The Seven Sages of Rome - User contributions [en]

Nakhshabi Tutinama

2026-03-10T00:56:04Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The Indian physician and Sufi mystic Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi possibly included a heavily abridged version of the Sindbadnama in his Tutinama, a 14th century Persian adaptation of the Sanskrit ''Śukasaptati''. However, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Tutinama date from the 1560s, which saw an explosion of interest in the text under the Mughal Emperor Akbar, who was a great benefactor of the Chishti Sufi order, of which Nakhshabi was a prominent member. The most well known product of this is a version and possible abridgement by Muhammad Kadiri at the turn of the 17th century, with which the Sindbadnama abridgements are always associated, and which was used in most early European editions of the text, to the extent that Brockhaus felt confident enough in 1845 to publish on the topic of 'Nachshebis sieben weisen meister'. However, it is difficult to assess to what extent Kadiri was simply a compiler with access to the original Nakhshabi text or an adapter of his underlying material. Some, but by no means all, of these manuscripts contain an abridged version of the Sindbadnama, but it is impossible to know whether it was included in Nakhshabi's original, or whether the story was inserted by Kadiri because of its later popularity. The manuscripts which do contain the Sindbadnama are also inconsistent, with some containing only the frame narrative and others containing very brief abridgements of some of the inset stories, though all are associated with the 8th night of tales in the narrative. It is also impossible to be sure that the Samarqandi Sindbadnama was the version which was used: the Tutinama abridgements are far more focused on the Makr al Nisa (wiles of women), whereas Samarqandi's version is significantly more nuanced. Given that the late 9th century polymath al-Yaqubi refers to the Sindbadnama of his day as a Makr al Nisa text, it is perhaps more likely that Nakhshabi was working off an earlier version (likely either the Fanaruzi or Rudaki versions, both now lost or highly fragmentary and difficult to attribute.<div><div><div></div></div><div><div><div>
*
</div></div></div></div><div></div>
|Has Title=Nakhshabi, Tutinama
|Has Author=Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Is Adapted From=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Delhi
|Has Date Of Text Composition=14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Text Composition=8th century
|Is Date Uncertain=No
|Has Modern Edition=Nakhshabī, Z̤iyāʼ al-Dīn. Ṭūṭī-nāma. Edited by Fatḥ-Allāh Mujtabāʼī and Ghulām-ʿAlī Āryā. Tehran: Intishārāt-i Zuvvār, 1372 SH
|Has Note=Notable Tutinama manuscripts containing a Sindbadnama abridgement:

Cambridge University Library MS Ff. 2. 21 (Browne 308): 19th century manuscript, central India

British Library Or. 15665 (East India Library 754): undated but likely Mughal based on stylistic evidence. Early Kadiri translation.

Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences Perzsza O.060: 17th century (commissioned at Akbar's court)
}}

Nakhshabi Tutinama

2026-03-10T00:20:02Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The Indian physician and Sufi mystic Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi possibly included a heavily abridged version of the Sindbadnama in his Tutinama, a 14th century Persian adaptation of the Sanskrit ''Śukasaptati''. However, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Tutinama date from the 1560s, which saw an explosion of interest in the text under the Mughal Emperor Akbar, who was a great benefactor of the Chishti Sufi order, of which Nakhshabi was a prominent member. The most well known product of this is a version and possible abridgement by Muhammad Kadiri at the turn of the 17th century, with which the Sindbadnama abridgements are always associated, and which was used in most early European editions of the text, to the extent that Brockhaus felt confident enough in 1845 to publish on the topic of 'Nachshebis sieben weisen meister'. However, it is difficult to assess to what extent Kadiri was simply a compiler with access to the original Nakhshabi text or an adapter of his underlying material. Some, but by no means all, of these manuscripts contain an abridged version of the Sindbadnama, but it is impossible to know whether it was included in Nakhshabi's original, or whether the story was inserted by Kadiri because of its later popularity. The manuscripts which do contain the Sindbadnama are also inconsistent, with some containing only the frame narrative and others containing very brief abridgements of some of the inset stories, though all are associated with the 8th night of tales in the narrative. It is also impossible to be sure that the Samarqandi Sindbadnama was the version which was used: the Tutinama abridgements are far more focused on the Makr al Nisa (wiles of women), whereas Samarqandi's version is significantly more nuanced. Given that the late 9th century polymath al-Yaqubi refers to the Sindbadnama of his day as a Makr al Nisa text, it is perhaps more likely that Nakhshabi was working off an earlier version (likely either the Fanaruzi or Rudaki versions, both now lost or highly fragmentary and difficult to attribute.<div><div><div></div></div><div><div><div>
*
</div></div></div></div><div></div>
|Has Title=Nakhshabi, Tutinama
|Has Author=Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Is Adapted From=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Delhi
|Has Date Of Text Composition=14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Text Composition=8th century
|Is Date Uncertain=No
|Has Modern Edition=Nakhshabī, Z̤iyāʼ al-Dīn. Ṭūṭī-nāma. Edited by Fatḥ-Allāh Mujtabāʼī and Ghulām-ʿAlī Āryā. Tehran: Intishārāt-i Zuvvār, 1372 SH
|Has Note=Notable Tutinama manuscripts containing a Sindbadnama abridgement:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}British Library ''Ṭūṭīnāma'', Or. 15665
{{!}}British Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}} rowspan="3" {{!}}
{{!}}-
{{!}}Cambridge University Library, MS Add. 3139
{{!}}Cambridge University Library
{{!}}19th century
{{!}}-
{{!}}Chester Beatty ''In 21''
{{!}}Chester Beatty Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}}}
}}

Persian Sindbadnama

2026-02-09T01:25:21Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The Persian Sindbadnama traditions are all thought to derive from a Middle Persian (Pahlavi) original, potentially adapted from Indian material by Borzuya, translator of the Panchatantra (Perry 1960). This Pahlavi text was adapted into early New Persian several times, by such luminaries as Rudaki (Dabir Siyaqi 1955) and Daqayeqi (Zakeri 2023). However, only the version originally translated by Fanaruzi (c. 9th century CE/3rd century AH) and ornamented by Zahiri al-Samarqandi in c. 1160 CE/555 AH survives from this period of early New Persian transmission. However, it was inserted, in abridged form, into other popular fable collections, such as Nakhshabi’s Tutinama and Daqayeqi's Bakhtiarnama. These abridgements tend to conform far more to the Makr al Nisa/wiles of women genre in which the 9th century Arab historian al Yaqubi places the Sindbad tradition than does Zahiri's version, potentially suggesting a closer link to the original Middle Persian tradition. Later, in 1374, the Shirazi belletrist and courtier Azod Yazdi versified Zahiri's version for the govenor of Shiraz, Tamerlane's son Shah Rukh. Of these different surviving versions, Zahiri's version seems to have been by far the most popular and sought after, particularly in the Ottoman Empire.
|Has Display Title=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Is Adapted Into=Nakhshabi Tutinama; Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama; Azod Yazdi versification; Bakhtiarnama abridgement
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Perry (1960); Zakeri (2023); Dabir Siyaqi (1955); (see specific versions for more)
|Has Note=Roughly 50% of the early manuscripts are to be found in Iranian libraries, who did not reply before the completion of this database. Below is a list of manuscripts in Iranian libraries whose existence can be confirmed:

Tehran, Danishgah 964/1556-57

Teheran, Danishgah 272

Teheran, Danishgah 46 ع

Teheran, Dehkhoda 268

Teheran, Adabiyyat 132-d

Qom, Gulpaygani 36/199–8199

Mashhad, Āstān-i Quds-i Raḍavī MS 9415

}}

Amasya Bayezid İl Halk Kütüphanesi, MS 750.

2026-02-09T01:16:33Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=Amasya Bayezid İl Halk Kütüphanesi, MS 750. |Has Location=Amasya Bayezid İl Halk Kütüphanesi |Has Siglum=MS 750. |Has Page Range=ff. 1-110 |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama |Has Language Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama |Has Language=Persian |Has Modern Edition=Not widely consulted due to late date |Has Author=Muhammad ibn 'Ali az-Zahiri as-Samarqandi |Has Canonical Name Of Aut..."

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=Amasya Bayezid İl Halk Kütüphanesi, MS 750.
|Has Location=Amasya Bayezid İl Halk Kütüphanesi
|Has Siglum=MS 750.
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-110
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Modern Edition=Not widely consulted due to late date
|Has Author=Muhammad ibn 'Ali az-Zahiri as-Samarqandi
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Amasya (likely)
|Has Date Of Production=17th/18th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=11th/12th century
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=110
|Has Height=21.5cm
|Has Width=15.5cm
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=No
|Has Catalogue=Amasya Bayezid İl Halk Kütüphanesi Yazma Eserler Kataloğu.; National Union Catalogue: Türkiye Yazmaları Toplu Kataloğu (TOPKAPI)
}}

Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, AE Farsça 1062

2026-02-09T01:05:16Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, AE Farsça 1062 |Has Location=Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, Istanbul |Has Siglum=AE Farsça 1062 |Has Page Range=ff. 1-179 |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama |Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama |Has Language=Persian |Has Modern Edition=Consulted by Ates (1948) |Has Place Of Production=I..."

