Part VII

What Was the Reality?

The myth of the House of Wisdom as previously explained was the outcome of a wild exaggeration and maximalist approach. Meanwhile, the unavailability of detailed historical accounts and the scanty information at hand do not make it an easy task to draw an accurate picture of this ninth-century palace library.

The actual picture that emerges from careful examination of the available short references clearly tells us about the existence of an organized palace library during the reign of both Abbasid Caliphs Harun al-Rashid and his son al-Ma’mun. Two important surviving historical accounts related to them include many clues that assert certain aspects of the existence, function, and working manners of this library as well as shed light on how the two caliphs made use of their library. Here below is the full English translation of these accounts for the benefit of wider readership.

The first account relates to the prominent Arab philologist al-Asma’i (d. 828) who narrated:

It was the habit of the Imam Caliph Haroun al-Rashid, when he feels spirited and lively to call me to narrate to him the chronicles of past nations and bygone centuries. It happened that as I was narrating to him one night, he asked me “al-Asma’i, where are the former Kings and their sons?” I answered him by saying “Prince of the Faithful, they have gone to their destiny”. At this point the Caliph raised his hands towards the sky and said “O, Annihilator of Kings, have mercy on me when you join me to them”. Then he called Saleh the keeper of his prayer hall and told him “go to the director of the ‘House of Wisdom” and ask him to fetch the [book] “Siyar al-Muluk” [Biographies of Kings] and bring it to me.

The director brought the book. The caliph asked al-Asma’i to read from it, so he read to him six chapters from the book that night. At this point, the caliph told him to go to al-Buhturi (the Jurist Judge) to help him in writing the events of the epoch between Adam and Sam, the son of Noah”.¹

The second account that deserves attention is what al-Qayrawani (d. 1060) reports from the celebrated Arab prose writer al-Jahiz (d. 869) who quotes al-Hasan Ibn Sahl Ibn Nawbakht, by saying

al-Hasan ibn Sahl related to me that Caliph al-Ma’mun once asked: “Which of the books by Arabs is the noblest?” I said “al-Mubt’da’ [The Commencement]”. He said “No”, I said “Then, it’s the book of History”. He again said “No”. Then he paused and said that it is the book of the interpretation of the Qur’an, because the Qur’an is immaculate, and its interpretation is immaculate too. Then he asked “Which of the books by non-Arabs [al-’Ajam] is the noblest among them?” I cited many names [of books], but he said “the book of Jawadan Khired [Mortal Wisdom] is the noblest among them.” At this point he asked me for the catalogue of non-Arab books, but he did not find any mentions of that book in the catalogue. Then he said, “How come that the name of that book does not figure in the catalogue?” I said, “This is the book of Dhouban and I wrote part of it”. He said “Bring it to me quickly!” I asked a messenger to bring it and when the messenger returned, the Caliph was up for prayer. Seeing me coming back carrying the book, the Caliph stopped the prayer, took the book and started to read from it. Whenever he finishes reading a Chapter, he says “There is no God but God”.

Getting tired, he sat down and continued to read. I told him the prayer has a fixed time that elapses while reading has no fixed time. He answered me “you are right but I was afraid to be distracted from focusing on my prayers thinking in my heart about the delights of the content of this book. I find no remedy to distraction except by mentioning death”. Then he started to recite from the Koran “Verily, you are bound to die, and they are bound to die too” (Surat Az-Zumar No: 39 [The Throngs] Verse 30]. Then he put down the book, stood up and started to pray. Upon completing his prayer, he again took the book and resumed reading until he read it all. Then he asked me “Where is the rest of the book?”, I answered “It remained with Dhouban, who did not give it to me.”. At this point he told me “Covenant is a rope, one of its two ends is in the hand of God and the second end is in our hands; otherwise, I would have taken that book. This, by God, is the talk that counts, and not what we are uttering by our tongues in the apertures of our mouth”.²

These two accounts substantiate the existence of the library close to the dwellings of the caliph and show as well that its director was on duty in the time his services were needed even in late times of the day. Then they show that Harun al-Rashid and al-Ma’mun had their habits of reading, listening, and discussing books with their companions. The second report of al-Jahiz tells us for the first time that there were catalogues of the library collection. They were known to al-Ma’mun and he asked for one of them that was the catalogue of non-Arab (Ajam) books. This implies that there was another catalogue of Arab books, and perhaps of Greek books and probably other catalogues.

