Introduction

Neither classical nor premodern Arabic language has a single term to serve as an equivalent for the term of the literary genre “fable” that is widely known in the European literatures since antiquity.¹The present article is a condensed and edited version of the introductory sections of my book ‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable‎. The few existing serious studies of the Arabic fable, such as those by Carl Brockelmann, Iḥsān ʿAbbās, or Robert Irwin, did not attempt to define the Arabic genre in relation to its Western sibling.²‎Brockelmann, “Fabel und Tiermärchen in der älteren arabischen Literatur”‎ ʿ‎ʿAbbās, Malāmiḥ yūnāniyya fī l-adab al-ʿarabī‎; ‎Irwin, “The Arabic Beast Fable”‎ see also ‎Sallūm, Kitāb qiṣaṣ al-ḥayawān fī l-adab al-ʿarabī al-qadīm‎; ‎Gelder, “In the Time of al-Fiṭaḥl.”‎ Defining a literary genre that in its indigenous historical context has never been clearly defined is a tricky affair. As for what this study calls the Arabic fable (that in the present context is predominantly equivalent to the beast fable) there is a core corpus of representative narratives in premodern Arabic literature, but the limitations of this corpus in relation to other short narrative genres, particularly the parable, the anecdote, and tales related to the origin of proverbs, are fluid. The question of genre itself is problematic, as is the quest for a specific genre terminology that is bound to differ from the one dominantly applied in Western cultures. Moreover, even if one decides that there is a genre in premodern Arabic literature that may be considered as equivalent to the fable of other traditions, the question remains whether one should apply the same European genre term. After all, the term fable has grown out of a specific tradition and forms part of a particular semantic field that reverberates with notions not necessarily encountered in any other tradition. Furthermore, the discrepancy between the documented tales featuring speaking animals in premodern Arabic literature and the lack of a single and unambiguous genre term gives rise to the question what notion lies at the basis of this practice. Prioritizing Western terminology without questioning its universal applicability risks being understood as cultural arrogance. Consequently, the unbiased question is whether authors of premodern Arabic literature perceived narratives featuring speaking animals as a specific literary genre at all and, if so, whether and how they conceived that genre in terms of terminology.

In terms of origins or commonalities, the overlap between the relevant ancient Greek and premodern Arabic narratives is too evident to be seriously challenged.³For fables of Graeco-Latin tradition, the extensive study and inventory of ‎Adrados, History of the Graeco-Latin Fable‎ is indispensable; see also ‎Perry, Babrius and Phaedrus‎. The considerable number of “Aesopic” fables that are first or even exclusively attested in Arabic literature strongly suggests that the overlap not only results from a process of adaptation but rather from a shared tradition. Parables featuring animals in premodern Arabic literature are to a certain extent also indebted to ancient Near Eastern (Mesopotamian) tradition, most obviously in the short narratives attributed to Ahikar/Ḥayqār.⁴See ‎Conybeare, Harris and Lewis, The Story of Aḥiḳar‎. In addition to this twofold legacy, Arabic animal tales are also prominently related to the literatures of ancient Iran and India, the latter being mediated through the pre-Islamic Iranian tradition; and, to a lesser extent, to ancient Jewish/Hebrew tradition. There is, of course, an Arabic tradition in its own right, namely Bedouin lore of the pre-Islamic or early Islamic period. Partly preserved in versified renderings of fables,⁵‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 18–19‎. this legacy shows implicitly in specific features of Bedouin society such as the supreme value of hospitality, dietary preferences, and the range of animal characters acting in the fables. In what follows, a combination of terms signifying narrative (like ḥikāya) and speaking animals (like ʿalā alsinat al-bahāʾim) is analyzed as evidence of an Arabic fable concept, which is then specified by more detailed features.

