A new edition of this work having been required, Mr. Lane was requested to undertake the correction of the press. But severe literary labours allowing him no leisure for this object, he named me, as his pupil in the study of Arabic, familiar with his writings, and for many years resident with him in Cairo, to fill, in some measure, his place. I have undertaken this duty with great diffidence, from a sense of my own deficiencies and his extensive knowledge; but I have felt that I could at least insure the correctness of the text, and a scrupulous adherence to his wishes. The present edition is printed, without any variations of my own (except those which are marked as such, and have been submitted to Mr. Lane), from a copy of the first and complete edition,viii with corrections and additions made by Mr. Lane, from time to time, since its first publication. These, however, from the accuracy with which the translation was made, and the fulness of the Notes, are not very numerous. The same reasons have also caused my own notes to be few: I believe that my Uncle's notes are complete in themselves; and that I have sometimes erred, even in the rare exceptions I have made, on the side of unnecessary addition.
An edition of any book not superintended by the author is sometimes regarded with distrust. I would therefore assure the reader that in this instance he may depend even on the punctuation; the whole having been laboriously collated with Mr. Lane's annotated copy, notwithstanding the great delay which this process has occasioned in the printing of the work.
I have called this a complete edition, to distinguish it from two others which have been published without Mr. Lane's notes or his method of writing oriental words, and with other variations from the standard edition. The public appreciation of these notes, and of the advantage of correctly-written foreign words, is, I conceive, proved by the call for the present edition. On the subject of the mode of writing oriental words in European characters, I need say little, for the controversy has well nigh died out. The present generation does not regard antiquated blunders as "the familiar names of childhood," but rather strives to attain accuracy in all things; and those few who still cling to "Mahomet" or "Mahomed" should consistently exhume the forgotten "Mahound" of the Crusades.
The translator's views respecting the origin and literary history of "The Thousand and One Nights" will be found fully expressed in the Review at the end of the third volume. In his original preface, he stated, "The remarks which I here submit to the reader, being written when only one-third of the work to which they principally relate is printed, must unavoidably be more defective than they would be if reserved until a later period. During the progress of the publication I may be enabled to form clearer and more complete views of the several subjects which might with propriety beix fully discussed at the head of my translation, and I think it better, therefore, to append at the close of the work many observations which I originally intended to prefix to the first volume." He has therefore wished me to remodel the preface, transferring all portions relating to the subjects in question to the Review, retaining whatever may more properly stand at the commencement of the work, and adding any matter of my own.
The object with which the translation was made is best expressed in the words of Mr. Lane's preface.
"My undertaking to translate anew the Tales of 'The Thousand and One Nights' implies an unfavourable opinion of the version which has so long amused us; but I must express my objections with respect to the latter in plain terms, and this I shall do by means of a few words on the version of Galland, from which it is derived; for to him alone its chief faults are to be attributed. I am somewhat reluctant to make this remark, because several persons, and among them some of high and deserved reputation as Arabic scholars, have pronounced an opinion that his version is an improvement upon the original. That 'The Thousand and One Nights' may be greatly improved, I most readily admit; but as confidently do I assert that Galland has excessively perverted the work. His acquaintance with Arab manners and customs was insufficient to preserve him always from errors of the grossest description, and by the style of his version he has given to the whole a false character, thus sacrificing, in a great measure, what is most valuable in the original work,—I mean its minute accuracy with respect to those peculiarities which distinguish the Arabs from every other nation, not only of the West, but also of the East. Deceived by the vague nature of Galland's version, travellers in Persia, Turkey, and India, have often fancied that the Arabian Tales describe the particular manners of the natives of those countries; but no one who has read them in the original language, having an intimate acquaintance with the Arabs, can be of this opinion: it is in Arabian countries, and especially in Egypt, that we see the people, the dresses, and the buildings, which it describesx in almost every case, even when the scene is laid in Persia, in India, or in China.
"Convinced of the truth of this assertion, I consider myself possessed of the chief qualifications for the proper accomplishment of my present undertaking, from my having lived several years in Cairo, associating almost exclusively with Arabs, speaking their language, conforming to their general habits with the most scrupulous exactitude, and received into their society on terms of perfect equality. Since the downfall of the Arab Empire of Baghdád, Cairo has been the chief of Arabian cities: its Memlook Sul?áns, introduced into Egypt in their youth, naturally adopted, to a great degree, the manners of its native inhabitants, which the 'Osmánlee Turks in later days have but little altered. Cairo is the city in which Arabian manners now exist in the most refined state; and such I believe to have been the case when the present work was composed."