There are two surviving accounts from the tenth century that show how large libraries and collections were organized. These accounts support our opinion on the content of the Abbasid palace library. The first account belongs to the Buyid ruler of Fars, ‘Adud al-Dawla (d. 977) who set up a splendid library in his palace in Shiraz described by al-Muqaddisi (d. 991):

There is a manager, a librarian and a supervisor from among the people of good repute in the town and there was not a book written up to that time, of all the various sciences, but happened to be there. It consists of a long oblong gallery in a large hall with rooms on every side. He attached to all the walls of the gallery and rooms bookcases six feet in height and three cubits long, made of wood and decorated … For every subject there are bookcases and catalogues in which are the names of the book.³

The second account related to the prominent philosopher, physician, and polymath scholar Avicenna (980–1037) who describes the library established by the Samanids in Bukhara which he used intensely:

a building with many rooms in each of which were chests of books opposite each other. In one room, there were books on Arabic language and poetry, in another jurisprudence and each room was similarly [dedicated] to a single science.⁴

As clearly described the big libraries had their collection of books well arranged and organized according to their subject and had catalogues to help their readers.

A The Origin of Book Collections

Acquiring books in the early Abbasid era should have been a demanding task for any librarian particularly before the advent of paper to the capital Baghdad. Nevertheless, acquiring books for the caliphal library would be more challenging where they were expected to collect these books from different sources all over. Besides the primary interests of the caliphs and scholars under their patronage, there were, for a decade after the founding of Baghdad as the new Abbasid capital, some members of their entourage who were undoubtedly behind the growing of this collection. In addition to the diversified sources mentioned above we should underline the introduction of paper manufacturing and using paper as a material for the production of books. The widespread adoption of paper manufacturing boosted the easy and cheap production of books.

The Ottoman bibliographer and polymath Katip Çelebi (d. 1657), in his universal bibliography Kashf al-Zunun and in reference to his predecessors, narrates that it was al-Mansur the second Abbasid Caliph who asked the Byzantine emperor to send him books and that the emperor sent him Euclid’s book and other books on mathematics.⁵

Primary sources at hand are explicit about the interest of both caliphs, Harun al-Rashid and his son al-Ma’mun, in locating Greek books inside their empire’s vast land or neighboring Byzantian Empire. Ibn Juljul and many others who followed him like Ibn al-Qifti and Ibn Abi Useybia narrated that Harun al-Rashid ordered Yuhanna Ibn Masawayh to translate the ancient medical books that were found in Ankara, Amuriye [Amorium], and Byzantine lands that became part of the Abbasid Empire.⁶

Notwithstanding the debate on the authenticity of this narrative and whether or not Ibn Masawayh started his career as translator during Harun al-Rashid or al-Ma’mun reigns, the substance of this narrative is historically correct. It is clear that Harun al-Rashid was interested in collecting ancient books to be recovered from Greek legacy.⁷

Despite the fact that the above-mentioned primary sources did not mention where the books collected from Ankara, Amorium, or elsewhere were deposited, it would be historically correct to say that they were added to the collection of palace library.

Al-Nadim, in his account on al-Ma’mun’s keen interest in collecting and translating books related to pre-Islamic sciences, narrates the following:

Between al-Ma’mun and the Byzantine emperor there was correspondence, for al-Ma’mun had sought aid opposing him. He wrote to the Byzantine emperor asking the permission to obtain a selection of old scientific (manuscripts) stored and treasured in the Byzantine country. After first refusing, he complied with this. Accordingly, al-Ma’mun sent forth a group of men among whom were al-Hajjaj, Ibn Matar, Ibn al-Batriq, Salm, Sahib (director) of Bayt al-Hikma and others besides them. He brought the books selected from what they had found. Upon bringing them to him, he ordered to translate, so they made the translation.⁸

In this paragraph, we can see a direct connection with the Bayt al-Hikma by mentioning the name of its director, Salm. Despite the fact that there is no explicit mention that the books were collected for the Bayt al-Hikma, it goes without saying that these books would have eventually been deposited there.

