{ix} Introduction

The history of the fables known variously as Kalila and Dimna and the Bidpai Fables is long and involved. It began in India with a collection of animal fables that became known as the Pañćatantra ‘Five Sections’ set in a frame story, some version of which is thought to have been composed around the third century before our era.1 Over time the Sanskrit Pañćatantra has inspired at least twenty-five recensions and many translations into regional languages in India, but this preface is concerned instead with the westward migration of the tales.

According to the oft-repeated legend, a version of the tales was brought to Iran from India and translated into Middle Persian by a physician named Burzoë at the behest of Chosroës I Anoshirvan, who ruled Persia from AD 531 to 579. The Middle Persian translation and the Sanskrit text from which it was purportedly made have both disappeared without a trace.

Not long after the Middle Persian version was produced it was translated into Syriac. This version is known as the Old Syriac to distinguish it from a later one, and so far as is known, it gave rise to no other versions.2

In the middle of the eighth century, an Arabic-writing Persian scholar named Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ translated the Middle Persian into Arabic.3 One of the earliest examples of literary narrative prose in Arabic, the translation {x} became a model of elegant writing and achieved such lasting popularity that it is still read in schools all over the Arab world. Translations of it were made into (1) Syriac, (2) Greek, (3) Persian, (4) Hebrew, and (5) Spanish.

(1) A Syriac translation of Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s Arabic was made by an unidentified Christian priest in the tenth or eleventh century (the New Syriac version).4

(2) A Greek translation was made around 1050 by Simeon, son of Seth, and that was rendered at some point, perhaps as early as the twelfth century, into Old Slavonic and later into Italian.5

(3) The first rendering of Kalila and Dimna into Persian was made by the poet Rudaki in the mid-tenth century, but only a few scattered lines of his work remain. Around 1120 Abu’l-Ma‘ali Nasrullah, a writer employed in the court chancery of the rulers of the Ghaznavid Empire, freely translated Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s Arabic into New Persian and dedicated his work to the ruler Bahramshah (r. 1117–1157).6 It is apparent that Nasrullah found the economy of expression that characterizes Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s Arabic—not to mention the elegance of diction—difficult to capture in Persian. His version is significantly expanded, and what was expressed in one pithy phrase in Arabic may run to a page of Persian, not counting the lines of epigrammatic poetry, often Arabic, that were inserted in conformity with the approved style of the time. Nasrullah’s version is also replete with quotations from the Koran and hadith, “all of which [sound] rather quaint in the mouths of animals in the jungles of India.”7

{xi} At the end of the fifteenth century, Nasrullah’s Persian having become hopelessly old-fashioned, Husayn Va‘iz Kashifi, a Timurid polymath, composed a new version in the fashionably elegant prose of the period and called it Anvār-i Suhaylī ‘The Lights of Canopus.’8 After lavishing praise on Nasrullah’s prose style, Kashifi adds:

However, because he introduces strange words, embellishes his prose with Arabic features, overdoes the use of various metaphors and similes, and is too wordy in obscure locutions and expressions, the mind of the listener fails to enjoy the purpose of the book and to comprehend the contents, and the reader is also unable to connect the beginning of a story to the end. All this inevitably leads to weariness on the part of the reader and listener, especially in this elegant time, when people have reached such a level of subtlety that they can comprehend meanings without their being decked out in verbiage, not to mention the fact that for some words one has to thumb through dictionaries and search to discover the meaning. For all these reasons, such a valuable book was almost abandoned and nearly became obsolete, and the people of the world were on the verge of being deprived of its benefits.9

In addition to being completely reworded in a much more fluid ­Persian, Kashifi’s version is considerably expanded from Nasrullah’s. While he retains the basic framework and stories of the earlier version, Kashifi added a number of stories, making his version considerably longer than Nasrullah’s. A hundred years after Kashifi, it was once again felt that it was time for a stylistic revision. This time the Mughal emperor Akbar’s friend and biographer Abu’l-Fazl composed a new version entitled ‘Iyār-i dānish ‘The Assay of Knowledge’ in the Persian style prevalent in India at that time.