Corpus

In premodern Arabic literature, tales featuring speaking animals occur essentially in two distinct strands of tradition. Slightly more than half of the 330 tales featuring speaking animals so far documented, or roughly 170 items, are cited in works of Arabic elite or middle literature⁶See ‎Chraïbi, Les Mille et une nuits. Histoire du texte et classification des contes, 15–20‎. compiled by known or anonymous authors.⁷‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 182–278‎, nos. 161–329. These fables may be termed fables “in literature” or “authored” fables. The best-known works of this category are Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ’s mid-eighth-century Kalīla wa-Dimna (Kalīla and Dimna),⁸See, most recently, ‎Gruendler and Toral, An Unruly Classic, 2‎. Ibn Ẓafar’s twelfth-century Sulwān al-muṭāʿ fī ʿudwān al-atbāʿ (Consolation for the Ruler During the Hostility of Subjects),⁹‎MS Paris suppl. arabe 535; see Bellino, “Animal Fables in the Sulwān al-muṭāʿ by Ibn Ẓafar al-Ṣiqillī”‎ ‎Bellino, “Between History and Fictionality”‎ and Ibn ʿArabshāh’s fifteenth-century Fākihat al-khulafāʾ wa-mufākahat al-ẓurafāʾ (The Fruits of the Caliphs and Witty Banter of the Stylish Folk).¹⁰‎Banister, “Squeezing Juice from the Fruits of the Caliphs.”‎ Most of the relevant narratives contained in this type of literature are either translated or adapted from non-Arabic tradition, either Syriac (Qiṣṣat Ḥayqār), Greek (Amthāl Luqmān al-ḥakīm), Indian (Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ’s Kalīla wa-Dimna; Qiṣṣat Jalīʿād and Shīmās), or Persian (Ibn ʿArabshāh’s Fākihat al-khulafāʾ). Some of them give the impression of having been invented in emulation of the “imported” fables (Ibn al-Habbāriyya, al-Ṣādiḥ wa-l-bāghim; Ibn Ẓafar, Sulwān al-muṭāʿ; Alf layla wa-layla¹¹‎Osigus, “Ein Fabelzyklus in 1001 Nacht.”‎). Some texts are fairly long and complex, their language is at times verbose, and they are often imbued with a dominant moral application.

A second strand of anonymously authored narratives is presently documented in another 160 Arabic texts.¹²‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 57–181‎, nos. 1–160. The majority of these tales featuring speaking animals are cited without a framing context and are scattered as single items, in small clusters, or in relatively short chapters in various genres of literature, in addition to adab literature mainly in works of history, biography, and lexicography. Most of these items either belong to a shared Middle Eastern and/or Mediterranean heritage, owe their existence to the adaptation of Greek or Iranian fables, or derive from ancient Arabic or Bedouin tradition. They are typically narrated in simple and straightforward language and usually lack a moral application that very likely was so obvious for their audience as to make its explicit mention appear unnecessary. About 30 of these narratives are cited in the specific historical context of an oral or written communication in which they serve as an analogy (mathal) for a specific situation.¹³‎Marzolph, “Framed Fables.‎” The two strands of tradition—i.e., the “authored” and the “scattered” tales featuring speaking animals—are independent from one another with little overlap. In other words, with a few exceptions, texts from one strand of tradition are not encountered in the other.

Considering the multiple origins of the relevant texts, rather than summarily addressing the genre in its Arabic dimension, one probably ought to differentiate between “tales featuring speaking animals in premodern Arabic literature,” denoting narratives of which there is an Arabic version regardless of their factual or potential origin, and “Arabic tales featuring speaking animals” proper, only the latter term strictly referring to narratives that are likely of an Arabic origin. Whereas the relation of the authored tales to a variety of non-Arabic traditions is obvious, the majority of the scattered texts is specific to premodern Arabic tradition. The present considerations relate primarily to the scattered texts, i.e., items documented outside and independent of the literary compilations or authored collections.

Terminological Analysis and Historical Semantics

The Concept of the Tales Featuring Speaking Animals in Arabic Tradition

The Arabic term mathal, often used in both anonymous tradition and authored works to introduce a parable featuring animals, is ambiguous. As a literary term, mathal has the general meaning of “parable” and also denotes the proverb as well as idiomatic phrases and expressions. At any rate, the term mathal links to the function of the texts. A mathal is a description by way of analogy. Only if followed by the names of animals, such as in, e.g., mathal al-dhiʾb wa-l-thaʿlab (parable of the wolf and the fox), the term unambiguously means “fable” in the sense used here.

