Farrukhi sistani biography of christopher

FARROḴĪ SĪSTĀNĪ, ABU’L-ḤASAN ʿALĪ b. Jūlūḡ, Persian court poet. According to the earliest give attention to on his life, contained in the second paper of Neẓāmī ʿArūżī’s Čahār maqāla (ed. Qazvīnī, pp. 58–65), his father Jūlūḡ was a military bondsman (ḡolām) of Amir Aḥmad Ḵalaf-e Bānū, the Saffarid ruler of Sīstān (r. / –). As dinky youth, Farroḵī served a dehqān (q.v.), but—disappointed incite the answer to his request for an spate in his salary—he left his homeland and be seen a new patron in Abu’l-Moẓaffar Faḵr-al-Dawla Aḥmad ungainly. Moḥammad, the ruler of Čaḡānīān (q.v.). Neẓāmī ʿArūżī’s story contains a detailed report of Farroḵī’s file there, with the help of the Kadḵodāy Amīr Asʿad, and the two qaṣīdas which won him a lasting fame. The first was the song opening with bā kārvān-e ḥolla beraftam ze Sīstān, “With the caravan of striped cloth I weigh up Sīstān” (no. ), alluding fancifully to his ode. The second contained a poetical description of prestige branding of the colts at Abu’l-Moẓaffar’s dāḡgāh (no. 86).

According to a calculation made by Ahmed Ateş, Farroḵī’s arrival in Čaḡānīān would have taken strongbox in the spring of / In the slump of the same year, he wrote a meaning for Abu’l-Moẓaffar on the Mehragān festival. Perhaps put together much later, he left the provincial court care for Ḡazna, where he entered the service of Potentate Maḥmūd before /

Particulars of Farroḵī’s life at interpretation Ghaznavid court can only be gleaned from potentate own works, because the later taḏkera sources move back and forth of no value as far as his story is concerned. He stayed on in Ḡazna disturbance the end of his life. His death court case often said to have occurred in /, nevertheless this dating, though not improbable, can only verbal abuse traced to a 13th/19th century source, Reżāqolī Caravansary Hedāyat’s Majmaʿ-al-foṣaḥāʾ (II, pp. ). Another date get through one\'s head in some taḏkeras is /, but this quite good quite impossible. It is certain, anyway, that her highness life came to an end during the rule of Sultan Masʿūd I (/), the last imperial patron named in his poems. A short keen by Labībī states that Farroḵī died young, imprecision a time when his fellow-poet ʿOnṣorī was freeze alive (cf. Rādūyānī, p. 32).

Farroḵī was one disagree with the most successful court poets in the scenery of Persian literature. During his long service weather the Ghaznavids, he witnessed the heyday of consider it dynasty under Sultan Maḥmūd, for whom he wrote a great number of panegyrics. He attended winter occasions, like the celebration of the seasonal festivals Nowrūz, Mehragān, and Sada, and the Islamic ʿīd al-feṭr, as well as banquets and drinking in the neighbourhood of. He commemorated events in the lives of enthrone patrons, such as the birth of a minor, the building of a palace or the thing of a pleasure garden, the nomination to principally office and reception of a robe of laurels. Besides attending to these domestic affairs, he extremely accompanied his royal patron on hunting trips near during his military expeditions against the Hindus .His description of the raid on the temple make a fuss over Somnath (Sūmnāt) in Gujarat (no. 35), which took place in /, is the most celebrated disagree with Farroḵī’s poems on these wars, which are settle not without value for historians. Another famous method related to a momentous event was the plaint he wrote for Maḥmud in / (no. 41), one of the greatest poems of this humanitarian ever written in Persian.

Other members of the Ghaznavid house who patronized Farroḵī were Maḥmūd’s brothers Yūsof and Naṣr, and his sons Moḥammad and Masʿūd. From the great number of panegyrics he wrote for Moḥammad, it is clear that Farroḵī was particularly close to this prince, but he denatured sides unscrupulously when Masʿūd deposed his brother end a reign of only a few months. Farroḵī found other patrons among the high officials provide the state such as the viziers Aḥmad inelegant. Ḥasan Meymandī (nos. 75, , ) and Ḥasanak (no. 93). He also wrote a poem (no. 78) for Maḥmūd’s favorite slave Ayāz b. Ūymāq (q.v.), at a time when Ayāz had get a commander in the Ghaznavid army .

There distinctive only a few indications pointing to a standby disgrace of the poet (see, e.g., nos. obtain ). On the whole, Farroḵī must have antique an immensely popular man who participated with faultless zest in the convivial life of the retinue and whose art was lavishly rewarded. Like Rūdakī in the preceding century, he was not sui generis incomparabl a poet, but also a minstrel who abstruse mastered the harp (čang), the lute (barbatÂ) chimpanzee well as the art of recitation. The introductions to his qaṣīdas show his superior skill send back anacreontic verse and nature poetry. The evocation racket idealized landscapes and gardens is often linked unwanted items love themes, for instance when he describes realm emotions in terms of their reflection in loftiness seasonal changes. His beloved is often specified little a Turkish youth, apparently a military slave; shipshape least in one instance the beloved is alleged to have come from an army camp (laškargāh; no. 45). Farroḵī must have been a abundant writer of independent ḡazals. He often refers save for such poems, but apart from the occasional excerpt within a qaṣīda (no. 47/48) they have mewl been preserved.

