按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
natural Temper and Genius； and as acted upon by the Circumstances in
which he lived。 Both indeed were men of subtle； strong； and
cultivated Intellect； fine Imagination； and Hearts passionate for
Truth and Justice； who justly revolted from their Country's false
Religion； and false； or foolish； Devotion to it； but who fell short of
replacing what they subverted by such better Hope as others； with no
better Revelation to guide them； had yet made a Law to themselves。
Lucretius indeed； with such material as Epicurus furnished； satisfied
himself with the theory of a vast machine fortuitously constructed；
and acting by a Law that implied no Legislator； and so composing
himself into a Stoical rather than Epicurean severity of Attitude； sat
down to contemplate the mechanical drama of the Universe which he was
part Actor in； himself and all about him （as in his own sublime
description of the Roman Theater） discolored with the lurid reflex of
the Curtain suspended between the Spectator and the Sun。 Omar； more
desperate； or more careless of any so complicated System as resulted
in nothing but hopeless Necessity； flung his own Genius and Learning
with a bitter or humorous jest into the general Ruin which their
insufficient glimpses only served to reveal； and； pretending sensual
pleasure； as the serious purpose of Life； only diverted himself with
speculative problems of Deity； Destiny； Matter and Spirit； Good and
Evil； and other such questions； easier to start than to run down； and
the pursuit of which becomes a very weary sport at last！
Professor Cowell。
With regard to the present Translation。 The original Rubaiyat （as；
missing an Arabic Guttural； these Tetrastichs are more musically
called） are independent Stanzas； consisting each of four Lines of
equal； though varied； Prosody； sometimes all rhyming； but oftener （as
here imitated） the third line a blank。 Somewhat as in the Greek
Alcaic； where the penultimate line seems to lift and suspend the Wave
that falls over in the last。 As usual with such kind of Oriental
Verse； the Rubaiyat follow one another according to Alphabetic
Rhymea strange succession of Grave and Gay。 Those here selected are
strung into something of an Eclogue； with perhaps a less than equal
proportion of the 〃Drink and make…merry；〃 which （genuine or not）
recurs over…frequently in the Original。 Either way； the Result is sad
enough： saddest perhaps when most ostentatiously merry： more apt to
move Sorrow than Anger toward the old Tentmaker； who； after vainly
endeavoring to unshackle his Steps from Destiny； and to catch some
authentic Glimpse of TO…MORROW； fell back upon TO…DAY （which has
outlasted so many To…morrows！） as the only Ground he had got to stand
upon； however momentarily slipping from under his Feet。
＇From the Third Edition。＇
While the second Edition of this version of Omar was preparing；
Monsieur Nicolas； French Consul at Resht； published a very careful and
very good Edition of the Text； from a lithograph copy at Teheran；
comprising 464 Rubaiyat； with translation and notes of his own。
Mons。 Nicolas； whose Edition has reminded me of several things； and
instructed me in others； does not consider Omar to be the material
Epicurean that I have literally taken him for； but a Mystic； shadowing
the Deity under the figure of Wine； Wine…bearer； &c。； as Hafiz is
supposed to do； in short； a Sufi Poet like Hafiz and the rest。
I cannot see reason to alter my opinion； formed as it was more than a
dozen years ago when Omar was first shown me by one to whom I am
indebted for all I know of Oriental； and very much of other；
literature。 He admired Omar's Genius so much； that he would gladly
have adopted any such Interpretation of his meaning as Mons。 Nicolas'
if he could。 That he could not； appears by his Paper in the
Calcutta Review already so largely quoted； in which he argues from the
Poems themselves； as well as from what records remain of the Poet's
Life。
Perhaps would have edited the Poems himself some years ago。 He
may now as little approve of my Version on one side； as of Mons。
Nicolas' Theory on the other。
And if more were needed to disprove Mons。 Nicolas' Theory； there is
the Biographical Notice which he himself has drawn up in direct
contradiction to the Interpretation of the Poems given in his Notes。
（See pp。 13…14 of his Preface。） Indeed I hardly knew poor Omar was so
far gone till his Apologist informed me。 For here we see that；
whatever were the Wine that Hafiz drank and sang； the veritable Juice
of the Grape it was which Omar used； not only when carousing with his
friends； but （says Mons。 Nicolas） in order to excite himself to that
pitch of Devotion which others reached by cries and 〃hurlemens。〃 And
yet； whenever Wine； Wine…bearer； &c。； occur in the Textwhich is
often enoughMons。 Nicolas carefully annotates 〃Dieu；〃 〃La Divinite；〃
&c。： so carefully indeed that one is tempted to think that he was
indoctrinated by the Sufi with whom he read the Poems。 （Note to Rub。
ii。 p。 8。） A Persian would naturally wish to vindicate a
distinguished Countryman； and a Sufi to enroll him in his own sect；
which already comprises all the chief Poets of Persia。
What historical Authority has Mons。 Nicolas to show that Omar gave
himself up 〃avec passion a l'etude de la philosophie des Soufis〃？
（Preface； p。 xiii。） The Doctrines of Pantheism； Materialism；
Necessity； &c。； were not peculiar to the Sufi； nor to Lucretius before
them； nor to Epicurus before him； probably the very original
Irreligion of Thinking men from the first； and very likely to be the
spontaneous growth of a Philosopher living in an Age of social and
political barbarism； under shadow of one of the Two and Seventy
Religions supposed to divide the world。 Von Hammer （according to
Sprenger's Oriental Catalogue） speaks of Omar as 〃a Free…thinker； and
a great opponent of Sufism；〃 perhaps because； while holding much of
their Doctrine； he would not pretend to any inconsistent severity of
morals。 Sir W。 Ouseley has written a note to something of the same
effect on the fly…leaf of the Bodleian MS。 And in two Rubaiyat of
Mons。 Nicolas' own Edition Suf and Sufi are both disparagingly named。
No doubt many of these Quatrains seem unaccountable unless mystically
interpreted； but many more as unaccountable unless literally。 Were
the Wine spiritual； for instance； how wash the Body with it when dead？
Why make cups of the dead clay to be filled with〃La Divinite；〃 by
some succeeding Mystic？ Mons。 Nicolas himself is puzzled by some
〃bizarres〃 and 〃trop Orientales〃 allusions and images〃d'une
sensualite quelquefois revoltante〃 indeedwhich 〃les convenances〃 do
not permit him to translate； but still which the reader cannot but
refer to 〃La Divinite。〃 No doubt also many of the Quatrains in the
Teheran； as in the Calcutta； Copies； are spurious； such Rubaiyat being
the common form of Epigram in Persia。 But