{xii} (4) A Hebrew translation of the Arabic was made in the twelfth or thirteenth century by a Rabbi Joel.10 Toward the end of the thirteenth century, Giovanni da Capua made a Latin translation of the Hebrew.11 A German translation was made from the Latin, and the earliest printed edition is from around 1480.12 From the German were produced translations in Danish in 1618 and in Dutch in 1623.13 A Spanish translation of the Latin appeared in 1493.14 On it is based Agnolo Firenzuola’s Discorsi degli animali ragionanti tra loro, first published in Venice in 1548, and that was translated into French in 1556.15 An Italian translation of the Latin was made in 1552 by Anton Francesco Doni, and part of that was translated into English by Sir Thomas North in 1570.16

(5) In 1251 Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s text was translated into Old Spanish by an unknown author.17 It and Giovanni da Capua’s Latin formed the basis of a later Latin version in 1313.18

As a testimony to the enormous worldwide popularity of Kalila and Dimna, there are today versions to be found in Arabic, Armenian, ­Azerbaijani, Chinese, Croatian, Danish, English, French, Georgian, {xiii} German, Greek, Hungarian, Indonesian, Italian, Karakalpak, Kashmiri, Kurdish, Laotian, Lebanese, Malay, Marathi, Nyanja, Old Church Slavic, Portuguese, Punjabi, Russian, Spanish, Tatar, Thai, Tongan, Turkish (both Ottoman and modern), Uighur, Urdu, and Uzbek.

The collection is often known in the West as the Bidpai Fables after the philosopher Bīd(a)bā, who serves King Dabshalīm, as Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ calls them.19 In Nasrullah’s version, those names are dispensed with. The philosopher becomes the Brahman, and Dabshalīm is simply the “Raja of India.” Kashifi transposes the setting to “olden days in the farthest reaches of the realm of Chīn,” which is the equivalent of “long ago and far away,” but he retains the emperor Dabshalīm and calls his vizier Bīdpāy, or ­Bidpai, an adaptation of the name given by Ibn al-Muqaffa‘.

The Pañćatantra belongs to an Indian genre called nītiśāstra, a treatise on nīti, or right, wise, and moral behavior that leads to security, prosperity, {xiv} resolute action, friendship, and learning to produce joy. The five sections of the Pañćatantra, into each of which are embedded numerous stories, are as follows:

(1) mitrabheda ‘breach of friendship’: The lion king Pingalaka (unnamed in Arabic and Persian) and the bull Sanjīvaka (Shanzaba) become friends, but the king’s scheming jackal retainer Damanaka (Dimna) breaks up the friendship.

(2) mitralābha ‘acquisition of friendship’: A crow sees a mouse free a pigeon from a snare and befriends the mouse against the mouse’s initial objections. A turtle and a gazelle join them. When the gazelle is trapped, they set him free, and then they work together to save the turtle when he is caught.

(3) kākolūkīya ‘crows and owls (natural enemies)’: A crow gains access to a group of owls and betrays them to the crows, who set the owls’ cave ablaze.

(4) labdhapraṇāśa ‘loss of gain’: A crocodile conspires to get a monkey’s heart to heal his wife, but the monkey escapes through guile.

(5) aparīkṣitakāraka ‘ill-considered action’: A Brahman’s wife leaves her child with a mongoose. Mistakenly believing that the bloodstained mongoose that greets her on her return has killed the child, she kills it, whereas the mongoose actually saved the child from a snake.

Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s Arabic version also contains these five chapters, but after the first chapter, to accord with Islamic sensibilities, which demanded justice for Dimna’s outrageous scheming against the bull, he inserts a chapter on the trial of Dimna. After those six chapters, Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s version also contains another eight chapters, (7) Īlādh (the minister), Shādram (the king), and Īrākht (the king’s wife); (8) the cat and the mouse; (9) the king and the bird Finza; (10) the lion and the fasting jackal; (11) the traveler and the goldsmith, and the monkey, the snake, and the tiger; (12) the king, the nobleman’s son, the merchant’s son, and the husbandman’s son; (13) the archer, the she-wolf, and the jackal; and (14) the ascetic and the guest. The cat and the mouse of chapter eight, the king and the bird of chapter nine, and the lion and the jackal of chapter ten are all found in the Mahābhārata. These three stories are found already in the Old Syriac translation, so whatever text the Syriac translator had must have included them.

