1. For “ one ” the NI use eka (106 Uo 7. 159 r 2. 187 o 8. 211 r 5. 231 r 2. 248 o 8. 253 r 1. 348 Uo 4. 425 Uo 5. Cr 6. 437 Cr 1. 577 Uo 6.630 o 4. 638 o 2, 3. 676 Uo 5. 688 oA 3).1 In the form eǵa it appears 709 Cr 4. It is used in the uninflected form, irrespective of gender;the genit. sing, ekisya “ single ”, is found 272 o 10. 514 o 1; a plural eke occurs 468 Cr 2. egaǵa in 417 o 2, as nomin. masc. egaǵo in 296 Uo 3, corresponds to Skt. ekaika-, Pāli ekaka- “single”, in accordance with the phonetic value of -ǵa.2 eka- is found in compounds with numerals(see 11), nouns (ekadeśammi 272 o 6), 3 adjectives (ekavarsaǵa ═ekavarṣika- 589 Uo 3).

Students of Moslem philosophy and mysticism have often observed the highly eclectic character of that type of human thought. All Moslem speculation, philosophical and theological, no less than the Sūfī literature of the more theosophical kind, as represented for instance by Ibn ‘Arabī and Suhrawardī of Aleppo, displays this eclecticism. Yet no definite answer has been given to the question how or why the main current of Moslem thinking came to be of that type of mixture in which ideas from Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, Philo Judæus, the Catholic thinkers of the Christian Church, the Gnostics, and the Neoplatonists are brought into one harmonious whole and mingled together in such an extraordinary manner. Certain attempts have been made in studying individual thinkers of Islam to trace their systems back to their respective sources, for no one source can satisfactorily explain such a diversity of doctrines as we find in Moslem literature. This was done by scholars who studied, e.g. al-Fārābī, Ibn Sīnā, al-Ghazālī, and was done by myself in studying the mystical philosophy of Muhyid-Dln Ibn ‘Arabī. In each case the fundamental ideas of the Moslem thinker were traced to the special source or sources which were deemed to have influenced his thought.

One important question, however, has always been overlooked, whether it is possible that the Moslem thinkers were not themselves responsible for mixing together those irreconcilable elements of Greek philosophy with other ideas derived from the prevalent religions of the East. In other words, was the eclecticism of Moslem thought only a reappearance of another kind of eclecticism which existed long before ? Some of the aspects of this problem will be dealt with in this paper.

The period from the late sixteenth century has been characterized in Ottoman historiography as one of fundamental change in the composition of the army. One of the features of this change was the gradual replacement of the tīmār-based cavalry force, to whom were awarded benefices in return for military service, by provincial levies able to use muskets (tüfenk), often hired only for the duration of a single campaign. Although the extent to which such changes were directly prompted by the supposedly superior technology which the Ottomans encountered when fighting the Habsburgs on their western borders remains open to further research, that there was a radical transformation which relied on the greatly increased use of firearms is beyond doubt.

Western scholars have, on the whole, neglected the Tzyjyh Tongjiann Kaoyih. Its existence and its importance as a land-mark in Chinese historiography have been briefly mentioned by several, but none, so far as I am aware, has seriously used it. Chinese scholars have, as one would expect, used it a good deal. Nevertheless, they have generally confined themselves to drawing on it for the elucidation of particular points. While this was undoubtedly the purpose for which it was originally intended, it can have for the modern student another very valuable function. By a careful analysis and comparison of the different entries, it is possible to get a great deal of other-wise unobtainable information about the sources of the Tongjiann and their interrelation.

To undertake such an analysis for the whole of the Tongjiann or even for the whole of the Tarng dynasty would be a task far beyond the scope of the present article. I shall, in fact, confine myself largely to the period 730–763 though I may occasionally step beyond those limits. This period is chosen because it includes the careers of An Luhshan and Shyy Syming , which I am engaged in studying. This short period, however, comprises about one-seventh of the whole Kaoyih.

Forty-eight works are quoted in this part of the Kaoyih, twenty-two of which appear to be still extant. They range in size and importance from the Jiow Tarngshu to a poem by Lii Bor . I shall first list some of the more important of these, giving in each case notes, whether derived from the Kaoyih or from some other source, on the origin and nature of the work.

In 1912 H. Maspero endeavoured to bring some order into the apparently capricious repartition of the old ju-shêng tones among the remaining four tones of Pekingese, and noted that words in plosive initials (including aspirated plosives), and in nasal or liquid initials, tend to be found in the departing tone (tone IV), and to a less extent in the upper even (tone I); while those with otḥer initials gravitate towards the old lower even (tone II).

In 1915 Karlgren considered Maspero's treatment of the problem, and while in general agreeing with his conclusions, pointed out that his law covered the facts only very approximately in regard, e.g., to words in unaspirated plosive initials. Nevertheless he quotes with approval Maspero's explanation (applied also to the twofold development of the lower rising tone in the modern Northern Chinese dialects), viz., that the initials 1-, m-, n-, n-, and vocalic initials involved a pronunciation of the syllable somewhat different from that of words having affricate, occlusive, or fricative initials; and he proceeds to suggest that the difference lay in a somewhat higher pitch in the case of the former type of word. This explanation is, however, difficult to follow; if, e.g., ACh dz‘ua, became \tso (tone IV) rather than (tone III) because the fourth tone is more compatible with the deeper pitch proper to affricate initials, it is by no means clear why ACh dz‘ak, having the same initial, should become ‘tso (tone II) rather than enter tone IV with so many other words from the lower ju-shêng.