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, AE Farsça 1062
|Has Location=Süleymaniye Kütüphanesi, Istanbul
|Has Siglum=AE Farsça 1062
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-179
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Modern Edition=Consulted by Ates (1948)
|Has Place Of Production=Istanbul (likely)
|Has Date Of Production=1675-6
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=1086
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=179
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq (mid Ottoman nakkaşhane)
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=Yes
|Has Note=Acquired by the famous 19th/early 20th century Ottoman bibliophile Ali Emiri Efendi.
}}

Topkapı Sarayı, Istanbul (Fātiḥ 3682)

2026-02-09T00:54:11Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama2
|Has Location=Istanbul, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi
|Has Siglum=H.3682
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-171
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Persian
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Digitisation=TYEKB portal (Turkish Manuscript Institution Presidency)
|Has Modern Edition=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948
|Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Shiraz
|Has Date Of Production=late 14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=8th century
|Has Source For Date Of Production=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=171
|Has Height=24.5 cm
|Has Width=16.5 cm
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=Yes
|Has Catalogue=F. E. Karatay, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi Farsça Yazmalar Kataloğu (Catalogue of Persian Manuscripts in the Topkapi Palace Museum Library), Istanbul, 1961
|Has Modern Research Literature=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948.; B.W. Robinson's Persian Paintings in the Topkapi Saray Museum (1991); Günsel Renda, The Transformation of Persian Imagery into Ottoman Style: The Sindbadnama, in "Seventh International Congress of Turkish Art", Warsaw, 1991
|Has Internal Notes=This ornately illustrated manuscript has 72 miniatures from the famous school of Injuid/early Muzaffarid Shiraz, depicting key scenes from within the narrative. It likely arrived in Ottoman hands as part of a gift exchange under Mehmet Fatih.
}}

İzmir Millî Kütüphane MS 457

2026-02-09T00:48:11Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=İzmir Millî Kütüphane MS 457 |Has Location=Izmir, Turkey (zmir Millî Kütüphane (İzmir National Library)) |Has Siglum=MS 457 (formerly in the library of Şehîd Ali Paşa). |Has Page Range=ff. 1-99 |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama |Has Incipit Or Textual Title=Ḥikāyat-i Haft Vazīr (Book of the Seven Vezirs) |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama |Has Language Group Within Version=per..."

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=İzmir Millî Kütüphane MS 457
|Has Location=Izmir, Turkey (zmir Millî Kütüphane (İzmir National Library))
|Has Siglum=MS 457 (formerly in the library of Şehîd Ali Paşa).
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-99
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Incipit Or Textual Title=Ḥikāyat-i Haft Vazīr (Book of the Seven Vezirs)
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=persian
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Modern Edition=Ateş, Ahmed (1948). Sindbād-nāme
|Has Scribe=ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Kāshī
|Has Canonical Name Of Scribe=ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Kāshī
|Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Unknown
|Has Date Of Production=1330-1
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=731
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=99
|Has Script Style=Naskh
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=No
|Has Catalogue=Ahmed Ateş in İstanbul Kütüphanelerinde Farsça Manzum Eserler I (1968)
|Has Note=One of the earliest Sindbadnama manuscripts. Was later acquired by the 17th century grand vizier Şehîd Ali Paşa.
}}

Azod Yazdi versification

2026-02-09T00:21:18Z

Watkins:

{{Secondary Version
|Has Description=This versification of Samarqandi's Sindbadnama by the Shirazi belletrist and bureaucrat Azod Yazdi was commissioned by, and dedicated to Shah Rukh, the Timurid prince/governor of Shiraz who would later ascend to the throne. It is written is slightly less ornate, Arabicised language than Samarqandi's version, and was comprised of Masnavis in a regular mutaqārib metre. It was rather less popular in most of the Persianate world than Samarqandi's version, but it arguably outshone it in the Indian subcontinent, encapsulated by the magnificent illuminated Deccan manuscript Or. 3214, now held by the British Library. This popularity in the Indian subcontinent meant that it, rather than the Samarqandi recension, was first translated and edited by European orientalists.
|Has Display Title=Azod Yazdi versification
|Has Language Within Version=Persian
|Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group=Sindbadnama
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Author=Seyyed Jalaloddin Azod-e Yazdi
|Has Title=Sindbād-nāma-ye manẓūm-e Azod-e Yazdi
|Has Siglum=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Shiraz, Iran
|Has Date Of Text Composition=14th century
|Has Modern Research Literature=Basset, René. Contes arabes, Histoire des dix vizirs. Paris 1883. Clouston, W. H. The Book of Sindibād. Or, The story of the king, his son, the damsel, and the seven vazirs; from the Persian and Arabic, with introduction, notes and appendix. Glasgow 1884; Falconer, Forbes. Analytical Account of the Sindibad Namah, or Book of Sindibad, A Persian Manuscript Poem in the Library of the East-India Company. London 1841.; Gīlak, Siyāmak. “Yāddāshthāī dar-bāri-ye Sindbād-nāma.” Āyandih 10 (1984), 365- 69.; Gīlak, Lotfizadeh, Bonnie Diane Irwin. The Book of Sindibad and the Seven Sages of Rome. Perspectives on the Frame and its Relationship to the Interpolated Tales in the Persian, Arabic, Latin, and Spanish Versions, Dissertation Berkeley 1991. (278 pages) (Gīlak, Lotfizadeh, Bonnie Diane Irwin. The Book of Sindibad and the Seven Sages of Rome. Perspectives on the Frame and its Relationship to the Interpolated Tales in the Persian, Arabic, Latin, and Spanish Versions, Dissertation Berkeley 1991. (278 pages)); Minovi, Mujtabā. “Dar bāri-ye Sindbād-nāma.” In his Pānzdah-guftār, 1981
|Has Text Language=Persian
}}

Azod Yazdi versification

2026-02-09T00:18:03Z

Watkins:

{{Secondary Version
|Has Description=This versification of Samarqandi's Sindbadnama by the Shirazi belletrist and bureaucrat Azod Yazdi was commissioned by, and dedicated to Shah Rukh, the Timurid prince/governor of Shiraz who would later ascend to the throne. It is written is slightly less ornate, Arabicised language than Samarqandi's version, and was comprised of Masnavis in a regular mutaqārib metre. It was rather less popular in most of the Persianate world than Samarqandi's version, but it arguably outshone it in the Indian subcontinent, encapsulated by the magnificent illuminated Deccan manuscript Or. 3214, now held by the British Library. This popularity in the Indian subcontinent meant that it, rather than the Samarqandi recension, was first translated and edited by European orientalists.
|Has Display Title=Azod Yazdi versification
|Has Language Within Version=Persian
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Author=Seyyed Jalaloddin Azod-e Yazdi
|Has Siglum=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Shiraz, Iran
|Has Date Of Text Composition=14th century
|Has Modern Research Literature=Basset, René. Contes arabes, Histoire des dix vizirs. Paris 1883. Clouston, W. H. The Book of Sindibād. Or, The story of the king, his son, the damsel, and the seven vazirs; from the Persian and Arabic, with introduction, notes and appendix. Glasgow 1884; Falconer, Forbes. Analytical Account of the Sindibad Namah, or Book of Sindibad, A Persian Manuscript Poem in the Library of the East-India Company. London 1841.; Gīlak, Siyāmak. “Yāddāshthāī dar-bāri-ye Sindbād-nāma.” Āyandih 10 (1984), 365- 69.; Hunar, ‘Alī Muḥammad. “Abyāt wa-amthāl-e Tāzī dar Sindbād-nāma.” (‘Arabic verses and proverbs in the [Persian] Sindbādnāma’) In: An Anthology of Iranian Studies 2 (1999), 1-36; Gīlak, Lotfizadeh, Bonnie Diane Irwin. The Book of Sindibad and the Seven Sages of Rome. Perspectives on the Frame and its Relationship to the Interpolated Tales in the Persian, Arabic, Latin, and Spanish Versions, Dissertation Berkeley 1991. (278 pages); Minovi, Mujtabā. “Dar bāri-ye Sindbād-nāma.” In his Pānzdah-guftār, 1981
|Has Modern Edition=Maḥjūb, Muḥammad Ja‘far. “Sindbād-nāma-ye manẓūm.” (‘Sindbādnāma in Verse’)In Pazhūhishhā-ye Īrānī (= Nāmwārih-ye Dr. Maḥmūd Afshār). Vol. 11. Tehran 1378, 561-622.Sindbād nāma-ye Manẓūm. Ed. Tehran: Tūs 1380 š./.
}}

Persian Sindbadnama

2026-02-08T23:46:53Z

Watkins:

Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama

2026-02-08T23:39:47Z

Watkins:

{{Secondary Version
|Has Description=Al-Ẓahīrī al-Samarqandī’s mid-6th/12th-century redaction of the ''Sindbādnāmah'', produced for the Qarakhanid court, constitutes the definitive Persian prose recension and the primary vector for the text’s subsequent transmission across Islamicate and later European literary traditions. The vast majority of surviving Sindbadnama manuscripts use Zahiri's version, and various rulers commissioned copies of the text despite being in possession of other, similar versions (eg British Library Or. 225). Its canonical status derives not from innovation in narrative material but from al-Samarqandī’s strategic reframing of pre-existing story cycles into a coherent work of political ''adab'', executed through specific linguistic, structural, and thematic interventions.

As a ''kātib'', al-Samarqandī composed in a polished, rhythmic prose (''nasr musajjaʿ'') characteristic of contemporary chancery style and high literary ''adab''. The language operates within a carefully modulated classical Persian register, avoiding both the colloquial and the excessively ornate, whilst skilfully imitating the rhetorical styles of other genres (historiography, Ghazal poetry, natural philosophy, fiqh) at different points, and blanketing the underlying text with a range of quotations and allusions from the conventional (the Quran, the Hadiths), to the heterodox (Ismaili devotional literature) to the borderline blasphemous (Zoroastrian cosmogonies and Pahlavi Andarz literature). This rhetorical choice signifies a deliberate move from the earlier, presumably more functional Samanid translation of Fanaruzi toward a text designed for courtly consumption and pedagogical utility. The prose serves as a vehicle for embedding narrative within a framework of ethical instruction, its cadence and clarity facilitating memorization and recitation, key aspects of its didactic function.

A significant departure in al-Samarqandī’s version is its systematic attenuation of the “Wiles of Women” (''makr al-nisāʾ'') motif, which earlier commentators like al-Yaʿqūbī explicitly linked to the ''Sindbād'' corpus. While retaining the core frame narrative - a prince silenced, a malicious queen, and seven viziers delivering exculpatory tales - al-Samarqandī recalibrates the thematic center of gravity. The embedded narratives are curated to address a wider spectrum of princely conduct: the fallibility of judgment, the importance of counsel (''andarz''), the deciphering of signs, the nature of loyalty, and the operations of chance (''dahr''). Female guile becomes one contingency among many within a broader political ontology focused on the vulnerability of the sovereign to deception and the necessity of forensic reason. This shift aligns the text more closely with the generic conventions of Indo-Persian wisdom literature (''andarz-nāmah, pand-nāmah'') and mirrors-for-princes, effectively distancing it from the potentially narrower, misogynistic story-collection tradition.

