QUADERNI DI STUDI ARABI

NUOVA SERIE 10 2015

Islamic Sicily: Philological and Literary

Essays

edited by Mirella Cassarino

 ANIMAL FABLES IN THE SULWĀN AL-MUṬĀʿ BY IBN ẒAFAR
AL-ṢIQILLĪ

FRANCESCA BELLINO
(UNIVERSITY OF TURIN)



Ibn Ẓafar al-Ṣiqillī (1104-1170 or 1172)1 was one of the leading adab literati of
the twelfth century. He crossed the history of Norman Sicily (1091-1282), living
in a particularly challenging period in which, “as the epicenter of flourishing
culture, Sicily became a bridge of cultural transmission between the Muslim
world and Christian Europe”.2 In this intellectual milieu, Ibn Ẓafar wrote the
Sulwān al-muṭāʿ fī ʿudwān al-atbāʿ (Waters of Comfort or Consolation for the
Ruler during the Hostility of Subjects3), the second redaction of which was
prepared in Sicily. This work is usually considered particularly representative in
relation to the Arabic literature of Sicily, since Ibn Ẓafar was allegedly born there
and spent some considerable time there.4
In this article, I will examine a relatively little explored topic that concerns the
model of fictionality outlined in the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ. I will provide an analysis of
its contents, focusing on the significance that Ibn Ẓafar conferred on the animal
—————
1 An outline of Ibn Ẓafar’s biography is given by Umberto Rizzitano, s.v. “Ibn Ẓafar, Abū
ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad,” in EI2, New Edition; C. Edmund Bosworth, “Ibn Ẓafar al-
Ṣiqillī”, in Encyclopedia of Arabic Literature, London: Routledge, 1988, vol. 1, p. 383; al-
Ziriklī, al-Aʿlām, Bayrūt: Dār al-ʿIlm li-l-Malāyīn, 2002, vol. 6, pp. 230-231.
2 R. Hrair Dekmejian, Adel Fathy Thabit, “Machiavelli’s Arab Precursor: Ibn Zafar al-
Siqilli”, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 27 (2000), pp. 125-137, cit. p. 126.
3 The title has been translated in different ways. I refer to the two translations as given in
Solwan or, Waters of Comfort by Ibn Zafer a Sicilian Arab of the Twelfth Century. From the
original manuscript by Michele Amari, London: Bentley, 1852, and R. Hrair Dekmejian,
Joseph A. Kechichian, The Just Prince. A Manual of Leadership Including an Authoritative
English Translation of the Sulwan al-Mutaʿ fī ʿUdwan al-Atbaʿ (Consolation for the Ruler
during the Hostility of Subjects), London: Saqi, 2003.
4 Ibn Ẓafar has been studied as a representative author of the Arab-Sicilian literature by
Michele Amari, Storia dei Musulmani di Sicilia, vol. 3, Firenze: Le Monnier, 1872, pp.
714-735; Francesco Gabrieli, “Un secolo di studi arabo-siculi”, Studia islamica, 2 (1954),
pp. 89-102; Umberto Rizzitano, Storia e cultura nella Sicilia saracena, Palermo: Flaccovio,
1975, pp. 160, 284, 366, 434-435, 450; Iḥsān ʿAbbās, al-ʿArab fī Ṣiqilliyya: Dirāsa fī l-taʾrīḫ
wa-l-adab, Bayrūt: Dār al-Ṯaqāfa, 1975, p. 161.
QSA n.s. 10 (2015), pp. 103-122
© Istituto per l’Oriente C.A. Nallino, Roma
fables he composed on purpose in the style of the Kalīla wa-Dimna and on the
role of animals in the context of the advice for the prince.

The idiosyncrasy of Ibn Ẓafar: an erudite man of letters between East and West
Despite its importance, the figure of Ibn Ẓafar is rather marginalized in the
studies of Arabic literature. The reasons for this marginalization is to be probably
found in the life itself of Ibn Ẓafar, who, in an environment of political upheaval
and personal uncertainty, “wandered about the world, maintaining himself by his
writings”.5 Throughout his life, he moved between Sicily, Egypt, and Syria,
following each time the course of the political history of the places where he
stopped and stayed.6
Despite the many hardships he experienced, Ibn Ẓafar’s bibliography is
particularly rich and touches almost all the fields of the Islamic knowledge
required to a scholar of his time, ranging from exegesis to law, theology,
philosophy, philology and adab. Michele Amari, who translated the Sulwān al-
muṭāʿ in the mid-nineteenth century, was astonished by the extent of Ibn Ẓafar’s
erudition, since his bibliography seems “to have followed the order in which
learning developed itself amongst the Arabs”.7

The Sulwān al-muṭāʿ fī ʿudwān al-atbāʿ

The Sulwān al-muṭāʿ is a major work even when considered within Ibn Ẓafar’s
agenda as an adab author.8 Ibn Ẓafar spent much of his life commenting on al-
Ḥarīrī’s (d. 1122) works, providing explanations (intended for Siculo-Arabic
speakers too), which offer us the picture of a gifted scholar, skilled and expert in
Arabic language and philology. Consistently with this perspective, he conceived
the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ as a real adab work, in so far as the knowledge of language,
literature and history played a key-role thanks to a skillful mixture of each.

—————
5 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, p. 20.
6 Information on Ibn Ẓafar’s bibliography is given by Carl Brockelmann, Geschichte der
Arabischen Litteratur, Weimar: Felber, 1898, vol. 1, pp. 351-352; Id., Geschichte der
Arabischen Litteratur. Supplementbände, Leiden: Brill, 1937, vol. 1, pp. 595-596; Ali Rıza
Karabulut, Ahmet Turan Karabulut, Muʿǧam al-taʾrīḫ: al-turā al-islāmī fī maktabāt al-
ʿālam, Kayseri: Akabe Kitabevi, 2006, vol. 4, pp. 2872-2873.
7 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 39. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 43-51, translated a list of Ibn
Ẓafar’s works from a catalogue written in 1150 ca. annexed to Ms Paris, BnF, Suppl. 536.
Ibn Ẓafer, Sulwân al-Muṭâʿ ossiano Conforti Politici. Versione italiana di Michele Amari a
cura di Paolo Minganti, Palermo: Flaccovio, 1975, pp. XLI-XLVI, updated this list.
8 In this article, I will refer only to the following editions: Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān al-muṭāʿ fī
ʿudwān al-atbāʿ, Tūnis: Maṭbaʿat al-Dawla al-Tūnisiyya, 1862; Id., Sulwān al-muṭāʿ fī
ʿudwān al-atbāʿ, ed. by M.A. Damaǧ, Bayrūt: ʿIzz al-Dīn, 1995.
104
 Ibn Ẓafar arranged his work around a five-fold conceptual framework, i.e. trust
in God (tawfīḍ), fortitude (taʾassī), patience (ṣabr), contentment (riḍā), and self-
denial (zuhd), that framed narrative and non-narrative materials. Within the five
corresponding chapters,9 he offered remedial guidelines (sing. sulwāna, comfort,
consolation) from which the ruler derived specific strategies of governance.
Probably conditioned by his personal experiences, Ibn Ẓafar’s guidelines dealt
with the reversals of fortune facing the sovereign. Consistently, each of the five
10
concepts had its own action strategy that guided him in various situations: the
ruler has to trust in God and advance resolutely if the cause is just, or abandon it
if it is unjust; to hold to the course of action with fortitude and bravery until the
crisis is over; to persevere with patience, should the issue prove unfortunate; to
submit to God’s will; to give up the vanity of earthly power, should it prove to be
too heavy a burden. In practice, the ruler should avoid the use of absolute force at
least in a first step in his action strategies, and must meet a combination of
planning (tadbīr), artifice (ḥīla) and force (quwwa).