Premodern Arabic literature profusely documents the familiarity with and use of the textual genre. Ever since Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ’s (d. 139/757) Kalīla wa-Dimna, the authors of literary compilations have questioned and/or justified the citation of clearly fictitious animal tales in serious discourse, a discussion that is otherwise closely linked to the genre of maqāmāt.¹⁴See ‎Bonebakker, “Some Medieval Views on Fantastic Stories”‎ ‎Drory, “Three Attempts to Legitimize Fiction in Classical Arabic Literature”‎ ‎Bonebakker, “Nihil obstat in storytelling?”‎ Authors defending the legitimacy of tales featuring speaking animals would argue that fiction here serves the higher purpose of indirect communication and that no one would seriously consider the events as having taken place in the literal sense. As the author of the “mirror for princes” Kalīla wa-Dimna, a work that is largely an adaptation of the Middle Persian adaptation of the originally Sanskrit Panchatantra (with additional tales from the Mahābhārata), Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ legitimized the use of tales featuring speaking animals as arguments in serious discourse (see the quotation below).

The currently available inventory of relevant Arabic texts suggests that essentially equivalent narratives were already known in pre-Islamic or early Islamic Arabic tradition prior to Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ. This is documented by versified versions of relevant texts by poets such as al-Nābigha al-Dhubyānī (d. 604), Umayya b. Abī l-Ṣalt (d. ca. 630), Yazīd b. Mufarrigh al-Ḥimyarī (d. ca. 688), and others.¹⁵See ‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 18–19‎. The scarcity of their documentation before Kalīla wa-Dimna does not bespeak their absence, as the absence of proof does not necessarily constitute a proof of absence. An additional argument here is the fact that the void stems, to a major extent, from the fact that Arabic written tradition only developed with the advent of Islam. Prior to the first/seventh century, Arabic tradition was largely tantamount to oral tradition. As such, it was subject to variation and potential oblivion. What Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ certainly achieved was to introduce a substantial number of previously unknown fables (ultimately deriving from Indian tradition) to the Arabic audience. In addition, by convincingly arguing for the tales’ supreme educational value, he made the citation of animal tales as arguments intellectually and socially acceptable in the Arabic and Muslim literatures and societies. In this respect, the impact of Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ’s work can hardly be overestimated. As for his understanding of narratives pertinent to the present discussion, this is what Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ says:

ولم تزل العلماء من كل أمة، وأهل كل لسان، يلتمسون أن يُعقل عنهم، ويحتالون لذلك بصنوف الحيل، ويبتغون في إخراج ما عندهم من العلل، حتى كان من تلك العلل وضعُ بليغ الكلام ومنمقه على أفواه البهائم والطير؛ فاجتمع لهم بذلك خلال: أما هم فوجدوا منصرفًا في القول وشعابًا.¹⁶Ibn al-‎Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ, Kalīlah and Dimnah (ed. and trans. Fishbein/Montgomery), 22‎.

In order to make their intention comprehensible, scholars of every nation and tongue have employed a variety of devices and means when presenting their arguments. One device was to put eloquent and elegant language into the mouths of animals and birds. This enabled them to accomplish a number of things: they found a way to speak indirectly and to communicate through implication.¹⁷Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ, Kalīlah and Dimnah (ed. and trans. Fishbein/Montgomery), 23‎.

The wording Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ here uses to define the genre, probably for the first time in Arabic literature, is waḍaʿa … ʿalā afwāh al-bahāʾim wa-l-ṭayr. Literally translated as “put … into the mouths of beasts and birds,” this can also be rendered as “attribute … to speaking beasts and birds.” In the following centuries, this simple, yet striking descriptive terminology was generally accepted and applied to similar tales by other authors (with little modification). In order to fathom the complexity of the research question, the following considerations reproduce the perspective of premodern Arabic authors in detail in order to arrive at a nuanced understanding that does not privilege Western notions. The following assessment applies a pragmatic bottom-up approach taking the minimal definition above as a starting point. It is essentially based on an inventory of 160 scattered tales featuring speaking animals in over 1,000 individual attestations. Although premodern Arab authors never bothered to amass comprehensive compilations of scattered animal tales, several works of adab literature contain clusters or chapters amassing such narratives, the latter usually bearing a distinct title.