Mr. Lane's first two visits to Egypt were made when, for the last time, Arab manners and customs as they existed in the age of the Arabian Nights could be studied; and his translation was written very shortly after his second return to England. Though some of the tales maybe Indian or Persian in origin, in their present state they exhibit a picture of the manners, modes of thought, and language, of the court and times of the Memlook Sul?áns of Egypt, which nearly resembled in these points those of the Khaleefehs of Baghdád, or the great Arab Empire. De Sacy and Von Hammer, the two celebrated orientalists who differed widely in opinion as to the origin of the book, agreed that the tales in which the Khaleefeh Hároon Er-Rasheed is introduced (the best, with few exceptions, in the collection) are Egyptian in character. But since the "Modern Egyptians" were described by Mr. Lane, all things in the East have changed, and every day witnesses the decay of some old custom, to be followed by a bastard European imitation. During Mohammad 'Alee's rule, all traces of the state and circumstance of the Memlook court gradually passed away. European dress has displaced oriental costume, cloth of gold, and dresses ofxi honour; European architecture elbows the quaint beauty of the old Arab capital; and the cavalcade of fifty horsemen around a grandee is succeeded by an English carriage that profanes the quiet streets of the city, and frightens away both 'Efreets and their memory. Mr. Lane saw the last of Cairo in its integrity; and he has not overstated his qualifications, as author of the "Modern Egyptians," for the task of translating the Arabian Nights.
Of the copy from which this translation was made, and the method observed in its execution, I may again quote the preface to the first edition. Mr. Lane says,—
"I have taken as my general standard of the original text the Cairo edition lately printed; it being greatly superior to the other printed editions, and probably to every manuscript copy.1 It appears to agree almost exactly with the celebrated MS. of Von Hammer, than which no copy more copious, I believe, exists; and contains all the tales in the old version except those which, as Von Hammer says, Galland appears to have taken from other works, Arabic, Persian, and Turkish, in the Royal Library of Paris. The manuscript from which it was printed was carefully collated and corrected by a very learned man, the sheykh 'Abd-Er-Ra?mán E?-?aftee Esh-Shar?áwee, who also superintended the progress of the work through the press. But in addition to the value conferred upon it by the corrections of this sheykh, the copy from which the whole of my translation is made, except in a few xiiinstances, possesses an advantage which, I believe, renders it incomparably superior to any other now existing: it has been again revised and corrected, and illustrated with numerous manuscript notes, by a person whom I think I may safely pronounce the first philologist of the first Arab college of the present day, the sheykh Mo?ammad 'Eiyád E?-?an?áwee, or, more properly, E?-?anditáee. His notes are chiefly philological, and explanatory of words which do not belong to the classical language; and many of them are of very great assistance to me; though most of them I find unnecessary, from the knowledge of the modern Arabic which I have acquired during my intercourse with the people who speak it. His corrections of the text are numerous; and as they would interest very few persons, I have mentioned but few of them in the notes to my translation, notwithstanding a strong temptation that I felt to do otherwise in order that Arabic scholars might be assisted to judge of the fidelity of my version by comparing it with the text of the Cairo edition.2 To the pieces of poetry which are interspersed throughout the work he has paid especial attention; not only correcting the errors which he found in them, but also always adding the vowel-points, and generally, commentaries or explanations. Thus I have shewn that I am very greatly indebted to him for his learned labours. I should, however, add, that I have ventured to differ from him in interpreting a few words; having found more appropriate meanings assigned to them by Arabs in parts not visited by him, or such meanings given in printed dictionaries with which he is unacquainted; and I have also corrected a few errors which have escaped his notice.3 Without the valuable xiiiaid which he has afforded me, I would not have attempted the translation; nor with it would I have done so were it not for the advantage that I derive from my having lived among Arabs. No translator can always be certain that, from twenty or more significations which are borne by one Arabic word, he has selected that which his author intended to convey; but, circumstanced as I am, I have the satisfaction of feeling confident that I have never given, to a word or phrase in this work, a meaning which is inconsistent with its presenting faithful pictures of Arab life and manners.
