I just found a second book in the attic! (published in 1937 with illustrations by Edmund Dulac).
I asked Google the following question:
Did Edward Fitzgerald make mistakes when he translated the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam?
AI Overview:
Yes, Edward FitzGerald made numerous, intentional, and often admitted "mistakes" (or rather, liberties) when he translated
The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. Rather than a strict, literal translation, FitzGerald created a "transmogrification" or "tessellation" of the original Persian quatrains, resulting in a work that is more of an English classic inspired by Khayyam than a direct translation.
Here are the specific ways FitzGerald diverged from the original:
1. Misreadings and Translation Errors
- Literal Failures: Critics and scholars, including E.B. Cowell (who taught Persian to FitzGerald), noted that FitzGerald occasionally struggled with the language, leading to direct errors in understanding the original text.
- Opposite Meanings: In some instances, FitzGerald misunderstood the Persian so completely that he made Khayyam say the exact opposite of what was written.
- Misread Words: Scholars have pointed out that he occasionally misread words, such as mistaking mānam (I remain) for mātam (grief/tears), which changed the meaning of the verse.
2. Intentional Alterations ("Transmogrification")
- "Mashed" Quatrains: FitzGerald combined lines from different, separate quatrains to create a new, cohesive poem.
- Invented Verses: Several stanzas in the Rubaiyat do not exist in the Persian original and were invented by FitzGerald himself.
- Refusal to Correct: When informed of errors by his mentor, Cowell, FitzGerald sometimes refused to correct them because he felt his version fit the "spirit" of the poem better.
- Changed Tone: FitzGerald turned what was sometimes a, at times, pessimistic or philosophical, at times, mystical original into a more consistently hedonistic, "carpe diem" ("seize the day") narrative that resonated with Victorian skeptics.
3. Cultural and Ideological Differences
- Sufi vs. Skeptic: While the original Persian often features spiritual, Sufi, or mystical undertones, FitzGerald’s version downplays this in favor of a secular, skeptical, and Epicurean tone.
- Interpretation of the "Saki": The "Thou" or "Saki" (cup-bearer) in the original, who is often a young, budding male, was interpreted by FitzGerald in a way that fit the romanticized, often slightly homoerotic tone common in some Victorian intellectual circles, rather than the original cultural context.
Conclusion:
While FitzGerald did make technical, linguistic mistakes, his biggest "mistakes" were, by his own admission, intentional, aimed at creating a poetic masterpiece rather than a dictionary translation. The resulting Rubaiyat is widely recognized as a "transcreation" that is more of a 19th-century English masterpiece than a literal 11th-century Persian one.