The earliest of these chapters is a section in Ibn Abī ʿAwn’s (d. 322/934), al-Ajwiba al-muskita (Ready-witted responses).¹⁸‎Ibn Abī ʿAwn, al-Ajwiba al-muskita (ed. May), 126–127‎. It bears the title Min amthāl al-Yūnāniyyīn (From the parables of the Greeks), thus clearly indicating the perceived origin of the cited items. One of the most extensive sections of tales featuring speaking animals in premodern Arabic literature is contained in al-Rāghib al-Iṣfahānī’s (d. shortly before 401/1010) Muḥāḍarāt al-udabāʾ (Conversations of the educated).¹⁹Al-‎Raghib al-Iṣfahānī, Muḥāḍarāt al-udabāʾ (ed. Ṭibāʿ), 2: 750–753.‎ Comprising more than 20 items, the section bears the relatively unspecific heading Ḥikāyāt ʿan al-bahāʾim, “Tales about beasts.”

Chronologically next is chapter 14 in the seventh and final volume of al-Ābī’s (d. 421/1030) comprehensive encyclopedia of anecdotes, Nathr al-durr (The scattering of pearls/Pearls of prose).²⁰‎Ābī, Nathr al-durr (ed. Mahfuz), 7,145-147‎. The chapter is titled Amthāl wa-nawādir ʿalā lisān al-bahāʾim, literally “parables and tales on the tongue of beasts.” The wording refers to speaking animals or, more exactly, to animals to which the capacity to speak is attributed in the context of a fictional narrative. Since speech is usually regarded as a feature uniquely germane to humans, the attribution of speaking to animals not only implies the use of language as a means of communication but also the underlying mental process as well as the conscious use of arguments and the resulting consequences in terms of action. Tales with “speaking animals” may thus be conceived as tales in which animals think, speak, and/or act as though they were human. Consequently, the authors citing these tales exemplify human behavior by attributing it to animals.

A section (faṣl) of chapter 22 in the book al-Azmina wa-l-amkina (Times and places) by al-Ābī’s contemporary al-Marzūqī (d. 421/1030) bears the heading Fīmā wuḍiʿa ʿalā alsinat al-bahāʾim, “On what is attributed to speaking (literally: placed on the tongue of) beasts.”²¹Al-‎Marzūqī, al-Azmina wa-l-amkina, 269–270‎. The inclusion of tales featuring speaking animals in that chapter apparently results from the fact that the animals (most of which are domestic animals) describe their reaction to coldness, particularly their actions on a chilly night. In general terms, most of the items listed by al-Marzūqī are intellectual exercises, that is tales in which animals use rare words to speak about their properties.

In his Jamʿ al-jawāhir (The Gathering of jewels) al-Ḥuṣrī al-Qayrawānī (d. 453/1061) has a section with the heading Nawādir tuḥkā ʿan ghayr al-nās, “Extraordinary tales told about other than humans.”²²Al-‎Ḥuṣrī al-Qayrawānī, Jamʿ al-jawāhir (ed. al-Bijāwī), 138–139‎. Eight out of the nine texts included in this section feature speaking animals in tales both known and unknown in the Graeco-Latin tradition. The first text explains the unique wording of the chapter heading, as it features the devil (Iblīs), who is asked about his experience with students. In terms of genre terminology, the chapter heading had no noticeable impact, although the specification ghayr al-nās, “other than humans,” has the potential to serve as an ideal classifier for the large variety of animal and nonanimal characters acting in narratives. In his Tadhkira (Anthology) Ibn Ḥamdūn (d. 562/1167) includes altogether three relatively short sections with animal tales.²³‎Ibn Ḥamdūn, al-Tadhkira (ed. Abbas/Abbas), 3: 141-142‎; 7: 221–222, 250–251. Whereas the first section bears the heading mimma wuḍiʿa ʿalā lisān al-ḥayawān, the headings of the two following sections differ only in using the word al-bahāʾim instead, all of them essentially meaning “Of what is attributed to speaking (literally: placed on the tongue of) animals/beasts.” All of Ibn Ḥamdūn’s tales are attested in earlier sources, whether deriving from Greek/shared Mediterranean or Arabic tradition.

