دانشگاه اصفهان متن شناسی ادب فارسی 2476-3268 18 2 2026 06 22 The Necessity for the Introduction of a New Critical Edition of ʿAwfī’s Lubāb al-Albāb ضرورت و معرفی تصحیح تازۀ تذکرۀ لباب‌الالباب عوفی 83 99 30235 10.22108/rpll.2026.147434.2526 FA هادی بیدکی استادیار گروه زبان و ادبیات فارسی، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و زبان‌های خارجی، دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، ایران Journal Article 2025 11 15 Abstract Lubāb al-Albāb, written by Muḥammad ʿAwfī around 618 AH, is the earliest extant Persian tazkira in the history of Persian literature. Despite its fundamental importance, the text has never been edited and published according to modern principles of critical scholarship. The first printed edition, prepared by Edward G. Browne, was not based on a rigorous editorial methodology, and all subsequent editions have relied almost entirely on Browne’s text. As a result, numerous textual errors, omissions, and conjectural interventions have been transmitted from manuscript to print and from one edition to another. In many cases, incorrect manuscript readings entered the printed tradition; in others, earlier editors misread correct manuscript forms or introduced personal conjectures without sufficient justification or reference to auxiliary sources. These practices have led the received text of Lubāb al-Albāb to diverge significantly from what ʿAwfī originally wrote. The present study argues for the necessity of a new critical edition based primarily on the newly identified Lucknow manuscript, in systematic comparison with the Berlin and Manchester manuscripts. In addition, later tazkiras such as Bazm-ārāy and ʿArafāt al-ʿĀshiqīn, which contain extensive transcriptions from Lubāb al-Albāb, are employed as auxiliary witnesses for reconstructing corrupted or missing passages. Keywords: Lubab ul-Albab, ‘Awfi, Correction, Tazkira. Introduction Poetic tazkiras occupy a central position in the history of Persian literary historiography. A significant portion of what is known about classical Persian poets, their works, and their cultural contexts is derived from these biographical anthologies. Moreover, the millennium-long tradition of tazkira-writing reflects the vitality of a literary genre that maintained a continuous dialogue with Persian literary culture and its producers. Among all Persian tazkiras, Lubāb al-Albāb holds a unique status as the earliest surviving example. Written in two volumes by Muḥammad ʿAwfī in 618 AH, it introduces 313 poets: 145 in the first volume and 168 in the second. The first volume focuses on poets for whom poetry was a secondary activity, whereas the second deals with professional poets who often possessed complete dīvāns. Although Lubāb al-Albāb has been printed at least five times and reprinted frequently, none of these editions can be considered a true critical edition. The earliest print was produced by Edward G. Browne in 1903–1906, followed by Saʿīd Nafīsī’s edition in 1335 SH. All later prints are essentially reproductions or hybrid combinations of these two editions, without direct recourse to manuscripts or transparent editorial principles. Materials and Methods The present study is based on a comparative analysis of the existing printed editions and the three known manuscripts of Lubāb al-Albāb, in conjunction with later tazkiras such as Bazm-ārāy and ʿArafāt al-ʿĀshiqīn, which function as partial transcriptions of ʿAwfī’s work. Selected textual samples from the printed editions were systematically compared with the newly discovered Lucknow manuscript and with secondary sources in order to identify inherited errors, omissions, distortions, and conjectural interventions. This method allows for an objective evaluation of the editorial practices of previous editors and demonstrates the necessity of a new critical edition. Research Findings At present, only three manuscripts of Lubāb al-Albāb are known to exist: Manuscript M.70.T (45671), Tagore Library, Lucknow University, India (microfilm no. 1414, Central Library of Tehran University); Manuscript Sprenger 318, National Library of Berlin; Manuscript 308, John Rylands