The recension standardizes a structure of 21 tales: ten accusations from the queen, ten defenses from the viziers (distributed among the seven), and the prince’s concluding narrative. This symmetrical, dialogic format transforms the text into a forensic dramatization of counsel, where each story functions as a piece of evidence within a life-or-death rhetorical contest. The selection of tales privileges plots hinging on interpretation, deduction, and the revelation of hidden truths—a narrative embodiment of ''ʿaql'' (intellect) overcoming ''hawā'' (passion) and ''ghish'' (deceit). The integration of tale and frame is taut; each narrative is diegetically motivated as a direct argument within the prince’s trial, reinforcing the overarching didactic premise that wisdom is performative and situational. This structural rigor facilitated the text’s utility as a pedagogical instrument for statecraft, wherein narrative exempla model the cognitive processes required for just rule.
|Has Language Within Version=Persian
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī
|Has Title=Sindbadnama
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Is Translated Into Languages=Ottoman Turkish
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Samarqand
|Has Date Of Text Composition=c.1150
|Has Islamic Date Of Text Composition=c.550
|Has Modern Research Literature=Clouston, W. A. The Book of Sindibād; Honar, A.M; Persian Verses and Proverbs in Sandbadnameh; Mecmûa-i Maḳālât-ı Mütâlaʿât-ı İslâmî II, Tahran, 1999; Hoffmann, A. Cats and Dogs, Manliness, and Misogyny: On the Sindbad-nameh as World Literature; Persian Literature as World Literature, 2021; Perry, Ben Edwin; The Origin of the Book of Sindbad Fabula 3 (1960): 1–94; Weinstein, Laura S. " Variations on a Persian Theme: Adaptation and Innovation in Early Manuscripts from Golconda; PhD diss., Columbia University, New York, 2011.; Zakeri, Mohsen; Ẓahīrī of Samarqand’s ‘Sindbādnāma’. A Mirror for Princes." In Die ‚Sieben weisen Meister‘ als globale Erzähltradition/The ‘Seven Sages of Rome’ as a Global Narrative Tradition, 172–188
|Has Text Language=Persian
}}
{{Version
|Has Note=For digital access, see https://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etca/iran/niran/npers/sindbad/sindb.htm?sindb029.htm
}}

Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama

2026-02-08T23:38:30Z

Watkins:

{{Secondary Version
|Has Description=Al-Ẓahīrī al-Samarqandī’s mid-6th/12th-century redaction of the ''Sindbādnāmah'', produced for the Qarakhanid court, constitutes the definitive Persian prose recension and the primary vector for the text’s subsequent transmission across Islamicate and later European literary traditions. The vast majority of surviving Sindbadnama manuscripts use Zahiri's version, and various rulers commissioned copies of the text despite being in possession of other, similar versions (eg British Library Or. 225). Its canonical status derives not from innovation in narrative material but from al-Samarqandī’s strategic reframing of pre-existing story cycles into a coherent work of political ''adab'', executed through specific linguistic, structural, and thematic interventions.

As a ''kātib'', al-Samarqandī composed in a polished, rhythmic prose (''nasr musajjaʿ'') characteristic of contemporary chancery style and high literary ''adab''. The language operates within a carefully modulated classical Persian register, avoiding both the colloquial and the excessively ornate, whilst skilfully imitating the rhetorical styles of other genres (historiography, Ghazal poetry, natural philosophy, fiqh) at different points, and blanketing the underlying text with a range of quotations and allusions from the conventional (the Quran, the Hadiths), to the heterodox (Ismaili devotional literature) to the borderline blasphemous (Zoroastrian cosmogonies and Pahlavi Andarz literature). This rhetorical choice signifies a deliberate move from the earlier, presumably more functional Samanid translation of Fanaruzi toward a text designed for courtly consumption and pedagogical utility. The prose serves as a vehicle for embedding narrative within a framework of ethical instruction, its cadence and clarity facilitating memorization and recitation, key aspects of its didactic function.

A significant departure in al-Samarqandī’s version is its systematic attenuation of the “Wiles of Women” (''makr al-nisāʾ'') motif, which earlier commentators like al-Yaʿqūbī explicitly linked to the ''Sindbād'' corpus. While retaining the core frame narrative—a prince silenced, a malicious queen, and seven viziers delivering exculpatory tales - al-Samarqandī recalibrates the thematic center of gravity. The embedded narratives are curated to address a wider spectrum of princely conduct: the fallibility of judgment, the importance of counsel (''andarz''), the deciphering of signs, the nature of loyalty, and the operations of chance (''dahr''). Female guile becomes one contingency among many within a broader political ontology focused on the vulnerability of the sovereign to deception and the necessity of forensic reason. This shift aligns the text more closely with the generic conventions of Indo-Persian wisdom literature (''andarz-nāmah, pand-nāmah'') and mirrors-for-princes, effectively distancing it from the potentially narrower, misogynistic story-collection tradition.

The recension standardizes a structure of 21 tales: ten accusations from the queen, ten defenses from the viziers (distributed among the seven), and the prince’s concluding narrative. This symmetrical, dialogic format transforms the text into a forensic dramatization of counsel, where each story functions as a piece of evidence within a life-or-death rhetorical contest. The selection of tales privileges plots hinging on interpretation, deduction, and the revelation of hidden truths—a narrative embodiment of ''ʿaql'' (intellect) overcoming ''hawā'' (passion) and ''ghish'' (deceit). The integration of tale and frame is taut; each narrative is diegetically motivated as a direct argument within the prince’s trial, reinforcing the overarching didactic premise that wisdom is performative and situational. This structural rigor facilitated the text’s utility as a pedagogical instrument for statecraft, wherein narrative exempla model the cognitive processes required for just rule.
|Has Language Within Version=Persian
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī
|Has Title=Sindbadnama
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Is Translated Into Languages=Ottoman Turkish
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Samarqand
|Has Date Of Text Composition=c.1150
|Has Islamic Date Of Text Composition=c.550
|Has Modern Research Literature=Clouston, W. A. The Book of Sindibād; or, the Story of the King, His Son, the Damsel, and the Seven Vazīrs. [Glasgow], 1874.; Honar, A.M; Persian Verses and Proverbs in Sandbadnameh; Mecmûa-i Maḳālât-ı Mütâlaʿât-ı İslâmî II, Tahran, 1999; Hoffmann, A. Cats and Dogs, Manliness, and Misogyny: On the Sindbad-nameh as World Literature; Persian Literature as World Literature, 2021; Perry, Ben Edwin; The Origin of the Book of Sindbad Fabula 3 (1960): 1–94; Weinstein, Laura S. " Variations on a Persian Theme: Adaptation and Innovation in Early Manuscripts from Golconda; PhD diss., Columbia University, New York, 2011.; Zakeri, Mohsen; Ẓahīrī of Samarqand’s ‘Sindbādnāma’. A Mirror for Princes." In Die ‚Sieben weisen Meister‘ als globale Erzähltradition/The ‘Seven Sages of Rome’ as a Global Narrative Tradition, 172–188
|Has Modern Edition=Al-Ẓahīrī al-Samarqandī, Muḥammad b. ‘Alī b. Muḥammad b. Ḥasan. Sindbādh- nāme [written ca. 556/1161]. Ed. Ahmed Ateş. Istanbul 1948.
|Has Text Language=Persian
}}
{{Version
|Has Note=For digital access, see https://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etca/iran/niran/npers/sindbad/sindb.htm?sindb029.htm
}}

Persian Sindbadnama

2026-02-08T21:19:01Z

Watkins:

Nakhshabi Tutinama

2026-02-08T20:04:09Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The Indian physician and Sufi mystic Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi possibly included a heavily abridged version of the Sindbadnama in his Tutinama, a 14th century Persian adaptation of the Sanskrit ''Śukasaptati''. However, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Tutinama date from the 1560s, which saw an explosion of interest in the text under the Mughal Emperor Akbar, who was a great benefactor of the Chishti Sufi order, of which Nakhshabi was a prominent member. Some, but by no means all, of these manuscripts contain an abridged version of the Sindbadnama, but it is impossible to know whether it was included in Nakhshabi's original, or whether the story was inserted because of its later popularity. The manuscripts which do contain the Sindbadnama are also inconsistent, with some containing only the frame narrative and others containing very brief abridgements of some of the inset stories. It is also impossible to be sure that the Samarqandi Sindbadnama was the version which was used: the Tutinama abridgements are far more focused on the Makr al Nisa (wiles of women), whereas Samarqandi's version is significantly more nuanced. Given that the late 9th century polymath al-Yaqubi refers to the Sindbadnama of his day as a Makr al Nisa text, it is perhaps more likely that Nakhshabi was working off an earlier version (likely either the Fanaruzi or Rudaki versions, both now lost or highly fragmentary and difficult to attribute.<div><div><div></div></div><div><div><div>
*
</div></div></div></div><div></div>
|Has Display Title=Nakhshabi abridgement
|Has Title=Nakhshabi abridgement
|Has Author=Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi
|Has Siglum=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Is Adapted From=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Delhi
|Has Date Of Text Composition=14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Text Composition=8th century
|Has Modern Edition=Nakhshabī, Z̤iyāʼ al-Dīn. Ṭūṭī-nāma. Edited by Fatḥ-Allāh Mujtabāʼī and Ghulām-ʿAlī Āryā. Tehran: Intishārāt-i Zuvvār, 1372 SH
|Has Note=Notable Tutinama manuscripts containing a Sindbadnama abridgement:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}British Library ''Ṭūṭīnāma'', Or. 15665
{{!}}British Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}} rowspan="3" {{!}}
{{!}}-
{{!}}Cambridge University Library, MS Add. 3139
{{!}}Cambridge University Library
{{!}}19th century
{{!}}-
{{!}}Chester Beatty ''In 21''
{{!}}Chester Beatty Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}}}
}}

