Ferdowsi School of Persian Literature

Four and a Half Ghazals from the time of Ferdowsi (in Early Judeo-Persian)

by Ruben Nikoghosyan

4th July 2025

Acknowledgement: I want to express my sincere gratitude to Prof. Arezou Azad (Invisible East) for kindly informing me about the existence of this extremely interesting manuscript. Without her, this small post would not have been possible. I want to thank Dr. Pegah Shahbaz for her contributions to a better understanding the literary value of the poems (upcoming). I also want to thank my friend Kristof Szitar (Lausanne), for carefully proofreading the text and kindly adding a comprehensive comment on the early stages of the development of the ghazal genre. The manuscript in question (Ms. Heb. 8333.195) has been prepared for publication by Pejman Firoozbakhsh, and is scheduled to appear by the end of this year. I did not have access to their material, and thus the text presented below, as well as all the conclusions (including mistakes) are based on my observations. This post is intended to inform the circles interested in Persian literary tradition in the contents of this manuscript, before the appearance of the abovementioned paper.

Note: The main part of the contents of this small online paper was written in a rush, over a week (in the second half of April, 2025), and then edited and emended in very unfavourable conditions during the last two months when I was/am traveling in Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Afghanistan. I had only a very limited time to spare for this small post, and thus, quite expectedly, there might be found many mistakes in the text provided. For that I want to ask for the reader’s apology, and hope that they will kindly inform me about any mistakes they will notice.

The manuscript Ms. Heb. 8333.195 [1] is a bifolio written in Early Judeo-Persian, i.e. the variety of Early New Persian written in Hebrew characters [2], and contains a small collection of ghazals [3]. The ms. belongs to the so-called “Afghan Genizah” collection acquired by and kept at the National Library of Israel. As many of the documents of this fascinating collection of manuscripts, it probably belongs to the earlier half of the 11th century [4], thus presenting high importance for the study of Classical Persian language and literature in its earlier stages.

 

This manuscript is of significance for two main reasons. Firsly, it preserves four (and a half) ghazals likely composed in the second half of the 10th century AD in a manuscript that has been copied chronologically very close to the originals. This lends it a considerable literary and linguistic value for the study of the early stages of New Persian and Classical Persian literature. Secondly, this unique manuscript not only attests to the presence of a Jewish community in what is now Afghanistan during the early 11th century (which is done by dozens of other documents), but also vividly shows the community’s cultural vibrancy and literary activity at the time. The very fact that such literary works were being produced suggests both a demand for refined literary compositions and the existence of skilled individuals capable of making them. 

 

It has four pages in total, the lines in each varying between 19 to 26 [5]:

 

Folio I B (verso): 23 lines

Folio I A (recto): 26 lines

Folio II B (verso): 19 lines

Folio II A (recto): 26 lines

 

Thus a total of 94 lines, of which 5 are the attributive titles, and 89 are poetic lines (hemistiches/miṣrā’). The manuscript is comparatively well-preserved and overall neatly written. Unfortunately, the middle part of both folios has extensive damages, thus making the reading of many verses illegible.

The bifolio contains a total of 4 complete ghazals, that survive in their entirety, and another one the beginning of which is missing. The bifolio used to belong to a codex, which used to be a poetry compilation. The order by which the manuscript pages should be read, and have been read here, is the following:

 

Folio I B (verso)

Folio II A (recto)

______________

Folio II B (verso)

Folio I A (recto).

 

Folio I B is followed by Folio II A (recto) on the reverse side, and we know that the second is the first’s continuation. There is a gap of unknown length, and we do not know how many pages there were between this part and the following two pages, i.e. Folio II B and Folio I A. I have arranged the pages accordingly, as they should be read, but you can see the manuscript in its original format on the website of the NLI.

 

At the current state it is hard for me to tell whether the collection was the divan of a particular poet or was a compilation of poems by various authors [6]. 