Ibn al-Jawzī’s (d. 597/1201) book on clever people, Akhbār al-adhkiyāʾ, contains two chapters relevant for the present study. Chapter 32 bears the heading Fī mā dhukira ʿan al-ḥayawān al-bahīm mimmā yushbihu kalām al-ādamiyyīn, “About what is related about brute animals in terms of what resembles human speech.”²⁴‎Ibn al-Jawzī, Akhbār al-adhkiyāʾ (ed. al-Rifai), 231–240‎, ch. 32. The tales of this chapter discuss remarkable animal actions, such as the astuteness and unconditional helpfulness of pet dogs, that suggest a transgression of the boundaries of normally perceived animal actions and cannot necessarily be regarded as fables under our minimal definition. In contrast, the same work’s chapter 33 bears the heading Fī dhikr mā ḍarabathu l-ʿArab al-ḥukamāʾ mathalan ʿalā alsinat al-ḥayawān al-bahīm mimmā yadullu ʿalā l-dhakāʾ, “Account of what the wise Arabs coined as parables about speaking (literally: on the tongue of) brute animals that indicates cleverness/intelligence.”²⁵‎Ibn al-Jawzī, Akhbār al-adhkiyāʾ (ed. al-Rifai), 241–245‎, ch. 33. This heading is remarkable in several ways. First, it refers explicitly to ancient Arab tradition; second, it states a direct correspondence between the mathal (here rendered as “parable”) and the tale about speaking animals; and third, it draws attention to the fact that, although the fictional character of the tales must have been obvious to the author, he allowed traits of cleverness or intelligence (dhakāʾ) to the animals. For the following centuries, works with specific chapters devoted to animal tales appear to be lacking. They only reappear in works pertaining to the late Ottoman period in the twelfth/eighteenth century. The headings of the chapters in these compilations are closely similar, and their content documents a considerable overlap.²⁶See ‎Marzolph, “Fluid Fables.”‎ This relates to chapter 27 of the Nuzhat al-udabāʾ (Entertainment of the educated) with the rhymed heading Fī mā jāʾa min al-amthāl al-ḥisān ʿalā alsinat al-ḥayawān, “What has been cited of the admirable (i.e., instructive) parables with speaking animals;”²⁷MS Gotha orient. A 2706, ‎109a–116a‎. the unnumbered chapter in the anonymous and undated Majmūʿ, ms. Istanbul Aya Sofya 2938, has Nawādir ʿalā alsinat al-ṭuyūr wa-l-wuḥūsh, “Extraordinary tales about speaking birds and wild animals;” ²⁸MS Istanbul Aya Sofya 2938; see ‎Rosenthal, “A Small Collection of Aesopic Fables in Arabic Translation.”‎ al-Ḥifnāwī headed the second chapter of his Bughyat al-jalīs (The Desire of the table companions) as Fī mā jāʾa min al-nawādir wa-l-amthāl ʿalā alsinat al-ḥayawān, “What has been cited of the extraordinary tales and parables with speaking animals;”²⁹MS Paris arabe 3448, ‎143b–148a‎. and chapter 13 of al-Satīwī’s Zubad al-udabāʾ (The Choicest parts of the educated) has Fī l-amthila al-ḥisān al-wārida ʿalā alsinat al-ḥayawān, “On admirable (i.e., instructive) parables to be found about speaking animals.”³⁰MS Paris arabe 3579, ‎128b–133b‎.