Nakhshabi Tutinama

2026-02-08T20:02:33Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The Indian physician and Sufi mystic Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi possibly included a heavily abridged version of the Sindbadnama in his Tutinama, a 14th century Persian adaptation of the Sanskrit ''Śukasaptati''. However, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Tutinama date from the 1560s, which saw an explosion of interest in the text under the Mughal Emperor Akbar, who was a great benefactor of the Chishti Sufi order, of which Nakhshabi was a prominent member. Some, but by no means all, of these manuscripts contain an abridged version of the Sindbadnama, but it is impossible to know whether it was included in Nakhshabi's original, or whether the story was inserted because of its later popularity. The manuscripts which do contain the Sindbadnama are also inconsistent, with some containing only the frame narrative and others containing very brief abridgements of some of the inset stories. It is also impossible to be sure that the Samarqandi Sindbadnama was the version which was used: the Tutinama abridgements are far more focused on the Makr al Nisa (wiles of women), whereas Samarqandi's version is significantly more nuanced. Given that the late 9th century polymath al-Yaqubi refers to the Sindbadnama of his day as a Makr al Nisa text, it is perhaps more likely that Nakhshabi was working off an earlier version (likely either the Fanaruzi or Rudaki versions, both now lost or highly fragmentary and difficult to attribute.<div><div><div></div></div><div><div><div>
*
</div></div></div></div><div></div>
|Has Title=Nakhshabi abridgement
|Has Author=Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Is Adapted From=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Delhi
|Has Date Of Text Composition=14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Text Composition=8th century
|Has Modern Edition=Nakhshabī, Z̤iyāʼ al-Dīn. Ṭūṭī-nāma. Edited by Fatḥ-Allāh Mujtabāʼī and Ghulām-ʿAlī Āryā. Tehran: Intishārāt-i Zuvvār, 1372 SH
|Has Note=Notable Tutinama manuscripts containing a Sindbadnama abridgement:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}British Library ''Ṭūṭīnāma'', Or. 15665
{{!}}British Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}} rowspan="3" {{!}}
{{!}}-
{{!}}Cambridge University Library, MS Add. 3139
{{!}}Cambridge University Library
{{!}}19th century
{{!}}-
{{!}}Chester Beatty ''In 21''
{{!}}Chester Beatty Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}}}
}}

Nakhshabi Tutinama

2026-02-08T19:59:25Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Version |Has Description=The Indian physician and Sufi mystic Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi possibly included a heavily abridged version of the Sindbadnama in his Tutinama, a 14th century Persian adaptation of the Sanskrit ''Śukasaptati''. However, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Tutinama date from the 1560s, which saw an explosion of interest in the text under the Mughal Emperor Akbar, who was a great benefactor of the Chishti Sufi order, of which Nakhshabi was a pr..."

{{Version
|Has Description=The Indian physician and Sufi mystic Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi possibly included a heavily abridged version of the Sindbadnama in his Tutinama, a 14th century Persian adaptation of the Sanskrit ''Śukasaptati''. However, the earliest manuscripts we have of the Tutinama date from the 1560s, which saw an explosion of interest in the text under the Mughal Emperor Akbar, who was a great benefactor of the Chishti Sufi order, of which Nakhshabi was a prominent member. Some, but by no means all, of these manuscripts contain an abridged version of the Sindbadnama, but it is impossible to know whether it was included in Nakhshabi's original, or whether the story was inserted because of its later popularity. The manuscripts which do contain the Sindbadnama are also inconsistent, with some containing only the frame narrative and others containing very brief abridgements of some of the inset stories. It is also impossible to be sure that the Samarqandi Sindbadnama was the version which was used: the Tutinama abridgements are far more focused on the Makr al Nisa (wiles of women), whereas Samarqandi's version is significantly more nuanced. Given that the late 9th century polymath al-Yaqubi refers to the Sindbadnama of his day as a Makr al Nisa text, it is perhaps more likely that Nakhshabi was working off an earlier version (likely either the Fanaruzi or Rudaki versions, both now lost or highly fragmentary and difficult to attribute).<div><div><div><div></div></div></div></div><div><div><div></div></div><div><div><div><div>
== Contents ==
</div>

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
</div></div></div></div><div><header>
= ''Śukasaptati'' =
</header></div>
|Has Title=Nakhshabi abridgement
|Has Author=Ziya' al-Din Nakhshabi
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Is Adapted From=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Of Version=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Delhi
|Has Date Of Text Composition=14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Text Composition=8th century
|Has Modern Edition=Nakhshabī, Z̤iyāʼ al-Dīn. Ṭūṭī-nāma. Edited by Fatḥ-Allāh Mujtabāʼī and Ghulām-ʿAlī Āryā. Tehran: Intishārāt-i Zuvvār, 1372 SH
|Has Note=Notable Tutinama manuscripts containing a Sindbadnama abridgement:
{{{!}} class="wikitable"
{{!}}British Library ''Ṭūṭīnāma'', Or. 15665
{{!}}British Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}} rowspan="3" {{!}}
{{!}}-
{{!}}Cambridge University Library, MS Add. 3139
{{!}}Cambridge University Library
{{!}}19th century
{{!}}-
{{!}}Chester Beatty ''In 21''
{{!}}Chester Beatty Library
{{!}}Late 16th/early 17th century (commissioned by Akbar the Great for the Mughal court).
{{!}}}
}}

Syriac Sindban

2026-02-08T19:19:13Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The beginnings of the Syriac Sindban tradition are very difficult to secure. Estimates for the first Sindban translation range from the 8th - 11th centuries. The difficulty we have is that no other surviving Syriac text refers to the Sindban, and although intertextual references to similar 'migrating texts' such as Kalila wa Dimna are also very few (though not nonexistent), other fabulistic narratives such as the Story of Ahiqar and the Fables of Aesop are frequently referred to. Furthermore, the fact that we have only one surviving manuscript (itself fragmentary) from a period of voluminous manuscript production adds to the fact that there is a strong body of negative evidence that suggests that the Syriac Sindban tradition was not particularly widespread, and may, in fact, be limited to the niche fabulistic interests of the monks of Mor Bar Sawmo monastery and the specifically 11th/12th century Byzantine interest in recovering the folklore of the lost Near Eastern provinces.

We are thus unable to provide a secure stemma for the Syriac part of the Seven Sages tradition. The Greek Syntipas and Sachau 238 are virtually identical in the plot lines of the surviving stories: the only differences can be explained by the reliance on rare vocabulary (eg the hunter storyline in Syriac uses the rare word ܢܐܳܫܘܪܽ for weasel, whose part is erased in Greek, likely due to the translator’s lack of familiarity with the word). However, there are numerous differences in phraseology. This raises the question of Michael Andreopoulos’ fidelity as a translator, which has divided scholars. If we assume Michael Andreopoulos was a faithful translator, we must distinguish between the Syriac text Andreopoulos claims to be translating and Sachau 238. Yuliya Minets has partly pushed back on this, suggesting that the differences can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative decontextualisation of the Sindban, moving away from a Middle Eastern language of power and replacing it with a Greek one. It is noteworthy, for example, that the Greek phraseology in describing the figures of royalty is significantly more vivid and precise than the Syriac, and the language of philosophical instruction is significantly more sophisticated (even accounting for the relative poverty of Syriac philosophical vocabulary). It could, therefore, be the case that our surviving Syriac manuscript ('Syriac 2'), possibly produced at the Mor Bar Sauma, faithfully draws off the Syriac text used by Michael Andreopoulos ('Syriac 1), and that the divergence can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative translation choices. However, we should note that a) Michael Andreopoulos’ text was dedicated to Gabriel of Melitene, and likely designed for the world of the frontier successor states following the battle of Manzikert, not the Constantinopolitan court, so there was a smaller Hellenising incentive and b) Andreopoulos’ text rarely reproduces common Byzantine formulae, eg rhetorical introductions or courtroom procedure, which we would expect to see if he really was creatively adapting the original Syriac 1. It is thus more likely that the differences can be explained by the inferiority of Syriac 2, either as a simpler copy of Syriac 1, or, more likely, that Syriac 2 was working off a separate Sindban manuscript.

A final point to note is the interaction between the Sindban and the wider Syriac fabulistic tradition. As is true of other versions (eg the Sindbadnameh and Seven Viziers) and parallel works (Fables of Aesop, Kalila wa Dimna, etc), there is a great deal of cross pollination between the Sindban and other fabulistic works. In particular, the theme of a falsely accused son being defended in a court setting by a group of Seven Sages crops up several times. However, there is a great deal of divergence in these pseudo Sindban tales. Thus, it is worth making a firm distinction between the Syriac Sindban proper and the broader Syriac ‘Fables of Sindban’ tradition. For more detail on the surviving manuscript, see manuscript page for Berlin Staatsbibliothek Petermann I 24.
|Has Display Title=Syriac Sindban
|Has Title=ܟܬܒܐ ܕܣܢܕܒܢ (The Book of Sindban)
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Is Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Is Adapted Into=Andreopoulos Syntipas
|Has Language Of Version=Syriac
|Has Regional Language=Syriac (Serto script)
|Has Text Language=Syriac
|Is Translated Into Languages=Greek
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Likely near Melitene (Malatya)
|Has Date Of Text Composition=Unknown (8th century-11th)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum (2003); Macler (1903); Gollancz (1987); Minov (2013); Minets (2023); Jernstedt (1912)
|Has Modern Edition=David Taylor (in progress as of 2025)
|Has Note='''Bibliography:'''

Baethgen, F., (ed.): Sindban oder Die Sieben weisen Meister. Syrisch und Deutsch. Leipzig 1879.

Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2003)., p: 196.

Gollancz, H., ‘The History of Sindbad and the Seven Wise Masters’, Transactions of the Folk-Lore Society 8 (1897), 99–130.

Jernstedt, V., Mich. Andreopuli Liber Syntipae (1912). (Greek translation)

Macler, F., Contes syriaques. Histoire de Sindbad (1903).

Minets, Y., “Language of Speaking, Arguing, and Persuading: Cultural Exchange and Adaptation in Greek and Syriac Versions of the ‘History of Sindban/Syntipas’,” Das Mit- telalter 28:1 (2023), 155–171.

Minov, S., (ed.), A Comprehensive Bibliography on Syriac Christianity (The Center for the Study of Christianity, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013)

Perry, Ben E.: The Origin of the Book of Sindbad. In: Fabula 3 (1960), pp. 1–94.