The text-history of the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ

In separate situations, Ibn Ẓafar prepared two redactions of the Sulwān al-
muṭāʿ that differed in their purposes.11
The first redaction was composed during Ibn Ẓafar’s first stay in Syria and was
dedicated to an unnamed ruler to be used facing an incipient revolutionary
situation.12 Most likely, the ruler in question was the governor of Damascus
Muǧīr al-Dīn Ābaq (d. 1169), who was expelled by Nūr al-Dīn al-Zanǧī in 1154.
The Preface covers a speculative part on the princedom and the conduct that
the ruler must hold towards his subjects. It also includes an explanation on the
choice of using animal fables and metaphorical language. In the light of this, it
appears that Ibn Ẓafar conceived the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ as a political treatise, by
writing it with the sophistication of an adab work.

—————
9 Mirella Cassarino, “Come rivolgersi all’autorità. I Conforti politici di Ibn Ẓafar il Siciliano”,
in Il potere della parola. La parola del potere. Tra Europa e mondo arabo-ottomano. Tra
Medioevo e età moderna, a cura di A. Ghersetti, Venezia: Filippi, 2008, pp. 26-45, in part.
29, has found an element of continuity with the Pañčatantra in the subdivision into five
parts.
10 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 124 and 144 (referring to the two Prefaces of the two
redactions); Kechichian and Dekmejian, The Just Prince, p. 72.
11 I used the term redaction (instead of Amari’s edition) referring to the Syrian and Sicilian
versions written by Ibn Ẓafar, thus considering his authorial intent.
12 Robert Irwin, “The Animal Beast Fables”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes,
55 (1992), pp. 36-50, in part. p. 41, stated that “it is more probable that Ibn Ẓafar wanted
to write a work of the mirror-for-princes type, without having a prince to write for, and so
invoked a fictitious one”.
105
 Ibn Ẓafar prepared a second redaction in 1159, upon his return to Sicily. This
time, the work was dedicated to the local emir Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn
Abī al-Qāsim.13 When he welcomed Ibn Ẓafar into his court, he was facing an
imminent political crisis. In this situation, the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ appeared to be yet
again a source of political guidance. This version shows significant differences
from the previous one in terms of style and content.14

The text-reception of the Sulwān al-Muṭāʿ

The Sulwān al-muṭāʿ has achieved notable popularity over the centuries. The
few existing specimens with miniatures display the target that this work had
among the Arab literati.15 When comparing the versions that have been
preserved, it appears that the Sicilian redaction had a wider reception.
Intermediate and mixed manuscript versions have been produced during its
transmission. There exist Persian and Ottoman Turkish translations as well as a
poetic version versified (naẓama) by Abū ʿAbd Allāh Tāǧ al-Dīn in 1396.16
In 1851, Michele Amari published an Italian translation of the Sulwān al-
17
muṭāʿ based on a hitherto unpublished Arabic edition, which, along with its
English version, brought Ibn Ẓafar’s work to the attention of scholars. Aiming to

—————
13 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 29-34, supposed that the said Abū al-Qāsim was the
guide of the Muslims in Sicily, who returned in the 1150s to re-establish Muslim rule over
Sicily and assume a leading position in the Norman government. Differently Adalgisa De
Simone, Splendori e misteri di Sicilia in un’opera di Ibn Qalāqis, Soveria Mannelli:
Rubbettino, 1996, p. 107, stated that it was about his father Abū ʿAbd Allāh Ḥammūd.
14 Along with Amari, Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 103, Ibn Ẓafar omitted “to mark the
distinction between his own narratives, apologues, and maxims, and those of other authors.
He also changes the arrangement of the parts, tastefully intermingling his own fables with
the historical romances of others, instead of placing them at the end of the latter. Then,
gradually diverging more and more from the Indian type, he deprives most of his animals
of their proper names, changes the species of same of them, and transfers a Mussulman
hypocrite to the Christians. Lastly, he suppresses several fragments of history, and one on
the lives of Christian saints, some fables, and several political reflections of great depth”.
15 See Rachel Arié, Miniatures hispano-musulmanes: Recherches sur un manuscrit arabe, Leiden:
Brill, 1969; Assadullah Souren Melikian-Chirvani, Sulwān al-muṭāʿ fī ʿudwān al-atbāʿ: A
Rediscovered Masterpiece of Arab Literature and Painting, Kuwayt: TRI publishing, 1985.
16 Ḥāǧǧī Ḫalīfa, Kašf al-ẓunūn ʿan asāmī al-kutub wa-l-funūn, Baġdād: Maktabat al-Muṯannā,
1941, vol. 2, col. 998, distinguished between a (supposedly complete) work and a
supplement ( ayl) consisting of two fascicles (fī kurrāsatayn). It is unclear whether this
information relates to the two redaction or rather to a real supplement.
17 Solwan el Motaʿ ossiano Conforti politici di Ibn Zafer Arabo siciliano del XII secolo. Versione
italiana di Michele Amari sul testo arabico inedito, non tradotto in alcuna lingua dell’Occi-
dente, Firenze: Le Monnier, 1851.
106
offer a complete text, Amari produced a synthesis of the two redactions.18 With
reference to the animal fables, he reintegrated all the material that Ibn Ẓafar had
expunged passing from the first to the second redaction and referred to many
more variants as documented in the manuscripts he used (Paris, Oxford, Leiden).
From 1861, the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ was published in Arabic. Only in 1995,
Muḥammad Aḥmad Damaǧ completed an accurate Arabic edition but only based
on manuscripts preserved in Hama, Aleppo, and Rabat. A version completely
devoid of animal stories, still based on the second redaction, circulated under the
title Kitāb al-Sulwānāt fī musāmarāt al-ḫulafāʾ wa-l-sādāt (Book of Consolations
in Nightly Conversations with Caliphs and Noblemen).19
The impact of Amari’s work has been equally important in the West. Thanks
to it, the scholar of political theory Gaetano Mosca drew parallels with
Machiavelli’s Prince, discerning in Ibn Ẓafar’s work “a Machiavelism more refined
than that of the Florentine Secretary”.20 This interpretation put the Sulwān al-
muṭāʿ at the center of further studies on Islamic political thought and its relations
with the European political tradition. R.H. Dekmejian, A.F. Thabit21 and J.A.
Kechichian returned to the theories of power and leadership outlined by Ibn Ẓafar
and Machiavelli, concluding that the former was a true Arab precursor of
Machiavelli.