Ibn Nubata al-Masri (d. 1366) tells us that al-Ma’mun became aware of the existence of a library containing Greek philosophers’ works kept in Cyprus and that it was closed and not accessible. Al-Ma’mun kept good relations with the ruler of Cyprus and asked him to send this library. The ruler of Cyprus summoned his advisors and asked their opinion, and with one exception they all were against accepting al-Ma’mun’s request. The bishop who was in favor of sending these books was of the opinion that “these rational sciences, wherever they were introduced, they distempered and provoked disagreement among scholars”, so the narrative goes on that the ruler of Cyprus accepted the caliph’s request, and the books were sent.⁹

Ibn Nubata also narrates that al-Ma’mun put Sahl bin Harun in charge of the repository of wisdom (Khizanat al-hikma) where books of philosophers transferred from Cyprus were kept.

The rationale behind this story is kind of an antirational school of thinking, nonetheless it indicates that al-Ma’mun was after Greek books all over.

B Patronage Associated with the Library

One of the well-documented examples of al-Ma’mun’s patronage for scholars is the story of famous Arab grammarian Ibn al-Farra (d. 207/822) and his book al-Hudud. The report handed down to us by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (d. 1071) in his famed book on the history of Baghdad indicates that Ibn al-Farra, upon approaching al-Ma’mun, received instructions to write a book that would compile the principles of Arabic grammar. Al-Ma’mun also allocated a special place for him at the Domicile (al-dar) and delegated slave maids and servants to attend to all his needs so that he may not endure any yearnings or feelings of estrangement. There were people even to keep him informed of the prayer times, scribes to record what he dictated, and still others to meet his financials needs, until he finished compiling the book al-Hudud after two years, which al-Ma’mun ordered to be copied and kept in libraries (khaza’in), then he was allowed to mix with people.¹⁰ This account is an example of the ideal and comprehensive patronage and care to which any scholars aspires so that he may dedicate himself to authorship.

The text of al-Khatib al-Baghdadi includes two terms that are worthy of a particular pause, namely “al-dar” (domicile) and the “khaza’in” (repositories). The word “al dar” with the definite article is bound to refer to a particular place.¹¹ It is an abbreviation of Dar al Khilafa (The caliph’s residence of Dar al-Ma’mun). This would mean that al-Ma’mun had allocated a special place for Ibn al-Farra in his own palace or its annexes. There is ample indication in the text also that al-Ma’mun provided him with all that one may require to dedicate oneself to scholarly work, along with servants, scribes, and caretakers, all of which cannot be housed together in the palace library. Once he was through with the book’s craft, the caliph made a point of having it reproduced in several copies to be kept in libraries. Despite this clear narrative, there is a tendency in contemporary writings to state that such scholarly activities were carried on within the House of Wisdom.¹² There are other examples in biographical sources that show the generous allocations made by the caliph to scholars covering their needs, providing them premises full of facilities and awarding them after completing their work. The nonexistent mention of the House of Wisdom in these accounts does not mean categorically the absence of an institutional involvement. Nevertheless, in order to confirm and to have a definite opinion on this subject and other activities related to the House of Wisdom, new sources should be explored. The unique example of the tutoring of the three brothers of Banu Musa in the House of Wisdom upon the instructions of al-Ma’mun (see Part III) stands as proof of a possibility of providing this source of education under the roof of the House of Wisdom.

C The Library and Greek Books

Dimitri Gutas in his aforementioned study touches upon this institution and its place in Abbasid cultural life; he rightly argues that due to limited historical information, it is wrong to envisage Bayt al-Hikma as “something grandiose or significant, hence a minimalist interpretation would fit the historical record better”. Meanwhile, he maintains that it was certainly not a center for the translation of Greek works into Arabic and the Greco-Arabic translation movement was completely unrelated to its other activities. Gutas built this assumption on the basis that Bayt al-Hikma was a library and, as an institution, it was part of the Sassanid administrative and bureaucratic state apparatus that was adapted under the early Abbasids around the concept of the “recovery” of the Sassanid imperial ideology.¹³

It is also true that Sassanid Persian customs were followed in the Abbasid Court ceremonies and government administration since Arabic traditions could not provide any relevant models. However, the well-known facts about the Persianate character of the Abbasid bureaucracy and the administrators of Bayt al-Hikma, who were, as we are aware, mainly of Persian origin, does not preclude the diversification of its activities. Our main source on Bayt al-Hikma has some clear evidences to the contrary. In his account on Ptolemy’s Almagest, al-Nadim provides us with an explicit example about the involvement of Bayt al-Hikma’s director in translating Greek books that was initiated by the Iranian vizier Yahya bin Khalid al-Barmaki. He reports that:

