As the first installment of a voluminous series initiated by the general editor Ehsan Yarshater, which engages all of Persian history, this volume was undoubtedly a challenging task to brave for any scholar. The editor of such a volume, considering the complex history of Persian literature and also weighing what must be considered in terms of what literature can be defined as, was to be faced with a Herculean task not meant for the faint of heart. Anyone who reads this volume will agree that a review—in this case a glowing one—is merely a formality when considering the scholarly depth of this volume and without a shadow of a doubt the multifacetedness of its editor. This volume guides the reader for what is to come in the next seventeen large volumes and it does so articulately, judiciously, and finally by a clarity that is expected of one of the most formidable scholars in Iranian studies, J. T. P. de Bruijn. Those who have had the unique occasion of reading his work would agree that he has, yet again, achieved a seminal feat, this time in an anthology. Although he is perhaps best known for Of Piety and Poetry: The Interaction of Religion and Literature in the Life and Works of Hakim Sana’i of Ghazna (Leiden: Brill, 1983), he demonstrates a unique rigor in production of such a volume. That said, no one is more qualified to introduce the reader to Persian literature in this first installment of the series than de Bruijn and I can confidently say he has provided a platform in navigating through the other volumes in the series, unmatched by any effort of the kind I have come across.A long list of contributors to this volume that reads like the who’s who of Persian studies can only make this volume worthwhile for any reader. The chapters are immaculately chosen in terms of thematic pertinence, and arranged to create a real sense of order in understanding Persian literature as the long tradition and developmentally cohesive phenomenon that it is (with some hitches along the way, granted). Particularly impressive for me are chapters 15, 16, and 17 of the volume. The late Iraj Afshar has penned all three of these chapters. These chapters are novel insights into an aspect of Persian literary studies seldom explored, and begin by the study of Manuscripts in Persian, leading the reader, in chapters 16 and 17, to a fascinating study of printing, and then libraries and librarianship in Iran.As a philologist who focuses greatly on Arabic language and literature in every facet of his research into Persian text, I found chapter 13 to be an insightful, even indispensible, study as Arabic literature’s influences on its Persian counterpart, although undeniable, can most appropriately claim the maxim “not seeing the forest for the trees.” Many in the field refuse to give the credit that is due to Arabic literature for its role as the kernel and a proxy in advancement and development of Persian language and literature. I should add that the combination of this chapter and the one by van Gelder accentuates this important historical relationship in earnest. With both scholars we see a true mastery of the subject (first in chapter 5 by van Gelder and then in chapter 13 by de Bruijn) of not only Persian but equally of Arabic; and the way they are able to cross-reference these massive traditions is, to say the least, awe-worthy.Another chapter of note, to whose theme I was closely drawn last year, engages the riddle in Persian literature—most particularly Persian verse. G. Windfuhr’s chapter highlights his expertise in this area as he has published other works on the subject that are considered seminal. He gives an extensive account of the riddle in the Persian literary tradition and explores its history not foregoing the seldom-mentioned antiqual notions of the riddle in Ancient Iran. Ali-Asghar Seyed-Gohrab’s thorough work on the subject would also be a great read on this subject, as it is a longer and more detailed exploration as it is a monograph (A. A. Seyed Gohrab, Courtly Riddles: Enigmatic Embellishments in Early Persian Poetry (Leiden: Leiden University Press, 2011). The rest of the chapters in the volume will be as follows and I will give a short description of them. In doing so, I will tie the chapters together. In the end, I have tried to group the pertinent chapters together as I feel the able editor has intended them to highlight the work as such thematically. Some of them I have reviewed individually for the reader and some as a part of a group1 in one all-encompassing paragraph. I must add that each of these chapters deserves a much longer review and scholarly explication.This chapter, as the title says, addresses the birth of Persian literature and engages the role of the poet, the patron, and the minstrels at the courts of rulers where the first all-important genre of the qaṣīda and the panegyric was born in the Persian-speaking world. Some of the subsections speak to the religious inspiration of Persian poetics, the “transmission of literature,” “the individuality of the writer and the poet,” and “views on poetry.” An important chapter and well defined in its goal.Perry investigates the rise of Persian as a language and a literary phenomenon beginning with “the fall of Middle Persian and the Rise of Persian.” He does an excellent job of expanding upon the cliché explanations of what classical Persian is by exploring the more cognitive notions of it both historically and philologically.Hanaway has