"I have thought it right to omit such tales, anecdotes, &c., as are comparatively uninteresting or on any account objectionable. In other words, I insert nothing that I deem greatly inferior in interest to the tales in the old version. Certain passages which, in the original work, are of an objectionable nature, I have slightly varied; but in doing this, I have been particularly careful to render them so as to be perfectly agreeable with Arab manners and customs. It was originally my intention to omit almost the whole of the poetry, thinking that the loss of measure and rhyme, and the impossibility of preserving the examples of paronomasia and some other figures with which they abound, would render translations of them generally intolerable to the reader: but afterwards I reflected that the character of the work would be thus greatly altered; and its value, as illustrating Arab manners and feelings, much diminished. I therefore determined to preserve a considerable number of select pieces, chosen either for their relative merits or because required by the context. The number of those comprised in the first volume of my translation is nearly half of the number contained in the corresponding portion of the original work; but in several cases I have omitted one or more verses of a piece as unsuitable, or for some other reason; and in a few instances I have given only the first verse or the first couplet. These pieces of poetry are not in general to be regarded as the compositions of the author or authors of the work: theyxiv appear to be mostly borrowed from others, and many of them are taken from the works of celebrated poets.—To avoid the tedious interruptions which occur in the original at the close of each Night, I have divided the translation into chapters, each of which consists of one tale, or of two or more tales connected one with another, and have merely mentioned the Night with which each chapter commences, and that with which it terminates.
"The original work being designed solely for the entertainment of Arabs, I add copious notes to the translation, to render it more intelligible and agreeable to the English reader. These are entirely my own, except in those cases when I have stated otherwise;4 and my general object in them has been to give such illustrations as may satisfy the general reader, without obliging him to consult other works. In many of them I endeavour to shew, by extracts from esteemed Arabic histories and scientific and other writings, chiefly drawn from MSS. in my possession, as well as by assertions and anecdotes that I have heard, and conduct that I have witnessed, during my intercourse with Arabs, that the most extravagant relations in this work are not in general regarded, even by the educated classes of that people, as of an incredible nature. This is a point which I deem of much importance to set the work in its proper light before my countrymen. I have resided in a land where genii are still firmly believed to obey the summons of the magician or the owner of a talisman, and to act in occurrences of every day; and I have listened to stories of their deeds related as facts by persons of the highest respectability, and by some who would not condescend to read the tales of 'The Thousand and One Nights,' merely because they are fictions, and not written in the usual polished style of literary compositions."
I have already mentioned that the literary history of "The Thousand and One Nights" is discussed in Mr. Lane's Review xvappended to this translation. In the course of my Arabic studies, and more especially since I have been occupied in editing the present work, I have endeavoured to form an unbiassed judgment on this difficult question; and all my researches have confirmed me in agreeing with the opinions there expressed. Von Hammer was inclined to lay too much stress on the supposed Persian or Indian origin of these Tales; while De Sacy, on the other hand, rejected the belief in any connection between the old work and the more modern; contending that the latter was an independent production. The discovery, however, of a passage in an Arabic author, by Von Hammer, since the publication of De Sacy's Essay and Mr. Lane's Preface, has placed the matter beyond a doubt; and scholars are now agreed, notwithstanding De Sacy's pleasant sarcasm, and the weight of his great name, that "The Thousand Nights" formed in some measure the prototype of "The Thousand and One Nights." On the other hand, De Sacy's keen appreciation of the modern (and chiefly Egyptian, or Arab,) character of the book, in its present form, must be fully recognised, and was indeed thus acknowledged by Von Hammer himself. The manners, dresses, and modes of thought, portrayed by it are Arab throughout, even in the stories which are probably retained from the Persian or Indian original, of which that of the Magic Horse is the best example in this translation. Besides those relating to the court and adventures of Hároon Er-Rasheed, which, as I have before remarked, are curiously Egyptian, many others appear to have been remodelled, if not actually composed, in Egypt. It is not less true that these tales are generally the best in the collection, if those of the Slave Káfoor, of 'Azeez and 'Azeezeh, and of Es-Sindibád, be excepted; for these certainly are inferior to none. The more colloquial and familiar stories point to the same origin; such as that of 'Alá-ed-Deen Abu-sh-Shámát (which is pervaded by Egyptian characteristics in phraseology and in other respects), that of Aboo-?eer and Aboo-?eer, and that of Ma?roof. The stories founded mainly on Persian or Indian originals appear to bexvi those in which supernatural beings play the most conspicuous parts; and, as Mr. Lane remarks, these are generally deficient in verses, although the converse does not hold good of the former class. The anecdotes are mostly historical: many of them are, in the Notes, identified with similar ones in other Arabic works; and almost all are of Arab origin.
The evidences of a late date scattered through the book may be additions of copyists and reciters; but considered with reference to its general character, they have a certain weight that cannot be overlooked: this is carefully stated in the Review.
