Translation or travesty?

Translation or travesty? an enquiry into Robert Graves’s version of some Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. John Charles Edward Bowen. Abingdon, Abbey Press (Berks), 1973. Freshet library, no. 2. IX, 43 p. ISBN: 0900012323.

Summary:
Bowen discusses whether Edward FitzGerald’s (1859) or Robert Graves’s (1967) version of Omar Khayyam’s Rubaiyat is a more accurate translation; it explains the scope of the great Islamic philosophy of Sufism, and questions whether a mystical interpretation of the quatrains accords with Khayyam’s known scepticism; and it quotes conclusive evidence that Robert Graves’s version of the Rubaiyat, so far from having been translated from a manuscript which has lain bidden in the Hindu Kush for the past 800 years, is based on the text of a book published in London in 1899.

A literary study of Edward FitzGerald …

A literary study of Edward FitzGerald, accompanied by an edition of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, with notes and critical commentary. Kenneth Angyal. Detroit, Wayne State University, 1974.

An empty glass for Omar’s FitzGerald

An empty glass for Omar’s FitzGerald. L.H. Robbins
In: New York Times Magazine, July 2, 1933

Pictures life and times of FitzGerald, and the popularity of the rubáiyát

The quatrains of ‘Omar-i-Khayyam

The quatrains of ‘Omar-i-Khayyam. C.N.S.
In: The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1931 No. 2 (April), p. 457-459

Critical review of Rosen’s edition of 1928.

Omar and the new era

Omar and the new era. Achtenhagen, Olga. The English Journal, 16 (1927) 8 (October), pp. 598–602

Students reflecting on reading and thinking about the Rubáiyát.

‘Omar Khayyam

‘Omar Khayyam. Ross, E. Denison. Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies London Institution, 4 (1927) 3, pp. 433-439.