 

As far as I could read, I could not identify but one name in this manuscript. On folio I b (recto), line 5, there appears an identifiable name, that of (A)bū ‘Alī Dāmγānī (folio 1b, line 5), who is the mamdūḥ of the poet:

 

Bū ‘Alī-i Dāmγānī ānki malik rā

nē[stī] yak-ē ham čūnōy āhū (?) u čākar

Bū ‘Alī-i Dāmγānī, the one like whom

A servant and ___, the King does not have

Thanks to Dr. Pegah Shahbaz, we identified this person as one of the last Samanid viziers, Abū ‘Alī Dāmγānī, who died in 992 AD. Based on this identification, and a number of other traits, I am inclined to think that this collection is a transcribed version of an originally Arabic-script collection of poems that were transcribed into Hebrew script. The poems in this case can be dated to the last quarter of the 10th century, and present us with a hitherto unknown collection of poetry from the earlier stages of Persian literature, which makes this manuscript of a very high value.

 

Here are some other points which make me think that this is not an original Judeo-Persian composition, but rather a transcription of an Arabic-script text, composed by a Muslim Persian-speaker:

 

  1. In a line in the second ghazal the beloved’s ‘muslimness’ is brought under question, as s/he is called xwēštan-parast, that is “one who worships their own self”. I think that although there is a slight possibility of this being only a literary device, in all likelihood it shows that the ghazal was composed by a Muslim, and given that Hebrew characters were used by the Jews.

folio 1b: lines 22-23: 

ki či musalmānī xwēštan-parast ____ 

či guftum ay but, guftum ki but-parastī tō

What kind of Muslim are you, self-worshipping ___

I called you an idol, but [forsooth] you are an idol-worshipper

  1. The extensive usage of words that are left in Perso-Arabic script and not converted to Hebrew characters. These appear regularly as the rhyme in the last ghazal, and also quite arbitrarily (as it seems) throughout the text. The exact reason for leaving certain words in Arabic characters is unclear (besides the rhime-words (radīf), there are also words in the text that are in Arabic characters), but seems to be a matter of personal taste [7]. 
  2. The shape of some letters seems to influenced by the Arabic-script, such as the ב (b) in certain words, as for example in גולאב in f 2b, l. 17, or in numerous instances on f 2a, where ב is written in an elongated د -like form, more similar to the Arabic-script b than to the Hebrew character. 
  3. The general lack of Jewish or Hebrew elements that are so characteristic for other Early Judeo-Persian texts. To this one can also add the usage of ki instead of kū, otherwise common in the other EJP documents of the same period. 

An interesting fact that I noticed is the slight but noticeable orthographic variation of the two folios (such as the usage of dots on the letter yod on one side and its lack on the other), despite it clearly being written by the same hand. This might indicate that the copyist, who prepared the current copy, used different manuscripts, and remained faithful to the varying orthography of his sources (if this is not the result of the arbitrariness of the copyist).

Overall, this manuscript is of significance for two main reasons. Firsly, it preserves four (and a half) ghazals likely composed in the second half of the 10th century AD in a manuscript that has been copied chronologically very close to the originals. This lends it a considerable literary and linguistic value for the study of the early stages of New Persian and Classical Persian literature. Secondly, this unique manuscript not only attests to the presence of a Jewish community in what is now Afghanistan during the early 11th century (which is done by dozens of other documents), but also vividly shows the community’s cultural vibrancy and literary activity at the time. The very fact that such literary works were being produced suggests both a demand for refined literary compositions and the existence of skilled individuals capable of making them. 

 

Few notes on the orthography of the text:

– The י is frequently marked by a dot (hiriq) above it and tends to be attached to the preceding letters, such as k, n, t.

– The long ā at times is not written and is marked by a kamatz sign above the preceding letter.

– ki/pa occasionally are attached to the following word, like כהמי (ki hamē). Same seems to apply to the Arabic-script words, as in the case of کمن (= که من) on line 18 of f. 1b, if this reading is correct.

– for the sounds k and x, כ is used, while ק is used for to mark the Arabic ق, as in the following cases עישק (عشق) or קיצה (قصه).

Footnotes

[1] https://www.nli.org.il/he/manuscripts/NNL_ALEPH990039250240205171/NLI#$FL45509054

[2] Technically, there is nothing incorrect with calling the language of the ghazals “Judeo-Persian” or “Early Judeo-Persian”, but based on a number of arguments presented below I am inclined to differentiate it from other original EJP documents, as this text seems to be a mere transcription of an Arabic-character Early Classical Persian text into Hebrew characters. 