The first person to become interested in translating and issuing it (Ptolemy’s Almagest) in Arabic was Yahyâ Ibn Khâlid Ibn Barmak. A group of people explained it for him but as they did not understand it perfectly, he was not satisfied with it; so he called upon Abu Hassan and Salm, the director of Bayt al-Hikma, for explanation. They made sure [of its meaning] and persevered in making it accurate, after having summoned the best translators, tested their translation, and making sure of its good literary style and accuracy.¹⁴

To stress Bayt al-Hikma’s role on the subject of Greek books, it should be emphasized that Salm, in addition to his duties as the director, was a member of the delegation that was sent to Byzantium by al-Ma’mun to collect Greek books. His presence as a member of the delegation illustrates his personal as well as institutional engagement.

In the following paragraph, al-Nadim relates al-Ma’mun’s interest in this subject by narrating the caliph’s famous dream in which he saw Aristotle.

Al-Ma’mun saw in a dream the likeness of a man white in color, with a ruddy complexion, broad forehead, joined eyebrows, bald head, bloodshot eyes and good qualities sitting on his bed. Al-Ma’mun related “It was as though I was in front of him, filled with fear of him. Then I said, who are you?” He replied, “I am Aristotle.” Then I was delighted with him and said, “Oh sage, may I ask you a question?” He said, “Ask it.” Then I asked, “What is good?” He replied, “What is good in the law” I said “Then what next?” He replied “mind.” I said again “Then what is next?” He replied, “What is good with the What is good with the public.” I said, “Then what more?” He answered “More? There is no more.” According to another quotation: “I [al-Ma’mun] said “give me something more!” He [Aristotle] replied “Whosoever gives you advice about gold, let him be for you like gold; and for you is oneness [of Allah].”¹⁵

According to the al-Nadim,

this dream was one of the most definite reasons for the output of books. Between al-Ma’mun and the Byzantine emperor, there was correspondence, for al-Ma’mun had sought aid opposing him (perhaps literally it should be “had overpowered him”). Then he wrote to the Byzantine emperor asking his permission to obtain a selection of old scientific [manuscripts], stored and treasured in the Byzantine country. After first refusing, the emperor complied with this request. Accordingly, al-Ma’mun sent forth a group of men, among whom were al-Hajjaj Ibn Matar, Ibn al-Batriq, Salm, the director of the Bayt al-Hikma, and others besides them. They brought the books selected from among what they had found. Upon bringing them to him [al-Ma’mun], he ordered them to translate [the manuscripts] so that they made the translation.¹⁶

These above-mentioned quotations that acknowledge the involvement of Bayt al-Hikma’s directors both in collecting the books from Byzantium and Cyprus and being charged by their translation exemplifies the scope and diversity of their duties that also included dealing with different aspects of the Greek books. This in contrast to the comments made by D. Gutas that the library was not a place which stored, as part of its mission, Greek manuscripts.¹⁷ Though there is no explicit information in the primary sources at hand showing a direct connection between the translation movement as a whole and the assumption that Bayt al-Hikma was also a “translation center”, it may easily be said that Greek books were collected from various places under the personal attention and auspices of Abbasid Caliphs, specifically al-Mansur, Harun al-Rashid, and al-Ma’mun; they were copied, bound, and preserved at Bayt al-Hikma, while only part of them would have been translated there. As explained in detail in Part III, the translations made from different languages did not have to be in a specific place as it was the case with other compilations and writings, it could be anywhere that provided the facility for scholarly working.

The accounts mentioned above show that the director’s supervision of the translation of Ptolemy’s Almagest was made under the patronage of Khalid bin Yahya, the Persian vizier of Harun al-Rashid who came from the famous Barmakid family. It clearly displays the director’s active participation in the delegation that went to Byzantium during al-Ma’mun’s reign. It is also a well-established fact that Salm, the Director of Bayt al-Hikma, was personally involved in translating Persian books¹⁸ and we also need to mention that Sahl bin Harun was of Persian origin.

