10 
[No. 1, 
C. J. Lvall —The Mo l allaqah of Zuheyr. 
1—8, (9 omitted) 11, 10, 14—15, 12—13, 18, 16—17, 19—22, 25, 23—24, 26—44 
a, (after which Ahlwardt inserts a second hemistich which is not in Arnold, and com¬ 
mences the next verse with a first hemistich wdiichis also wanting in the latter. Arnold’s 
44 b agrees with Ahlwardt’s 44 b\) 45—47, 49, 48, 50, 52, 51, 57, 54, 56, 53, 58, 60, 59. 
vv. 55 and 61—64 are omitted ; they will be found in the Appendix, p. 192. 
Of the two main differences above mentioned, it must be admitted that the arrange¬ 
ment of the verses describing the journey reads more smoothly and consecutively in 
Ahlwardt’s text than in Arnold’s ; perhaps this is rather a reason for suspecting the hand 
of a later adjuster than for rejecting the more difficult order : in such a matter how¬ 
ever no critical judgment is worth much. The second difference, the omission of vv. 
55 and 61—64 among the sententious utterances which close the poem, seems to be 
also generally in favour of Ahlwardt; v. 55 might, as he suggests (Bemerkungen fiber 
die Aechtheit &c., p. 64), find its proper place after v. 51. Of the last four verses of 
Arnold I would retain v. 64, which seems a fitting close of the poem, and appropriate 
to the tradition (of two payments by the Peace-makers) with which it is connected ; 
the other three are clearly out of place where they stand, and belong to another poem 
(perhaps two others), whether by Zuheyr or some other poet. 
Among the minor differences of arrangement, Ahlwardt’s text seems to err in 
placing v. 18 before vv. 16-17 ; v. 16 appears clearly to be the opening of the real 
theme, and the change of person in v. 18 (called iltifat) is of frequent occurrence in the 
old poetry and offers no difficulty. Of the transposition of v. 25 there is little to be 
said one way or the other. The additions in Ahlwardt after v. 44 a are evidently to 
be rejected, the second inserted hemistich being a mere echo of v. 24 a. 
Of textual differences there are few of much importance; in v. 11 a, Ahlwardt reads 
li-s-sadiqi for li-l-latiji: in v. 14 b , wa man for wa Team: in v. 15 5, mufa”ami for wa 
mxif'ami : in v. 20 b, mina-l- amri for mina-l-qauli: in v. 22 a , wa gheyrihu for hadi- 
tumd : in v. 25 b, ifdli-l-Muzennemi for ifdlin muzennemi (see note below on this verse) : 
in v. 26 a, faman mublighu for aid ’ abliglii: in v. 27 a , tektumenna (wrongly) for tektu - 
munna, and nufusikum for sudurikum (last better) : in v. 31 b, tahmil for tuntej (last 
better) : in v. 35 b, yetejemjemi for yetaqaddemi : in v. 37 «, tefza, 1 buyutun ketliiretun 
for yufzi ‘ buyutan kethiretan (last preferable) : in v. 40 a, ra‘au mu ra l au min iim'ihim 
thumma for ra^au <tiw£ahum hatta idd temma, and b, tesilu bir-rimuhi for tefarrd bis-siluhi 
(last preferable metrically) : in v. 43 a, slidrakiifi-l-qaumi for shdraket Ji-l-mauti : in v. 
45 b, tala l at for taraqet (last preferable, since the former unnecessarily repeats the 
tdlkdtin of v. 44 b) : in v. 46 a , tiu-l-witri yudriku witrahu for f.tu-d-dighni yudriJcu teb- 
lahu : in v. 54 a, el-meniyyeti yelqahd for el-mendyd yenelnahu , and b , ruma for yerqa : in 
v. 53 a, yufdi for yuhda : in v. 60, b , wa lau for wa in : in v. 59, for our reading Ahl¬ 
wardt has the following— 
wa man lam yezel yestahmilu-n-ndsa nefsahu , 
wald yughnihd yauman mina-d-dahri , yus'ami : 
in v. 63 b , (Appendix p. 192,) yahlumu (right : see note below) for yahlumi : 
in v. 64 b, sayohramu for sayohrami (both are equally right grammatically, but the 
former would be an iqwd if the verse really belongs to this poem). 
The verses of the Mo‘allaqah quoted in the Aghani are the following :— 
together on p. 146, Yol. ix, —vv. 1, 3, 4, 6, 56, 54 (in the last verse Ahlwardt’s 
reading, not Arnold’s, is given) : 
on p. 148, v. 18 : 
