumes of
Samak-e Ayyar’s Persian manuscript. This part was translated from
Turkish to Persian by Reza Seyed-Hosseini. Its textual critic tried to
remove the defects by doing this translation. The textual criticism
was made with astonishing care and obsession; as Mahjoub writes
about its textual criticism that has been published: “This first part (the
first volume) was textually criticized cautiously, and published and
bonded adorably” (Mahjoub, 2007: 609). He adds: “textual criticism
of this book is not an easy task either, because its copyist - no doubt -
was a man of little wealth and low in literature, and as a result of his
negligence and illiteracy, many mistakes, abortions, and distortions
are left in the book, that because the version is unique, they must be
textually criticized by guessing” (Mahjoub, 2007: 609).
There are slips and errors in Samak-e Ayyar’s revised text about
which no study has been conducted. These slips are divided into two
categories: those related to recording proper nouns and those related
to common nouns. In addition, in some places, words or phrases are
confused.
1.1. Slips and errors related to recording common nouns
Slips related to this part occur more in verses quoted by poets and less in prose phrases. If the critic of the erroneous verse is known, it
can be corrected by referring to his corrected Diwan as the textual
critic of Samak-e Ayyar himself has corrected some of the erroneous
verses by referring to the Diwan of their narrators. In the footnotes of
pages of his corrected text, he writes: “The poem is by Qatran Tabriz
and was textually criticized based on his Diwan” (Arrajani, 2006:
3/121 and 125). More poems by Persian-speaking poets were quoted
in the Turkish translation of Samak-e Ayyar than the Persian volumes
of this story, which are not without slip. For example, sixteen verses
were quoted from the long ode of Bukhara’s depth in praise of Nasr
ibn Tafghaj Khan, several verses of which are erroneous, and their
textual criticism is possible by referring to and confronting the Diwan
of this poet.
1.2. Slips related to recording proper nouns (names)
In Samak-e Ayyar’s mauscript, there are slips in recording the names
of fictional characters in some cases. The proofreader corrected some
of these inaccuracies and recorded the erroneous form in the
footnotes. Nevertheless, some of these slips remain in the corrected
text. The multiplicity of similarities between the characters is one
factor that confuses the scribe or narrator in writing and narrating
these names. In correcting such mistakes, accuracy in the process of
events and the role of characters in it are practical and valuable.
1.3. The shortcomings and confusion of the text
In Samak-e Ayyar maunscript, and consequently in the corrected text,
sometimes a sentence has no logical connection with the previous
sentences. This discrepancy is apparently due to the omission of the
sentence that made the connection between these sentences.
Reference to the course of events in the story can help the proofreader
and the critic restore these omitted sentences approximately.
1.4. The meaning of the words
The textual critic of Samak-e Ayyar gives the meaning of many words
in the book The City of Samak. However, there are a few words
whose meanings are lost. One of the words “body”, which means
“pudendum”, is in this sentence: “Three times he had a hot desire in
her body and she took it out from him, the worse it was, he would deal with that woman” (Arrajani, 2006: 5/489). The meaning of this
word is still common in some Iranian dialects and local languages;
Ahmad Shamloo has recorded it in the book Alley. Also, the word
تنگه“ ” in this sentence: “I was wearing two tenges, now I see one,
another has fallen”, which he recorded in The City of Samak for the
meaning of “gold coin”. However, in comparison with the sentence
“... he said I have lost a battle” in the continuation of this story
(Arrajani, 2006: 2/379), it can be inferred and argued that its meaning
is “a fardel”.
4. Conclusion
Samak-e Ayyar is one of the invaluable texts of Persian fables that
have been textually criticized only once until today. This textual
criticism was made very carefully, and its slips are tiny due to the
length of the story and the fact that only one manuscript of it remains.
Restoring the correct form of the textually criticized text excerpts and
their application in later editions of this book can make this text more
refined and make it more eloquent and eligible for the reader.