The genre of the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ and its relation with the Kalīla wa-Dimna
Over the centuries, Arab biographers usually regarded the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ as
22
belonging to the genre of mirrors for princes. ā k pr zāda (d. 1561) classified
it among the works of muḥāḍarāt (dialogues).23 Ḥāǧǧī Ḫalīfa (or Kātib Çelebi, d.
—————
18 Amari translated from the second redaction, Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 105-106:
“prefixing to it, however, the prefaces to both editions; reinstating in their proper places
the choicest of the passages which had been expunged from the first, owing either to fear
or to religious scruple; retaining the fragments of those which I believe to have been
scarified to an improved style; and for the rest referring the reader to the notes, in which
same of them are inserted a full length”.
19 Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwānāt fī musāmarāt al-ḫulafāʾ wa-l-sādāt, ed. by Abū Nahlat Aḥmad Ibn ʿAbd
al-Maǧīd, al-Qāhira: A. arābzūnī, 1978; ed. by Ayman ʿAbd al- abbār al-Buḥayrī, al-
Qāhira: Dār al- fāq al-ʿArabiyya, 1999; al-Qāhira: Dār al- fāq al- adīda, 2001.
20 Gaetano Mosca, Histoire des Doctrines Politiques, Paris: Payot, 1936, p. 27.
21 See also ʿ dil Fatḥī Ṯābit, Fann uṣūl al-ḥukm ʿinda Ibn Ẓafar al-ʿArabī al-Ṣiqillī: al-sābiq
ʿalā al-Mīkāfallī al- ṭālī, al-Iskandariyya: Dār al- āmiʿa al- adīda li-l-Na r, 1998.
22 Victor Chauvin, Bibliographie des ouvrages arabes relatifs aux Arabes publiés dans l’Europe
chrétienne de 1810 à 1855, Liège: H. Vaillant-Carmanne, 1897, vol. 2, pp. 175-187, places
the Sulwān al-Muṭāʿ among Kalīla wa-Dimna’s “imitations ou analogues”.
23 ā k pr zāda, Miftāḥ al-saʿāda wa-miṣbāḥ al-siyāda fī mawḍūʿāt al-ʿulūm, Bayrūt: Dār al-
Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1985, vol. 1, pp. 214-215. Muḥammad Ṣiddīq Ḥasan, Abǧad al-ʿulūm,
ed. by Aḥmad Šams al-Dīn, Bayrūt: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1999, vol. 2, p. 399,
107
1657) stated that it was a work “in which there are rules of wisdom (qawānīn al-
ḥikma), strange historical tales of sultans (nawādir aḫbār al-salāṭīn) in the mouth
of birds and beasts (ʿalā lisān al-ṭuyūr wa-l-wuḥūš)”.24
The concomitant presence of animal fables and historical narratives is
undoubtedly one of the most peculiar, but problematic, characteristics of this
work. In this regard, it may be important to refer to the guiding principles
followed by Ibn Ẓafar who, in the Preface of the first redaction, stated:
I therefore proceeded to select from amongst the best and rarest of the writings of the
Arabs on the subject of moral philosophy, some narratives concerning Commanders of
the Faithful, and other yet more ancient monarchs. I polished up the rough gold of
these narratives, using my utmost diligence to make their meaning plain. I inserted here
and there, as in a nest, philosophical maxims, both maidens and spouses; and I have
united with them certain fabulous personages, into whom I have breathed the breath of
those lofty spirits, robed their persons in the mantle of regal bearing, bound their
temples with the garland of lofty thoughts, and suspended from their shoulders the
sword of Arabian or foreign domination. I have opened every chapter with a few verses
from the Koran, and some traditions of the elect Prophet Mahomet, whom may God
bless with praise and worship: and lastly, I have placed it in gardens for the delight of the
25
heart and ears, and weapons for combat against faults of habit or of character.
These hints evidence a plain authorial role on the part of Ibn Ẓafar, who included
in his own writing almost all the stories adapting the historical characters to the
animal world and fitting roles and morals into an allegorical framework. In this
transfer, the Kalīla wa-Dimna has certainly been a model. However, Ibn Ẓafar did
not quote verbatim from it. As Yavari remarked, Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ’s work served
writers to “put their advice in the mouths of animals, for animals were wise, and
by doing so, shielded their work from criticism and increased the efficacy of their
counsel”.26
If the presence of animal fables is not a decisive feature in defining the genre
to which the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ belongs,27 on the other hand it provides an element
of intertextuality that, in any case, relates Ibn Ẓafar’s work to others similar in
—————
specified that it belonged to the genre of the nightly conversations of the kings (ʿilm
musāmarat al-mulūk).
24 Ḥāǧǧī Ḫalīfa, Kašf al-ẓunūn, vol. 2, p. 998.
25 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 123-124. All the Arabic editions that I have consulted
omit this part that apparently is found only in manuscripts.
26 Neguin Yavari, Advice for the Sultan. Prophetic Voices and Secular Politics in Medieval Islam,
London: Hurst & Company, 2014, p. 59.
27 M.V. McDonald, “Animal-books as a genre in Arabic Literature”, Bulletin of the British
Society of Middle Eastern Studies, 15 (1988), pp. 3-10, and Irwin, “Arabic Beast Fable”, are
the two major attempts to identify a genre of animal-books in Arabic and trace the
development of the Arabic beast fable.
108
purpose, content and style. Some centuries later, in his Fākihat al-ḫulafāʾ wa-
mufākahat al-ẓurafāʾ (The Fruits of the Caliphs and the Banter of the Witty), Ibn
ʿArab āh (d. 1450) mixed historical narratives with animal fables and used fictive
narrative elements that provided a sort of alienated description of reality,28 by
29
representing human society in animals’ guise.
This issue is anything but simple and the topics under discussion are varied:
they relate to the function of animal fable in adab works,30 but they also concern
models of fiction and fictionality in the Arabic literature.

Ibn Ẓafar’s attempts to legitimize fiction through animal fables

Juxtaposing different types of narratives, Ibn Ẓafar introduced into his work a
sophisticated device of cross-references and frames, which allowed him to switch
from the historical to the fictional plan seamlessly. By means of this device, he
adopted a rather new model of fictionality that differed both from that of the
earlier Kalīla wa-Dimna and from the coeval Maqāmāt.31
In the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ, the pieces of exemplary fiction (represented by stories
with talking and acting animals) transpose into the allegorical dimension rules,
roles and behaviors pertaining to a few distinguished historical characters. The
animal fables stigmatize and amplify only certain critical aspects of the historical
events these characters experienced in relation to the message that, from time to
time, Ibn Ẓafar aimed to convey. The fiction is, therefore, inextricably linked to
the historical narrative to the point that one is complementary to the other.
In this connection, the Preface of the first redaction of the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ
contains many points in which Ibn Ẓafar sought an excuse to introduce talking
animals and even inanimate objects as speakers. These passages recall the
reference, often apologetic, to the animal tales which is found in the prefaces of
the Maqāmāt and more generally in some prefaces of adab works that legitimize

—————
28 Stefan Leder, “Convention of fictional narration in learned literature”, in Story-telling in the
Framework of Non-Fictional Arabic Literature, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1998, pp. 34-60,
on Ibn ʿArab āh and Ibn Ẓafar pp. 51-52. Leder stressed the satirical purposes that can be
found in the representation of human society in animals’ guise.
29 Ibn ʿArab āh, Fākihat al-ḫulafāʾ wa-mufākahat al-ẓurafāʾ, al-Qāhira: Dār al- fāq, 2001, p.
29 quoted Ibn Ẓafar.
30 See Regula Forster, “Fabel und Exempel, Sprichwort und Gnome. Das Prozesskapitel von
‘Kalīla wa-Dimna’”, in Tradition des proverbes et des exempla dans l’Occident médiéval. Die
Tradition der Sprichwörter und exempla im Mittelalter, éd. par H.O. Bizzarri, M. Rohde,
Berlin-New York: De Gruyter, 2009, pp. 191-218; Ulrich Marzolph, s.v. “Fable”, in EI3.
31 Rina Drory, “The Introduction of the fictionality into Classical Arabic Literature”, in
Models and Contacts. Arabic Literature and its Impact on Medieval Jewish Culture, Leiden:
Brill, 2000, pp. 11-36, exp. p. 25. See also Philip F. Kennedy, “Preface”, On Fiction and
Adab in Medieval Arabic Literature, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2005, in part. pp. xviii-xxi.
109
the use of stories with talking animals.32 This parallel does not imply an equal
similarity of genre between the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ and the Maqāmāt, namely the
quintessential genre of fiction in Medieval Arabic literature. As Hämeen-Anttila
noted, “an open use of fictitious characters, division of the work into sulwānas,
and the strong emphasis on narrative, interspersed, though, with groups of
maxims, make the work somewhat resemble maqāmas, but its historical settings,
lack of fixed main characters and its non-comic tenor make it fall clearly outside
33
the genre”.
Ibn Ẓafar considered lawful the presence of inanimate objects as well as the use
of allegorical language and animal fables. Indeed, as he himself declared:
He [Ibn Ẓafar] used this language metaphorically, because having called to mind these
philosophical admonitions he was minded to cast them in the form of a narrative,
dividing them into questions and answers, attributing them to others, and putting
them in the mouth of the inanimate earth, because he perceived that the hearers
would thus be more forcibly driven to reflection, and more urgently moved to relate
34
the matter to others.
In the Preface of the first redaction, Ibn Ẓafar quoted two animal fables (i.e. The
Lion and the white, the red and the black Bulls, and The Hyena, the Fox and the
Crocodile), respectively on the authority of the Prophet’s cousin ʿAlī b. Abī ālib
and his companion Nuʿmān b. Ba īr. While not being drawn from Kalīla wa-
Dimna, both were well known in the Arabic tradition. Actually, Ibn Ẓafar’s
version of The Lion and three Bulls displays a variant of a quite famous Aesopic
35
fable. Referring to a well-known fable, the intent of Ibn Ẓafar was clearly to
reinforce the evidence of the legitimacy of fiction and probably in response to the
criticism coming from adherents of the old poetics.36
Ibn Ẓafar went a step further when he defended his choices relying on the
authority of the Qurʾān: “All Mussulmans, moreover, agree in admitting that the
marvellous narratives devised by gifted persons are a lawful imitation of the

