THE island of the Northern New Hebrides which the French explorer Bougainville named Isle of Lepers is uow usually known as Oba (Omba), and to this the locative preposition a is prefixed, Aoba. One is inclined, however, to question the accuracy of the name Oba as applied to Lepers’ Island, since on Raga, the nearest island eastward, the name given to the island is Bai, A Bai. Also on Atchin and its neighbouring islets to the westward, off the coast of Malekula, places that had a considerable connection with Lepers’ Island for ceremonial as well as for trading purposes, Ba and Bai are the names by which it is known. Bishop Patteson, of the MM., who frequently visited the island, always wrote of it as Lepers’ Island. The later name of Opa given to it by members of the MM. would seem to be due to mission scholars from the island of Mota further north, where p replaces b, and the article o precedes the names of islands. This would point to Ba (Mba) being the name of the island.

Dr. R. H. Codrington published a grammar of the Oba language, using the dialect of that portion of the north coast of the island which is known as Walurigi. This grammar was founded principally on information derived from scholars from that part of the island in the MM. school at Norfolk Island.

The Nanda couplet occurs in the Legend of Sthūlabhadra, which relates to the time of the Nine Nandas, who preceded Candragupta the Maurya. This Legend is recounted by Hemacandra in his Sthavirāvalī Carita, and Jacobi has made a full English abstract of it in his Bibl. Ind. edition of the work (p. 50 foll.). L. Alsdorf has given an account of this Legend in German (Kumārapāla Pratibodha, p. 19 foll.) to accompany the Apabhraṃśa version of his text and in an Appendix has supplemented it with extracts from other works on the subject. The couplet is recorded in Skt., Pkt., Apa., and Gujarati; and as most of the versions can be dated, they are of great linguistic interest. Their value would be still greater if the unknown element of copyists’ errors and emendations could be eliminated. Those which can be detected will be noticed in due course.

It is well known what an extraordinary power of absorbing foreign words Persian possesses. In addition to the innumerable Arabic words which since the creation of the New Persian literary language have formed an integral part of Persian speech, we have a fair number of Aramaic words 1 on the one hand, and of Eastern Iranian words on the other; in later times, there is also considerable borrowing from Turkish. It is, I think, proper to regard Eastern Iranian words in Persian as “loan-words” in the same way as, say, Arabic or Aramaic words; for no Eastern Iranian language is amongst the constituent dialects of Modern Persian, which can perhaps best be defined as the descendant of the current language of culture and commerce which developed in Persia during the Sasanian era. So far, little attention has been paid to the Eastern Iranian words in Persian. Horn, in his excellent paper on the New Persian literary language, quoted examples such as Balaχšān, Hilmand, fiš “mane”, fay, fuy “idol”, malaχ “locust”, bilist “span”, lōγḻdan “to milk”, etc., words whose phonetic habitus does not agree with the normal Persian development. To-day we are in a much more fortunate position since the Sogdian language has gradually become known to us: seen from Persia, Sogdian was by far the most important Eastern Iranian language, a language of culture, literature, and commerce, whose territory bordered on the area of Persian speech and extended towards the frontiers of China.

The following texts have been selected to illustrate the religion of Khotan and to supplement the material already available from other sources.

In the first part of this article we have discussed seven different -*- eras or (to be strictly correct) different kinds of time-reckoning with or without a common era. We are now going to deal with the fourteen remaining sections of our list. But before proceeding to the discussion of the next number, I want to insert here a small note relating to No. 3, i.e. the Kharājī era in Egypt, as a complement to what has already been said in the preceding number of this Bulletin (BSOS., pp. 914–15).

Professor A. S. Tritton called my attention to a few Kharājī dates occurring in an Arabic manuscript in the British Museum (Or. 1338). On examining these dates, which belong to the fifth and early sixth centuries A.H., I find some interesting points which supplement our knowledge about that era as used in that country in the time of the Fāṭimid caliphs. This anonymous book is a history of the Monophysite patriarchs of Alexandria, from St. Mark to Matthew the 87th patriarch who died 31st December, 1408, and it must have been composed by an unknown author soon after the latter date.Some of the Kh. dates in this book are given with their corresponding dates of the Diocletian era (era of the Martyrs). These are as follows:—

Moreover, the date of the death of the Fāṭimid Caliph al-Musta‘lī, which happened in the month of Ṣafar, A.H. 495 (Hilālī) = December, A.D. 1101, is given as 491 Kh. (fol. 284b).