Stating that Bayt al-Hikma was an institution where some of the translations and compilations from Persian and Greek sources were made is correct statement. However, apart from these examples, it is not possible to come across any strong evidence proving that all translated or written books, especially those mentioned by al-Nadim, were written or translated in the House of Wisdom during this period.¹⁹ These baseless claims are put forward in some modern publications, examples of which were referred to in Part II. Though the majority of these books were translated or written under the auspices of and with the financial support of the caliphs and prominent statesmen and scholars, it may be surmised that authors or translators prepared them in their own working premises. It is possible that translation activities were carried out in an organized way and there are hints and references that suggest the possibility of their having a connection with Bayt al-Hikma. Al-Qifti in his biography of Hunayn Ibn Ishaq narrates that he sat down (qa’ada) among the translators to translate [Greek] books on wisdom to Syriac and Arabic.²⁰ The verb “qa’ada” in this context means that there was a place where these group of translators would sit and do translations. Undoubtedly, the House of Wisdom could be an appropriate place for such activities.

D Abbasid Caliphal Library and Persian Royal Libraries

For the moment we do not have enough information on the impact of the Persian royal library model and tradition in the early Abbasid era. However, we have an unequaled, detailed text on this subject that belongs to the twelfth century, surviving in a manuscript copied in 630/1232, that furnishes us with fascinating details.

Contrary to the very brief remarks and passing references in Hamza al-Isfahani’s book Kitab al-Amthal al-Sadira ‘an Buyut al-shi’r regarding the Persian royal libraries, a book of royal deportments attributed to Abu’l Hasan Ali bin Razin (c. twelfth century) devotes a whole chapter to the palace library and the functions of its librarian in the service of the king.²¹ The author states that in preparing the book, he benefited from Buzurgmihr’s and Muhammed bin al-Haris al-Tha’labi’s (d. 864) books on the subject of Ahlâq al-Muluk.²² It is clear that he made a synthesis of the Persian and Arabic traditions. The Berlin manuscript has an unequalled chapter titled The King’s Study of the History of the Past Kings and of Other Sciences (Nazar al-Malik fi al-Siyasa wa ghayriha min al-’ulum). Here the kind of books that should be read by the king are outlined; also, there are notes on how he should read and how should the director (Sahib) of the palace library, which he calls Bayt al-Hikma, serve the king.²³ This detailed account relates the fascinating protocol procedures, indicating how the director (Sahib) of the palace library should submit the book to the king and repeatedly advises that no one, including the members of his own family, should have information about the kind of books, even a verse of the Qur’an, read by the king. The detailed account on matters relating to the way a book ought to be prepared and submitted to the King are meticulously depicted. This chapter, unlike the others, does not include the name of any Persian or Arab kings that the author refers elsewhere.²⁴ He does not quote here any specific historical account or anecdote as he frequently does in the rest of the book where he narrates events related to some of the Sassanian kings and Arab caliphs starting from Mu’awiyya, the founder of the Umayyad dynasty to the tenth Abbasid Caliph al-Wathiq (r. 842–848).

The author’s repetitive, detailed account of the secrecy and discretion about the king’s reading and his prudence in discussing matters related to religion and philosophical matters in his court might be better understood in light of what al-Ma’mun created with his open and straightforward style by pursuing his intellectual interests and siding with the viewpoint of the Mu’tazila on the issue of the Quran’s createdness. As the text of this chapter does not lend itself to any exclusive “Persian” context and the author does not refer to the origin of the term Bayt al-Hikma as an appellation for the royal library, it is hard to sustain that this institute was mainly of Persian origin and the name was the translation of its unmentioned Persian equivalent. It is evident that the author is using an already established expression. It could also be inferred that since references to the Abbasid Caliphs do not go beyond al-Wathiq, the predecessor of al-Mutawakkil who abandoned the oppressive policy of al-Ma’mun, it could be argued that this book was written either during the reign of al-Wathiq or shortly after his death, hence the remarks concerning the secrecy about the books read by the caliph and the discussions held with his courtiers on religious and philosophical subjects. This must be a reaction to the great controversy and his disapproval of al-Ma’mun’s frank and open approach to such matters. It is more sensible to consider that this secrecy and prudence is more in line with the growing opposition to the mihna (ordeal) created by al-Ma’mun and abandoned around 850 by al-Wathiq’s successor al-Mutawakkil.