—————
32 Seeger A. Bonebakker, “Nihil obstat in storytelling?”, in The Thousand and One Nights in
Arabic Literature and Society, ed. by R.G. Hovannisian, G. Sabagh, F. Malti-Douglas,
Cambridge: CUP, 1997, pp. 56-77, in part. pp. 58-59.
33 Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila, Maqama. A History of a Genre, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2002, p. 94.
34 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 127.
35 Chauvin, Bibliographie, vol. 2, p. 186, listed a number of sources (much later than Ibn
Ẓafar’s work) in which variants of this fable can be found.
36 Irwin, “The Animal Beast Fable”, p. 37, remarked: “Ibn Ẓafar’s energetic defence of the
legitimacy and worth specifically of the beast fable implies at the very least the existence of
critics who had picked this out as a reprehensible genre of literature. Of course, Ibn Ẓafar
did not see himself as transmitting ḫurāfāt, and neither did his even more famous
predecessor Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ”.

110
specimen contained in the Koran, in the parable of the Ant and the Gnat”.37 At
this regard, Ibn Ẓafar commented various verses from the Sūrat al-Naḥl (The
Bees, in part. 16:46, 68-70) and the Sūrat al-Naml (The Ants, in part. 27:18-26),
by concluding: “I declare that when the knowledge of facts, and the deductions to
be drawn therefrom, are unfolded before the intellect of Man, he makes himself
master of the various forms of eloquence, and from the sense of hearing to which
language is addressed proceeds to communicate by imagery with the sense of
38
sight; nor is there anything which is beyond his power to achieve”.
These words do not only endow fiction with legitimacy, but they affirm the
very possibility of the existence of talking animals, a topic at the center of another
important debate in the Arabic literature of which Ibn Ẓafar was certainly aware.39

The layers of framing in the Sulwān al-Muṭāʿ

Ibn Ẓafar introduces various (macro and inner) frames in the structure of the
Sulwān al-muṭāʿ, using a relatively sophisticated technique.
On the general level, the Preface of the first redaction of the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ
represents a sort of conceptual macro-frame aimed at outlining the various types
of material of the work as well as, on a theoretical level, its purpose. In terms of
typology, this part acts as an instructive and static frame. It is not narrative, like
the Kalīla wa-Dimna’s Preface, but rather a description of the author’s intents.
Ibn Ẓafar followed a very systematic order in the arrangement of the materials
that required an equally rigorous method and an articulated structure. In this
40
order, various layers of framing can be identified. Interestingly, Ibn Ẓafar led the
transition from one layer to other, by changing the literary genre of the materials
he quoted, or reworked, or by changing the narrator. In this way, he did not
always used the technique of Chinese boxes (tales within tales) to move from layer
to layer, which is only the case when there is a narrator (either human or animal)
telling a story as additional example of what has previously been related.
When we look closely at the animal fables, the authorial role of Ibn Ẓafar is
even greater. When passing from one layer to another, it is evident that the
animal fables can not be separated from the historical narratives. They represent
—————
37 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 131.
38 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 136-137.
39 On this topic, see Antonella Ghersetti, “Des Animaux parlants. Modèles littéraires
contraintes idéologiques”, The Arabist. Budapest Studies in Arabic, 32 (2013), pp. 1-32. The
issue is discussed also by Egle Lauzi, Il destino degli animali. Aspetti e tradizioni culturali
araba e occidentale nel Medio Evo, Firenze: Sismel – Ed. del Galluzzo, 2012, pp. 52-56.
40 Barry Taylor, “Frames Eastern and Western”, in D’Orient en Occident. Les recueils de fables
enchâssés avant les Mille et une Nuits de Galland (Barlaam et Josapht, Calila et Dimna,
Disciplina clericalis, Roman des Sept Sages), éd. par M. Uhlig et Y. Foehr-Janssens,
Turnhout, 2014, pp. 23-40, in part. p. 28.
111
the hinge of this complex device, since they are put in the mouth of the narrator
in order to admonish the listener in the previous framing narrative. In this way,
Ibn Ẓafar regarded animal fables as a fundamental component of his discourse41 by
interlinking with one another narrators and the stories they narrate.

The telescopic structure of the Sulwān al-mutāʿ and the function of animal fables
Michele Amari described the layers of framing by using the simile of the
telescope whose tubes are interlinked with one another. A short presentation of
the stories in the first chapter provides an example of this mechanism.
The first layer of framing relates to the word-frame trust in God (sulwānat al-
tafwīḍ).42 This part includes verses of the Qurʾān and quotations from Qurʾānic
commentaries, a Qurʾānic narrative on the Pharaoh and his Kingsman, a tradition
concerning Muḥammad (ḥadī ) and philosophical maxims, both in prose and
verse, concerning trust in God (asǧāʿ wa-abyāt ḥikmiyya fī al-tafwīḍ).
The second layer points to a fair garden and excellent area (rawḍa rāʾiqa wa-
riyāḍa fāʾiqa).43 It embraces two historical narratives about the Umayyad caliphs
al-Walīd ibn Yazīd (d. 744) (Ḥikāyat ʿaṣyān Yazīd al-nāqiṣ wa-tamarrudihi ʿalā al-
Walīd ibn Yazīd) and ʿAbd al-Malik (d. 705) (Ḥikāyat qitāl ʿAbd al-Malik ibn
Marwān wa-ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Zubayr) narrated one inside the other.
The third layer refers to the animal fables. On this level, the differences
between the first and second redactions are most noticeable. Only in the first
redaction, the fable of The Two Foxes and the Serpent (Ḥikāyat ẓālim ma-
mufawwiḍ wa-l-ḥayya) frames a second fable of The Peacock and the Cock, which
was, indeed, eliminated in the second redaction. This third layer, in turn, contains
a further fourth layer, enclosing the story of The Two Viziers that is narrated as
advice for the prince on the model of the previous animal fable.
The final part of the chapter seals all the layers, by returning the narrative on
the historical level. Here, Ibn Ẓafar added two further stories, narrated one inside
the other, which describe the struggles for supremacy between the caliphs al-
Amīn and al-Maʾmūn (Ḥikāyat ṣirāʿ al-Amīn wa-l-Maʾmūn ʿalā al-sulṭa) and

—————
41 Cassarino, “Come rivolgersi all’autorità”, pp. 35-42, has analyzed in depth this concept. She
distinguished between Ibn Ẓafar’s various uses of the word – i.e. the word of the power and
the power of the word (‘potere della parola e parola del potere’), the words of God
(Qurʾānic verses and ḥadī s), the secret words (‘parole segretate’) – and Ibn Ẓafar’s uses of
the discourse, i.e. the metaphorical garden in which he placed its stories.
42 I have indicated the Arabic titles (if any) as they are given in Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt
1995 and the corresponding English translation in Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari.
43 Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt 1995, p. 117; Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 124. According
to Hämeen-Anttila, Maqāma, p. 93, in the Sulwān al-Mutāʿ, “the basic narrative unit is a
rawḍa “garden” which, in its turn, contains emboxed narratives”.
112
between Ḫu nawāz, king of the Hephthalites, and Fayrūz, the King of Persia
(Ḥikāyat ḥurūb Aḫušnawār maʿa Fayrūz ibn Yazdaǧird).
Not all chapters are organized following this same pattern. For instance, in the
fourth chapter regarding contentment (Sulwānat al-riḍā), the animal fable of The
Bear and the little Monkey (Ḥikāyat al-dubb wa-l-qirda), that represents the third
layer of framing, includes a number of stories that, thematically, correspond to
the fourth layer (i.e. stories meant as advice for the ruler).
The bear and one of the monkeys narrate the following sequence of stories:
The Hermit and the Thief (Ḥikāyat al-rāhib wa-l-liṣṣ), The Miller and the Ass
(Ḥikāyat al-ṭaḥḥān wa-l-ḥimār wa-zawǧat al-sawʾ), The little Bird and the King’s
Daughter (Ḥikāyat al-amīra wa-l-ṭāʾir wa-l-masǧūn). These stories are told always
returning to the initial frame that outlines the conflict which has occurred firstly
between the monkeys and a bear and then between this same bear and a monkey
he has captured, thus linking the narrator and the story narrated. In this way, Ibn
Ẓafar allowed both parts to expose various possibilities of solution of the conflict
that, rather significantly, ends tragically. The bear kills the monkey when it tries
to escape to seek her freedom. At the end of this long fable, Ibn Ẓafar returned to
the second historical layer represented by the story of the Sassanid king Bahrām
Gūr (Ḥikāyat Yazaǧir al-a īm maʿa walī ʿahdihi Bahrām Ǧūr).