The inscriptions described in this article were discovered in the course of a short journey which I made in the vilayet of Urfa, Turkey, in May–June, 1952. It is my pleasant duty to thank those who made this journey possible— the School of Oriental and African Studies, who granted me leave to travel to Turkey, and the officials of the Turkish Department of Antiquities, who accorded me facilities to operate in that remote area of the country. I am especially grateful to Mr. Seton Lloyd, Director of the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, for his generous encouragement and help; Mr. Lloyd had visited Sumatar Harabesi during the previous year, and it was he who drew my attention to the monuments there.

The collection of books and manuscripts belonging to the library of William Marsden, and given by him to King's College in 1835, but now in the possession of the School of Oriental Studies, has in its valuable contents a few Marathi manuscripts. Sir E. Denison Ross, in his article on “The Manuscripts Collected by William Marsden”, published in the Bulletin (Vol. II, Pt. Ill), has reproduced on pp. 535 and 537 the entries made by Mr. Marsden on these Marathi MSS.

The meanings of the root /gar- (1) are according to the concise statement of Neisser, ‘Stimme erheben, besingen; ehren, ruhmen, loben; beifällig, ehrend aufnehmenä. This accurately represents the facts, but it gives rise to an obvious question inasmuch as the last meaning, which involves no raising of the voice or utterance, is on consideration noticeably different from the first. Neisser's statement, which represents the consensus of opinion, assumes that the primary meaning of this root is ‘speak aloud, sing, proclaim, etc.’, and that the other set of meanings ‘welcome, approve, show appreciation, etc.’, represents a secondary meaning development, presumably through the intermediate stage ‘express approval’, etc.

In 1907 M. Louis Desplaques described in Le Plateau Central Nigérien a series of large tumuli—pyramids of earth—the burial places of chiefs of a past era. He notes their existence at El Walaji and as far east as Aménaka, near Zinder, on the banks of the Niger near the Bassa rapids, west to Sikassa, and on the banks of the Senegal. On archaeological grounds, supported by a well-known passage from the Arab writer El Behri, he concludes that they were built by “red” or Berber races of the same stratum of population as the ancient inhabitants of the Ghana Empire. “They remain”, he writes, “as the sole witnesses of the activity, the industry, and civilization of these ‘red’ peoples, whose names and real origin we do not know”.

The subject of this brief paper is one of the most widely known sung poems of the 'Afar people. Hitherto unwritten it is nevertheless revered, sung and recited throughout the 'Afar-speaking world. The present writers feel that its fame is not undeserved, a conclusion reached from a consideration of both its aesthetic appeal and the historical significance of its message.

The Cairo Geniza is surely the most important manuscript source for the study of Judaeo-Arabic texts, that is to say, texts whose language is Arabic written in Hebrew characters. This paper is an overall survey of the Judaeo-Arabic material in the 54 Arabic boxes of the Old Series in the Taylor-Schechter Genizah Collection. This collection which is housed in the Cambridge University Library is the largest collection of Geniza pieces to be found in any one place, with some 140,000 fragments. The Judaeo-Arabic material we are specifically dealing with here comprises some 7,000 manuscript fragments, research on which is now being prepared for publication. The discussion is limited to present research; it does not include references to other oriental collections such as the Firkovitch in St. Petersburg, which comprises not only fragments but codices (some almost complete) and a much wider range of Karaite Arabic material. As the Firkovitch collection is at last becoming more accessible, its contents will obviously need to be studied at a later stage in relation to the Cambridge Geniza material.

Qur'ān 2: 198 states that it is no fault in the Muslims that they should seek the faḍl of their lord: laysa ‘alaykum junāḥun an tabtaghū faḍlan min rabbikum. This verse occurs within a series of godly ordinances pertaining to the Muslim ḥajj, and it is therefore quite obvious why Muslim exegetes thought that the faḍl of Allāh in our verse ought to be sought by the believers during the ḥajj. In order to convey this view, the exegetes used a simple device, they added the following clause at the end of the verse: fī mawāsim al-ḥajj—during the rites of, or, in the stations of the ḥajj. Several traditions in al-Ṭabarī contain this addition. Most of the isnāds of these traditions are Meccan, which implies that the scholars of this place were particularly interested in encouraging the believers to come to the holy places of the Meccan ḥajj. Thus, tradition no. 18 in al-Ṭabarī which contains the addition fī mawāsim al-ḥajj is transmitted from the Meccan ‘Ubaydallāh b. Abī Yazīd (d. 126 A.H.), who quotes Ibn al-Zubayr. In fact, the clause fī mawāsim al-ḥajj gained the rank of a qirā'a. In some traditions it is transmitted as such from the Meccan ‘Aṭā’ b. Abī Rabāh (d. 114 A.H.) on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās. ‘Aṭā’ is quoted through the Meccan Talḥa b. ‘Amr (d. 152 A.H.), as well as through Ḥajjāj b. Arṭāt (d. 145 A.H.). The Medinese ‘Ikrima (d. 105 A.H.) also spread the same qirā'a. In al-Ṭabarī he is quoted by the Basrian Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī (d. 131 A.H.).