The above headings for specific chapters also appear with a fair variety of different, although closely similar wordings as classifications for individual texts or shorter clusters of animal tales.³¹See ‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 12–17‎. Altogether, the various attested wordings demonstrate that the most widely applied terminology for what I suggest calling the Arabic fable over the centuries can be abstracted as ʿalā/ʿan lisān/alsinat/alsun al-bahāʾim/al-ḥayawān/al-ḥayawānāt (on the tongue of/featuring speaking beasts/animals). In addition to this standard terminology, the sources document a small number of expressions referring to more specific entities than just animals or beasts. In addition to the explicitly mentioned partridge (al-ḥajala), wolf (al-dhiʾb), and snake/serpent (al-ḥayya), they include the generic denominations al-aḥnāsh (snakes), al-hawāmm (vermin; reptiles), al-ṭayr (birds), al-ʿajmāwāt (dumb/speechless beasts), and al-jamād(āt) (inorganic bodies or inanimate beings).

Specifics of the Arabic Fable and Some Specimens

About two thirds of the 160 scattered tales featuring speaking animals so far documented are specific to the Arabic tradition, implying that they are currently either first or even exclusively attested in Arabic literature. These texts may justly be regarded as pertaining to the Arabic tradition proper.³²See ‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 29–32‎. Notably, this pertains to the oldest layer of scattered texts, i.e., items first attested in the second/eighth and early third/ninth centuries. These narratives are characterized by a set of pertinent features. The most peculiar animals of the Arabic fables are the lizard (al-ḍabb) and the hyena (al-ḍabuʿ). In the realm of popular tradition, the lizard acts as judge or umpire for the animals; the hyena represents the acme of both greed and stupidity. In general, the animals featuring in the Arabic narratives are part of a rural landscape that mirrors the demanding life of Bedouins, either sedentary farmers or migratory herders. Farmers as well as nomads kept small livestock, primarily chicken, sheep, and goats, but also camels. The constant battle for survival is a prominent theme. Whereas many animals appearing in the tales are well-known from the Graeco-Latin tradition, such as most prominently the fox and the lion, the Arabic narratives feature several animals typical for the arid wilderness, such as the dung beetle (al-khunfusāʾ), the rock hyrax (al-wabr), the sandgrouse (al-qaṭā), and the scorpion (al-ʿaqrab). In addition to the lizard that apparently constituted part of the Bedouin diet, the gazelle and the hare are hunted as game. The setting of the Arabic fable generally is a rural one, with only a few fables mentioning buildings and thus alluding to permanent settlements.

Many Arabic fables display a subtle sense of humor. The following three fables are representative samples documented in Arabic literature by the third/ninth century.

أبصرت الضبعُ الظبيةَ على حمار، فقالت: أردفيني، فأردفتها. فقالت: ما أفره حمارك! ثم سارت يسيرًا فقالت: ما أفره حمارنا! فقالت لها الظبية: انزلي قبل أن تقولي: ما أفره حماري.فأنزلتها.³³Muʾarrij al-‎Sadūsī, al-Amthāl (ed. ʿAbd al-Tawwāb), 47‎.

The hyena sees the gazelle riding a donkey and asks permission to join. Once astride the mount, the hyena exclaims, “How brisk your donkey is!” After a while, the hyena exclaims, “How brisk our donkey is!” At this point, the gazelle asks the hyena to dismount, lest the hyena say next, “How brisk my donkey is!”³⁴‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 65‎, no. 10.

زعموا أن البازي قال للديك: ما في الأرض شيء أقل وفاءً منك.قال: وكيف؟ قال: أخذك أهلك بيضةً فحضنوك، ثم خرجت على أيديهم فأطعموك على أكفهم، ونشأت بينهم، حتى إذا كبرت صرت لا يدنو منك أحد إلا طرت هاهنا وهاهنا، وضججت وصحت. وأُخذتُ أنا من الجبال مسنًّا، فعلّموني وألّفوني، ثم يُخلّى عني فآخذ صيدي في الهواء، فأجيء به إلى صاحبي. فقال له الديك: إنك لو رأيت من البزاة في سفافيدهم مثل ما رأيت من الديوك، لكنت أنفر مني.³⁵Al-‎Jāḥiẓ, al-Ḥayawān (ed. ʿUyūn al-Sūd), 2: 442, no. 547‎.