Roediger, E. Chrestomathia Syriaca. 1801-1874 ed. Halis Saxonum

Sachau, E. ed., Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin, 23. Band:Verzeichniss der syrischen Handschriften, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1899).
}}

Syriac Sindban

2026-02-08T19:18:17Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The beginnings of the Syriac Sindban tradition are very difficult to secure. Estimates for the first Sindban translation range from the 8th - 11th centuries. The difficulty we have is that no other surviving Syriac text refers to the Sindban, and although intertextual references to similar 'migrating texts' such as Kalila wa Dimna are also very few (though not nonexistent), other fabulistic narratives such as the Story of Ahiqar and the Fables of Aesop are frequently referred to. Furthermore, the fact that we have only one surviving manuscript (itself fragmentary) from a period of voluminous manuscript production adds to the fact that there is a strong body of negative evidence that suggests that the Syriac Sindban tradition was not particularly widespread, and may, in fact, be limited to the niche fabulistic interests of the monks of Mor Bar Sawmo monastery and the specifically 11th/12th century Byzantine interest in recovering the folklore of the lost Near Eastern provinces.

We are thus unable to provide a secure stemma for the Syriac part of the Seven Sages tradition. The Greek Syntipas and Sachau 238 are virtually identical in the plot lines of the surviving stories: the only differences can be explained by the reliance on rare vocabulary (eg the hunter storyline in Syriac uses the rare word ܢܐܳܫܘܪܽ for weasel, whose part is erased in Greek, likely due to the translator’s lack of familiarity with the word). However, there are numerous differences in phraseology. This raises the question of Michael Andreopoulos’ fidelity as a translator, which has divided scholars. If we assume Michael Andreopoulos was a faithful translator, we must distinguish between the Syriac text Andreopoulos claims to be translating and Sachau 238. Yuliya Minets has partly pushed back on this, suggesting that the differences can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative decontextualisation of the Sindban, moving away from a Middle Eastern language of power and replacing it with a Greek one. It is noteworthy, for example, that the Greek phraseology in describing the figures of royalty is significantly more vivid and precise than the Syriac, and the language of philosophical instruction is significantly more sophisticated (even accounting for the relative poverty of Syriac philosophical vocabulary). It could, therefore, be the case that our surviving Syriac manuscript ('Syriac 2'), possibly produced at the Mor Bar Sauma, faithfully draws off the Syriac text used by Michael Andreopoulos ('Syriac 1), and that the divergence can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative translation choices. However, we should note that a) Michael Andreopoulos’ text was dedicated to Gabriel of Melitene, and likely designed for the world of the frontier successor states following the battle of Manzikert, not the Constantinopolitan court, so there was a smaller Hellenising incentive and b) Andreopoulos’ text rarely reproduces common Byzantine formulae, eg rhetorical introductions or courtroom procedure, which we would expect to see if he really was creatively adapting the original Syriac 1. It is thus more likely that the differences can be explained by the inferiority of Syriac 2, either as a simpler copy of Syriac 1, or, more likely, that Syriac 2 was working off a separate Sindban manuscript.

A final point to note is the interaction between the Sindban and the wider Syriac fabulistic tradition. As is true of other versions (eg the Sindbadnameh and Seven Viziers) and parallel works (Fables of Aesop, Kalila wa Dimna, etc), there is a great deal of cross pollination between the Sindban and other fabulistic works. In particular, the theme of a falsely accused son being defended in a court setting by a group of Seven Sages crops up several times. However, there is a great deal of divergence in these pseudo Sindban tales. Thus, it is worth making a firm distinction between the Syriac Sindban proper and the broader Syriac ‘Fables of Sindban’ tradition. For more detail on the surviving manuscript, see manuscript page for Berlin Staatsbibliothek Petermann I 24.
|Has Display Title=Syriac Sindban
|Has Title=ܟܬܒܐ ܕܣܢܕܒܢ (The Book of Sindban)
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Is Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Is Adapted Into=Andreopoulos Syntipas
|Has Language Of Version=Syriac
|Has Regional Language=Syriac (Serto script)
|Has Text Language=Syriac
|Is Translated Into Languages=Greek
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Likely near Melitene (Malatya)
|Has Date Of Text Composition=Unknown (8th century-11th)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum (2003); Macler (1903); Gollancz (1987); Minov (2013); Minets (2023); Jernstedt (1912)
|Has Modern Edition=David Taylor (in progress as of 2025)
|Has Internal Notes='''Bibliography:'''

Baethgen, F., (ed.): Sindban oder Die Sieben weisen Meister. Syrisch und Deutsch. Leipzig 1879.

Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2003)., p: 196.

Gollancz, H., ‘The History of Sindbad and the Seven Wise Masters’, Transactions of the Folk-Lore Society 8 (1897), 99–130.

Jernstedt, V., Mich. Andreopuli Liber Syntipae (1912). (Greek translation)

Macler, F., Contes syriaques. Histoire de Sindbad (1903).

Minets, Y., “Language of Speaking, Arguing, and Persuading: Cultural Exchange and Adaptation in Greek and Syriac Versions of the ‘History of Sindban/Syntipas’,” Das Mit- telalter 28:1 (2023), 155–171.

Minov, S., (ed.), A Comprehensive Bibliography on Syriac Christianity (The Center for the Study of Christianity, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013).

Perry, Ben E.: The Origin of the Book of Sindbad. In: Fabula 3 (1960), pp. 1–94.

Roediger, E. Chrestomathia Syriaca. 1801-1874 ed. Halis Saxonum

Sachau, E. ed., Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin, 23. Band:Verzeichniss der syrischen Handschriften, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1899).
|Has Note=See especially: Barsoum p. 196; Gollancz 99-130.
}}

Syriac Sindban

2026-02-08T19:17:12Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The beginnings of the Syriac Sindban tradition are very difficult to secure. Estimates for the first Sindban translation range from the 8th - 11th centuries. The difficulty we have is that no other surviving Syriac text refers to the Sindban, and although intertextual references to similar 'migrating texts' such as Kalila wa Dimna are also very few (though not nonexistent), other fabulistic narratives such as the Story of Ahiqar and the Fables of Aesop are frequently referred to. Furthermore, the fact that we have only one surviving manuscript (itself fragmentary) from a period of voluminous manuscript production adds to the fact that there is a strong body of negative evidence that suggests that the Syriac Sindban tradition was not particularly widespread, and may, in fact, be limited to the niche fabulistic interests of the monks of Mor Bar Sawmo monastery and the specifically 11th/12th century Byzantine interest in recovering the folklore of the lost Near Eastern provinces.

We are thus unable to provide a secure stemma for the Syriac part of the Seven Sages tradition. The Greek Syntipas and Sachau 238 are virtually identical in the plot lines of the surviving stories: the only differences can be explained by the reliance on rare vocabulary (eg the hunter storyline in Syriac uses the rare word ܢܐܳܫܘܪܽ for weasel, whose part is erased in Greek, likely due to the translator’s lack of familiarity with the word). However, there are numerous differences in phraseology. This raises the question of Michael Andreopoulos’ fidelity as a translator, which has divided scholars. If we assume Michael Andreopoulos was a faithful translator, we must distinguish between the Syriac text Andreopoulos claims to be translating and Sachau 238. Yuliya Minets has partly pushed back on this, suggesting that the differences can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative decontextualisation of the Sindban, moving away from a Middle Eastern language of power and replacing it with a Greek one. It is noteworthy, for example, that the Greek phraseology in describing the figures of royalty is significantly more vivid and precise than the Syriac, and the language of philosophical instruction is significantly more sophisticated (even accounting for the relative poverty of Syriac philosophical vocabulary). It could, therefore, be the case that our surviving Syriac manuscript ('Syriac 2'), possibly produced at the Mor Bar Sauma, faithfully draws off the Syriac text used by Michael Andreopoulos ('Syriac 1), and that the divergence can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative translation choices. However, we should note that a) Michael Andreopoulos’ text was dedicated to Gabriel of Melitene, and likely designed for the world of the frontier successor states following the battle of Manzikert, not the Constantinopolitan court, so there was a smaller Hellenising incentive and b) Andreopoulos’ text rarely reproduces common Byzantine formulae, eg rhetorical introductions or courtroom procedure, which we would expect to see if he really was creatively adapting the original Syriac 1. It is thus more likely that the differences can be explained by the inferiority of Syriac 2, either as a simpler copy of Syriac 1, or, more likely, that Syriac 2 was working off a separate Sindban manuscript.

A final point to note is the interaction between the Sindban and the wider Syriac fabulistic tradition. As is true of other versions (eg the Sindbadnameh and Seven Viziers) and parallel works (Fables of Aesop, Kalila wa Dimna, etc), there is a great deal of cross pollination between the Sindban and other fabulistic works. In particular, the theme of a falsely accused son being defended in a court setting by a group of Seven Sages crops up several times. However, there is a great deal of divergence in these pseudo Sindban tales. Thus, it is worth making a firm distinction between the Syriac Sindban proper and the broader Syriac ‘Fables of Sindban’ tradition. For more detail on the surviving manuscript, see manuscript page for Berlin Staatsbibliothek Petermann I 24.
|Has Display Title=Syriac Sindban
|Has Title=ܟܬܒܐ ܕܣܢܕܒܢ (The Book of Sindban)
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Is Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Is Adapted Into=Andreopoulos Syntipas
|Has Language Of Version=Syriac
|Has Regional Language=Syriac (Serto script)
|Has Text Language=Syriac
|Is Translated Into Languages=Greek
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Likely near Melitene (Malatya)
|Has Date Of Text Composition=Unknown (8th century-11th)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum (2003); Macler (1903); Gollancz (1987); Minov (2013); Minets (2023); Jernstedt (1912)
|Has Modern Edition=David Taylor (in progress as of 2025)
|Has Internal Notes='''Bibliography:'''

Baethgen, F., (ed.): Sindban oder Die Sieben weisen Meister. Syrisch und Deutsch. Leipzig 1879.

Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2003)., p: 196.

Gollancz, H., ‘The History of Sindbad and the Seven Wise Masters’, Transactions of the Folk-Lore Society 8 (1897), 99–130.

Jernstedt, V., Mich. Andreopuli Liber Syntipae (1912). (Greek translation)

Macler, F., Contes syriaques. Histoire de Sindbad (1903).

Minets, Y., “Language of Speaking, Arguing, and Persuading: Cultural Exchange and Adaptation in Greek and Syriac Versions of the ‘History of Sindban/Syntipas’,” Das Mit- telalter 28:1 (2023), 155–171.

Minov, S., (ed.), A Comprehensive Bibliography on Syriac Christianity (The Center for the Study of Christianity, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013)

Perry, Ben E.: The Origin of the Book of Sindbad. In: Fabula 3 (1960), pp. 1–94.