The animal fables in the Sulwān al-Mutāʿ as a corpus of analysis

Taking into consideration the two redactions of the Sulwān al-Muṭāʿ, twelve
stories in which animals act as main characters can be isolated. These stories
constitute a sort of corpus of animal tales that, in some respects, can be isolated
and studied as such. Except for a few, Ibn Ẓafar claimed to have composed the
majority of them.44
In most of the adab works, the animal fables are generally short, given as small
clusters, scattered into the narration without any systematic order. Often, it
comes to citations and reworkings from the Kalīla wa-Dimna or from the wide
corpus of Aesopic fables in Arabic. In the case of the Sulwān al-Muṭāʿ, exactly the
opposite happens. The animal fables are rather longer and interspersed with
maxims and sayings functional to the discourse of one or other of the animals.
Besides, they have a pivotal role in the mechanism of layers of framing outlined
previously. They turn out to be decisive in the use of the metaphorical language
by Ibn Ẓafar, who made use of them to represent human beings, their conflicts
and contradictions in total continuity with the historical facts he narrated.

—————
44 Ibn Ẓafar expressly declared to be the author of almost all the stories (at least in the first
redaction), except for the stories of The Hermit and the Thief, The Miller and the Ass, The
Little Bird and the King’s Daughter, and The Restoration of a Deserted Monastery.
113
 Between the various manuscript versions and the two redactions, there are
more or less significant variants in the style and, in some cases, there are
differences in the choice of the content as well as in the endings.45 These variants
meet two criteria. The first, which is authorial, consists of Ibn Ẓafar’s
programmatic changes, such as, for ex., the elimination of the two animal fables
from the Preface of the second redaction or that of The Donkey and the Crow
from the second chapter. The second, which is necessarily philological, consists of
variants typical of the dynamics of textual transmission over time with a more or
less consistent degree of changes made by copyists.

Typologies of animal fables outlined in the Sulwān al-Muṭāʿ

If we try to classify term the animals featured in the fables, Ibn Ẓafar’s focus is
respectively on 1) different animals with well-defined characteristics, 2) pairs of
animals of the same kind but with opposite moral characteristics, 3) groups of
animals. The stories that have protagonists both humans and animals could
constitute a type apart. Accordingly, different types of animal fables could be
determined.
The fable of The Horse and the Wild Boar, set within the second chapter on
fortitude, could fall into the first type.46 This fable has as its protagonists a horse
and a wild boar who act according to considerably different principles. The horse
seeks freedom from the servitude of his master trying to escape from him.
Through a long (almost Socratic) dialogue, the wild boar makes him aware of his
faults ( unūb) in that he is seeking a wild life to which he was not born and
which he would not be able to endure.47 In essence, freedom must come from a
state of awareness. Ibn Ẓafar’s focus here concerns two opposing viewpoints on
slavery and freedom.
The fable of The two Elephants, set in the fifth chapter on abnegation, involves
two animals of the same species but with opposite characteristics and represents a
second type. It is a tale of an educated elephant (al-fīl al-adīb) and a wild elephant
—————
45 Chauvin, Bibliographie, vol. 2, pp. 178-87, respectively nr. 35, 36, 3, 4, 10, 11, 15, 19, 21,
22, 32, gave a summary of all the animals fables. For some, he draws parallels with other
versions preserved in Arabic literature and other sources.
46 The frame inside which Ibn Ẓafar inserted this fable is very complex. The historical
narrative of the second historical layer of framing is a long story of espionage between the
Sasanian emperor Sāpūr Ḏū al-Aktāf and Caesar (al-qayṣar). It includes the story of an old
woman and ʿAyn Ahlihi, which, in turn, encloses the fable of The Horse and the Wild Boar.
Only in the first redaction does the latter contain a further, analogous, animal fable, whose
protagonists are a donkey and a crow.
47 Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt 1995, p. 187; Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, p. 6, listed all six
mistakes that the horse commits in his quest for freedom from the subjugation of his
master.
114
(al-fīl al-waḥšī). This time, the contrast is played between two animals of the
same kind, whose different qualities of departure represent their acceptance or
rejection of the condition of submission to man. The long debate between the
two makes the trained elephant aware of the importance of freedom. The message
is the reverse of the previous one. Here freedom from the servitude of man is the
awareness that “if the meaning of slavery (ʿubūdiyya) is to serve others, and to
have need of them, then these three are indeed slaves – a king, a lover, and one
who has received a benefit; for they are all three in captivity, both outwardly and
inwardly (al-ʿubūdiyya ʿalā ẓāhirihim wa-bāṭinihim).”48
The groups of animals represent the third type. The rats and “a numerous
tribe of monkeys are respectively featured in the initial part of the fables of The
Rat and the Gerboa and in The Bear and the little Monkey.49 The two groups
represent an initial state of disorder and chaos. In the development of the story,
Ibn Ẓafar shifts the focus to single individuals, which enables him to resume the
representation of animals with opposite characteristics.
The last, but different, type is represented by the stories featuring both
animals and human beings. The story of The Miller and the Ass is the most
significant example. The interest of this story comes, undoubtedly, from the fact
that it was included in the Arabian Nights and in the One Hundred and One
50
Nights. The role of the donkey is particularly significant, since it is twofold. It
helps the miller to find the place where his wife has been thrown by a neighbor
with whom she had betrayed him and, accordingly, it brings the miller to the
awareness of having lost everything (the treasure that he had given to his wife
first and also his wife). Notwithstanding its role and the importance, the donkey
suffers the same destiny of the woman. The miller kills him and the finale is,
once again, tragic. The man, indeed, deeply repents of his act and kills himself.
In the representation of the animal kingdom, Ibn Ẓafar is quite realistic, since
he does not refer to any imaginary situation nor fantastic animal. On the contrary,
the animals mentioned are relatively common, being the following: ant, hoopoe,
frog, bull, hyena, fox, land crocodile, serpent, lion, peacock, cock, horse, wild
boar, gazelle, antelope, rat, gerbil, bear, monkey, ass, little bird, and elephant.
According to a rather widespread tradition in Arabic literature, certain animals
have nicknames or proper names that indicate their moral or physical

—————
48 Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt 1995, p. 314; Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, p. 208.
49 Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt 1995, p. 226; Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, p. 116.
50 See Chauvin, Bibliographie, vol. 2, p. 183; “Miller and His Wife”, in The Arabian Nights
Encyclopedia, ed. by Ulrich Marzolph and Richard van Leeuwen, Santa Barbara-Denver-
Oxford: ABC CLIO, 2004, vol. 1, p. 303. An interesting analysis is made by Aboubakr
Chraïbi, Contes nouveaux des 1001 Nuits. Étude du manuscrit Reinhardt, Paris: Maison-
neuve, 1996, pp. 96-97.
115
characteristics.51 In the fable of The Two Foxes, the two foxes are respectively
called Ẓālim and Mufawwiḍ. As I indicate in the next section, these nicknames
are significant both in relation to the general theme that the fable develops and in
relation to the world-frame in so far as they represent two (opposing) attitudes. It
must be said that, between the first and second redaction, Ibn Ẓafar changed
precisely the proper names of the animals.

