^{page 586 note 1} Edited by Sayyid Jalālud–DIn Tehrānī and published in Tehrān, A.H. 1313 (solar). Houtum–Schindler quotes extensively from the Tārīkhi Qumm (under the title Kom–nameh) in Eastern Persian Irak (London, 1898).

^{page 586 note 2} See Yāqūt, Dictionary of Learned Men, ed. Margoliouth, Gibb Mem. Series, ii, 310, for an account of Ismā′il b. ′Abbād.

^{page 587 note 1} Cf. the modern kuma “butt” (for shooting).

^{page 588 note 1} He refutes Hamza of Isfahān′s statement that no villages were transferred from Rei to Qumm.

^{page 588 note 2} Most of these are given in the Bihār ul–Anwār of Muhammad Bāqir Majlisi.

^{page 590 note 1} See p. 593, n. 3.

^{page 591 note 1} For the term īghārain see Jacut′s Geog. Wōrterbnch (ed. Wustenfeld, i, 420) and Ibn Khordadbeh in the Kitāb al–Masālik wx′l–Mamālik (Bibl. Geog. Arab., ed. M. G. de Goeje, vi). The latter states that the īghārain were domains which belonged to several provinces, their principal towns being Karaj and Murj. Elsewhere he states that Karaj was the principal town of Ighārain (pp. 199, 243).

^{page 591 note 2} See p. 187.

^{page 592 note 1} Ahmad b. Zarkub in the Shīrāznāma (ed. Tehran, p. 26) also mentions agrarian changes brought about by the Dailamites. He states that whereas formerly most of the land had been private property it became crown property and iqtā′s were created. See also Ibn al–Atbir, al–Kāmil (ed. Tornberg), VIII, 342–3.

^{page 593 note 1} pp. 107–8.

^{page 593 note 2} pp. 72–3. Houtum–Schindler mentions a tax on dates. The Persian text has which would appear to be trefoil rather than dates.

^{page 593 note 3} Von Kremer in his discussion of the budget for the caliphate for the year A.H. 306 gives the assessment for Qumm as follows: kharāj 197,229 dīnār, ziyā′ 80,229 dīnār Ueber das Einnahmebudget des Abbasiden Beichts vom Jahre 306 B. (918–919), p. 28. The figure given in the printed text for the crown lands, as stated above, is 8,229 dīnar, while the reading in the British Museum MS. is 8,209 dinar. The total figure for the budget for A.H. 306 as given in the Tārīkhi Qumm also differs slightly from von Kremer′s figure.

^{page 594 note 1} p. 149.

^{page 594 note 2} SeevonKremer, UeberdasEinnahmebudget des AbbasidenReichesmm Jahre 306 E. (918–919), for a discussion of the relative value of the dīnār to the dirham. See also Houtum–Schindler, pp. 68–9, who states, apparently in error, that the rate rose to 200 under Rukn ud–Dawla.

^{page 595 note 1} See Tabari, iii, 2143, who states that Mu′tazid deferred the demand for the first instalment of kharāj in A.H. 182 to the 11th of Hazīrān. The anonymous Mujmal ut–Tawārākh (ed. by Malik ush–Shu′arā Bahār, Tehran, p. 368) states that intercalary days were instituted in the reign of Mu′tazid.

^{page 595 note 2} See Fischel, W. J., Jews in the Economic and Political Life of Mediaeval Islam (R.A.S. Monograph, 1937), for a discussion of the function of the jahbadh.Google Scholar

^{page 595 note 3} p. 174.