When critics of Arabic literature consider Arabic invective, the Umayyad poet, Jarīr, springs to mind along with his two contemporary rivals, al-Farazdaq and al-Akhṭal. However, when elegy is the subject matter, despite the importance of this particular genre and the classical claim that its composition is one of the markings of a true poet, few scholars would propose the name of Jarīr as a major contributor to this genre. If one were to persist in seeking this aim of praising the dead in the poetry of Jarīr, one poem would be on everyone’s lips, Jarīr’s elegy to his first wife, Khālidah, a rā‛iyyah commencing with the words, “law lā al-hayā’ ” or “But for the ignominy [the deluge of tears would return]”. The poem’s opening and the gharaḍ seem clear: lament of the beloved and a literal weeping over the ruins, the new abode of the beloved: Khālidah’s gravesite. The lyrical nature of the opening has the power to bring the listener to tears as well as the tragic figure of the poet. But this 115-line poem has another seemingly antithetical aim: cutting invective of rivals al-Ba‛īth and his most-favored target, al-Farazdaq, leaving the listener pondering over the nature of the poet’s true intent. Is the gharaḍ elegy or invective? This appropriation of the tender, elegiac gharaḍ to serve as a 'lyrical sword' to strike a fatal blow to the opponent for the ultimate gharaḍ of invective has not been adequately treated by scholars of Jarīr or those researching the emergence of Umayyad invective forms. Current scholarship on invective is in danger of becoming too distracted by the scatological humor that serves as the seemingly playful barbs of invective and, by so doing, risks missing an invective poem’s true lyrical power. In this paper, drawing on contemporary theories in linguistics and other disciplines, I will seek to show how the most eternal invective and immortal fame of the poet depends not on the invective alone, not on the scatological theatre of the obscene, but rather on the aesthetic pairing of lyric elegy and cutting invective.

RESTRUCTURING THE SOCIETY Sudayf ibn Maymūn’s Panegyric Performance before the Caliph Abū al-ʻAbbās al-Saffāḥ Ali Alnahhabi Recent studies in the field of Classical Arabic Poetry have turned their attention to the performative aspects of the qaṣīdah, particularly in light of the literary anecdotes (akhbār) that purport to provide a performance context. Rather than limiting the analysis to the poetic textual surface, these studies approach the qaṣīdah by analyzing all aspects involved in its performance This paper seeks to add to the insights of these recent studies through analyzing the panegyric performance of Sudayf ibn Maymūn’s poem “The Foundation of Dominion Has Become Steady” in the court of the first ʻAbbāsid Caliph Abū al-ʻAbbās al-Saffāḥ (r. 749–754) as depicted by the literary tradition. The classical literary Arabic compendia often associate the poet Sudayf ibn Maymūn (ca. 700–764) with the alleged slaughter of the Umayyad dynasty in the beginning of the ʻAbbāsid caliphate. They present the poet’s performance at the court of Abū al-ʻAbbās al-Saffāḥ as successful performance that succeeded in instigating the Caliph to revoke the amnesty that was given to the remaining members of Umayyad family—ultimately led to their slaughter. In this paper, I seek to investigate this success by analyzing the verbal and nonverbal elements that constitute Sudayf’s “envisioned” performance. I argue that Sudayf’s poem celebrates the establishment of the ʻAbbāsid Caliphate and the birth of a new Caliphal discourse that claims legitimacy based on the religious rights of the Hāshemites. The poem performatively calls for the revocation of the amnesty of the Umayyad family as being both morally just and politically necessary. Both the anecdote and the poem serve to defend and legitimize the ʻAbbāsid slaughter of the Umayyads—the poet presents it as a moral obligation—avenging slain ʻAbbāsids, a religious duty—following God’s judgment of the Umayyads and a political imperative—the Umayyads are still stinging from their wounds and will eventually turn against the ʻAbbāsids—their show of loyalty is mere pretense. The ritually negotiated context of the poem performatively restructures the hierarchy of the ʻAbbāsid society, a hierarchy that was in different order before the presentation of the poem as the akhbār indicate. Finally, the poet’s costume and actions during the presentation of the poem as depicted by the literary tradition collaborate well with the pragmatic function of the poem, a collaboration that makes Sudayf ibn Maymūn’s performance conceived as successful.

