^{page 82 note 1} Cf. Brockelmann, , Sup. i, 377Google Scholar.

^{page 82 note 2} Sarakhsī, 134; Technique and Approach of Muslim, Scholarship, 27 n.

^{page 83 note 1} Isis, 36 (1946), 251 (Rosenthal, F.)Google Scholar; Islamica, iv (1931), 535Google Scholar. Prof. Jörg Kraemer of Tübingen has now identified these “Homer” citations as fairly literal translations of the so-called Gnomai of Menander, still grouped for the most part according to the original Greek alphabetical order. Prof. Kraemer has discussed them in “Homer bejsden Arabern”, ZDMG., Bd. 31 (1956), 259–316Google Scholar. He authorizes me to say that the Arabic Menandrea, which include other gnomai besides those assigned to Homer here, contain a number not in the Greek original, in the form in which it has reached us (ed. by A. Meineke, 1841), cf. ibid., 310.

^{page 83 note 2} B.M. MS. Or. 9033, fol. 31b–32b.

^{page 83 note 3} Fol. 49b.

^{page 83 note 4} Fol. 38b.

^{page 83 note 5} Fol. 43b.

^{page 83 note 6} Fol. 43b.

^{page 83 note 7} Fol. 60a–65b.

^{page 83 note 8} Fol. 58a–59b.

^{page 83 note 9} Fol. 59b–60a.

^{page 83 note 10} Fol. 66a–68a.

^{page 83 note 11} See Brockelmann, , GAL., Sup. i, 558Google Scholar.

^{page 83 note 12} Bodleian Catalogue, i, 121, No. 484 = Marsh 539Google Scholar.

^{page 83 note 13} Catalogus Codicum Arabicorum Bibl. Acad. Lugduno-Batavae, vol. 2, pars prior, 1907, 132, n. 1Google Scholar.

^{page 83 note 14} I have been able to use a number of transcriptions of the Bodleian MS., kindly made in Oxford by Mr. G. Morrison.

^{page 83 note 15} MS. Or. 9033 is there said to date from the fourteenth century.

^{page 84 note 1} Islamica, iv, 535.

^{page 84 note 2} Ibid., 537.

^{page 84 note 3} Fol. 70b–72b.

^{page 84 note 4} E.g. Ibn abī Usaibi'ah, i, 321.

^{page 84 note 5} Cf. D. S. Margoliouth in El., vol. i (1913), art. Abū Ḥaiyān; Brockelmann, Sup. i, 436.

^{page 84 note 6} Fol. 70b.

^{page 84 note 7} Al-Qifṭī, ed. Lippert, 283.

^{page 84 note 8} Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, i, 321.

^{page 84 note 9} Ed. Flügel, 264.

^{page 84 note 10} See the list of the works of Abū Sulaimān as-Sijistānī given by Ibn abīUṣaibi'ah, i, 322.

^{page 85 note 1} The passages in Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, i, 15 (Aesculapius), i, 57 (Theophrastus), i, 104 (Yahyā, an-Naḥwī), cannot be traced in the Ṣiwān al-Ḥikmah. The same applies to the passage from the Ta'ālīq quoted by Paul Kraus (Jābir ibn Ḥayyān, Mém. Instit. figypte, Égypte, Tome 44, Cairo, 1943, i, lxiii, n. 9)Google Scholar from Raad., iii (1923), 7Google Scholar, to the effect that a certain al-Ḥasan b. an-Nakad al-Mauṣilī, a contemporary of Abū Sulaimān, was the author of works on alchemy which he passed off as having been written by Jābir b. Ḥaiyān. The quotation comes from the little-known Kitāb Bustān al-Aṭibbā' wa-Rauḍat al-Alibbā' of Muwaffaq ad-Dīn As'ad b. Ilyāsb. al-Maṭrān of Damascus (died 587/1191).

^{page 85 note 2} Cf. n. 7, p. 84.

^{page 85 note 3} Ed. Ḥasan as-Sandūbī, Cairo, 1347/1929, 286.

^{page 85 note 4} Fol. 70b.

^{page 85 note 5} Fihrist, 245.

^{page 85 note 6} i, 38, 42 (from the account of Pythagoras, which Franz Rosenthal has shown to follow the extant Greek Life of Pythagoras by Porphyry, Orientalia, vi, 43–56).

^{page 85 note 7} Fol. 31b.

^{page 85 note 8} Fol. 30b, cf. Ibn abī Uṣaibi'ah, i, 57, where A. Müller suggested Aeschrion (?).

^{page 86 note 1} Fol. 58a–58b.

^{page 86 note 2} Pol. 66a–66b.

^{page 86 note 3} MS. always Bābwaih, but the name is explained by Qazvīnī, M. K., Bīst Maqālah, ii, Teheran, 1313, 131 = Public. Soc. tftudes iran.etc., No. 5, 1933, 39Google Scholar.

^{page 87 note 1} Fol. 72b–73a.

^{page 88 note 1} Chronology, 183, 249, 322.

^{page 88 note 2} Sub anno, 341 Heg.

^{page 88 note 3} Ed. as Sandūbī, 296.

^{page 88 note 4} Fol. 60a.

^{page 89 note 1} Rosenthal, F., “Isḥâq b. Hunayn's Ta'rtîḫ al-aṭibbā'”, Oriens, vii, 1954, 59Google Scholar.