Shaikh Zubayr
« previous post |
Sean Swanick, "Shaikh Zubayr", Duke University Libraries Blog, 4/13/2016:
A man lost at sea, having drifted far away from his native Iraqi lands, comes a shore in England. In due time he will be nicknamed the Bard of Avon but upon landing on the Saxon coast, his passport reportedly read: Shaikh Zubayr. A knowledgeable man with great writing prowess from a small town called Zubayr in Iraq. He came to be known in the West as Shakespeare and was given the first name of William. William Shakespeare of Zubayr.
Or at least this is loosely how a story goes about The Bard’s origins. It was purportedly first suggested by the famous Lebanese intellectual, Aḥmad Fāris al-Shidyāq and later popularised by the Iraqi intellectual Dr. Ṣafāʾ Khulūṣī. Khulūṣī in 1960 published an article entitled “The Study of Shakespeare” in al-Ma’rifa (1960) where he paid homage to the Bard while also expanding upon al-Shidyāq’s theory. This perplexing theory has generated much rebuttal and discussion. This theory rested upon “that most of Shakespeare’s language could be traced back to Classical Arabic…[t]o give one example : the Arabic adjective nabīl which means ‘noble’ and which occurs, naturally enough, throughout the plays and poems.” (“Shadow Language” in Ormsby, Eric L. 2011. Fine incisions: essays on poetry and place. Erin, Ont: Porcupine’s Quill.) The former Libyan dictator, Mu’ammar al-Qadhāfī is also reported to have supported the theory of Shaikh Zubayr.
See also Abdul Sattar Jawad, "Shakespeare in Baghdad", The Chronicle 12/2/2011, who spells it Sheikh Zbair.
I recall reading in one of Sir Richard Burton's works about his discussion with a Somali host, who argued that the English might be good at making machines, but they lacked the poetry for which the Somalis were notable. Burton countered by quoting Shakespeare, to which his host responded "And this Sheik Subeer, how many camels does he have?"
Or maybe I dreamed it, as I haven't been able to locate the passage. I thought it was in First Footsteps in East Africa, but it's not.
Gokul Madhavan said,
October 14, 2024 @ 7:19 am
An amusing story, but patently false, of course. All true scholars know that “William Shakespeare” was in fact a highly learned and widely travelled Indian scholar of Tamil origin whose real name was Chandrashekhara Appayyar. Due to the difficulties the natives of a little windswept isle faced with pronouncing his grand name (a fact amply documented when said natives returned the favor and traveled back to Chandrashekhara Appayyar’s homeland), it was gradually whittled down into a simpler form. First the “Chandra” was dropped, leaving just “Shekhara Appayyar”. This then coalesced into a single “Shekharappayyar” (the clear violation of Sanskrit sandhi rules being yet another indicator of the sad unfamiliarity of the locals with the language of the gods). Next to go was the awkward ‘r’ in the middle of the name, which was especially challenging to speakers of a non-rhotic tongue. Perhaps because it was sandwiched between two voiceless consonants, this became a simple ‘s’, which also had the added advantage of eliminating any aspiration in the ‘kh’ and of preserving the non-aspirated original ‘p’. Finally, to add insult to butchery, the honorific “ayyar” was collapsed into a mere “ear” (perhaps subtly hinting at the violence inflicted upon the poor man’s auditory faculties). Thus was born “Shakespeare”.
AlexB said,
October 14, 2024 @ 7:32 am
@Gokul Madhavan
Are you the bloke from Goodness Gracious me?
Gokul Madhavan said,
October 14, 2024 @ 7:39 am
Jokes apart, a couple of fun notes on this: First of all, there was in fact a Sanskrit genius and polymath in the Tamil lands by name Appayya Dīkṣita(r, if we include the Tamil honorific personal suffix) whose life overlapped with Shakespeare’s. (Appayya is likely to have passed away in 1593 CE.) He was a profound and revolutionary scholar who reveled in overturning long-held beliefs across a wide range of disciplines, including in language-related topics. Among many, many other things, he wrote multiple works on Sanskrit literary theory, especially on figures of speech, a long versified treatise + autocommentary that tried to establish a new theory of injunctive statements, and multiple short essays on the semantics of adjectives. (I’m currently slowly translating his introductory text on figures of speech, but to my knowledge the other works I listed above have not been translated into English.) However there is no evidence to my knowledge that Appayya travelled anywhere outside South India, let alone crossing the seas and setting down roots in England! He also never wrote a Sanskrit play as far as we know.
Second, on the topic of national poets having unusual origins, I was amazed to learn that Aleksandr Pushkin had some African heritage through his great-grandfather Abram Gannibal. (Struggling to enter hyperlinks here, but see Wikipedia.)
Gokul Madhavan said,
October 14, 2024 @ 7:42 am
@AlexB: Goodness gracious me! I wish I were, but I’m not!.I did watch a few episodes of the show back in the day though.
Pedro said,
October 14, 2024 @ 10:37 am
I don't understand the significance of the idea “that most of Shakespeare’s language could be traced back to Classical Arabic…[t]o give one example : the Arabic adjective nabīl which means ‘noble’ and which occurs, naturally enough, throughout the plays and poems.”
Firstly, the word noble doesn't come from Arabic but from Latin via French, and there must be attestations of the word prior to Shakespeare's time.
Secondly, even if the word were Arabic in origin, why would that imply Arab origins for Shakespeare, and not all the other writers who used the same word. In other words, in what sense is noble "Shakespeare's language" rather than anyone else's language?
Or am I missing something and is the whole thing a joke that I just don't get?
Ted McClure said,
October 14, 2024 @ 11:06 am
I thought Shakespeare was Klingon.