[3] [by Kristof Szitar, Lausanne] By the 10th century, the term ghazal was already in use in Persian poetry (e.g., in the works of Rudaki, Kisai, etc.), but within the Samanid literary tradition, the dominant poetic form was the qasida. Of particular importance was its introductory section known as the taghazzul—a thematically unrelated prelude to the main body of the qasida. The taghazzul itself had subtypes: the nasib (amatory introductions) and the tashbib (nostalgic or commemorative preludes), which were especially favored by poets like Manuchehri. These introductory sections typically ranged from 5 to 20 bayts (couplets), though your examples tend to be longer.

Over two centuries, poets such as Rudaki, Kisai, Unsuri, and Farrukhi refined and developed these openings. Their use of recurring themes, conceptual vocabulary, and rhetorical strategies laid the groundwork for what would eventually become recognized as the ghazal. To create a transition between the taghazzul and the main (often panegyric) body of the qasida, poets began inserting a gurizgah—a pivot where they would also often mention their pen names.The major formal and thematic shift occurred in the 11th century, particularly with early Ghaznavid poets, who began extending the taghazzul sections further into the main body of the poem. A notable example is the emergence of dialogic poetry (guftam-gufta style) seen in the works of Unsuri and Farrukhi.This transitional form—neither a fully independent ghazal nor just a prelude—can be termed a “proto-ghazal.” Even in the early 11th century, ghazal did not yet denote a fixed poetic form but rather referred loosely to amatory or romantic sections within larger poems.

[4] On the website of the National Library of Israel the date of the manuscript is given as 16th or 17th centuries. However, based on the language of the manuscript, which clearly shows many characteristics peculiar to earlier stages of the language, this dating seems to have no ground.  Thus, it belongs to the same date as the other documents from the Afghan Genizah.

[5] Not counting the rhyme-words of some lines that are written beneath the main line as separate lines

[6] The term و له فی الغزل (wa lahu fī-l-ghazali) which is repeated 5 times, never contains a name.

[7] This insertion of words in Arabic script in JP texts is an interesting phenomenon, particularly in our case. It indicates that the intended audience/reader was at least familiar with the Arabic script.

Ms. Heb. 8333.195 (The National Library of Israel, "Ktiv" Project)

Folio II A (Recto)

Folio I B (Verso)

Folio I A (Recto)

Folio II B (Verso)

Folio I || B (Verso) Transliteration

 

1.[1] m’h[2] y mr’ m’nd ’n 2 hpth šbh m’h

  1. gr bwwdy m’h r’ z ‘mbr ṣnbr
  2. klq ny y’bd nṣyr y ’n bwt hrgyz
  3. hm ṣw ny y’bd nṣyr y kw’ṣh w myhtr
  4. bw ‘ly y d’mg’ny ’nk mlyk r’
  5. ny[st]_ yky hm ṣwnwy ’hw w ṣ’kr
  6. s[rš]___ (hm)h s’l sbz b’d w dylš š’d
  7. z’_’ spy?hr y bryn br ’brdwm sr
  8. w lh fy l γzl
  9. [z ‘]hd ymn (d)yl [’y] k’rg y bwšwsty tw
  1. bwbs(ty) ________ks w ‘yšq w kwd buṣsty [tw]
  1. _______________ (b)gwsysty ’z kkdr mr’
  2. ny d(’) _________ b’z’n ṣyr’ gwsysty [tw]
  1. kwd ’y _________? bhyštyrwy
  2. kzyn gw[na] ______?? ṣy ṣwsty [tw]
  1. hld __________________?’r drwst
  2. gr (șy) br gšty mr’ w rsty tw tw
  1. ṣwn’n kmr ’z tn br kwyštn gryststwm
  2. z ‘yšq zyps br kwyštn grysty ____ tw
  1. pṣ’y y pkrt br ṣ’y krdw(m) ______
  2. p’ nwg y mwzg’n ’n ṣ’y r’ b_______ tw
  1. ky ṣy mslm’n ’y kwyštn prst ?? __
  2. ṣy gwptwm ’y bwt gwptwm kbwt prsty  [tw]

[1] The beginning of this ghazal is missing from the manuscript.