Ibn Ẓafar’s method of treating his subject

In his analysis of the contents of the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ, Amari observed, “If we
now proceed to consider our author’s method of treating his subject, we shall
perceive it to be at once synthetic and analytic”.52 Amari distinguished between a
synthetic portion (i.e. the non-narrative materials that Ibn Ẓafar quoted from
Islamic exegetical, Persian and Indian wisdom as well as Christian religious
literature) and an analytical portion (i.e. the narrative materials that Ibn Ẓafar
himself composed, by taking inspiration from historical and literary sources,
together with translations or paraphrases of those of others). As for the analytic
portion, Ibn Ẓafar made a further distinction between “the historical narratives he
composed by reworking historical information” and those narratives “which Ibn
Zafer confesses to have paraphrased, and which might be correctly designated as
53
historical romances”, by inserting formulas that asserted his authorship. In this
regard, Kechichian and Dekmejian noticed, “aside from his own Muslim/Arab
heritage, Ibn Zafar’s work is powerfully influenced by the history of Persia, which
provided him with numerous models of kingship and a source of historical
romances, tales and maxims”.54
An outstanding example of Ibn Ẓafar’s composition method is given by the
association of the story of the Umayyad caliph ʿAbd al-Malik Ibn Marwān with the
various fables inserted within it. The protagonists of the first fable of The Two Foxes
are respectively named Ẓālim (Wicked) and Mufawwiḍ (Trusting). They represent
different, even opposite, approaches towards a form of injustice perpetrated by the
serpent that has occupied their den. At the same time, these two foxes suggest
—————
51 This is a device rather widespread in Arabic literature. See Jacqueline Sublet, “Nommer
l’animal”, in Mohammed Hocine Benkheira, Catherine Mayeur-Jaouen, Jacqueline Sublet,
L’Animal en Islam, Paris: Les Indes savantes, 2005, pp. 45-75, in part. pp. 52-53.
52 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 56.
53 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 59. Regarding the contents, the analytical and the
synthetic portions include many historical narratives, in particular about the kings of Persia
(i.e. Kosrow I Anushiruwān, Yazdiǧird, Fīrūz Ibn Yazdiǧird, Bahrām Ghūr, Sābūr, Arasa īr
Ibn Bābak), the Lakhmid king of al-Ḥīra al-Nuʿmān, the rightly Guided Caliphs (i.e.
ʿUṯmān b. ʿAffān), the Umayyad caliphs (Muʿāwiya Ibn Yazīd, al-Walīd Ibn Yazīd, ʿAbd al-
Malik Ibn Marwān) and the Abbasid Caliph (Mūsā al-Hādī).
54 Kechichian and Dekmejian, The Just Prince, p. 70.
116
diverse outlooks of the key conceptual framework of trust in God (tawfīḍ) in their
opposite disposition of relying on God to achieve a solution when facing act of
abuse. While Mufawwiḍ is looking for a peaceful solution relying on God, Ẓālim
acts wickedly and tries to perpetrate the same injustice he has received.
In the first redaction, in an attempt to convince his companion to change
attitude, Mufawwiḍ tells Ẓālim the fable of The Peacock and the Cock, which, in
turn, contains the story of The Two Viziers. Both stories provide exempla of
diverse solutions in the face of injustices and different attitudes of relying on
God’s will. The first is noteworthy. The protagonists are two peacocks, a male and
a female, one of which is called Zibriǧ (Multi-colored), along with a cock, called
Hinzāb (or Hayzab, Lively55). They discuss their different degrees of acceptance of
their master’s will. The solution proposed by Ibn Ẓafar comes from the mouth of
the cock Hinzāb who relates a story of a certain king who had two viziers, both of
them honest and faithful. The king puts them both to the test, choosing as his
only adviser the most devout (religiously speaking) of them.
The conclusions of the two animal fables advance different solutions within the
general theme of the chapter. On the one hand, “Zibriǧ having heard this tale,
submitted himself implicitly to his master.”56 In contrast, in the story of the two
foxes, Ẓālim does not accept expulsion from the den (that means its exile) and, in
an attempt to retrieve it, sets it on fire with the intention of burning even
Mufawwiḍ. However, by mistake, Mufawwiḍ sets light to the den and then Ẓālim
dies.
57
At the end of this fable, Ibn Ẓafar returned to the frame-story on the
Umayyad caliph ʿAbd al-Malik, pointing out (through a narrator) that the revolt of
the fox Mufawwiḍ against the abuse of power of the fox Ẓālim “closely resembles
the revolt of Amr Ibn Saîd, in respect of his injustice, of his treachery against Abd-
al-Malik, and of his having entered into the capital of the Caliph, and strengthened
himself there during his absence”.58 By transposing the historical conflict of 689
between ʿAmr ibn Saʿīd, the head of the al-ʿ ṣ clan, and ʿAbd al-Malik onto an
allegorical plane, Ibn Ẓafar outlined his own version of the facts:
But Abd-al-Malik, in advancing to make war against Ibn Zobair, does the very thing
to increase the strength of Amr Ibn Saîd, and to leave the sovereignty to his family,
while wresting it from Ibn Zobair. For the power of Amr, and his kingdom the
kingdom of Amr, who on his side neither looks with the favour upon this campaign of

—————
55 Ibn Ẓafer, Sulwân, It. ed. Minganti, p. 40, suggested “Forse Hayzab = vivace, pieno di
fuoco”. The different degree of coloring of the plumage demonstrates the acceptance or
not of their master’s will.
56 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 198.
57 Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt 1995, p. 143, resumed the story from this point.
58 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 192; Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt 1995, p. 143.
117
 Abd-al-Malik, nor assists him in it, although it would turn to his own ultimate
59
advantage. Thus he is acting as Zâlim acted toward Muffawâd.
It is worth mentioning that the poet and prose writer Ibn Ḥiǧǧa al-Ḥamawī (d.
1433), in his anthology of anecdotes entitled amarāt al-awrāq fī al-muḥāḍarāt
(Fruits of Leaves on Lectures), quoted several stories extrapolated from the first
two chapters of the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ.60
In the chapter on the companion in nightly entertainment of al-Walīd ibn
Yazīd (Samīr al-Walīd ibn Yazīd), Ibn Ḥiǧǧa recounted the story of the struggles
between al-Walīd ibn Yazīd and Yazīd ibn al-Walīd. In this context, he referred
to a discussion between ʿAbd al-Malik and an old man regarding the issue of the
succession in the caliphate. ʿAbd al-Malik argued that when he addressed to Ibn
al-Zubayr, he was in the guise of an oppressor (kāna fī ṣūrat ẓālim) and when he
addressed to Ibn Saʿīd, he was in the guise of an unjustly treated (kāna fī ṣūrat
maẓlūm). At this point, Ibn Ḥiǧǧa quoted the fable of Mufawwiḍ and Ẓālim, who
clearly represent his two different approaches. In the chapter that follows,
concerning the story of the Sasanian emperor Sābūr and Caesar (Ḫabar Sābūr ibn
Hurmuz wa-Qayṣar), Ibn Ḥiǧǧa introduced the fable of the horse and the wild
boar to support the long historical narrative, framing it, as in the Sulwān al-
muṭāʿ, within the story of ʿAyn Ahlihi and an old woman. While Ibn Ḥiǧǧa made
some changes in the frame stories simplifying the various layers of framing, the
animal fables are quoted, in certain passages, even literally.