Roediger, E. Chrestomathia Syriaca. 1801-1874 ed. Halis Saxonum

Sachau, E. ed., Die Handschriften-Verzeichnisse der Königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin, 23. Band:Verzeichniss der syrischen Handschriften, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1899).
|Has Note=See especially: Barsoum p. 196; Gollancz 99-130.
}}

Syriac Sindban

2026-02-08T19:13:31Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Description=The beginnings of the Syriac Sindban tradition are very difficult to secure. Estimates for the first Sindban translation range from the 8th - 11th centuries. The difficulty we have is that no other surviving Syriac text refers to the Sindban, and although intertextual references to similar 'migrating texts' such as Kalila wa Dimna are also very few (though not nonexistent), other fabulistic narratives such as the Story of Ahiqar and the Fables of Aesop are frequently referred to. Furthermore, the fact that we have only one surviving manuscript (itself fragmentary) from a period of voluminous manuscript production adds to the fact that there is a strong body of negative evidence that suggests that the Syriac Sindban tradition was not particularly widespread, and may, in fact, be limited to the niche fabulistic interests of the monks of Mor Bar Sawmo monastery and the specifically 11th/12th century Byzantine interest in recovering the folklore of the lost Near Eastern provinces.

We are thus unable to provide a secure stemma for the Syriac part of the Seven Sages tradition. The Greek Syntipas and Sachau 238 are virtually identical in the plot lines of the surviving stories: the only differences can be explained by the reliance on rare vocabulary (eg the hunter storyline in Syriac uses the rare word ܢܐܳܫܘܪܽ for weasel, whose part is erased in Greek, likely due to the translator’s lack of familiarity with the word). However, there are numerous differences in phraseology. This raises the question of Michael Andreopoulos’ fidelity as a translator, which has divided scholars. If we assume Michael Andreopoulos was a faithful translator, we must distinguish between the Syriac text Andreopoulos claims to be translating and Sachau 238. Yuliya Minets has partly pushed back on this, suggesting that the differences can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative decontextualisation of the Sindban, moving away from a Middle Eastern language of power and replacing it with a Greek one. It is noteworthy, for example, that the Greek phraseology in describing the figures of royalty is significantly more vivid and precise than the Syriac, and the language of philosophical instruction is significantly more sophisticated (even accounting for the relative poverty of Syriac philosophical vocabulary). It could, therefore, be the case that our surviving Syriac manuscript ('Syriac 2'), possibly produced at the Mor Bar Sauma, faithfully draws off the Syriac text used by Michael Andreopoulos ('Syriac 1), and that the divergence can be explained by Michael Andreopoulos’ creative translation choices. However, we should note that a) Michael Andreopoulos’ text was dedicated to Gabriel of Melitene, and likely designed for the world of the frontier successor states following the battle of Manzikert, not the Constantinopolitan court, so there was a smaller Hellenising incentive and b) Andreopoulos’ text rarely reproduces common Byzantine formulae, eg rhetorical introductions or courtroom procedure, which we would expect to see if he really was creatively adapting the original Syriac 1. It is thus more likely that the differences can be explained by the inferiority of Syriac 2, either as a simpler copy of Syriac 1, or, more likely, that Syriac 2 was working off a separate Sindban manuscript.

A final point to note is the interaction between the Sindban and the wider Syriac fabulistic tradition. As is true of other versions (eg the Sindbadnameh and Seven Viziers) and parallel works (Fables of Aesop, Kalila wa Dimna, etc), there is a great deal of cross pollination between the Sindban and other fabulistic works. In particular, the theme of a falsely accused son being defended in a court setting by a group of Seven Sages crops up several times. However, there is a great deal of divergence in these pseudo Sindban tales. Thus, it is worth making a firm distinction between the Syriac Sindban proper and the broader Syriac ‘Fables of Sindban’ tradition.
|Has Display Title=Syriac Sindban
|Has Title=ܟܬܒܐ ܕܣܢܕܒܢ (The Book of Sindban)
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Is Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Is Adapted Into=Andreopoulos Syntipas
|Has Language Of Version=Syriac
|Has Regional Language=Syriac (Serto script)
|Has Text Language=Syriac
|Is Translated Into Languages=Greek
|Has Place Of Text Composition=Likely near Melitene (Malatya)
|Has Date Of Text Composition=Unknown (8th century-11th)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum (2003); Macler (1903); Gollancz (1987); Minov (2013); Minets (2023); Jernstedt (1912)
|Has Modern Edition=David Taylor (in progress as of 2025)
|Has Note=See especially: Barsoum p. 196; Gollancz 99-130.
}}

Topkapı Sarayı, Istanbul (Fātiḥ 3682)

2026-02-08T18:59:05Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama2
|Has Location=Istanbul, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi
|Has Siglum=H.3682
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-171
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Persian
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Digitisation=TYEKB portal (Turkish Manuscript Institution Presidency)
|Has Modern Edition=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948
|Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Shiraz
|Has Date Of Production=late 14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=8th century
|Has Source For Date Of Production=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=171
|Has Height=24.5 cm
|Has Width=16.5 cm
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=Yes
|Has Catalogue=F. E. Karatay, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi Farsça Yazmalar Kataloğu (Catalogue of Persian Manuscripts in the Topkapi Palace Museum Library), Istanbul, 1961
|Has Modern Research Literature=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948.; B.W. Robinson's Persian Paintings in the Topkapi Saray Museum (1991); Günsel Renda, The Transformation of Persian Imagery into Ottoman Style: The Sindbadnama, in "Seventh International Congress of Turkish Art", Warsaw, 1991
|Has Internal Notes=This ornately illustrated manuscript has 72 miniatures from the famous school of Injuid/early Muzaffarid Shiraz, depicting key scenes from within the narrative. It likely arrived in Ottoman hands as part of a gift exchange under Mehmet Fatih.
}}

Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama

2026-02-08T18:57:52Z

Watkins:

{{Version
|Has Note=For digital access, see https://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etca/iran/niran/npers/sindbad/sindb.htm?sindb029.htm
}}
{{Secondary Version
|Has Parent Version=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
}}

Topkapı Sarayı, Istanbul (Fātiḥ 3682)

2026-02-08T18:55:02Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama2
|Has Location=Istanbul, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi
|Has Siglum=H.3682
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-171
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Persian
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Digitisation=TYEKB portal (Turkish Manuscript Institution Presidency)
|Has Modern Edition=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948
|Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Shiraz
|Has Date Of Production=late 14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=8th century AH
|Has Source For Date Of Production=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=171
|Has Height=24.5 cm
|Has Width=16.5 cm
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=Yes
|Has Catalogue=F. E. Karatay, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi Farsça Yazmalar Kataloğu (Catalogue of Persian Manuscripts in the Topkapi Palace Museum Library), Istanbul, 1961
|Has Modern Research Literature=Ahmed Ateş, Sindbād-nāme (Yazarı: Zahîrî-yi Semerkandî), Istanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1948.; B.W. Robinson's Persian Paintings in the Topkapi Saray Museum (1991); Günsel Renda, The Transformation of Persian Imagery into Ottoman Style: The Sindbadnama, in "Seventh International Congress of Turkish Art", Warsaw, 1991
|Has Internal Notes=This ornately illustrated manuscript has 72 miniatures from the famous school of Injuid/early Muzaffarid Shiraz, depicting key scenes from within the narrative. It likely arrived in Ottoman hands as part of a gift exchange under Mehmet Fatih.
}}

Topkapı Sarayı, Istanbul (Fātiḥ 3682)

2026-02-08T18:39:04Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama2 |Has Siglum=H.3682 |Has Page Range=ff. 1-171 |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama |Has Language Group Within Version=Persian |Has Language=Persian |Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha) |Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī |Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi |Has Place Of Production=Sh..."

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama2
|Has Siglum=H.3682
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-171
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Persian
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Author=Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ẓāhīrī al-Samarqandī
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Shiraz
|Has Date Of Production=late 14th century
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=8th century AH
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=171
|Has Height=24.5 cm
|Has Width=16.5 cm
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=Yes
|Has Catalogue=F. E. Karatay, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi Farsça Yazmalar Kataloğu (Catalogue of Persian Manuscripts in the Topkapi Palace Museum Library), Istanbul, 1961
|Has Internal Notes=This ornately illustrated manuscript has 72 miniatures from the famous school of Injuid/early Muzaffarid Shiraz, depicting key scenes from within the narrative. It likely arrived in Ottoman hands as part of a gift exchange under Mehmet Fatih.
}}

Royal Asiatic Society (MS P.337)

2026-02-04T00:40:58Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama3
|Has Location=Library of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland
|Has Page Range=ff. 1-117
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Scribe=unknown - colophon says it was copied from a manuscript by Lalah Sahib Wali Ni'matullah
|Has Author=Lalah Sahib Wali Ni'matullah
|Has Place Of Production=Central India
|Has Date Of Production=1785
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Illustrations=No
|Has Collation=The majority of the manuscript is made up of the Jawami ul-Hikayat, an early 13th century collection of mirabilia (aja'ib) by Muhammad Awfi, who likely knew Zahiri al Samarqandi personally, and who, in his other notable work, the Lubab ul-Albab, provides much of the testimonia we have concerning Zahiri al Samarqandi and the broader Persian tradition. This text was considerably more popular than the Sindbadnameh, with 111 manuscripts surviving, and enjoyed great esteem in both Islamicate courts and among European orientalists.
}}

Royal Asiatic Society (MS P.337)

2026-02-03T03:03:14Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama3 |Has Location=Library of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland |Has Page Range=ff. 1-117 |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama |Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama |Has Language=Persian |Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha) |Has Scribe=unknown - colophon says it was copied from..."

Topkapı Sarayı, Istanbul (Ahmet III 2990)

2026-02-03T02:48:15Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama1 |Has Location=Istanbul, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi |Has Page Range=entire manuscript |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama |Has Language Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama |Has Language=Persian |Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha) |Has Scribe=Zahiri al Samarqandi |Has Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi |Has Canonic..."