In Nasrullah’s version there are, in addition to Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s fourteen chapters, four prefaces: (1) Nasrullah’s preface outlining the history {xv} of the book, (2) a Persian adaptation of Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s preface, (2) Buzurjmihr’s preface to Burzoë’s translation, and (4) the testament of the physician Burzoë.

Major themes that are stressed throughout versions of Kalila and Dimna in their Islamic guise are ḥazm, a quality that is a combination of resolve, firmness, judiciousness, and prudence, and muruvvat ‘gallantry.’ Muruvvat is etymologically connected to the Arabic word for ‘man’ (mar’) and would be the equivalent of ‘manliness’ were not modern notions of manliness at such odds with the medieval ideal. It would also be the equivalent of ‘virtue,’ which is derived from the Latin for ‘man,’ vir, if the modern understanding of virtue were not limited to moral excellence. The ideals of chivalry are not far from those of muruvvat, but chivalry conjures up images of knights in armor and is inappropriate. The best modern word for muruvvat is probably ‘gallantry’ because it still contains implications of moral excellence, bravery and courage, and good manners, all of which are implied in muruvvat. The Persian equivalent of muruvvat is hunar, and both words are often found on the pages of Kalila and Dimna.

Another quality that is often mentioned is ‘ignorance’ (jahl, nādānī). For the Arabic- and Persian-writing authors of Kalila and Dimna, ‘ignorance’ is not so much the lack of knowledge as it is the lack of self-­control—that is, impetuosity and incautiousness. Anyone who rushes into action not fully prepared and without judicious reflection on the consequences of his actions is guilty of ‘ignorance.’

Much advice is given throughout concerning master-servant relationships. Few people these days have servants, and that relationship is a thing of the past, but if employer-employee relationships are substituted, much will be immediately recognizable.

In the various versions, one animal is sometimes substituted for another. For example, the Pañćatantra story that is chapter five in ­Nasrullah’s version is the story of a monkey and a crocodile. In Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s version, the crocodile is a tortoise (ghaylam) and remains a tortoise or turtle in subsequent versions. While some substitutions may have been made because the animal in question, like the mongoose or the crocodile, was unfamiliar in Arabic- and Persian-speaking environments, usually it makes little or no difference since the animals, while being appropriate to their settings, behave less like animals and more like human beings. In Nasrullah’s chapter twelve, the King and the Brahmans, there are no animals {xvi} at all. The purpose of the chapter was originally to excoriate Brahmans, and it is thought to be thoroughly Buddhist in origin.20 Ibn al-Muqaffa‘ and, following him, Nasrullah have expanded this chapter into a long and tedious exchange between the king and his minister Bilar before the resolution of the tale. Kashifi, as usual more interested in good storytelling than in faithfully reproducing an old tale, reduced the exchange to the bare minimum.

Changes in other respects, too, have been made in the various translations. In the Old Syriac version, the various holy men of the Sanskrit are called mgušē ‘Magi,’ or Zoroastrian priests. In the Islamic versions, they have all become nāsik ‘ascetics,’ since in the Islamic world there was no priestly caste, and there was certainly nothing analogous to the hermits and Brahmans of the Sanskrit.

This translation has been made from Nasrullah’s version, but Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s text has also been taken into account, and Kashifi’s interpretations have been relied upon when Nasrullah’s text is ambiguous or obscure.

