A Reflection on the Reasons for Misattributed Poems in Persian Poetry

The role of poetic anthologies (Jongs), biographical dictionaries (“Tazkerehs”), and ancient manuscripts in correcting texts and retrieving poets' works is undeniable. However, these very sources, which can even revive the divan of a forgotten poet, are themselves the origin of serious issues regarding the correct attribution of poems. The extent of these issues is directly dependent on the degree of reliability and authenticity of each manuscript. This research, with a descriptive-analytical approach, investigates the roots of "misattributions" in these texts attributions that are primarily based on non-critical and conjectural grounds, including: a poet's fame in specific poetic forms and styles, nominal (or pen-name) similarities, unconscious repetition and imitation of later sources, inaccurate citations in prose texts, deliberate forgery, and additions by scribes. Given that a significant number of newly found poems and ambiguous attributions have entered the accepted corpus of poets through this channel, this study emphasizes the necessity for greater scholarly caution by editors and researchers when utilizing these sources.
 
Extended Abstract

Introduction

Poetic biographical dictionaries (“Tazkerehs”) and anthologies (“Safinehs”) play a significant role in recording poets' works and validating our literary history. From the pioneering Lobab-al-Albab to later Tazkerehs and poetic anthologies, each has contributed immensely to the richness of Persian literature. Although these Tazkerehs and Safinehs are not of equal status in terms of antiquity, textual authenticity, and calligraphic art, regardless of their reliability, they must be examined and studied meticulously. It is evident that Tazkerehs and poetic anthologies have drawn from one another, with ample historical evidence supporting this. For instance, the influence of Lobab-al-Albab on subsequent Tazkerehs cannot be easily overlooked. Furthermore, the influence of ancient sources on later Tazkerehs is undeniable. This practice was also common among compilers of poetic anthologies, who sometimes used earlier anthologies to collect poems. These mutual influences have undoubtedly, in some cases, led to the repetition of errors. Manuscripts of poets' works are not immune to these issues either. Many errors, based on scribal mistakes, have found their way into manuscripts and persisted in other copies. Examining these shortcomings requires profound attention to the antiquity of manuscripts and literary history. We often encounter poems not found in any manuscript attributed to the poet. The authors of this research believe that before considering these poems as newly discovered, they should be cautiously examined, and their attribution should be doubted; because if the poem truly belonged to the poet, it should logically have been recorded in at least one manuscript. For single-copy texts, there is often no choice but to cautiously accept the attributions, provided they do not conflict with other sources. When dealing with poets without a divan or single-copy works, the only option is trust albeit conditional. Therefore, correcting and analyzing these texts requires deep precision, and the mere presence of a poem in a text is not definitive proof of its correct attribution to the poet.

Theoretical Framework

The present study is an effort to identify potential flaws in poetic Tazkerehs, Safinehs, and manuscripts. This research attempts, by citing several examples of attributions from various poetic Tazkerehs and Safinehs (not focusing on a specific one), to examine and analyze them, demonstrating the extent to which one can rely on and trust the "newly discovered" nature of poems and the attributions in these texts. In this regard, and under several headings, incongruous attributions in Persian poetry and the reasons for their formation will be investigated.

Research Method

This research aims to address this important issue using a descriptive-analytical method, by citing poetic examples from various anthologies (“Jongs”) and examining and analyzing them, to determine whether the mere mention of an attribution in poetic anthologies can serve as a basis for citation and trust or not.
 4.Findings
Based on misattributions, this study concluded that a portion of misattributed Persian poems have occurred for several reasons. The most important identified reasons are as follows:

A poet's fame in specific poetic forms: Sometimes a poet's renown for composing in a particular form (especially Qet'eh and Roba'i) has led scribes or Tazkereh writers to mistakenly attribute similar poems to them.
Nominal similarity: The similarity of names among some poets has led to the mixing of works and incorrect attributions.
Stylistic proximity: The similarity of a work's style to that of a famous poet has been another reason for erroneous attributions.
Imitation of prior sources: several errors have been repeated and solidified due to the uncritical copying and adherence to previous Safinehs and Tazkerehs.
Deliberate forgery and distortion: In some cases, intentional tampering with poems and their forgery has fueled the spread of incorrect attributions.
Interference by scribes and owners: Later additions and alterations made by scribes or owners of manuscripts have been other contributing factors to these errors.


Conclusion

Through examining primary poetic sources meticulously, including Tazkerehs, Safinehs, and manuscripts, this research clearly shows that these valuable treasures, despite their importance in transmitting the heritage of Persian poetry, are not free from flaws and errors. Therefore, absolute and uncritical trust in the newly found items and attributions contained within them can lead to misinterpretations and distortions of literary history. The results of this study emphasize the necessity for a cautious approach by editors and researchers and insist that engagement with manuscript texts must be accompanied by a critical and methodological perspective. Thus, to achieve more correct and reliable texts, editors must examine the attribution of poems with care and scrutiny beyond their mere presence in an ancient source, relying on multiple valid pieces of evidence.
Select Bibliography
Āzar Bigdeli, L. Ātaškade-ye Āzar, With an introduction, index, and annotations by Sayyed Jaʿfar Shahidi. Muʿassase-ye Našr-e Ketāb Publications. (Original work published 1337 AH), 1958. [In Persian]
Al-Maltawi, M. (c. 14th century). Anis al-Khalwa wa Jalīs al-Salwa, Manuscript No. 1670, Ayasofya Library, Istanbul. [Manuscript]. [In Persian]
Ebn Yamīn Faryūmadī, M. (c. 16th century CE). Moqattaʿāt-e Ebn Yamin Faryumadi, Manuscript No. 4300, Ayasofya Library, scribe Darvīsh Mahmūd bin ʿAbdollāh Naqqāsh, [Manuscript]. [In Persian]
Eʿtemād al-Salṭana, M. Khayrāt Ḥesān, Lithograph print, No. 5871, National Library of Iran, 1877. [In Persian]
Khayyām, O. (1461). Robāʿiyyāt-e Khayyām, No. 140, Bodleian Library, Oxford, scribe Sheikh Mahmūd Yarbūdāqī. [Manuscript]. [In Persian]
Khayyām, O. Hakim Omar Khayyām va Robāʿiyyāt-e Ū, by Yegāni. Serial Publications of the Anjoman-e Āsār-e Melli, 1963. [In Persian]
Rashīdī Tabrīzī, Y. Robāʿiyyāt-e Khayyām (Tarabkhāne), Edited by Jalāl al-Dīn Homāʾī. Tehran, Našr-e Homā, 2nd edition, 1988. [In Persian]
Ṣabā, M. Tazkere-ye Rūz-e Rowshan, Edited with annotations by Mohammad-Ḥoseyn Roknzāde Ādamiyat. Ketābkhāne-ye Rāzī, 1964. [In Persian]
Safavī, S. Tohfat-e Sāmī, Edited and collated by Vahīd Dastgerdī. Tehran: Maṭbaʿa-ye Armaghān, 1935. [In Persian]
ʿAlīshīr Navāʾī, A. Tazkere-ye Majālis al-Nafāʾis, Edited by ʿAlī-Aṣḡar Ḥekmat. Tehran: Ketābforūšī-ye Manūchehrī, 1984. [In Persian]