The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayam | Page 6

what they subverted by such better Hope as others, with
no better Revelation to guide them, had yet made a Law to themselves. Lucretius indeed,
with such material as Epicurus furnished, satisfied himself with the theory of a vast
machine fortuitously constructed, and acting by a Law that implied no Legislator; and so
composing himself into a Stoical rather than Epicurean severity of Attitude, sat down to
contemplate the mechanical drama of the Universe which he was part Actor in; himself
and all about him (as in his own sublime description of the Roman Theater) discolored
with the lurid reflex of the Curtain suspended between the Spectator and the Sun. Omar,
more desperate, or more careless of any so complicated System as resulted in nothing but
hopeless Necessity, flung his own Genius and Learning with a bitter or humorous jest
into the general Ruin which their insufficient glimpses only served to reveal; and,
pretending sensual pleasure, as the serious purpose of Life, only diverted himself with
speculative problems of Deity, Destiny, Matter and Spirit, Good and Evil, and other such
questions, easier to start than to run down, and the pursuit of which becomes a very
weary sport at last!
<6>Professor Cowell.
With regard to the present Translation. The original Rubaiyat (as, missing an Arabic
Guttural, these Tetrastichs are more musically called) are independent Stanzas, consisting
each of four Lines of equal, though varied, Prosody; sometimes all rhyming, but oftener
(as here imitated) the third line a blank. Somewhat as in the Greek Alcaic, where the
penultimate line seems to lift and suspend the Wave that falls over in the last. As usual
with such kind of Oriental Verse, the Rubaiyat follow one another according to
Alphabetic Rhyme--a strange succession of Grave and Gay. Those here selected are
strung into something of an Eclogue, with perhaps a less than equal proportion of the
"Drink and make-merry," which (genuine or not) recurs over-frequently in the Original.
Either way, the Result is sad enough: saddest perhaps when most ostentatiously merry:
more apt to move Sorrow than Anger toward the old Tentmaker, who, after vainly
endeavoring to unshackle his Steps from Destiny, and to catch some authentic Glimpse of
TO-MORROW, fell back upon TO-DAY (which has outlasted so many To-morrows!) as

the only Ground he had got to stand upon, however momentarily slipping from under his
Feet.
[From the Third Edition.]
While the second Edition of this version of Omar was preparing, Monsieur Nicolas,
French Consul at Resht, published a very careful and very good Edition of the Text, from
a lithograph copy at Teheran, comprising 464 Rubaiyat, with translation and notes of his
own.
Mons. Nicolas, whose Edition has reminded me of several things, and instructed me in
others, does not consider Omar to be the material Epicurean that I have literally taken
him for, but a Mystic, shadowing the Deity under the figure of Wine, Wine-bearer, &c.,
as Hafiz is supposed to do; in short, a Sufi Poet like Hafiz and the rest.
I cannot see reason to alter my opinion, formed as it was more than a dozen years ago
when Omar was first shown me by one to whom I am indebted for all I know of Oriental,
and very much of other, literature. He admired Omar's Genius so much, that he would
gladly have adopted any such Interpretation of his meaning as Mons. Nicolas' if he
could.<7> That he could not, appears by his Paper in the Calcutta Review already so
largely quoted; in which he argues from the Poems themselves, as well as from what
records remain of the Poet's Life.
<7> Perhaps would have edited the Poems himself some years ago. He may now as little
approve of my Version on one side, as of Mons. Nicolas' Theory on the other.
And if more were needed to disprove Mons. Nicolas' Theory, there is the Biographical
Notice which he himself has drawn up in direct contradiction to the Interpretation of the
Poems given in his Notes. (See pp. 13-14 of his Preface.) Indeed I hardly knew poor
Omar was so far gone till his Apologist informed me. For here we see that, whatever
were the Wine that Hafiz drank and sang, the veritable Juice of the Grape it was which
Omar used, not only when carousing with his friends, but (says Mons. Nicolas) in order
to excite himself to that pitch of Devotion which others reached by cries and
"hurlemens." And yet, whenever Wine, Wine-bearer, &c., occur in the Text--which is
often enough--Mons. Nicolas carefully annotates "Dieu," "La Divinite," &c.: so carefully
indeed that one is tempted to think that he was indoctrinated by the Sufi with whom he
read the Poems. (Note to Rub. ii. p. 8.) A Persian would naturally wish to vindicate a

distinguished Countryman; and