[2] The words that are written in Perso-Arabic script are marked here with bold letters.

Folio I || B (Verso) Transcription

  1. māh-i marā mānad ān 2 hafta šbh[1] māh
  2. gar būdī māh rā zi ‘ambar čanbar
  3. xalq niyābad naẓīr-i ān but hargiz
  4. ham čū niyābad naẓīr-i[2] xwāja u mihtar
  5. Bū ‘Alī-i Dāmγānī ānki malik rā
  6. nē[st]_ yak-ē ham čūn ōy āhū[3] u čākar
  7. s[ar-aš]_ hama sāl sabz bād u dil-iš šād
  8. za_a sipihr i barīn bar-ābardum[4] sar
  9. wa lahu fī-l-γazali
  10. [zi ‘ah]d-i man (d)il [ay] xārijī bušustī tō
  1. bubast[ī] _______ kas? u ‘išq u xwad bujastī tō
  1. _______________bugusistī az band-at[5] marā
  2. nē d(ā) _________ bāzān čirā gusistī[6] [tō]
  1. xwad ay _______________? bihištīrōy
  2. kazīn gu[na] ______ōy či ǰustī [tō]
  1. hilad ____________________?ar durust
  2. gar [či] bar gaštī marā u rastī tō tō[7]
  1. čunān kamar az tan bar xwēštan gristastum
  2. zi ‘išq zi pas bar xwēštan gristī ___ tō
  1. pa ǰāy-i faxr-at bar ǰāy kardum ___
  2. pa nōg-i (= nōk-i?) mužžagān ān ǰāy rā b[ruftī] tō
  1. ki či musalmān-ī xwēštan-parast ??__
  2. či guftum ay but, guftum ki but-parastī tō

[1] The first letter of the word is not clear; hence other readings are also possible.

[2] There is a small probability that this might be read as Naẓīrī, the takhallos of the poet.

[3] The common meaning of the word doesn’t fit in this context.

[4] A dialectical version of āwardum

[5] Reading not certain, as the last letter is more like a ר or ד.

[6] CP gusastī

[7] The second tō seems redundant

Folio I || B (Verso). Reconstructed Persian Original 

غزل ١ (بدون آغاز)