To vol. iii, No. 1, of Monumenta Nipponica J. Rahder contributed an article in which he gives a list of consonant alternances and vowel alternances in Japanese including various dialects spoken in Ryūkyū. The importance of an extensive and careful study of such linguistic phenomena cannot be overestimated, for it constitutes the very first step towards the laborious task of grouping Japanese words into word-families, thence tracing them back to their respective roots.

Cette expression se lit á la ligne 41 de la Charte de Suse et désigne l'un des deux matériaux, avec l'argent, qui ont été importés d'Égypte pour servir à la construction du palais de Darius.

Le second terme en est relativement clair. Son premier signe est très endommagé, mais on reconnaît, même sur la reproduction, de quoi justifier la lecture du P. Scheil. Celle-ci est reprise notamment par M. Benveniste, BSL., XX, iii, p. 132: dāru, équivalent de skr.

Present difficulties have induced me to publish in the form of an article the text of the Khotanese Rāma poem. It is of interest to both Indian and Iranian scholars, not least perhaps to our confrères with whom we are not at present in contact. It is hoped to publish a commentary and translation in a subsequent paper.

A description, with short summary, of the contents of the poem was given in a lecture to the American Oriental Society in Baltimore, April, 1939, and will be shortly published in the Journal of that Society. Reference for the present may be made to that account.

The text is contained in three MS. rolls numbered 2801, 2781, 2783, written on Chinese paper, in cursive Khotanese script, and now preserved in the Bibliothèque Nationale. I first read them in December, 1937, and subsequently obtained photostatic copies. I wish once again to thank Professor Paul Pelliot for his permission to use them.

Literature is full of the saints of Islam, like the man who was so oppressed by the seriousness of life that he always looked as if he were coming from the funeral of a near relative, and another who fainted when he saw a bedouin smearing his camel with hot tar, because it reminded him of hell. It is a mistake to think that all Muslims lived up to this standard.

Even the pious ‘Umar lost his temper at a formula consecrated by religion. In reply to a question a man said, “God knows best”; the caliph told him to say either “I know” or “I do not know”.Tales told of society in Medina show that amusements tolerated there fell far short of the standard of decency demanded by religion.

There was a class of men who told edifying stories to instruct the faithful. One of them said that those, who fasted for three successive months, would have in heaven houses one thousand parasangs long, broad and high, with doors ten parasangs square. “A poor house for January,” ejaculated one of the audience. Another of these preachers said, “The name of the wolf that ate Joseph was so and so.” It was objected that no wolf ate Joseph so he corrected himself, “The name of the wolf that did not eat Joseph was so and so.”.

Of all our Iranian sources for that form of Zoroastrianism which recognized Zurvān as the prime principle of the cosmos, the Selections of Zātspram are undoubtedly the most important. We have seen (BSOS., IX, p. 573) that in his first chapter Zātspram assigns to Zurvān a decisive rôle in the creative process not found elsewhere; for it was he who handed to Ahriman that “black and ashen garment”, “that weapon, like unto fire … that containeth the very essence of Āz”. In so doing he was making no idle gesture; he was presenting Ahriman with one who was to be at once his most powerful ally and his eventual destroyer. The results of this action are related in the thirty-fourth chapter, an edition of which is offered here. Though our text is at some points exasperatingly corrupt, our chapter does seem to throw additional light on the mysterious figure of Jēh, the Primal Whore, and to support the theory advanced by Professor Benveniste that woman belonged, in the Zervanite system, to the evil creation. We hope in the near future to be able to offer an interpretation of this fascinating chapter: in this article we have confined ourselves to the text and, in the next number of this Bulletin, we will add a first translation which we hope will be of use to such students of religion as are unfamiliar with Pahlavi.

Maewo is the northernmost island eastwards of the double chain of islands in Melanesia known as the New Hebrides. Dr. R. H. Codrington gives a grammar of Maewo in ML., pp. 408–420. The dialect used by him for the grammar was that of Tanoriki, a place some twelve miles from the north end of the island on the west side. This grammar was founded principally on information supplied by native scholars from that part of Maewo in the Melanesian Mission school at Norfolk Island. Codrington also made use of a small edition, 33 pp., of the Book of Common Prayer in the language. The translation of Psalm 100 in ML., p. 419, is taken from that book.