Notes

1. Quated by Jawad Ali, “Mawarid ta’rikh al-Tabari”, Majallat al-Maj’ma al-Ilmi al-Iraqi, Vol. 2, 1951, pp. 142, 143.

2. Abu Ishaq Ibrahim bin Ali al-Husayn al-Qayrewani, Zeyl Zahr el-Adab, edited by Mohammed Ali al-Bijawi, Cairo, Vol. 1, pp. 77, 78.

3. Al-Muqaddisi, The Best Divisions of Knowledge of the Regions, Ahsan al-Taqasim fi Marifat al-Aqalim, Garnet Publishing, 2000, p. 395. (Quoted by Amira K. Bennison, The Great Caliph: The Golden Age of the Abbasid Empire, Tauris, 2009, p. 180.)

4. William Gohlman, The Life of Ibn Sina: A Critical Edition and Annotated Translation, Albany State University of New York Press, 1974, pp. 36, 37.

5. Katip Çelebi, Kashf al-Zunun, edited by E. Ihsanoglu, B.A. Marouf, London, al-Furqan Foundation, 2021, Vol. 3, p. 412.

6. See Ibn Juljul, 1955, p. 65; Ibn Al-Qifti, 1903, p. 380; Ibn Abi Usaybia, 1965, p. 246.

7. For questioning Ibn Juljul above mentioned account see comments of Fuad Sayid in page 65 about the non-matching dates of the conquest of these places with Abbasid reign. It is also clear that the dates of the conquest of these places do not correspond to what mentioned in the narrative.

8. AN II, pp. 143–147; for English translation see, Dodge, p. 584.

9. Ibn Nubate al-Masri, Sarh al-’uyun fi Qasidat Ibn Zaydun, edited by Abu al-Fadl Ibrahim, Cairo, 1964, p. 242.

10. This story was reported by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, al-Hafedh Abubakr Ahmed, The History of Baghdad or The City of Peace, Cairo, 1931, Vol. 14, pp. 149, 150; Yaqut al-Hamawi, Mu’jam al-Udaba, Vol. 19, Cairo, Dar al-Ma’mun, pp. 11, 12; Ibn Khalkan, Shamsuddin Abu al-Abbas, Wafiyatul A’yan Wa Anba’ Abna’u Zaman, edited by Ihsan Abbas, Beirut, 1969, Vol. 6, p. 177. The period over which Ibn al-Farra authored the book al-Hudud is said to be “several years” in al-Baghdadi’s report, whereas Ibn Khalkan sets it at “two years” and it is the latter that we have considered as most likely.

11. In classic Arabic “Dar” means a house, mansion house of large size, comprising a court or a house comprising several sets of apartments and a court, a place of abode which comprises a building or buildings and court. See E.W. Lane, p. 931.

12. For example, see Abd al-Jabbar Naji, Bayt al-Hikma al Baghdadi, Baghdad, 2008, pp. 8, 59.

13. D. Gutas, pp. 54, 59

14. AN I, p. 327; B. Dodge, p. 639.

15. AN II, pp. 141–143; B. Dodge, pp. 583, 584.

16. Ibid.

17. D. Gutas, p. 54.

18. AN I, p. 134.

19. There are unjustified claims to this end in some newly published studies. See the strange lists in Attallah’s book, pp. 258–320.

20. Al-Qifti, pp. 171–177.

21. For a discussion of the book and its author and its relation to similar literature, see F. Rosenthal, “From Arabic Books and Manuscripts, XVI: As-Sarakhsi (?) on the Appropriate Behavior for Kings”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 115, 1995, pp. 105–109.

Also see Mohammed-Taqi Danishpazhouh, An annotated Bibliography on Government and Statecraft in Authority and Political Culture in Shi’ism, edited by S.A. Argomaud, Suny Press, 1988.

22. The author in his introduction writes this name as Haris al-Ta’ğlibi; however, in the rest of his book, he mentioned the correct name of Haris al-Tha’labi.

23. Berlin, Mss. Or. Oct. 2673 (copied on 630/1232). Abu’l Hasan Ali bin Razin, Adab al-Muluk, Beirut, Dar al-Tali’a wa al-nashr, 2001; based on this unique manuscript the text has been edited and published by Jalil al-Atiyya.

24. Abul’l-Hasan ‘Âli b. Razin, Kitabu Adab al-Muluk, Berlin Manuscript or. oct. 2673, ff.9a–14b; the published edition pp. 45–49