١. ماه مرا ماند آن دو هفته شبه؟ ماه

٢. گر بودی ماه را ز عنبر چنبر

٣.  خلق نیابد نظیر آن بت هرگز

٤. همچو نیابد نظیر خواجه و مهتر

٥. بو علی دامغانی آنکه ملک را

٦. نیست یکی همچون اوی آهو و چاکر

٧. سر<ش> همه سال سبز باد و دلش شاد

٨. ز- به سپهر برین بر آوردُم (متن: آبردم) سر

غزل ٢

٩. وله فی الغزل

١٠. ز عهد من دل ای خارجی بُشستی تو

١١. بُبسَتی (دستُم زِ)پس عشق و خود بجستی تو

١٢. ________ بگسستی از بندت؟ مرا

١٣. ندانم _____ کزان چرا گسستی تو

١٤. خود آیی_________ای بهشتی روی

١٥. کزین گونه ________وی چه جستی تو

١٦. هِلد  ترا __________کردگار درست

١٧. گر چه؟ برگشتی مرا و رستی تو، تو

١٨. چونانک من از تو بر خویشتن گِریستستُم

١٩. ز عشق ز پس بر خویشتن گریستی _ تو

٢٠. بجای فخرت بر جای کردُم ___

٢١. به نوک مژگان آن جای را برُفتی؟ (بروبی؟) تو

٢٢. که چه مسلمانی خویشتن پرست ___

٢٣. چه گفتم ای بت، گفتم بت پرستی تو

Folio II || A (Recto) Transliteration

  1. pdn zmn khmy ‘hd ymn šksty tw
  2. ny y’mdt kwwd ’n ‘hd br ṣy bsty tw
  1. p’ krdg’r ṣy ‘wdr[1] ’wry prwz qṣ’ṣ
  2. kwnd sw’l k‘hdyš ṣr’ šksty tw
  1. nyd’ny ’y pg ṣwn bwng[ry b]d’ny b’z
  2. ’zyn zps kknwn kwd __m[s]ty tw
  1. w lh fy ’l-γzl
  2. hyṣrn y ’y m?__w dylbr __ knd hmy
  3. rwks’rh zrd ?dydh n(y)__(n)’n knd hmy
  4. sr lškr [y]__dwny[2]__[kw]nd[3] br yky rwx (or dh?)
  5. z’n srw ky kbr m__________ knd hmy
  6. mn br ‘dw p ny___________dhwm
  7. ’n bwy pmn p’____________n’ knd hmy
  8. gr rby mn ____________d mr mr’
  9. ’n [ṣwn’]n________________d ’n knd hmy
  10. ’n nknd _________________kwṣ’ by k’m
  11. gr _______________________n knd hmy
  12. mn dyl hmy spwrd ny y’?s pd’n bk’r
  13. gr ṣy ‘tyb y gmzš b’ j’n knd hmy
  14. ’yr’k hrk b’ ṣ’n pywstwmy pr_
  15. ___’yyd ’z kn’rm w pnh’n knd hmy
  16. __ ṣy? znwm? kzwlpk pyṣ’n knd hmy
  17. (m)y’n šbm? qz 2 lb knd’n knd hmy
  18. yzd’n knd my’n nm’n(d) ? ṣwn(’n)k bwd
  19. kyn ṣ’n y t(w) ny zwhrh w kyw’n knd hmy
  20. w lh fy ’l γzl[4]

[1] The word can also be read as ‘wd, but the meaning of this last reading is not clear to me.

[2] Can be also __rwny.

[3] Can be also any other verb, like [by]nd

[4] As the next page has disappeared, we don’t have the following ghazal.

Folio II || A (Recto) Transcription

  1. padān zamān ki hamē ‘ahd-i man šikastī tō
  2. niyāmad-at xwad ān ‘ahd bar či bastī tō
  1. pa kirdigar či ‘udr (عذر) āwarī pa rōz-i qiṣāṣ
  2. kunad su’al ki ‘ahd-iš čirā šikastī tō
  1. nēdānī ay faγ čūn bung[arī bi]dānī bāz
  2. azīn zi pas ki kunūn xwad m[as]tī tō
  1. wa lahu fī-l-γazalī
  2. hiǰrān-i ō m[āh] u dilbar [či] kunad hamē
  3. ruxsāra z[ar]d [u] dīda[1] n[ālān kunad hamē
  4. sarlaškar-i __dūnī [ku]nad bar yakē rux
  5. z-ān sarw ki xabar m_______ kunad hamē
  6. man bar ‘adū pa nē[2]__________dahum
  7. ān bawī pa man pā_________nā[3] kunad hamē
  8. gar rabb-i[4] man [dahad dā]d mar marā
  9. ān [čunā]n_______________d ān kunad hamē
  10. ān nakunad _____________ kuǰā (bē) kām
  11. gar ______________________n kunad hamē
  12. man dil hamē sipurd nē yā?s padān pa kār
  13. gar či ‘atīb i γamz-iš bā ǰān kunad hamē
  14. ī-rā ki har ki bā ǰān paywastumī fr__
  15. ___ [k]āyad az kanāram u panhān kunad hamē
  16. __ ǰān či? zanum? ki zulfak pēčān kunad hamē
  17. __dī ān šabam ki? dō lab xandān kunad hamē
  18. yazdān kunad mayān namānad čūn[ān] ki būd
  19. k-īn ǰān-i m(ā)? nē zuhra u kēwān kunad hamē
  20. wa lahu fī-l-γazali

[1] The beginning of this word is damaged and it might be another word, like gardīda or else.

[2] maybe nērang?

[3] As the finals short ’ is usually expressed by h, it was considered here that these two letters are the final ones of a word that rhymes with -nā

[4] could also be read as dādī, the context doesn’t help here.