LA découverte du tokharien en Asie Centrale à la fin du siècle précédent était une grande surprise pour les indo-européenistes. Dès lors, on pouvait s'attendre à une élaboration grammaticale rapide des textes trouvés, élaboration, qui aurait indiqué en même temps la position de cette langue dans la famille i.-e.

Cependant, il n'en est rien: seulement en 1931, E. Sieg, W. Siegling, et W. Schulze publièrent leur Tocharische Grammatik, où se trouvent étudiés les fragments du dialecte A. Du dialecte B, il n'y a pas même une grammaire descriptive: tout ce que nous en possédons, c'est le recueil de quelques textes, publié par S. Lévi en 1933. D'autres manuscrits de cette branche tokh., qui se trouvent à Paris, Berlin, Tokio, restent inédits jusqu' à présent.

A Passage in the Sogdian edition of the Manichæan Book of the Giants relates what punishment the angels meted out to the γίγανтες (Sogd. kwyšt, cf. βγyšt, etc.). They apply” ṯr nfṯṯ'ṯ[yy l–2]wqṯṯ “fire, naphtha, and?” It is a priori obvious that the third, damaged word is “sulphur”, and further confirmation (although not necessary) can be found in a similar sentence of the Middle Persian Kawān where we read: pd 'dwr npt' wd gwgyrd “with fire, naphtha, and sulphur” (both fragments are unpublished).

In the seventies and early eighties of the eighteenth century the Secret Committee had shown, as we have seen, an increasing tendency to become subservient to the Ministry, and in consequence the Directors had begun to keep a careful watch on the Committee's activities. Although, in April, 1783, to please Fox they nominated the “Chairs”, Sir Henry Fletcher and Nathaniel Smith, to be the Secret Committee, with authority to conduct the Company's naval and military affairs and to consult with the Ministry, they at the same time cautiously enjoined that such powers should be valid for only one month. These powers were grudgingly renewed monthly until November, when Fox, with the approval of Fletcher, who was one of his best friends and firmest political supporters, produced his India Bills, which sought to destroy the Company's existing home government. That Fletcher had seen and yet silently acquiesced in these revolutíonary Bills was deemed by the majority of the Directors to be a betrayal of his trust as chairman, and they promptly sacked him. So great was the blow to their confidence in the “Chairs” that subsequent to the overthrow of the Coalition in late December they forbade the new Chairmen privately to interview the Ministers unless accompanied by Laurence Sulivan, the senior Director and trusted representative of the Indian interest, the strongest party in the Court.

The well-known Turkish scholar Kilisli Raf'at, to whom we owe the publication of Kāshgharī's monumental Dīwān lughat al-Turk, was fortunate in discovering a short but important work in Persian, which throws an unexpected light on the military and civil organization of the Aq-qoyunlu state in the reign of Uzun Hasan (A.D. 1466–1478). The original of the ‘Arḍ-nāma (“Account of the Parade”) forms one of the twenty-one items of MS. 1438 of the Ḥamdīya Library in Stambul which contains the complete works (kulliyāt) of Jalāl al-dīn Muḥammad b. As'ad Davānī (A.H. 830–908/ A.D. 1427–1502). This learned theologian, poet, and moralist is particularly known in the west by his Akhlāq-i Jalālī compiled at the request of Sulṭān-Khalīl, who was governor of Fars on behalf of his father Uzun-Ḥasan. The ‘Arḍ-nāma is a further proof of

The most detailed account of Mani's last days is contained in the Coptic “Narrative on the Crucifixion” (Polotsky, Man. Hom., pp. 42 sqq.). As I had occasion to point out before, this “Narrative” had been quoted by the Christian Jibrā'īl b. Nūḥ in his anti-Alanichaean book which was still available to al-Bērūnī (Chronology, 20819–22).