Some liberties have been taken with the translation. Nasrullah uses a heavily Arabicized vocabulary in his Persian, “decked out in verbiage,” as Kashifi says. He quite often uses Arabic words in metaphorical senses far removed from the usual meanings of the words—particularly the meanings they normally have in Persian. I have tried to render these in an understandable fashion in modern English. It is impossible, given ­Nasrullah’s style, to fix a specific meaning to a given word and to translate it uniformly throughout the work. Routinely omitted from translation are the quotations of Arabic poetry with which Nasrullah embellished his text. However apropos they may be to the topic at hand, they rarely sound good in translation and wind up sounding either obtuse or silly. Kashifi omitted the Arabic lines altogether, perhaps because few in his milieu would have understood them, and added a lot of Persian poetry of his own. There are also a few places in the text that are insolubly problematic. They were deleted altogether by Kashifi, a fact that may well indicate that these places in the text were already corrupt in his time.

{xvii} Manuscripts of Kalila and Dimna were often copiously illustrated. For a catalog, see Ernst Grube, “Prolegomena for a Corpus Publication of Illustrated Kalīlah wa Dimnah Manuscripts,” Islamic Art 4 (1990–1991): 301–481.

Concordance of Versions of the Tales

	Panch.21	Syriac22	Muq.23	Nasr.24	Kashifi25
Nasrullah’s introduction	—	—	—	2–27	—
Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s preface	—	—	46–52	28–43	—
Anoshirvan sends Burzoë to India	—		19–29	30–37	—
Buzurjmihr’s preface	—	—	—	38–43	—
Testament of the physician Burzoë	—	—	30–44	44–58	—
I. On causing dissension among allies: The lion and the bull, and the jackals Karataka (Kalila) and Damanaka (Dimna)	19–25	Chap. 1 1–50	Chap. 1 53–101	Chap. 1 59–126	12–166
The monkey that pulled the wedge	25–41	3	55	62	75
The jackal that tried to eat a drum	41–48	10	62	70–71	87
The adventures of an ascetic	58–62	12	65–67	74–79	92–97
{xviii} Battling rams kill a greedy jackal	61–62	12	65	75	92
A weaver cuts the nose of a bawd	62–71	13–17	66–67	76–78	94–97
The crow that killed a snake	74–76	17–20	69–72	81–85	103–6
The crab cuts off the heron’s head	76–81	18–20	69–71	82–85	104–7
The hare that outwitted the lion	81–89	20–23	72–73	86–88	110–12
How the louse got killed trying to be nice to a bug	119–22	25	77–78	—	—
How the lion’s servants killed the camel	—	32–36	84–85	106–9	136–40
The sandpiper that ­defeated the ocean	145–62	36–37	88–91	110–13	141
The turtle and the geese	147–49	37–38	89	110–12	141–44
The fate of three fish	149–53	23–25	75–76	91–92	115–17
The bird that tried to advise a monkey	184	43–44	94	116–17	150–51
The duck that saw the reflection of a star in the water	—	—	—	102	126–27
Two friends and betrayed trust	184–97	44–46	95–98	117–20	152–56
How the mongoose ate the heron’s chicks	188–89	46–48	97	118–19	154–55
The iron-eating mice	192–95	48–49	99	122	162–64
The trial of Dimna	—	—	Chap. 2 102–24	Chap. 2 127–56	167–219
The woman who couldn’t tell the difference between her lover and his slave	—	—	109–10	137–38	194–95
The quack physician	—	—	—	146–47	205–7
The scheming gamekeeper	—	—	—	153–54	213–16
{xix} II. On securing allies: The crow, rat, tortoise, and deer that became friends	213–72	Chap. 2 51–73	Chap. 3 125–42	Chap. 3 157–89	220–64
The ascetic and the mouse	231	59–66	131	170–80	243
The woman who traded husked sesame for unhusked	234–38	60	132–34	171–73	244
How the greedy jackal died eating a bowstring	235–37	61	133	172	245
How the deer got caught in a trap	279–88	70–73	140	184–89	260
III. On war and peace: The enmity between crows and owls	291–304	Chap. 6 92–122	Chap. 4 143–66	Chap. 4 191–236	265
The ass in leopard’s skin	409–12	—	—	—	—
The birds who wanted to make the owl their prince	304–8	97–98	147–48	201–11	280
The hare that fooled an elephant	308–15	98–101	148–49	202–5	281
The partridge and hare take their case to the cat	315–24	101–4	149–51	206–8	287
Three rogues who fooled a Brahman	324–26	104–7	152–53	211	295
The old merchant and his young wife	341–43	107–8	155	214	300
The thief, the ogre, and a Brahman	343–46	108–10	155–56	215	301
How the unfaithful wife tricked her foolish husband	348–53	110–13	156–57	217–21	303
The marriage of a mouse that turned into a girl	353–59	113–18	159–60	224–26	317
The frogs that went for a ride on the back of a snake	368–70	118–22	162–63	230–32	323–25
{xx} IV. On losing what you have gained: The friendship between a crocodile and a monkey	381–422	Chap. 3 74–81	Chap. 5 167–74	Chap. 5 238–59	333–60
The ass without ears or a heart	—	78–81	172–74	253–57	353–59
V. On hasty actions: Killing a mongoose in haste	432–34	Chap. 4 82–85	Chap. 6 175–77	Chap. 6 261–65	362–73
The dreamy beggar	453–54	82–83	176	263	366–67
Escaping calamity by being kind to an enemy: The cat and the mouse26	—	Chap. 5 86–91	Chap. 8 205–10	Chap. 7 266–81	375–97
Enemies who are best avoided	—	Chap. 7	Chap. 9	Chap. 8	398–422
The king and the bird Finza27	—	123–30	211–16	283–303	—
The old woman and her daughter	—	—	—	288–90	406–7
Kings and their intimates	—	Chap. 8	Chap. 10 217–27	Chap. 9 304–33	426–59
The lion and the jackal28	—	131–43	—	308–33	—
One who has to harm others to preserve his own life	—	—	Chap. 13 239–42	Chap. 10 334–39	462–75
The archer and the she-lion	—	—	—	335–39	462–74
One who foolishly abandons his own calling	—	—	Chap. 14 243–44	Chap. 11 340–46	476–92
The ascetic and his guest	—	—	—	340–45	477–85
The washerman and the crane	—	—	—	—	481
{xxi} The man who lost his beard	—	—	—	—	482–83
The crow that wanted to walk like a partridge	—	—	244	344–45	490–91
Clemency is the best quality in rulers	—	Chap. 9	Chap. 7	Chap. 12 347–96	493–533
The king and the ­Brahmans	—	144–79	178–204	351–96	496–533
The pair of doves that stored up grain	—	159	—	377–78	527
Who deserves the king’s trust?	—	—	Chap. 11 228–32	Chap. 13 397–407	534–58
The goldsmith and the traveler	—	—	—	402–6	557
The role of destiny	—	—	Chap. 12 233–38	Chap. 14 408–17	559–82
The prince and his friends	—	—	—	409–16	560–80
The man who bought a pair of parrots and set them free	—	—	—	416	577–79