Folio II || A (Recto). Reconstructed Persian Original 

١. بدان زمان که همی عهد من شکستی تو

٢. نیامدت خود آن عهد بر چه بستی تو

٣. به کردگار چه عذر آوری بروز قصاص

٤. کند سوال که عهدش چرا شکستی تو

٥. ندانی ای فغ چون بنگری بدانی باز

٦. ازین زپس که کنون خود مستی تو

غزل ۳

٧. وله فی الغزل

٨. هجران او ماه؟ و دلبر چه کند همی

٩. رخساره زرد و دیده (نالان)؟ کند همی

١٠. سر لشکر گردونی؟ کند بر یکی رخ

١١. زآن سری که خبر مرا؟ ____کند همی

١٢. من بر عدو به (نیرنگ؟) ________دهُم

١٣. آن بَوی به من به __________نا کند همی

١٤. گر ربِ من ___________داد؟ مر مرا

١٥. آنچنان (بود)__________ویران؟ کند همی

١٦. آن نکند (عدو) __________کجا بی کام

١٧. گر___________________ن کند همی

١٨. من دل همی سپرد نیارم؟ بدان بکار

١٩. گرچه عتیب غمزه اش با جان کند همی

٢٠. ایرا که هرک با جان پیوستمی پد__

٢١.(دانم؟) کآید از کنارم و پنهان کند همی

٢٢. __ جان چه زنُم که زلفک پیچان کند همی

٢٣. __دی آن شبم؟ که؟ دو لب خندان کند همی

٢٤. یزدان کند میان نماند؟ چنانک؟ بود

٢٥. کین جان ما؟ نی زهره و کیوان کند همی.

٢٦. {وله فی الغزل}

Folio II || B (Verso) Transliteration

 

  1. w lh fy ’l γzl
  2. wg’n z’n ṣmš_____ xmš pynd’ry ‘lylsty
  3. (b)y gwyy gnṣ pwr nhd[s]t w d’d w twš wkyl hsty
  1. ṣhn ’[ry] py‘l y ’hrmn br ’hrmn dlyl hsty
  1. ’gr _____’l y’hrmn ṣwn’n ṣmš kḥyl hsty
  1. pnwb[h’r] pgyty dr ksy b’w ‘dyl hsty
  1. gw[yy kw] ____yny k’[z] __sk pa dwny’ dar b[xyl] hsty
  1. [z]____[’w]pt’d w [ny] gwyy mgr majuw, ṣlyl hsty
  1.  wgr n[y] ________r’ lb ynwšyn kfylsty
  2. ’jl ’_____________mwzg’nyš pzwhd ’ndr [p_yl] [h]sty
  1. zy‘yšqyš g[r] ____________r’ dylwsryys mtyl [hsty]
  1.  z ṭwp’n y [nwḥ]_______ymn ṣhan ’ndr msyl [hs]ty
  1. gr whm y hkym(n) r’ pwṣk y’ [dk]yl hsty
  1. skyn gwpt’r ymn b’dy pdw dr mst[dil] hsty ’sty
  1. w lh fy ’l γzl
  2.  ’[y] z(’)n zwlpk’n y t’b zdh
  3.  ṣ’n[1] r’ sr psr gwl’b zdh
  4.  br sr ykwy pyšwm ’md mst
  5.  b’md’d’n ky šr’b zdh

[1] Despite this reading, the last letter is more like b.

Folio II || B (Verso) Transcription

 

