This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.

remained unavenged while the blood of Taghlib was always spilt with impunity. Then tauntingly he says further that an inquiry into the conduct of the two tribes will not fail to shew that the Thaglibians have always been guilty of many heinous crimes, treason and rebellion against the king, whose trust they always basely betrayed, while the Bakrians have ever conducted themselves nobly and shewed promptitude in serving the king, who is under deep obligation to them for the many noble services rendered by them to establish his power and to consolidate his rule. Among others, he quotes especially three prominent instances: firstly, when 'Amru was assailed by Ma'add in a large army under Qais; secondly, when Hujr led a large Persian army against 'Amru; and thirdly, when Imra-ul-Qais, brother of 'Amru, was released from his long captivity, and the blood of his father Munzir was fully avenged by the death of a great chieftain of the tribe of Ghassân, and by the leading of nine other chiefs into captivity. Bakr have also claims of blood on the favour of the king, inasmuch as he is their nephew on the mother's side. Such services and such claims of kinship are too strong to allow the king to be influenced by the insinuations of Banî Taghlib. In conclusion, the poet sarcastically enumerates instances of several campaigns lost by Banî Taghlib through sheer imbecility, rashness and faithlessness on their part; and tells them that it is only fair that they should abide by the consequences of their own misguided conduct without shifting the responsibility on to the shoulders of the rival tribe of Bakr, whose noble deeds, exalted position and high influence with the king they could not help looking upon without a tingling feeling of envy.
This poem stands in a marked and relieved contrast with the 5th poem in every respect. The poets are both chieftains of their respective tribes, each having the same subject and the same object in common, namely, the pleading of the cause