Library, University of Manchester. Browne based his edition solely on the Berlin and Manchester manuscripts and had no access to the Lucknow copy. The newly discovered Lucknow manuscript now serves as the primary base of the present critical project, in systematic comparison with the other two manuscripts and relevant tazkiras. Browne’s editorial method is a mixture of eclectic and conjectural correction. He frequently supplied missing or doubtful readings through analogy and personal judgment, sometimes drawing on Majmaʿ al-Fuṣaḥāʾ by Riḍā-Qulī Khān Hidāyat. Large portions of his first volume rely exclusively on the Berlin manuscript, without collating the Manchester copy. Moreover, he failed to record variant readings, making it impossible to trace his deviations from the base manuscript. Nafīsī did not consult manuscripts at all and merely revised Browne’s edition, introducing additional conjectures based on his own literary taste and auxiliary sources. These interventions were not systematically documented, forcing readers to compare editions manually. The editions of Ṭāhā Ḥijāzī and ʿAlīzādeh represent uncritical compilations of previous prints. Their hybrid nature renders it impossible to distinguish between manuscript evidence and editorial conjecture, thus depriving researchers of a reliable textual basis. Discussion of Results and Conclusion Despite its foundational importance in Persian literary history, Lubāb al-Albāb has never received a scientifically sound critical edition. All previous editions suffer from methodological weaknesses, including uncontrolled eclecticism, analogical reconstruction, undocumented conjectures, and the absence of auxiliary witnesses. The necessity of a new critical edition can be summarized as follows: Numerous textual errors originating in the Manchester manuscript entered Browne’s edition and were subsequently transmitted to all later prints. Many passages in the manuscripts contain omissions and distortions that earlier editors failed to resolve effectively. Correct manuscript readings were frequently misread, particularly in Browne’s edition, and these errors became canonical in later prints. Browne introduced conjectural interventions without sufficient justification, and later editors compounded these interventions with further uncritical additions. None of the previous editors systematically used auxiliary sources such as Bazm-ārāy and ʿArafāt al-ʿĀshiqīn, despite their clear value for textual reconstruction. Browne incorporated marginal notes from the Manchester manuscript—often written by later hands—into the main text, thereby mistaking secondary material for ʿAwfī’s original composition. In light of these issues, a new critical edition based on the Lucknow manuscript and supported by comprehensive manuscript collation and auxiliary sources is not merely desirable but methodologically essential for restoring Lubāb al-Albāb to a form that approximates its original authorial state. لباب‌الالباب نخستین تذکرۀ موجود در تاریخ ادبیات فارسی است که محمد عوفی آن را در پیرامون سال 618ق تألیف کرده و با وجود اینکه چند بار چاپ و بازچاپ شده، متن آن هنوز به‌صورت علمی و انتقادی تصحیح و منتشر نشده است؛ به‌طوری‌که چاپ اول آن یعنی تصحیح ادوارد برون بر روش درستی از تصحیح استوار نیست و اساس چاپ‌های بعدی نیز فقط چاپ برون است؛ بنابراین، اشتباهات و نواقص متعدد هرکدام از چاپ‌ها تصحیح تازه و علمی آن را دوچندان می‌کند؛ زیرا هم برخی از ضبط‌های مغلوط نسخه‌ها به چاپ‌های قبلی نفوذ کرده است و هم نسخه‌ها افتادگی و ضبط‌های مخدوشی دارند که تصحیح قیاسی مصححان در مواجهه با آنها کارساز نبوده است. صاحبان چاپ‌های پیشین نیز گاه برخی از ضبط‌های درست نسخه‌ها را بد خوانده‌اند و گاه به‌جای استفاده از منابع کمکی، دخل و تصرفات ذوقی و حدسی خود یا حواشی ناموجه نسخه‌ها را به متن نفوذ داده‌اند. همۀ این موارد باعث شده متن لباب‌الالباب از آنچه عوفی نوشته است، دور شود؛ درعوض تصحیح ما براساس نسخۀ نویافتۀ لکنو و مقابلۀ آن با دو نسخۀ برلین و منچستر صورت گرفته است و در کنار این سه نسخه از تذکره‌ها- مثل بزم‌آرای و عرفات العاشقین که حکم رونویس لباب‌الالباب را دارند- و منابع فرعی دیگری هم برای ضبط‌های مغلوط و افتادگی‌های نسخه‌ها استفاده شده است.

https://rpll.ui.ac.ir/article_30235_bbb7b83263d5ffbc4ea11c96802d6ef5.pdf