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SamarqandiSindbadnama1
|Has Location=Istanbul, Topkapı Sarayı Müzesi Kütüphanesi
|Has Page Range=entire manuscript
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Zahiri al Samarqandi, Sindbadnama
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Scribe=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Samarqand (likely)
|Has Date Of Production=1208/09
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=605
|Has Source For Date Of Production=Colophon
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=150
|Has Illustrations=No
}}

Berlin Staatsbibliothek Petermann I 24

2026-01-04T19:45:54Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SyriacSindban1
|Has Display Title=Syriac (Berlin Sachau 238)
|Has Location=Berlin, Staatsbibliothek
|Has Siglum=Petermann Syr. 24
|Has Page Range=60a–87b
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindban
|Has Incipit Or Textual Title=ܟܬܒܐ ܕܣܢܕܒܢ (the book of sindban)
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Syriac
|Was Translated Or Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Has Scribe=Unknown
|Has Canonical Name Of Scribe=Unknown
|Has Author=Unknown
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Unknown
|Has Place Of Production=Unconfirmed - likely Bar Sauma monastery near Melitene (Malatya).
|Has Date Of Production=Unconfirmed - codicological evidence suggests it was likely copied in 15th/16th century, working off an original that was similar, but likely distinct from, the version used by Michael Andreopoulos in translating the Book of Syntipas
|Has Start Date Of Production=1400
|Has End Date Of Production=1500
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Collation=Manuscript contains a heterogenous collection of folk and wisdom literature traditions. However, only 87 folios of the original 177 survive, and about half of the remaining folios are inserted replacements, with dated paratextual comments suggesting that the process of replacement began in the 16th/17th century. We therefore cannot securely assess the full original character of the manuscript. The first part of the manuscript is taken up by a dialogue between God and Moses on Mount Sinai, comprising of a series of wise aphorisms and followed by a prophetic speech concerning the last judgement, and then a Garshuni (Arabic language in Syriac script) version of Aesop’s fables, set in a frame story at the court of Nebuchadnezzar. Six fables, however, forming a continuous group in the middle, are in Syriac.

The Sindban itself takes up pages 60a-87b, and is written in fine small Serto script. The manuscript also contains medical advice (how to tell when a woman is pregnant with a boy), and a collection of spiritual addresses to the soul in (inconsistent and poorly rhymed) Iambic metre. In the case of the latter, the poet identifies himself as Habib, a presbyter from the village of Klebin near Mardin (the heartland of Syriac monasteries on the Tur Abdin plateau). Sachau notes the similarities between these verses and contemporary Arabic folk songs from the Mardin/Sirnak region.
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=87 surviving (many replacement folios added later); 177 folios originally
|Has Illustrations=No
|Has Modern Edition=Baethgen, F., (ed.): Sindban oder Die Sieben weisen Meister. Syrisch und Deutsch. Leipzig 1879 (Baethgen, F., (ed.): Sindban oder Die Sieben weisen Meister. Syrisch und Deutsch. Leipzig 1879); David Taylor (in progress as of 2025)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2003)., p: 196. (Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2003)., p: 196.); Gollancz, H., ‘The History of Sindbad and the Seven Wise Masters’, Transactions of the Folk-Lore Society 8 (1897), 99–130. (Gollancz, H., ‘The History of Sindbad and the Seven Wise Masters’, Transactions of the Folk-Lore Society 8 (1897), 99–130.); Jernstedt, V., Mich. Andreopuli Liber Syntipae (1912). (Greek translation); Macler, F., Contes syriaques. Histoire de Sindbad (1903).; Minets, Y., “Language of Speaking, Arguing, and Persuading: Cultural Exchange and Adaptation in Greek and Syriac Versions of the ‘History of Sindban/Syntipas’,” Das Mit- telalter 28:1 (2023), 155–171.; Minov, S., (ed.), A Comprehensive Bibliography on Syriac Christianity (The Center for the Study of Christianity, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013)
|Has Note=A precise provenancing of this manuscript is difficult to achieve. It was obtained by Julius Heinrich Petermann during his travels in eastern Anatolia in the 1850s. However, as far as I can find, Petermann does not provide any information on where he obtained it. Paratextual comments suggest that it circulated between at least two different monasteries. However, the presence of page numberings, an unusual practice in Syriac outside of hagiographies, is limited to a few monasteries, one of which is the old patriarchal headquarters of Mor Bar Sauma, just outside Melitene, where Michael Andreopoulos

translated the Syriac into the Greek Syntipas. One potential reconstruction of this manuscript’s circulation history would be an initial production at Mor Bar Sauma, based on the earlier Sindban manuscript used by Michael Andreopoulos, likely around the 15th century (given that Garshuni only really takes off in the late 14th century), followed by an enforced move east in the 16th/17th century (when Mor Bar Sauma was gradually abandoned, and when we have records of the insertion of replacement folios in the manuscript), followed by a another move between the 17th and 19th centuries.

The original texts of the manuscript seem to have been put together by at least 4 different hands (not including replacement folios). On folio 15, we have a series of signed paratextual records: in 1579 we have a priest, Hidayat, who, following aristocratic Syriac custom, provides family details, and, in 1660, a deacon named Qūsṭanṭīn. The other names are not dated, but follow the conventions of early modern Serto without diacritics or vocalisations. One possibility is that the dominant landowners around Mardin, a Syriac Christian family which produced several patriarchs of the Syriac Orthodox Church, and among whom the names Hidayat (admittedly a Syriac common name) and Qūsṭanṭīn (a far less common, classicising name) were ubiquitous, came to acquire the manuscript in the 1500s, which would explain both the apparent explosion of interest in the manuscript during this period and the literary links to the folk poetry of the Mardin region.
}}

Berlin Staatsbibliothek Petermann I 24

2026-01-04T19:42:45Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=SyriacSindban1 |Has Display Title=Syriac (Berlin Sachau 238) |Has Location=Berlin, Staatsbibliothek |Has Siglum=Petermann Syr. 24 |Has Page Range=60a–87b |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindban |Has Incipit Or Textual Title=ܟܬܒܐ ܕܣܢܕܒܢ (the book of sindban) |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Syriac |Was Translated Or Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers) |Has Scribe=Unknown |Has Canonical Name Of..."

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=SyriacSindban1
|Has Display Title=Syriac (Berlin Sachau 238)
|Has Location=Berlin, Staatsbibliothek
|Has Siglum=Petermann Syr. 24
|Has Page Range=60a–87b
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindban
|Has Incipit Or Textual Title=ܟܬܒܐ ܕܣܢܕܒܢ (the book of sindban)
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Syriac
|Was Translated Or Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Has Scribe=Unknown
|Has Canonical Name Of Scribe=Unknown
|Has Author=Unknown
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Unknown
|Has Place Of Production=Unconfirmed - likely Bar Sauma monastery near Melitene (Malatya).
|Has Date Of Production=Unconfirmed - codicological evidence suggests it was likely copied in 15th/16th century, working off an original that was similar, but likely distinct from, the version used by Michael Andreopoulos in translating the Book of Syntipas
|Has Start Date Of Production=1400
|Has End Date Of Production=1500
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Collation=Manuscript contains a heterogenous collection of folk and wisdom literature traditions. However, only 87 folios of the original 177 survive, and about half of the remaining folios are inserted replacements, with dated paratextual comments suggesting that the process of replacement began in the 16th/17th century. We therefore cannot securely assess the full original character of the manuscript. The first part of the manuscript is taken up by a dialogue between God and Moses on Mount Sinai, comprising of a series of wise aphorisms and followed by a prophetic speech concerning the last judgement, and then a Garshuni (Arabic language in Syriac script) version of Aesop’s fables, set in a frame story at the court of Nebuchadnezzar. Six fables, however, forming a continuous group in the middle, are in Syriac.

The Sindban itself takes up pages 60a-87b, and is written in fine small Serto script. The manuscript also contains medical advice (how to tell when a woman is pregnant with a boy), and a collection of spiritual addresses to the soul in (inconsistent and poorly rhymed) Iambic metre. In the case of the latter, the poet identifies himself as Habib, a presbyter from the village of Klebin near Mardin (the heartland of Syriac monasteries on the Tur Abdin plateau). Sachau notes the similarities between these verses and contemporary Arabic folk songs from the Mardin/Sirnak region.
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=87 surviving (many replacement folios added later); 177 folios originally
|Has Illustrations=No
|Has Modern Edition=Baethgen, F., (ed.): Sindban oder Die Sieben weisen Meister. Syrisch und Deutsch. Leipzig 1879; David Taylor (in progress as of 2025)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2003)., p: 196.; Gollancz, H., ‘The History of Sindbad and the Seven Wise Masters’, Transactions of the Folk-Lore Society 8 (1897), 99–130.; Jernstedt, V., Mich. Andreopuli Liber Syntipae (1912). (Greek translation); Macler, F., Contes syriaques. Histoire de Sindbad (1903).; Minets, Y., “Language of Speaking, Arguing, and Persuading: Cultural Exchange and Adaptation in Greek and Syriac Versions of the ‘History of Sindban/Syntipas’,” Das Mit- telalter 28:1 (2023), 155–171.; Minov, S., (ed.), A Comprehensive Bibliography on Syriac Christianity (The Center for the Study of Christianity, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013)
|Has Internal Notes=A precise provenancing of this manuscript is difficult to achieve. It was obtained by Julius Heinrich Petermann during his travels in eastern Anatolia in the 1850s. However, as far as I can find, Petermann does not provide any information on where he obtained it. Paratextual comments suggest that it circulated between at least two different monasteries. However, the presence of page numberings, an unusual practice in Syriac outside of hagiographies, is limited to a few monasteries, one of which is the old patriarchal headquarters of Mor Bar Sauma, just outside Melitene, where Michael Andreopoulos

translated the Syriac into the Greek Syntipas. One potential reconstruction of this manuscript’s circulation history would be an initial production at Mor Bar Sauma, based on the earlier Sindban manuscript used by Michael Andreopoulos, likely around the 15th century (given that Garshuni only really takes off in the late 14th century), followed by an enforced move east in the 16th/17th century (when Mor Bar Sauma was gradually abandoned, and when we have records of the insertion of replacement folios in the manuscript), followed by a another move between the 17th and 19th centuries.