When the blind 10-11th C. poet from the provincial Syrian town of Maʿarrat al-Nuʿmān decided to try to make his way in the literary and cultural capital of the time, Baghdād, he was greeted upon his arrival by the death of a Shiʿite notable, al-Sharīf al-Ṭāhir al-Musāwī, whose two sons, the celebrated Shiʿite scholars and poets, al-Sharīf al-Raḍī and al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā, reigned over the literary scene in the ʿAbbāsid/Būyid capital. The present study argues that, far from merely presenting an elegy to mourn the passing of a great man or to express his condolences to his sons, Abū al-ʿAlāʾ takes advantage of this opportunity to present his poetic wares before the Baghdādī literary elite, and the two bereaved Sharīfs in particular. This brings into high relief the evaluative aspect of performance: that the performer/poet is highly conscious that his presentation will be evaluated by his audience—with the added pressure that his prime audience—the two Sharīfs--are two of the most celebrated poets of the age. The poet is therefore performing multiple tasks—1) the social obligation of mourning/elegizing a deceased notable; 2) undergoing an examination to test his poetical abilities and his worthiness to be granted a place among the literary elite—i.e., a literary rite of initiation; and 3) offering a poetic gift—of praise—to his would-be patrons, the two Sharīfs. The result is hybrid and highly complex poem which, although classified in the editions of his diwan, Saqṭ al-Zand, as rithāʾ (elegy), exhibits extensive elements from other genres, namely fakhr (self-boast) of his own poetic prowess and praise (madīḥ) of the two Sharīfs. This results in a complex poetic structure and performance through which al-Maʿarrī is able to present his mastery of an extended motival and thematic range as well as equally complex rhetorical and metapoetic feats. Finally, the study questions al-Maʿarrī’s claim in his introduction to Saqṭ al-Zand that he never wrote poetry for material gain. The extended passage of praise of the Sharīfs’ munificence at the end of the poem is an elaborate reenactment of the Arabic panegyric convention of praising the patron’s generosity in return for a (usually monetary) prize.

In this article, I will explore how Arabs, in a later period, revived the history/legend of the victory of Banū Shaybān over the Persian army in the pre-Islamic battle of Dhū-Qār in order to incite national Arab sentiments against a non-Arab enemy. The book Ḥarb Banī Shaybān maʻa Kisrá Ānūshirwān, The war of Banī Shaybān against Kisrá Ānūshirwān retells the story of Ānūshirwān, the Persian king, who presented an offer of marriage to al-Nuʻmān, the Arabic king, for the hand of his daughter. al-Nuʻmān refused Ānūshirwān’s request, believing that marrying his daughter to a Persian would be a dishonor on his family and the Arab. The book was rewritten again during the 18th and 19th centuries. The copies used by al-Mashhadānī, a modern Iraqi scholar, to edit the book Ḥarb Banī Shaybān maʻa Kisrá Ānūshirwān (Baghdad, 1988) are archived at the Iraqi Museum and al-Qādirīyah Library in Iraq. The first and second manuscripts were written in 1797 and 1799, shortly after the siege of al-Baṣrah in Iraq, which lasted from 1775 to 1779, by the Persian army, which was under the rule of the Iranian Zand Dynasty (1750–1794). Due to the situation, Ḥarb Banī Shaybān maʻa Kisrá Ānūshirwān might have been reproduced in order to reflect the siege. In the Arabic fuṣḥá, poetry exists that directly addresses this victory over the Persian/Zandi army. I argue that the battle of Dhū-Qār works allegorically in later periods to incite Arabs against their opponents, especially Persians. The victory of Banū Shaybān in protecting their identity has been used as a source of inspiration for Arab in later periods. In the second part of this article, I analyze the poetic usage of the battle motif in later periods using the Speech Act Theory and Paul Connerton’s Understanding of Myth Concordance.