1. The version of the Pañćatantra that exists today almost certainly contains many accretions and has been massively reworked over time. The Pañćatantra, the Mahābhārata, and the Hitopadeśa all contain elaborated parts of an original collection or stock of stories and fables. What was translated into Middle Persian and thence into Syriac and later into Arabic represents an earlier version of—or selection from—what became the Pañćatantra and not the Pañćatantra as it is now known.

2. The Old Syriac was edited and translated into German by Gustav Bickell with a long introduction by Theodor Benfey in 1876: Kalilag und Damnag: Alte syrische Übersetzung des indischen Fürstenspiegels (repr., Amsterdam: APA-Philo Press, 1981). A later edition of the Syriac was made by Friedrich Schulthess, Kalila und Dimna (Berlin: G. Reimer, 1911).

3. Among the numerous editions of Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s text are Calila et Dimna, ou Fables de Bidpai, ed. Silvestre de Sacy (Paris: Imprimerie Royale, 1816), and Louis Cheikho’s Beirut edition of 1905, La version arabe de Kalīlah et Dimnah, ou, Les fables de Bidpai (repr., Amsterdam: APA-Philo Press, 1981). An English translation of the Arabic was made in 1819 by Wyndham Knatchbull, Kalila and Dimna, or The Fables of Bidpai (Oxford: W. Baxter, 1819).