The falcon chides the rooster for his apparent unfaithfulness. Even though the falcon was caught by the humans, he is proud to serve them faithfully. The rooster, on the contrary, being well fed and taken care of by the humans, runs away as soon as he sees them. “Well,” responds the rooster, “but maybe you would act differently if you saw your own kin being grilled on a spit.”³⁶‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 87–89‎, no. 24.

قيل للحمار: لِمَ لا تجترّ؟ قال: أكره مضغ الباطل³⁷‎Dīnawarī, al-Mujālasa wa-jawāhir al-ʿilm, 7: 77‎.

The donkey is asked why he does not ruminate. He responds, “I detest to chew on something useless.”³⁸‎Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, 104–105‎, no. 40.

Conclusion

Based on a comprehensive survey of premodern Arabic sources, this study defines the Arabic equivalent to the fable of Graeco-Latin tradition as a narrative (ḥikāya, ḥadīth, nādira, ramz) ʿalā/ʿan lisān/alsinat/alsun al-bahāʾim/al-ḥayawān/al-ḥayawānā (featuring speaking beasts/animals). Texts characterized by this or similar wording are narratives featuring anthropomorphized nonhuman entities that are normally not endowed with the capacity to think, speak, or act like human beings.³⁹On thinking as preceding speaking, see the important considerations by ‎Ghersetti, “Des animaux parlants.”‎ The genre definition primarily refers to usually relatively short narrative texts in prose (or, rarely, poetry) in which the nonhuman entities, mainly through their spoken words, but also through their actions, make a statement, provide counsel, or express sentiments normally regarded as being specific to humans only. The nonhuman entities are usually animals, most often mammals: carnivore mammals that feature prominently are the fox, the wolf, and the hyena; herbivore mammals include the gazelle as well as a number of domesticated animals such as the donkey, the camel, and the sheep. In addition, the narratives feature birds, reptiles, insects, or other small living beings such as arachnids like the scorpion or the spider. Rarely occurring nonanimal actors include plants, inanimate things, natural phenomena, or celestial objects.⁴⁰See Marzolph, The Arabic Fable, no. 36: The Two Palm Trees; 155, no. 111: The Pumpkin Plant and the Pine Tree; 129–130, no. 71: The Waterskin as Floating Aid; 154 –155, no. 110: The Wall and the Peg; 164–165, no. 127: The Goat and the Waterskin; 97–98, no. 33: The South Wind and the North Wind; 148–149, no. 100: Canopus and Venus‎. In the understanding of premodern Arabic authors, tales in which animals use rare words to speak about their properties, or etiological tales explaining the origin of properties specific for the respective animals also fall under the same category.⁴¹See ‎Gelder, “In the Time of al-Fiṭaḥl.”‎ Moreover, particularly in works of the late premodern period, the genre also appears to encompass tales in which humans read animal behavior as expressing mental processes that are supposedly exclusively germane to humans. Often, relevant narratives display a humorous approach to the vicissitudes and foibles of the animal (and, by analogy, the human) existence. Often, but not in the majority of cases, a narrative featuring speaking animals is consciously cited as a simile or parable (mathal) to teach some kind of generally applicable (moral) lesson. In these cases (and maybe generally), the relevant narrative is a subgenre of the parable.

Several Arabic narratives inspired Latin adaptations by medieval European authors, most prominently by the English author Odo of Cheriton (d. 1246/47) who spent several years teaching at universities in Spain.⁴²‎Marzolph, “Reading Odo of Cheriton’s (d. ca 1246/47) Fables from an Arabist Perspective.“‎ Modern research largely ignores the Arabic dimension of the narratives adopted by Odo and summarily treats them as fables “in the Aesopic tradition.”⁴³‎Perry, Babrius and Phaedrus‎. This appropriation neglects the creative individual contribution of Arabic tradition by uncritically subsuming the tales of Arabic origin in the dominant Western tradition. It is here that future research must still do justice to the historical contribution by studying the impact of Arabic narratives in international tradition.