The original texts of the manuscript seem to have been put together by at least 4 different hands (not including replacement folios). On folio 15, we have a series of signed paratextual records: in 1579 we have a priest, Hidayat, who, following aristocratic Syriac custom, provides family details, and, in 1660, a deacon named Qūsṭanṭīn. The other names are not dated, but follow the conventions of early modern Serto without diacritics or vocalisations. One possibility is that the dominant landowners around Mardin, a Syriac Christian family which produced several patriarchs of the Syriac Orthodox Church, and among whom the names Hidayat (admittedly a Syriac common name) and Qūsṭanṭīn (a far less common, classicising name) were ubiquitous, came to acquire the manuscript in the 1500s, which would explain both the apparent explosion of interest in the manuscript during this period and the literary links to the folk poetry of the Mardin region.
}}

Syriac Sindban

2026-01-04T19:08:50Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Version |Has Display Title=Syriac Sindban |Has Parent Version=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers) |Has Author=Unknown |Has Title=Syriac Sindban |Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad |Is Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers) |Is Adapted Into=Andreopoulos Syntipas |Has Text Language=Syriac |Has Regional Language=Syriac (Serto script) |Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd rev..."

{{Version
|Has Display Title=Syriac Sindban
|Has Parent Version=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Has Author=Unknown
|Has Title=Syriac Sindban
|Has Branch Of Tradition=Book of Sindbad
|Is Adapted From=Arabic Version A (The Seven Viziers)
|Is Adapted Into=Andreopoulos Syntipas
|Has Text Language=Syriac
|Has Regional Language=Syriac (Serto script)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Barsoum, I. A,. The Scattered Pearls: A History of Syriac Literature and Sciences, 2nd revised (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2003)., p: 196.; Gollancz, H., ‘The History of Sindbad and the Seven Wise Masters’, Transactions of the Folk-Lore Society 8 (1897), 99–130.; Jernstedt, V., Mich. Andreopuli Liber Syntipae (1912). (Greek translation); Macler, F., Contes syriaques. Histoire de Sindbad (1903).; Minets, Y., “Language of Speaking, Arguing, and Persuading: Cultural Exchange and Adaptation in Greek and Syriac Versions of the ‘History of Sindban/Syntipas’,” Das Mit- telalter 28:1 (2023), 155–171.; Minov, S., (ed.), A Comprehensive Bibliography on Syriac Christianity (The Center for the Study of Christianity, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 2013); Perry, Ben E.: The Origin of the Book of Sindbad. In: Fabula 3 (1960), pp. 1–94.
|Has Modern Edition=aethgen, F., (ed.): Sindban oder Die Sieben weisen Meister. Syrisch und Deutsch. Leipzig 1879.; David Taylor (in progress as of 2025)
}}

Persian Sindbadnama

2025-12-14T20:06:26Z

Watkins:

London British Library Or. 225

2025-12-11T22:29:01Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=British Library (Or. 225)
|Has Display Title=Sindbadnama_Zahiri1
|Has Location=London, British Library
|Has Siglum=Or. 225
|Has Page Range=f1v - f155r
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian
|Has Language Group Within Version=Dari
|Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Samarqandi Sindbadnama
|Was Translated Or Adapted From=Claims to be adapted from Fanaruzi's 9th century translation of a Pahlavi original
|Has Scribe=Unknown
|Has Author=Muhammad b. 'Ali az-Zahiri as-Samarqandi
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al-Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Hyderabad (Decca)
|Has Date Of Production=1622 CE
|Has Start Date Of Production=1622
|Has End Date Of Production=1622
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=1029 AH
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Regional Language=Dari (Insha)
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Collation=None (specially copied for Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah).
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=155
|Has Illustrations=No
|Has Digitisation=No
|Has Modern Edition=Seyyed Mohammad Bagher Kamaladdini, Tehran, 2013 (Zahiri Sindbadnameh)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Haidar and Sardar (2015), p. 203; Rieu (1879-83) vol. 2 p. 748
|Has Note=This manuscript was specially commissioned by Mohammad Qutb Shah in 1622. The decision to commission a translation of Zahiri al Samarqandi's translation, given that there was already a beautifully illuminated manuscript of Azod Yazdi's later versification of the work circulating in the Deccan court, illustrates the widespread popularity of the Sindbanama and, in particular, the reputation of Zahiri al Samarqandi's original version.
}}

London British Library Or. 225

2025-12-11T22:23:52Z

Watkins:

London British Library Or. 225

2025-12-11T22:22:46Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=British Library (Or. 225)
|Has Display Title=Sindbadnama_Zahiri1
|Has Location=London, British Library
|Has Siglum=Or. 225
|Has Page Range=f1v - f155r
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian
|Has Language Group Within Version=Dari
|Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Samarqandi Sindbadnama
|Was Translated Or Adapted From=Claims to be adapted from Fanaruzi's 9th century translation of a Pahlavi original
|Has Scribe=Unknown
|Has Author=Muhammad b. 'Ali az-Zahiri as-Samarqandi
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Zahiri al-Samarqandi
|Has Place Of Production=Hyderabad (Decca)
|Has Date Of Production=1622 CE
|Has Start Date Of Production=1622
|Has End Date Of Production=1622
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=1029 AH
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Literary Form=Prose
|Has Collation=None (specially copied for Sultan Muhammad Qutb Shah).
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=155
|Has Illustrations=No
|Has Digitisation=No
|Has Modern Edition=Seyyed Mohammad Bagher Kamaladdini, Tehran, 2013 (Zahiri Sindbadnameh)
|Has Modern Research Literature=Haidar and Sardar (2015), p. 203; Rieu (1879-83) vol. 2 p. 748
}}

London British Library Or. 225

2025-12-11T22:21:02Z

Watkins:

London British Library Or. 225

2025-12-11T22:07:22Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=British Library (Or. 225) |Has Display Title=Sindbadnama_Zahiri1 |Has Location=London, British Library |Has Siglum=Or. 225 |Has Page Range=f1v - f155r |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama |Has Siglum Of The Version Of The Seven Sages=Persian |Was Translated Or Adapted From=Claims to be adapted from Fanaruzi's 9th century translation of a Pahlavi original |Has Scribe=Unknown |Has Author=Muhammad b. 'Ali az-Zahiri as-Samarqand..."

London British Library IO Islamic 3214

2025-12-11T20:16:22Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=Sindbadnama_Yazdi1
|Has Display Title=British Library IO Islamic 3214
|Has Location=British Library, originally Golconda
|Has Siglum=British Library IO Islamic 3214
|Has Page Range=entire manuscript
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Persian (Dari)
|Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Azod Yazdi versification
|Was Translated Or Adapted From=Zahiri al Samarqandi (versified and adapted)
|Has Scribe=unknown
|Has Author=Seyyed Jalaloddin Azod-e Yazdi
|Has Canonical Name Of Author=Azod Yazdi
|Has Date Of Production=1575-85
|Has Start Date Of Production=1575
|Has End Date Of Production=1585
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=982 AH
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Literary Form=Verse
|Has Collation=None
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=157
|Has Height=435
|Has Width=300
|Has Illustrations=Yes
|Has Digitisation=No
|Has Modern Edition=Yazdi, Azod. Sindbad-nameh-ye Manzum. Ed. Mohammad Jaʿfar Mahjub. Tehran: Tus, 2002.
|Has Internal Notes=Manuscript of the Shirazi poet Azod Zazdi's 1374CE versification (masnavi form) and adaptation of Zahiri al Samarqandi's Sindbadnama. The stories are identical to Zahiri's version.
|Has Note=his richly illuminated manuscript (holding 72 miniatures stylistically associated with the Shirazi school of miniaturists) was acquired by the East India Company orientalist Hamish Forbes Falconer, likely from the library of the Tipu Sultan of Mysore after his defeat in 1799. It was then briefly lost until it was purchased in a bazaar in 1857, and waantransferred to the British library when the latter took over the papers of the East India Company.

Next to the many of the miniatures are short descriptive commentaries in Kannada (previously misidentified as Telugu), potentially suggesting that the manuscript was circulating within Hindu circles of the Deccan court.
}}

London British Library IO Islamic 3214

2025-12-11T20:14:41Z

Watkins:

{{Manuscript
|Has Reference Number=Sindbadnama_Yazdi1
|Has Display Title=British Library IO Islamic 3214
|Has Location=British Library, originally Golconda
|Has Siglum=British Library IO Islamic 3214
|Has Page Range=entire manuscript
|Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama
|Has Language Group Within Version=Persian (Dari)
|Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Azod Yazdi versification
|Was Translated Or Adapted From=Zahiri al Samarqandi (versified and adapted)
|Has Start Date Of Production=1575
|Has End Date Of Production=1585
|Has Islamic Date Of Production=982 AH
|Has Material=Paper
|Has Language=Persian
|Has Literary Form=Verse
|Has Collation=None
|Has Script Style=Nastaliq
|Has Total Pages In Manuscript=157
|Has Height=435
|Has Width=300
|Has Illustrations=Yes
|Has Digitisation=No
|Has Modern Edition=Yazdi, Azod. Sindbad-nameh-ye Manzum. Ed. Mohammad Jaʿfar Mahjub. Tehran: Tus, 2002.
|Has Internal Notes=Manuscript of the Shirazi poet Azod Zazdi's 1374CE versification (masnavi form) and adaptation of Zahiri al Samarqandi's Sindbadnama. The stories are identical to Zahiri's version.
|Has Note=his richly illuminated manuscript (holding 72 miniatures stylistically associated with the Shirazi school of miniaturists) was acquired by the East India Company orientalist Hamish Forbes Falconer, likely from the library of the Tipu Sultan of Mysore after his defeat in 1799. It was then briefly lost until it was purchased in a bazaar in 1857, and waantransferred to the British library when the latter took over the papers of the East India Company.

Next to the many of the miniatures are short descriptive commentaries in Kannada (previously misidentified as Telugu), potentially suggesting that the manuscript was circulating within Hindu circles of the Deccan court.
}}

London British Library IO Islamic 3214

2025-12-11T19:15:12Z

Watkins: Created page with "{{Manuscript |Has Reference Number=Sindbadnama_Yazdi1 |Has Display Title=British Library IO Islamic 3214 |Has Location=British Library, originally Golconda |Has Siglum=British Library IO Islamic 3214 |Has Page Range=entire manuscript |Has Standardised Title Of Narrative=Sindbadnama |Has Language Group Within Version=Persian (Dari) |Has Narrative Or Scholarly Group Within Version=Azod Yazdi versification |Was Translated Or Adapted From=Zahiri al Samarqandi (versified and..."