4. The Syriac Book of Kalilah and Dimnah was edited by William Wright in 1884 (repr., Amsterdam: APA-Philo Press, 1981). An English translation was made by Ion G. N. Keith-Falconer, Kalilah and Dimnah, or the Fables of Bidpai: Being an Account of Their Literary History (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1885).

5. The Greek text was edited by Sebastian Gottfried Starke, Specimen sapientiae Indorum veterum: Id est, liber ethico-politicus pervetustus, dictus arabice ودمنه کلیله, graece Στεφανιτης και Ιχνηλατης (Berlin: Johann Michael Rüdiger, 1697). The Italian translation, Del governo de’ regni, sotto morali esempi di animali ragionanti tra loro, was edited by Dominico Mammarelli and published in Ferrara in 1583.

6. Nasrullah’s translation, known as Kalīla u Dimna-i Bahrāmshāhī, was edited by Mujtabā Mīnuvī-Ṭihrānī, Tarjuma-i Kalīla u Dimna (Tehran: Dānishgāh, [1343] 1964). It has often been reprinted with various titles.

7. François de Blois, Burzōy’s Voyage to India and the Origin of the Book of Kalīlah wa Dimnah (London: Royal Asiatic Society, 1990), p. 5.

8. Suhayl is Canopus, a star (α Carinae) of great auspiciousness and the second brightest in the sky, but it is never visible north of the latitude of Athens. Suhaylī was the poetic pen name of a Timurid dignitary, Amir Shaykh-Ahmad, to whom ­Kashifi’s version was dedicated. Anvār-i Suhaylī was translated into English by Edward B. Eastwick, The Lights of Canopus (Hertford: S. Austin, 1854), and later by Arthur N. Wollaston (London: Wm. H. Allen, 1877). For a recent study of Anvār-i Suhaylī, see Christine von Ruymbeke, Kashefi’s Anvar-e Sohayli: Rewriting Kalila wa-Dimna in Timurid Herat (Leiden: Brill, 2016).

9. Kamāluddīn Ḥusayn Vā‘iẓ Kāshifī, Anvār-i Suhaylī (Tehran: Amīr Kabīr, [1362] 1983), p. 7.

10. Joseph Derenbourg, ed., Deux versions hébraïques du livre Kalîlâh et Dimnâh (Paris: F. Vieweg, 1881).

11. Giovanni da Capua, Directorium vitae humanae: Parabola antiquorum sapientum. The earliest known printed copy, in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge, dates from before 1483. The standard edition is by Joseph Derenbourg (Paris: F. Vieweg, 1887–1889).

12. Antonius von Pforr, Das Buch der Beispiele der alten Weisen, ed. Wilhelm Ludwig Holland (Stuttgart: Litterarischer Verein, 1860).

13. Christen Nielssen, De gamle vijses exempler oc hoffsprock (1618; repr., Copenhagen: J. H. Schultz, 1951–1953); Voorbeelsels der oude wyse (Amsterdam: Broer Jansz, 1623).

14. Exemplario contra los engaños y peligros del mundo (Zaragoza: Pablo Hurus, 1493).

15. Agnolo Firenzuola, La prima veste de’ discorsi degli animali di messer Agnolo ­Firenzuola, ed. Pier Carlo Tagliaferri (Imola, Italy: Angelini, 2009); Gabriel Cottier, Le plaisant et facétieux discours des animaux, nouvellement traduict de tuscan en françois (Lyon, 1556).

16. Anton Francesco Doni, La moral’ filosophia del Doni (Venice: Francesco ­Marcolini, 1552); Thomas North, The Morall Philosophie of Doni Drawne out of the Auncient Writers (London: Henry Denham, 1570).

17. Calila e Dimna, ed. Juan Manuel Cacho Blecua and María Jesús Lacarra (Madrid: Castalia, 1984).

18. Raymond de Béziers (Raimundus de Biterris), Liber de Kalila et Dimna, MS, Latin 8504, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris.