During the brief reign of King Hormizd Mani went to Babylonia, where he stayed until the accession of Bahram I. After some time he left Babylonia and slowly travelled down the River Tigris, visiting his communities on the way. He reached Hormizd-Ardašīr (Ahwāz, Sūq al-Ahwāz), one of the four chief towns of Susiana, from where he started on a journey to the north-eastern provinces of the Sasanian empire. But he was forbidden to go there and compelled to turn back to Susiana. From Hormizd-Ardašīr he journeyed to Mesene, thence up the River Tigris in a boat to Ctesiphon. From the capital he went to “the Pargalia”, where he was joined by Bαατ. He travelled to Kholassar, and from this town he reached Belapat, where he was destined to die. The route taken by him on the journey from Kholassar to Belapat is not known, as there is a gap in the manuscript. While the situation of “the Pargalia” remains unsettled, that of Kholassar (Khalasar) is well defined by a comparison of the itinerary given by Isidorus Kharacenus with the Arab geographers (journey from Ctesiphon to Holwan):—

In the year 5282 (A.D. 1521–2) an Italian Jew made a pilgrimage to Palestine, of which he left a brief record in Hebrew. Until the present year, no manuscript of this work was known,, and even the author's name had not come down to us. The text was preserved in an old Italian collection of Palestine Itineraries, published in Leghorn in 1785, under the name of Shibhḥē Yěrūshālāyim, by one Jacob Bārūkh b. Mōshe Ḥayyim, and several times reprinted since.The editor informs us that he found the work in an old manuscript, and that though the author's name was not marked, he was obviously a man of great learning. Nothing beyond this was known of the anonymous traveller. It had been suggested, without much evidence, that the traveller's name was Bārūkh, and that he was the Rabbi Bārūkh with whom the theologian R. Tam b.Yaḥya corresponded. The latest reprint of this text is that of Mr. J. Eisenstein, in his Corpus of Jewish Travellers.

In the present year a new edition of this work has been published by Mr. Isaac Ben-Zevi, who has had the good fortune to find an early—probably an autograph—manuscript.

Mr. Ben-Zevi's text is in every way fuller and better than the Leghorn edition, and is presumably the original and correct one.Although the manuscript does not bear the author's name, there is no reason to doubt Mr. Ben-Zevi's attribution of the work to Rabbi.

The words to be treated in this paper show one common aspect in their etymologies. It is suggested that they have arisen through coalescence of their etymons with the suffix na “in”—or in the case of ẖam, with the negation ma (or mi)—and that after the coalescence the final vowel was lost. The latter assumption will have to be linked up with the enclitic, or in the case of yin, at least unstressed nature of the words. In this connection we may note that the separating shad, the Tibetan comma, will invariably be found after, never before . The same holds good of , though punctuation is much rarer after . In the case of and kyin, the enclisis is moreover strongly borne out by the phonetic changes which their initial consonants undergo in assimilation to the endings of the preceding words. For the assumed treatment of the final vowel, I may refer to my paper “Certain Tibetan Suffixes and their Combinations” (in vol. v of the Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies (HJAS.), where the same change has been suggested for the instrumental suffix.

Burmese music is a virgin field for research. Nobody can bewail this virginity more than myself. To help me there does not seem to exist a single western work on Burmese music though there are such classics as Fox Strangways' on Indian and J. H. Levis' on Chinese music. Many writers on Burma have passed remarks, kind or humorous, on Burmese music. But few have attempted a technical study of it. Nothing Burmese escaped the notice of Sir James George Scott, of course. But I know of only two who left some technical remarks on Burmese music: Paul Edmonds, the author of Peacocks and Pagodas; and P. A. Mariano, in an appendix on Burmese music to that most lovingly produced book Burma by Max and Bertha Ferrars.

The first thing which strikes the student of the Arabic literature of this period is the remarkable number of works attributed to Rifā،ah, but, in reality, there is nothing new or startling about the quantity, for the eighteenth century provides us with the names of many Egyptian scholars who produced long lists of works on all the subjects in which the learned were interested and for which there was a constant demand in scholastic circles. Rifā،ah had a gift for writing which was encouraged by the exceptional circumstances in which he found himself once he had become absorbed into the military system created by Muḥammad ،Alī. What is so pleasing about Rifā،ah is the variety of his literary interests, and he must be credited with having been the principal actor in laying the foundations of the “new” literature. His verses, too, were admired by his contemporaries; as a student in the mosque of al-Azhar, he wrote an urjūzdh on tauḥīd which attracted the attention of one of his teachers, Shaikh al-Faḍḍālī, but it was never published.