  1. wa lahu fī-l-γazali
  2. wu ǰān z-ān čamš[1]____ xamuš pindārī ‘alīlastī
  3. [b]y guyī ganǰ pur nihād[2]-[s]t u dād u tūš, wakīl hastī
  1. ǰahān ā[rī] fi‘l-i Ahriman, bar Ahriman dalīl hastī
  1. agar ____āl-i Ahriman čūnān čamš-i kaḥīl hastī
  1. pa nawb[ahār] pa gētī dar kas-ē baw[3] ‘adīl hastī
  1.  g[uyī] _____īnī k-a[z] __sk pa dunyā dar, b[axīl] hastī
  1. [zi]___[u]ftād u [nē] guyī magar majū, ǰalīl[4] hastī
  1. wu gar n[ē] _____[ī]_rā lab-i nūšīn kafīl-astī
  2.  aǰal a___________mužžagān-iš pa zuhd andar, [p_īl] [ha]stī
  1.  zi ‘išq-iš g[ar] ____________rā dil u sar-um? matīl [hastī]
  1.  zi ṭufān-i [nuḥ]________i man ǰahān andar, masīl  [has]tī
  1. gar wahm-i hakīm(ān) rā pa wasfī [??]īl hastī
  1.  saxun[5] guftār-i man bād-ē pad-ō dar mast __[īl] hastī astī
  1. wa lahu fī-l-γazali
  2.  ay jān zulfakān-i tāb zada
  3.  tāb rā sar pa sar gulāb zada
  4.  bar sar-i kūy pēšum āmad mast
  5.  bāmdādān kay šarāb zada

 

[1] čamš is the metathetical version of čašm

[2] This reading (with the addition of a long ā) is supported by the writing of גהן for ǰahān in the next line.

[3] a different reading might be possible, as the current one doesn’t make much sense.

[4] Or żalīl  (ضلیل)

[5] the w in the word is short and the reading is doubtful.

Folio II || B (Verso). Reconstructed Persian Original 

١. وله فی الغزل

٢. و جان زآن چمش____ خمش پنداری، علیلستی

٣. بگویی گنج پر نهادست و داد و توش، وکیل هستی

٤. جهان آری؟ فعل اهرمن بر اهرمن دلیل هستی

٥. اگر (کنی سوالِ) اهرمن چونان چمش کحیل هستی

٦. بنوبهار؟ بگیتی در کسی باو؟ عدیل هستی

٧. گر___ستی خا__سک؟ به دنیا در (بخیل) هستی

٨. ___ اوفتاد و نی؟ گویی مگر مجو، ضلیل (یا جلیل) هستی

٩. وگر نی________را لب نوشین کفیلستی

١٠. اجل آ_____مژگانش به زهد اندر، ف_یل هسنتی

١١. ز عشقش گر______را دل و سرم، متیل هستی

١٢. ز طوفان (نوح)______من جهان اندر

١٣. گر وهم حکیمان را بوصفی __یل هستی

١٤. سخن گفتار من بادی، بدو در مست(دل؟) هستی استی

۱۵. وله فی الغزل

۱۶. ای ـــــــــــــ زان زلفکان تاب زده

۱۷. تاب را سربسر گلاب زده

۱۸. بر سر کوی پیشم آمد مست

۱۹. بامدادان کی شراب زده

Folio I || A (Recto) Transliteration

  1. kw’nydh ṣpwn w gmzh kwn’n’n[1]
  2. kw’b n’dydh gwn w k’b zdh
  3. mwzg’n ṣw dyl y gwnhk’r’n
  4. bsy ’hy brw kț’b zdh
  5. lrz lrz’n my’n ky ?__l___
  6. trhy prny’n br [šāna z]dh
  7. ’y hmh ’pt’b ky [dy]d
  8. l’lh br ṭrp y ’p[t’b]_[z]dh
  9. ’yy zn kṭ ṣ?mw p’ ṣ’ n____
  10. ’mdh r’h [y] m’ht’[b] __ [zdh]
  11. n’ gwš’dh lb’n y’w z jdyt
  12. rḥmtst ’z _____________b zdh
  13. gyrd kwršyd b_________g kṭy[2]
  14. ṣw ṣw’b ’(z) b[r y]_______t zdh
  15. t’pth _________________dylwm ny šgypt
  16. zn 2 z?_n______________(t) zdh
  17. hm ṣwn’n ṣ??___________?’b w dyl
  18. srpsr ṣwgwl nyq[’]b zdh
  19. ‘yšk y’w ’tš y hqyqy[3] b’z
  20. gr br gyrd y ’w kb’b zdh
  21. b’z mn b’z d’d qyṣh ymn
  22. ’z ps qyṣh dr ṣw’b zdh
  23. kwwd pk’m ydylyt rsydh bwdy
  24. gr ny bwdy ṣwnyn št’b zdh
  25. mwṭrb’n y ṣhn ?kyyt nm’
  26. gwpth hr j’y w br d’b zdh

[1] At the moment I am not sure about the reading. The second letter, the upper part seems to be damaged, and the second and third letters can as well be a t, although I can’t think of a word that would fit that description. Beside the final alef there is also the diacritical sign for alif, so there should be two long ā-s. It can be either a corrupt form of kunān or xwānān

[2] the middle letter seems to be corrected, so the reading is uncertain.