Mr. Lane's arguments in favour of the collective "Thousand and One Nights" being an individual work, and not one of many similar collections, seem to me to be conclusive: not the least important of these is the fact that no similar collection is known to exist, nor is mentioned by any Arab author, with the sole exception of the old "Thousand Nights," which I believe he has demonstrated to be the prototype, in a remote degree, of the "Thousand and One." To cite the words of the Preface on the question of the original of the work as it is known to us—"I have shewn it to be my opinion that all the complete copies of 'The Thousand and One Nights' now known are in the main derived, though not immediately, from one original; and I hold the same opinion with respect to every fragment containing the commencement of the work;" "not regarding the work as wholly original, nor as the first of its kind; for many of the tales which it contains are doubtless of different and early origins; and I think that its general plan is probably borrowed from a much older production, bearing the same title of 'The Thousand and One Nights,' [or 'The Thousand Nights,'] a translation of a Persian work having a corresponding title, namely 'Hezár Afsáneh.'... One thing is certain—that 'The Thousand and One Nights,' [or 'The Thousand Nights,'] translated from the Persian was much older than the work now known by that title, and also extremely different from the latter."
When these facts are considered in reference to each other, thexvii date assigned, in the Review, to the composition of the work cannot reasonably be regarded as far from the truth. It is in Egypt, and especially in the Memlook court, that we must look to find the people, the manners, and the habits of thought, of "The Arabian Nights;" while the style of the language in which they are written is that which we might expect from an Egyptian of those times, who, unskilled in the classical Arabic, yet endeavouring to imitate it, was doubtless more generally intelligible then than he is now to the modern Egyptians. This assumption of the old language, I may remark, is, and always has been, characteristic of all learned Arabs, be they Egyptians or natives of other Arabian countries (for such Egypt truly is); but no other instance exists of a work of fiction in which the attempt fails so singularly in affecting the classical, or retaining the modern tongue; while all other Arabic tales are certainly composed in either the one or the other. The modern Egyptian romances are mostly written in the colloquial dialect of every-day life; but those which are of older date are not modernized, as some have supposed, against all reason, "The Thousand and One Nights" to be: such an alteration would be without a parallel in Arabic literature, as Mr. Lane proves in the Review in a way to relieve me of the necessity of further alluding here to this particular question. "The Thousand and One Nights" exhibit a style which would be unfamiliar to the audience of the reciter of romances, without attaining to the classical diction: and the conclusion is forced on us that the work exhibits the language of a by-gone generation, which (taking into consideration the other indications of its age and country), is, it can scarcely be disputed, that of the later period of the Memlook rulers of Egypt, before the Turkish conquest of that country. In the words of Mr. Lane's Preface:—"Most of the tales which it contains are doubtless of an older origin, and many of them founded upon very old traditions and legends; but all these traditions or legends were evidently remodelled so as to become pictures of the state of manners which existed among the Arabs, and especially among those of Egypt, at the period here mentioned;xviii and I think that the composer of the work, or each of the composers, if one commenced and another completed it, was an Egyptian."
But a more popular subject than its obscure origin is the literary merit of this work. The rare fascination of these old Arab stories, their supernatural romance, excessive love, quaint philosophy, and grotesque humour, have, since the days of Galland, secured to them more readers than any other profane work. The translation of Galland, with all its lameness, puerility, and indecency, gained for them a hold which has never been relaxed; and it only required the appearance of a scholarlike and readable translation, freed from these defects, to make them generally accepted in English families. The fashion of travelling in the East has not a little added to the desire for a standard and annotated edition of a work unique, even in those lands of genii and adventure, in its remarkable portrayal of Eastern character, life, and, when closely translated, idiom. The humour of the book, now broad, now subtle, (who does not delight in Káfoor and his "half lie?") renders the comic stories generally superior to the romantic; but the pathos perhaps excels every other beauty. The story of Shems-en-Nahár is remarkable for this characteristic; and that of 'Azeez and 'Azeezeh (first published in this translation), surpasses in delicate tenderness any Arab tale with which we are acquainted.
Of the critical value of Mr. Lane's translation I ought scarcely to speak. Yet I may observe that students of Arabic make it a text-book in reading the original; while the English reader not uncommonly forgets that it is a translation, and detects not the literal accuracy of its rendering of an unfamiliar, or unknown, language.