Ibn Ẓafar’s use of the animals for representing historical and social conflicts
In the opinion of various scholars, the narrative space of the animal fables
represents a sort of jungle. In this regard, Makram Abbès stated that “l’espace
dans lequel se déroulent la plupart des fables est l’espace de la jungle caractérisé
par la domination des pulsions animales de faim, de conservation d’un territoire,
d’agression ou de riposte à une agression et de répartition d’une injustice.” 61 The
animal kingdom portrayed by Ibn Ẓafar is rather an “espace sauvage humanisé ou
—————
59 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 192; Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Bayrūt 1995, p. 143. Leder,
“Convention of fictional narration in learned literature”, pp. 52-55, analyzed “fictive
elements in historical narration” taking as an example this same episode on ʿAbd al-Malik.
60 Ibn Ḥiǧǧa al-Ḥamawī, amarāt al-awrāq, ed. by Muḥammad Abū al-Faḍl Ibrāhīm, Bayrūt:
al-Maktabat al-ʿAṣriyya, 2005, pp. 139-153, referred to the two chapters within which Ibn
Ḥiǧǧa quoted the stories of al-Walīd ibn Yazīd, ʿAbd al-Malik, The Two Foxes in the
chapter on the companion in nightly entertainment of al-Walīd ibn Yazīd and the stories
of Sābūr, ʿAyn Ahlihi and an old woman, the horse and the wild boar, the gazelle and the
antilope.
61 Makram Abbès, “L’ami et l’ennemi dans Kalila et Dimna”, Bulletin d’études orientales, 57
(2006-2007), pp. 11-41, in part. pp. 15-17, cit p. 15.
118
jungle policée” (or “selva”),62 in which there is some sort of overlap between the
animal and the human dimension and only certain types of animals act for specific
human types. Ibn Ẓafar staged an animal world highly anthropomorphic.
In many adab works, including the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ, the ultimate aim of
including animal fables has been to provide empirical and valuable exempla, with an
artistic and didactic value, to be used by the rulers in order to preserve their power
and secure their realm. Even by referring to the Kalīla wa-Dimna, Cheikh-Moussa
argued that the animal fable “est aussi le moyen dont se sert le pouvoir pour se
dérober, pour échapper à la prise, à l’emprise de la ʿĀmma, et, ce faisant, pour mieux
assurer son maintien, sa stabilité et sa pérennité”.63 Ibn Ẓafar has been particularly
sensitive to this issue, in so far as is interspersed in the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ.64 Less
openly than the stories such as the one depicting the war of cats and the mice,65 in
the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ the conflicts among animals, most of the time instigated by
acts of tyrannical oppression and the violation of principles of justice, represented
allegorically the inter-class conflicts that may cause revolutions. Using the fables,
more than a diagnosis, Ibn Ẓafar offered a representation of the various attitudes
towards the power and the possible strategies of governance recommended for a
pragmatic, virtuous and just prince (al-sulṭān al-ʿādil).

—————
62 This concept is also reflected in Cassarino, “Come rivolgersi all’autorità”, pp. 29-39: “tale
presenza rinvia alla questione dell’ambivalenza nella selva, ossia della sovrapposizione fra la
sfera dell’istintualità e della bestialità e quella del raziocinio, fondamentale nella
comprensione del comportamento umano”.
63 Abdallah Cheikh-Moussa, “Du discours autorisé ou Comment s’adresser au tyran ?”,
Arabica, 46/2 (1999), pp.139-175, cit. p. 157.
64 Kechichian-Dekmejian, Just Prince, pp. 80-84: “Theories of Revolution”Dekmejian-Thabit,
“Machiavelli’s Arab Precursor”, p. 132.
65 Joseph Sadan, “Arabic Tom ’n Jerry Compositions. A Popular Composition on a War
between Cats and Mice and a Maqâma on Negotiations and Concluding Peace between a
Cat and a Mouse”, Israel Oriental Studies, 19 (1999), pp. 173-205.

119
 APPENDIX
In the following, I have listed the animal fables which are found in the main Arabic
66
printed editions and in the translation by Amari:

Preface
1) The Lion and the three Bulls. This fable is attested only in the first redaction.
Currently there are no published versions of this fable in Arabic. It belong to the
corpus of Aesopic fables in Arabic. An English translation based on Ibn Ẓafar’s
version is given in Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 128-129.
2) The Hyena, the Fox and the Crocodile. This fable is attested only in the first
redaction. Currently there are no published versions in Arabic. For the English
translation, see Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. pp. 129-130.
Chapter 1: Trust in God (tafwīḍ)
3) The Two Foxes (Ḥikāyat Ẓālim wa-Mufawwaḍ wa-l-ḥayya). See Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān,
Tūnis 1862, pp. 12-16; Bayrūt 1995, pp. 138-145; Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1,
67
pp. 170-178 and pp. 188-191 (conclusion).
4) The Peacock and the Cock. This fable is only in the first redaction. See Solwan, Eng.
68
ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 178-183 and p. 188 (conclusion).
Chapter 2: Fortitude (taʾsī)
5) The Horse and the wild Boar (Ḥikāyat al-faras al-tāʾih wa-l-ḫanzīr). See Ibn Ẓafar,
Sulwān, Tūnis 1862, pp. 35-38; Bayrūt 1995, pp. 184-190; Solwan, Eng. ed.
Amari, vol. 2, pp. 5-16.
6) The Donkey and the Crow. This fable is only in the first redaction. Currently there
are no published versions in Arabic. For the English translation, see Solwan, Eng.
69
ed. Amari, vol. 2, pp. 228-229.

—————
66 The titles in Amari’s translation and in the Arabic edition by Damaǧ attest variants, which
are found in manuscripts preserving one or the other redaction. Lacking a critical edition, I
refer both to Amari’s English translation and to the main Arabic editions (Tūnis 1862 and
Bayrūt 1995).
67 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, p. 285, noted that in Ms Paris BNF, Supl. Ar. 536, the
fable has a different conclusion in Ẓālim’s death. According to Amari, “the narrative in the
second edition is less improbable, and accords more closely with the circumstances of the
revolt of Amr Ibn Saîd, who took possession of Damascus, and fortified himself in it
during the absence of the caliph”.
68 This fable appears only in the first redaction; it is missing in Arabic editions. According to
Amari, Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 1, pp. 281-282, it is found in a single manuscript, Ms
Paris, BnF, Supl. Ar. 536: “This was assuredly not suppressed from fear or by command of
the censorship, as is probable in the case of some other passages […]. I therefore presume
that, upon reflection, the author considered it bad to insert so many stories one within the
other”. In this case, therefore, Amari inserts a story taken from the first redaction.
69 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, pp. 225-228, highlighted the following variants: - “The
Ms. SA 536, here considerably diverges from all the rest […] the fable of the horse and the
wild boar is related much further on”; - “the horse, as in all Indian fables, has a proper
120
Chapter 3: Patience (ṣabr)
7) The Gazelle and the Antelope (Ḥikāyat ibn al-tāǧir wa-l-ẓaby wa-l-ġazāl). See Ibn
Ẓafar, Sulwān, Tūnis 1862, pp. 39-41; Bayrūt 1995, pp. 190-196; Solwan, Eng. ed.
70
Amari, vol. 2, pp. 16-23.
8) The Rat and the Gerboa (Ḥikāyat al-ǧar wa-l-faʾra wa-l-yarbūʿ). See Ibn Ẓafar,
Sulwān, Tūnis 1862, pp. 56-59; Bayrūt 1995, pp. 226-230; Solwan, Eng. ed.
Amari, vol. 2, pp. 69-77; vol. 2, p. 250, Amari noted some variations.
Chapter 4: Contentment (raḍā)
9) The Bear and the Monkey (Ḥikāyat al-dubb wa-l-qirda). See Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān,
Tūnis 1862, pp. 70-77; Bayrūt 1995, pp. 256-257, 259-261, 263-265 and 267-268;
Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, pp. 116-118, pp. 122-126 (continuation), pp. 131-
71
134 (continuation), pp. 138-140 (continuation); vol. 2, pp. 276-278 (variants).
10) The Miller and the Ass (Ḥikāyat al-ṭaḥḥān wa-l-ḥimār wa-zawǧat al-suwaʾ). See Ibn
Ẓafar, Sulwān, Tūnis 1862, pp. 73-74; Bayrūt 1995, pp. 261-263; Solwan, Eng. ed.
Amari, vol. 2, pp. 126-131.
11) The King’s Daughter and the Little Bird (Ḥikāyat al-amīra wa-l-ṭāʾir al-masǧūn). See
Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān, Tūnis 1862, pp. 75-76; Bayrūt 1995, pp. Solwan, Eng. ed.
Amari, vol. 2, pp. 134-138.
Chapter 5: Self-denial (zuhd)
12) The Two Elephants (ḥikāyat al-fīl al-adīb wa-l-fīl al-waḥšī). See Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān,
Tūnis 1862, pp. 96-98; Bayrūt 1995, pp. 311-315; Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol.
72
2, pp. 204-211.