done much work on this subject and it is befitting that he was tasked with penning this chapter. In his description of anthologies as a genre, and true to the judicious ways of this volume, he includes all its different names even (jong, safine, bayāz, entekhāb, montakhab, gozideh, bargozideh, golchin, majmu’e) and says, “Even though anthologies generally lack much specific information about the poets whose works were included, like the tadhkere they can be a revealing index to the taste of the time,” which is right on point as they can be indicators of mannerism and style creating a literary common denominator for the times. Although not indicative of an exact science, they are feelers, as one might say.Chapter 4, along with chapters 5, 6, and 7 of the volume, whether by design, which has to be the case, or otherwise sum up the cooperation of rhetoric, prosody, and meaning in creating nuance in Persian verse quite well. The chapter (6) on the figurative language in Persian literature (Chalisova) and chapter 5, which addresses the traditional literary theory, do well together to imply not only what is implied in the very informed chapter 13 dealing with “Arabic influences in Arabic Literature,” by de Bruijn, but also as a rule of thumb that there is continuity between Arabic and Persian literatures regardless of linguistic particularities and differences. They have informed each other for ages and these chapters make that fact incontrovertibly clear.An abundantly resourceful chapter by a scholar who has dedicated her fruitful career, or at least a good part of it to the qaṣīda and the history of the qaṣīda in Persian literature, she carefully examines the development of the qaṣīda genre, its uses, and provides plenty of resource to inspire further scholarship on the subject. Her emphasis on the panegyric is well founded as qaṣīda, even when not a panegyric, is informed by the imagery embedded in its nuanced understanding both socially and in literary circles. It is an excellent chapter that is well complemented by her seminal work on court poetry of the Persian-speaking world (J. Meisami, Medieval Persian Court Poetry [Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987]).Pourjavady’s chapter is a detailed study of the religious genre of literature. He explicates upon “commentaries on the Qur’an and stories of the prophets,” “manuals,” “short works on mystical states and stages, and on spiritual conduct,” “hagiographies,” “sermons,” “allegories,” “treatises on love,” “didactic and theoretical works in prose,” and “didactic mathnavis”: basically the whole gamut of religious literature. For such a huge undertaking in an anthology he has managed to give a good overview of each of the genres while providing plenty of sources that will allow for further reading (which is a must) for those interested in this important area of research.In terms of true philology these two chapters stand out. De Blois and van Ruymbeke touch on subjects that can be considered abandoned in literary Persian studies and they show why they shouldn’t be. In tracing the thematic roots of some of the most important literary works in the history of Persian literature, i.e., Kalīla va Dimna (and direct associations with the Bidpai Indian tales), the Shāhnāma of Firdausī, and the Book of Sindbad to old Iranian and Indian tales, de Blois accentuates an often forgotten continuity within the cultural linguistics of Iran and outside of it (although, linguistically speaking, there are massive associations between Iranian and Indic). In van Ruymbeke’s chapter we see another kind of influence, that of the Hellenistic tradition, which has certainly been missing from scholarly goals of many as it is an unknown relatively speaking, but one that demands further exploration. Although a great learning experience for me at every level, the most interesting parts of her chapter were those dealing with “the influence of Greek science on Persian poetry,” and “the possible Greek influence on rhetorical theory and poetical practice” by the Greeks:She then gives an excellent example from Khusrau va Shīrīn to highlight the above point.This chapter ties nicely into what ensues by the late Iraj Afshar in his seminal study of books, manuscripts, production, and dissemination as regards the Persian book.There are two appendices:As can be seen from this impressive colophon, it also becomes a Herculean task to write a review that does justice to the massive effort organized by de Bruijn and Ehsan Yarshater. Here, as a scholar of Persian, who has relied on de Bruijn’s erudition, not only during my days as a PhD student at Harvard University, but later as a lifelong student in the field, it behooves me to add that the nonsensical criticisms of de Bruijn’s scholarship in the past should, after reading this endeavor, be summarly refuted and deemed once and for all null and void—and simply shelved as erroneously channeled envy for de Bruijn’s acuity for excellence. This volume is recommended for the novice and scholar alike and would make for a great textbook for students of Persian literature as an invaluable reference. In conclusion, as the general editor of the series, Ehsan Yarshater has yet again given something wonderful (and voluminous) to the field and he has chosen as the editor of its most important volume, its crown jewel, or purple patch as they say, the only scholar that could achieve it with such charisma and excellence: J. T. P. de Bruijn.