Nakhshabi Tutinama: Difference between revisions
From The Seven Sages of Rome
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
|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 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: | |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) | |||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 00:56, 10 March 2026
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.
Identification & General Information
Title
Author
Tradition & Lineage
Recorded Secondary Versions
Language & Composition
Language of version
Regional or specific language of version
Place of composition
Date of Composition
14th century (8th centuryAH)
Islamic date of composition
8th century
Modern Scholarship & Editions
Notes & Commentary
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)