I have adverted to the system adopted in transcribing foreign words, and I now conclude these preliminary remarks (intended only to render the learned Review easier of perusal to the general reader, and to smooth his first steps in a strange land), by quoting, with some slight improvements by Mr. Lane, the explanation of that system given in the preface to the first edition.xix
"In writing Arabic and other Oriental words in the present work, I have employed a system congenial with our language, and of the most simple kind; and to this system I adhere in every case, for the sake of uniformity as well as truth.5 Some persons have objected to my writing in this manner a few familiar words which are found in our dictionaries; but they will excuse me for remarking that general usage is not altogether accordant with their opinion. Almost every author, I believe, now writes 'Koran,' or 'Kurán,' and 'Pasha,' or 'Pacha,' for our dictionary-words 'Alcoran' and 'Bashaw;' and most of our best authors on Arabian History, of late, have written 'Khalif' for 'Caliph.' In a work relating to a people who pronounce the Arabic w as v, I should write 'Vezeer' for the Arabic word 'Wezeer;' but to do so when the subject is Arabian, I consider inexpedient: and in this opinion I am upheld by a great majority of literary and other friends whom I have consulted on the subject, in the proportion of five to one. I may add that Dr. Johnson has written in his Dictionary, 'Vizier [properly Wazir];' and if we express the Arabic vowels by their Italian equivalents, it is properly 'Wazír' or 'Wezír.'—The system which I here employ requires but little explanation; the general reader may be directed to pronounce
a as in our word 'beggar:'6 é as in 'there:'
á as in 'father:'7 ee as in 'bee:'
e as in 'bed:' ei as our word 'eye:'
xxey as in 'they:' oo as in 'boot:'
i as in 'bid:' ow as in 'down:'
o as in 'obey' (short): and
ó as in 'bone:' u as in 'bull.'
The letter y is to be pronounced as in 'you' and 'lawyer:' never as in 'by.'
An apostrophe, when immediately preceding or following a vowel, I employ to denote the place of a letter which has no equivalent in our alphabet; it has a guttural sound like that which is heard in the bleating of sheep: ? (with a dot beneath) represents the same sound at the end of a syllable, when it is more forcibly pronounced.
Each of the consonants distinguished by a dot beneath has a peculiarly hard sound.
Having avoided as much as possible making use of accents, I must request the reader to bear in mind that a single vowel, when not marked with an accent, is always short; and that a double vowel or diphthong at the end of a word, when not so marked, is not accented ('Welee,' for instance, being pronounced 'W?'lee'): also, that the acute accent does not always denote the principal or only emphasis ('Hároon' being pronounced 'Hároón'); that a vowel with a grave accent (only occurring at the end of a word), is not emphasized, though it is long; and that dh, gh, kh, sh, and th, when not divided by a hyphen, represent, each, a single Arabic letter."8
I have only to add one more extract from Mr. Lane's Preface.
"Many of the engravings which are so numerously interspersed in this work will considerably assist to explain both the Text and xxithe Notes; and to insure their accuracy, to the utmost of my ability, I have supplied the artist with modern dresses, and with other requisite materials. Thus he has been enabled to make his designs agree more nearly with the costumes &c. of the times which the tales generally illustrate than they would if he trusted alone to the imperfect descriptions which I have found in Arabic works.9 Except in a few cases, when I had given him such directions as I deemed necessary, his original designs have been submitted to me; and in suggesting any corrections, I have, as much as possible, avoided fettering his imagination, which needs no eulogy from me. He has acquired a general notion of Arabian architecture from the great work of Murphy on the Arabian remains in Spain, and from the splendid and accurate work on the Alhambra by Messrs. Goury and Jones; and through the kindness of my friend Mr. Hay, of Linplum, he has been allowed to make a similar use of a very accurate and very beautiful collection of drawings of a great number of the finest specimens of Arabian architecture in and around Cairo, executed by M. Pascal Coste, and now the property of Mr. Hay.10 He has also consulted a number of Oriental drawings, and various other sources. My acknowledgments to other persons I have expressed in several of the Notes.
"The portion which is comprised in the first volume of this translation, terminates with part of the hundred and thirty-seventh Night: it is therefore necessary to remark,—first, that there is less to omit in the early part of the original work than in the later:—secondly, that the Nights in the early part are xxiigenerally much longer than in the subsequent portion; the first hundred Nights (without the Introduction) comprising 213 pages in the Cairo edition of the original work; the second hundred, 149 pages; the third, 107; the fourth, 106; the fifth, 94:11—thirdly, that a similar observation applies to the Notes which are inserted in my translation; those appended to the early tales being necessarily much more copious than the others."