19. The frame story of the king and the philosopher is not found in the Pañćatantra as it exists today. In the Old Syriac, the king is called ܕܒܫܪܡ dbšrm, which looks like it could reflect a Middle Persian form that might well have been interpreted as Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s Dabshalīm since l and r are written with the same letter in Middle Persian. What it could have come from in Sanskrit is not known, since modern versions of the Sanskrit have no such character. The Old Spanish Dicelen is a transcription of the Hebrew דיסלם dyslm, which must have resulted from a miscopying or misreading of دبشلیم dbšlym (Dabshalīm) as دیسلم dyslm. In Giovanni da Capua’s Latin, the Hebrew is misread as דיסלס dysls and becomes Disles. Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s بیدبا Bīd(a)bā has a variety of names. In the Old Syriac, he is ܒܝܕܘܓ bydwg, which is probably to be read as Bēdawāg and could represent an assumed Middle Persian form like Wēda-wāga, Wēda-nāka, or Wēda-nāga (n and w are represented by the same sign in Middle Persian, as are k and g). The final -ka or -ga of Middle Persian would have been dropped in New Persian, so it could have been read as Wēdawā and written in Arabic as Bīd(a)bā. In the Hebrew version, the translator gave up on the Arabic altogether and called the philosopher סנדבאר (Sandabār), a mistake for סנדבאד (Sindbād), a name with which the translator would have been familiar from the well-known book Sindbad the Sage and the Seven Wise Masters (a different character altogether from Sinbad the Sailor of the Arabian Nights). Sandabar became Sendebar in Giovanni da Capua’s Latin translation. The variants in Old Spanish—Bundobet, Barduben, Burduben, and Bendubec—are all garbled versions of Bīd(a)bā. See Keith-Falconer, Kalilah and Dimnah, p. 271. In the fifth chapter of the Old Syriac version (Bickell, Kalilag, p. 57 of the Syriac text = Nasrullah chapter 7), the two characters are called ܙܕܫܬܪ (Zedashtar) and ܒܝܫܡ (Bisham), names that betray the original Indic names Yudhiṣṭhira and Bhīṣma from the Mahābhārata, and it is likely that the Middle Persian version had names much like those. Bidpai is what was turned into Pilpay, the name of the Indian sage to whom Jean de La Fontaine attributed his second collection of fables in 1671.

20. The premise of the basic frame of this story, the Brahmans’ exploitation of the fear of dreams and their intentional misrepresentation of the king’s dream to further their own aims, is shared by the Mahāsupina Jātaka. See E. B. Cowell, ed., The Jātaka, or Stories of the Buddha’s Former Births (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1895), 1:187.

21. Panch. = The Panchatantra, trans. Arthur W. Ryder (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1925). This is the Pañćatantra as it exists today.

22. Syriac = Kalila und Dimna, ed. Friedrich Schulthess (Berlin: G. Reimer, 1911). The Old Syriac translation is assumed to be the version closest to the lost Middle Persian translation.

23. Muq. = Ibn al-Muqaffa‘, Aqdam nuskha makhṭūṭa mu’arrakha li-kitāb Kalīla wa-Dimna, ed. Louis Cheikho (1905; repr., Amsterdam: APA-Philo Press, 1981).

24. Nasr. = Abū’l-Ma’ālī Naṣrullāh Munshī, Tarjuma-i Kalīla u Dimna, ed. Mujtabā Mīnuvī-Ṭihrānī (Tehran: Dānishgāh-i Ṭihrān, [1362] 1983).

25. Kashifi = Kamāluddīn Ḥusayn Vā‘iẓ Kāshifī, Anvār-i Suhaylī (Tehran: Amīr Kabīr, [1362] 1983). The late fifteenth-century reworking of Nasrullah’s translation of Ibn al-Muqaffa‘’s version.

26. The story of the cat and the mouse is found in Mahābhārata XII, vv. 4930 sqq. (section CXXXVIII).

27. The story of the king and the bird is found in Mahābhārata XII, vv. 5133 sqq. (section CXXXIX).

28. The story of the lion and the jackal is found in Mahābhārata XII, vv. 4084 sqq. (section CXI), where the lion is a tiger.