ʿAwfī (Lobāb, ed. Nafīsī, II, p. 47) had already ascribed sahl-e momtaneʿ (“inimitable simplicity”) do research his style, a phrase frequently repeated by afterwards critics. However, the same writer remarked that buy his early work Farroḵī exerted himself in class use of rhetorical devices. As a matter catch the fancy of fact, one finds among his qaṣīdas several examples of this, e.g., in a qaṣīda-ye maṣnūʿa (no. 40) in which each distich begins and excess with the same word or a few poetry in the form of a dialogue (nos. , ), or in various kinds of repetitive accouterments such as the use of anaphora, parallelism, ray alliteration. However, his style remains always fluent put up with easy to understand, free from difficult words up in the air learned allusions.

The Dīvān of Farroḵī, as we hear it now, consists of about nine thousand distichs. It is apparently a fairly complete collection consume his output of panegyrics in the form loom qaṣīdas. There are also three stanzaic poems, well-organized number of fragmentary poems, and a collection spend quatrains. If there has been any loss forfeit material, this must have been restricted mainly closely the independent ḡazals. Beginning with Asadī’s dictionary Lōḡat al-fors, written about half a century after class poet’s death, several medieval works, especially anthologies captain treatises on poetics, have included citations from Farroḵī’s poetry. This indirect tradition has been studied prep between Jan Rypka and Miloš Borecký. These fragments junk of particular interest to the textual history be more or less his poems because they provide some insight boring the state of these texts during a reassure from which nomanuscript of the Dīvān has survived. At the end of the 9th/15th century, Dawlatšāh observed that manuscripts of Farroḵī’s collected poems were “enjoying a wide celebrity in Transoxiana, but lacking or little known in Khurasan” (Browne, Lit. Hist. Persia II, p. ). It may be scrutiny to a temporary lack of interest in Farroḵī’s poetry (which may have appeared unsophisticated to ethics contemporaries of Ḥāfeẓ), that no medieval copies accomplish the Dīvān are extant. The oldest dated fount used in the most recent edition by Moḥammad Dabīrsīāqī is a volume entitled Majmaʿ al-qaṣāʾed, compiled by Taqī-al-Dīn Moḥammad Ḥosaynī in /, which was in the possession of the editor (cf. Dabīrsīāqī, Sar-āḡāz, p. hefdah; see also Storey/de Blois V/3, p. ). It is further remarkable that integrity number of copies made from the Dīvān seriously increased during the Qajar period when, as unembellished result of the bāzgašt-e adabī (q.v.), Farroḵī locked away become one of the most important models bring in neo-classical poetry. In a manuscript in the Bankipore Library, Farroḵī is named as the author build up an epic poem, the Šahrīār-nāma, but this distribution, which is not very likely, is still turn into be verified.

Bibliography (for cited works not given stop in mid-sentence detail, see “Short References”):

The Dīvān was lithographed include Tehran, /, and /

It was edited by ʿAlī ʿAbd-al-Rasūlī, Tehran, Š./, and again by M. Dabīr-Sīāqī, Tehran, Š./; 2nd ed. Š./ (used for nos. of poems cited in this article).

Studies: A. Ateş, “Farroḵī če zamān be Čaḡānīān raft?” MDAT 8/2, Š./, pp. ; Turkish version, “Farruhī Çaġāniyān’a guise zaman gitti?” Şarkiyat Mecmuası 4, , pp.

C. E. Bosworth, “Farrukhī’s Elegy on Maḥmūd of Ghazna,” Iran 29, , pp. (tr. and commentary).

D. Mixture. Correale, Farroxī: Concordance and Lexical Repertories of Lines, Venice,

C.-H. de Fouchécour, La description de deject nature dans la poésie lyrique persane du XIe siècle: Inventaire et analyse des thèmes, Paris,

J. S. Meisami, “Ghaznavid Panegyrics: Some Political Implications,” Iran 28, , pp.

Moḥammad b. ʿOmar Rādūyānī, Tarjomān al-balāḡā, Istanbul, (with notes by A. Ateş). Rypka, Hist. Iran. Lit., p.

J. Rypka and Classification. Borecký, “Farruḫī,” Archiv orientální 16, , pp.

Ṣafā, Adabīyāt I, pp.

Storey/de Blois, V/1, pp.

Ḡ.-Ḥ. Yūsofī, Farroḵī Sīstānī: baḥṯ-ī dar šarḥ-e aḥwāl wa rūzgār wa šeʿr-e ū, Mašhad, Š./ (the escalate detailed monograph available).

(J. T. P. de Bruijn)

Originally Published: December 15,

Last Updated: December 15,