[3] Above this word there are two letters added, namely wd, however, their function, as well as the reason why the first two letters seem to have been corrected, is uncertain.

Folio I || A (Recto). Reconstructed Persian Original

 

۱. خوانیده سپون؟ و غمزه کنانان؟

۲. خواب نادیده گون و خاب زده

۳. مژگان چو دل گناهکاران

۴. بسی آهی برو خطاب زده

۵. لرز لرزان میان که ــــــــ

۶. تاره‌ی پرنیان بر (شانه) زده

۷. ای همه آفتاب که دید

۸. لاله بر طرف؟ آفتاب؟ زده

۹. آیی زان خط چو مو؟ بجان؟

۱۰. آمده راه ماهتاب ـــــــــــ

۱۱. نه گشاده لبان او ز جدیت

۱۲. رحمت است از ــــــــاب زده

۱۳. گیرد خورشید ب‌ــــــــــ‌گ خطی

۱۴. چو جواب از بر‌ــــــــــــــ‌اب زده

۱۵. تافته ـــــــــــــــــــــ دلم نه شگفت

۱۶. زان دو زــــــــــــــــــ‌اب زده

۱۷. همچنان چون؟ ــــــــــــ‌عب و دل

۱۸. سربسر چو گل نقاب زده

۱۹. عشق او آتش حقیقی باز

۲۰. گر بر گردِ او کباب زده

۲۱. بازِ من باز داد قصه‌ی من

۲۲. از پسِ قصه در جواب زده

۲۳. خود بکام دلت رسیده بودی

۲۴. گر نبودی چنین شتاب زده

۲۵. مطربان جهان ـــــــــ نما

۲۶. گفته هر جای و بر راب زده

 

Folio I || A (Recto) Transcription

  1. xwānīda ṣpwn u γamza kunānān?
  2. xwāb nadīda gūn u xāb zada
  3. mužžagān čū dil-i gunāhkārān
  4. bas-ē āh-ē barō kațāb zada
  5. larz-larzān mayan ki ?__l__
  6. tāra-yi parniyān bar [šāna za]da
  7. ay hama āftāb ki [dī]d
  8. lāla bar ṭaraf-i a[ftāb z]ada
  9. āyī z’n xaṭṭ č?mū pa ǰā n___
  10. āmada rāh[-i] māhtā[b] __ [zada]
  11. na gušāda labān-i ō zi ǰiddiyyat
  12. raḥmat-ast az _________āb zada
  13. girad xwaršēd b________g xaṭṭ-ē
  14. čū ǰawāb az b[ar-i] ______āb zada
  15. tāfta _________________dilum nē šigift
  16. z-ān dō z?_n____________āb zada
  17. ham čūnān č[un]__________‘ā(b) u dil
  18. sar pa sar čū gul-i niq(ā)b zada
  19. ‘išq-i ō ātaš-i haqīqī[1] bāz
  20. gar bar gird-i ō kabāb zada
  21. bāz(-i) man bāz dād qiṣṣa-yi man
  22. az pas(-i) qiṣṣa dar ǰawāb zada
  23. xwad pa kām-i dilit rasīda būdī
  24. gar nē būdī čūnīn šitāb zada
  25. muṭribān-i ǰahān ?kyyq nimā
  26. gufta har ǰāy u bar dāb? zada

[1] There are two letters written above the word, and the first two letters ae not clearly legible.

FOLLOW US

Instagram

Facebook

CONTACT
Ruben S. Nikoghosyan (Yerevan, Armenia)

Email: nikoghosyanruben@gmail.com