—————
name” […] “his deliverer, instead of a wild boar, is a spotted panther”; - “Into the said
fables another is inserted”, which is the fable of “the Donkey and the Crow”.
70 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, pp. 250-251, highlighted the following variants: - “S.A.
536, places this tale in the mouth of the author himself, and not of the vizier”; - “Instead
of rats, we have two ants”, […] “male and female, of whom the male was named Normaïl”;
“The remainder of the story is the same, except that they meet with a dhabb (land
crocodile), who enacts the part of philosopher instead of the yarbù or gerboa”.
71 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, pp. 276-278, highlighted: “In S.A. 536 the story of the
Bear and the Monkey is given with some slight variations, both in the narrative and in the
maxims. The bear is there named Ahleb, or the hairy”. There are also other differences
between the MS. Paris, Suppl. Ar. 535 and the other manuscripts.
72 Solwan, Eng. ed. Amari, vol. 2, pp. 345, noticed, “S.A. 536 prefaces the speech of the
elephant with the usual protestation that perchance God bestowed intellect and utterance
upon these two animals, as he did aforetime upon the camel, who complained to Mahomet
of his master who gave him much work and little food”. On this legend, see Giovanni
Canova, “Storia del cammello e della gazzella e i miracoli del Profeta”, QSA, n.s. 4 (2009),
pp. 159-176, and the enclosed bibliography.
121
ABSTRACT
The present article offers an analysis of the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ fī ʿudwān al-atbāʿ
(Waters of Comfort or Consolation for the Ruler during the Hostility of Subjects) by
Ibn Ẓafar al-Ṣiqillī (1104-1170 or 1172). This work contains a significant number
of animal fables written in the style of the Kalīla wa-Dimna by adapting the
historical narratives the author quotes and paraphrases to the framework of the
animal world. In order to switch from the historical to the fictional level, Ibn
Ẓafar depictes a sophisticated arrangement of the narrative and the non-narrative
materials within his work. The Sulwān al-muṭāʿ is only divided into five chapters
(each of which offers remedial guidelines for the ruler), but it has many more
inner layers of framing and cross-references forming a sort of telescopic structure.
Placed at its center, the animal fables are pivotal both on the structural and on
the theoretical level. They give Ibn Ẓafar the possibility of adopting a new model
of fictionality, which differs from that used by Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ’s Kalīla wa-Dimna
and from the Maqāmāt.

122
 QUADERNI DI STUDI ARABI N.S. 10 (2015)

ISLAMIC SICILY: PHILOLOGICAL AND LITERARY ESSAYS

edited by MIRELLA CASSARINO

Studies on Islamic Sicily: The Last Fifteen Years (Mirella Cassarino) 3-11

Brigitte FOULON, Analyse de la figure du poète d’origine sicilienne Ibn Ḥamdīs

dans la aḫīra d’Ibn Bassām et le Nafḥ al-ṭīb d’al-Maqqarī 13-38

Nicola CARPENTIERI, At War with the Age: Ring Composition in Ibn Ḥamdīs
no. 27 39-55

Francesca Maria CORRAO, The Poetic of Exile in the Siculo-Arab Poet

Ibn Ḥamdīs 57-66

Ilenia LICITRA, L’ode del disinganno: intimismo e retorica nei versi

di Ibn Qalāqis 67-85

Arie SCHIPPERS, Arabic and Hebrew Love Poetry in Sicily in the Middle
Ages and their Contacts with Early Romance and German Poets
in Sicily: Suffering of Love in Sicilian Poetry 87-102

Francesca BELLINO, Animal Fables in the Sulwān al-Muṭāʿ by Ibn Ẓafar

al-Ṣiqillī 103-122

Mirella CASSARINO, Arabic Epistolography in Sicily: the Case of Ibn al-Ṣabbāġ

al-Ṣiqillī 123-138

Oriana CAPEZIO, Il trattato di metrica Kitāb al-Bāri‘ fī ‘ilm al-‘arūḍ

di Ibn al-Qaṭṭā‘ 139-156

Francesco GRANDE, Aspetti semantici e diacronici dell’analisi morfologica

di Ibn al-Qaṭṭā‘ 157-172

Cristina LA ROSA, Alcune ricette per la preparazione degli inchiostri ḥibr e midād
tratte dal Libro del Siciliano: Traduzione del testo e osservazioni 173-190

***
Amir LERNER, Arabic Literary Refinement and the Arabian Nights: The Seventeenth-
Century Neglected Case of al-Shirbīnī’s Hazz Al-Quḥūf 191-209

Veronika RITT-BENMIMOUN, Images of Women in the Contemporary

Vernacular Poetry of Southern Tunisia 211-235

Simone SIBILIO, Tra gli echi del passato. Lo spazio aperto del testo di Munṣif
al-Wahāybī 237-256

RECENSIONI
J. OWENS (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Arabic Linguistics, Oxford – New York: Oxford
University Press, 2013 (F. Grande); G. LANCIONI, L. BETTINI (eds.), The Word in Arabic,
Leiden – Boston: Brill, 2011 (M. Cassarino); F. CORRIENTE, C. PEREIRA, Á. VICENTE,
Aperçu grammatical du faisceau dialectal arabe andalou. Perspectives synchroniques,
diachroniques et panchroniques, Encyclopédie linguistique d’al-Andalus, vol. 1, Berlin –
Boston: De Gruyter, 2015 (C. La Rosa); C. HOLES & R. DE JONG (eds.), Ingham of
Arabia. A collection of articles presented as a tribute to the career of Bruce Ingham, Leiden:
Brill, 2013 (R. Morano); P. LARCHER, Le Brigand et l’amant. Deux poèmes préislamiques de
Taʾabbata Sharran et Imruʾ al-Qays, Paris – Arles: Sindbad/Actes Sud, 2012 (A.
Ghersetti); ABÛ KABÎR AL-HUDHALÎ, Zuhayra ! Quatre poèmes à sa fille sur la vieillesse et la
mort. Édition bilingue par P. Larcher, Paris – Arles: Sindbad/Actes Sud, 2014 (A.
Ghersetti); AL-QĀḌĪ AL-QUḌĀʿĪ, A Treasury of Virtues. Sayings, Sermons and Teachings of
ʿAlī with One Hundred Proverbs Attributed to al-Jāḥiẓ, ed. T. Qutbuddin, New York –
London: New York University Press, 2013 (F. Bellino); O. ARABI, D.S. POWERS & S. A.
SPECTORSKY (eds.), Islamic Legal Thought. A Compendium of Muslim Jurists, Leiden-
Boston: Brill, 2013 (I. Zilio Grandi); D. MCMURRAY – A. UFHEIL-SOMERS (eds.), The
Arab Revolts. Dispatches on Militant Democracy in the Middle East, Bloomington –
Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2013 (M. Campanini); AL-MANṢŪR, The Shiʿi
Imamate. A Fatimid Interpretation, ed. and transl. S. Makarem, London: I.B. Tauris, 2013
(C. La Martire); S. JIWA, The Founder of Cairo. The Fatimid Imam-Caliph al-Muʿizz and
His Era, London: I.B. Tauris, 2013 (C. La Martire); V. COMERRO, Les traditions sur la
constitution du muṣḥaf de ‘Uthmān, Beirut: Orient-Institut; Würzburg: Erlon Verlag, 2012
(C. Bori); G.S. REYNOLDS (ed.), New Perspectives on the Qur’ān. The Qur’ān in its
Historical Context 2, Oxon: Routledge, 2011 (C. Bori); Galeni De differentiis febrium. Libri
duo Arabice Conversi, a cura di Claudio de Stefani, Pisa – Roma: Fabrizio Serra Ed., 2011
(F. Bellino); H.A. SHEHADA, Mamluks and Animals. Veterinary Medicine in Medieval
Islam, Leiden – Boston: Brill, 2013 (A. Ghersetti). 257-277