From the point of view of Europeans there is no book that deals satisfactorily with Urdū, metres, and as the metres are numerous, it is difficult for a student to recognize any except the three or four commonest. They have all been taken over unaltered from Persian, and Persian took them almost unaltered from Arabic. To Europeans the rules of Urdū prosody seem arbitrary, because metres must conform to certain rules for which there seems to be no adequate reason.

For example the commonest Urdū, metre is scanned as follows: maf‘ūlu fā‘ilātu mafā‘īlu fā‘ilun. It might just as well be scanned mustaf‘ilun mafā‘ilu mustaf‘ilun fa‘al or in other ways, but we should be arbitrarily told that there are no such metres and that in fact they would be impossible.

The Club was an exclusive society; admission to it was eagerly sought, but not very easily obtained; election was by ballot and one black ball excluded; many eminent men, among them Gibbon, Lord Camden, Beilby Porteus, Bishop of Chester, Conversation Sharp, George Canning, and Samuel Rogers were temporarily or permanently refused admission, even Edmond Malone, who became its treasurer and “great Corner Stone”, had to make two or three attempts to get into it. To this society William Jones, aged 26, in the spring of 1773, was elected.

For many years it was vaguely known that the monastery of St. Catherine in Sinai possessed a large collection of documents concerning its own affairs and written in Arabic and Turkish, and more especially that this collection also included a number of decrees issued by various Fāṭimid caliphs; but it was only recently that detailed information became available. It will be convenient to preface the edition of one of these Fāṭimid documents by a review of what has been written about the Sinai documents up to now.

The likely reaction of a Semitist on reading for the first time a Mehri grammar or text, is to assume that, in forms like ɧayd (ḥayd) ‘hand’, ɧawguur (ḥawgûr) ‘slave’, ɧəyuum (ḥeyûm) ‘sun’, the ɧ(a)– element represents a definite article. A later reaction might be that the ɧ(a)– element, since few forms so affixed occur without this prefix, is perhaps a fossilized definite article.

The story of Suto and Tato is in no way fiction, it is a lively reality, and anyone even slightly acquainted with these far-distant, but beautiful and picturesque countries and their inhabitants, will confirm my statement. The principal actors, Shaikh Muhammad Sadiq, the Shaikh of Barzan, Tato, Osman—Suto's elder son, are no longer alive. I am not certain about Suto himself. This old man, a perfect type of a Kurdish chief ruling over the most impregnable region of Central Kurdistan, may yet be alive. At any rate, in 1918 he was. Mulla Said, the narrator, was murdered in Urumia in July, 1918, by his countrymen. Peace be on him!

Much has been written about the trading relations of the Italian states with the Levant in the period of the Crusades and the late Middle Ages. The bulk of the material that has made these studies possible has been provided by the voluminous archives of the various Italian cities, which also contain a few treaties and letters that originated from Muslim authorities (largely of the Mamluk period) and have been preserved in the original and/or in translation. The document to be presented here was addressed to various officials in Tripoli, that is, Tarābulus al-Shām, and dates from near the end of the Mamluk sultanate. It is an order for the attention of the Mamluk authorities only, intended to govern commercial dealings in Tripoli as they were unilaterally understood. The document is not to be thought of as comparable with the so-called ‘treaties’, which were draw up after a process of negotiation although they were ultimately expressed as independent decrees of the Sultan. One can only wonder at the chance survival of this undoubtedly genuine piece. It is now held in the Oriental Institute Museum of the University of Chicago, under the number OIM 13787. It was purchased in 1929 from Dr Bernhard Moritz, one-time librarian of the Khedivial Library in Cairo, and its provenance beyond that point is unknown. Three other Mamluk documents of the same period, which are relevant to affairs at Tripoli, survive in the archives of St Catherine's Monastery in Sinai, namely nos. LXIX, LXX and LXXI of those published by Ernst. The first of these three refers to the monastery's waqf property at Tripoli, but the other two have absolutely no connection with any interests or affairs of the monastery, and it is difficult to imagine how they found their way there.

When Theodor Nöldeke, working on a retrograde calculation from the well-known date of the beginning of the era of Yazdijerd (16th June, 632), made his table of Persian new year's days during the Sasanian period from A.D. 220 to 652 (Appendix B, p. 436, Geschichte der Perser und Araber zur Zeit der Sasaniden), Dulaurier (L'histoire universelle par Etienne de Daron, 1883, p. 195) criticized it, saying that this depends on admitting the base as granted. In other words, the table would be correct only if we assumed that the Persian year was a vague one without intercalation, which fact, he asserted, is not proved.