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.

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.

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.

Tibetan orthography looks phonetically challenging, to say the least; and one may well wonder whether such tongue-twisting combinations as the brj of brjes, the blt- of bltas, or the bst- of bstan ever did twist a Tibetan tongue, or whether the significance of these and other such orthographic forms might not have been morphophonemic in origin, with the letters r, l, and s in the syllable initial of forms such as these serving to associate these past-tense forms lexically with their corresponding present-tense forms; e.g. Viewed in relation to Tibetan orthography the past-tense forms of a class of verbs in the Golok dialect seem to support this hypothesis. Table 1, below, contains a number of examples of Golok verbs in their past-tense and present-tense forms to illustrate a type of phonological analysis suited to that view of the r syllable-initial unit in the Golok examples, and, indirectly, in the WT examples too (the symbols b and b will be accounted for in section (B) below).

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.

I Give below a portion of the Pahlavi Žāmāsp-Nāmak with notes. The text is easily accessible in J. J. Modi's Jâmâspi, Pahlavi Pâzend and Persian Texts, 1903, Bombay, and, for a part only, in West's edition in Avesta, Pahlavi, and Ancient Persian Studies, 1904. It has, therefore, seemed unnecessary to reprint the Pahlavi. West used a MS., entitled DP., of the late Shams ul Ulama Dastur Dr. Peshotanji Behramji Sanjana (West, loc. cit.), for the other MSS. see Modi's introduction, loc. cit. I have noted the chief discrepancies only (Modi's MSS. are quoted as “ MSS.”, or separately as MU.,DE.).

This article analyses Shakespeare and Molière's enduring appeal in various African countries and the diversity of their plays’ adaptations. The starting point is the discrepancy between the two playwrights, Shakespeare in Africa being an artistic phenomenon (a controversial one in some quarters), while the adaptation of Molière remains mainly the domain of school curricula. This article will first provide a historical overview of activities related to the introduction of Shakespeare and Molière's works in Africa. Second, it will set out to analyse the varied adaptation and “Africanization” of both playwrights’ work. It will shed light on the political and scholarly disputes over the incorporation of these authors in school curricula after independence and examine the ways in which these classical European texts were domesticated in Africa.

It is well known that the oldest existing complete literary work of a Mussulman Turk, the Qudatqu Bilik or Qutadghu Bilik, was composed in 462 H. (a.d. 1069–70) by Yūsuf Khāṣṣ Ḥājib, a native from Bālāsāghūn, on the River Chu, for a Khān residing in Kāshghar who is called “Mashriq Maliki Tabghach Khani Malik Bughra Khan” (King of the East, Khan of China, the King Bughra Khan), “Tabghach Qara Bughra Khanlar Khani” (the Chinese Qara Bughra, the Khan of Khans), “Tabghach Ulugh Bughra Khan” (the Chinese, the great Bughra Khan), even more simply “Ordukent Khani Beg” (the Khan of the court-town, that is Kashghar, the prince). The statements concerning the chronology of the Kashghar kings of the eleventh century are very vague and scanty, and are not supplied by numismatic evidence; therefore it is not an easy task to ascertain who was the king mentioned by Yūsuf. There can be no doubt that he belonged to the dynasty of the Ilek Khāns. The chief authority on the history of that dynasty has been for all Muhammedan and European scholars the great work of Ibn al-Athīr, especially the statements given under the year 408 H. We are told by Ibn al-Athīr that Arslān Khān, son of Qādir Khān Yūsuf, King of Kāshghar, Khotan, and Bālāsāghūn, was deposed by his brother Bughra Khān and taken prisoner; Bughrā Khān was some time later poisoned by his wife, who put to death Arslān Khān also, in 439 H. Bughrā Khān ruled only fifteen months and was succeeded by Ṭoghrul Khān, son of Yūsuf Qadir Khāan (that is, by his brother), who ruled sixteen years (until 456 or 457). His son, Ṭoghrul-tagīn, was deposed after two months by “Hārūn Bughrā Khān, brother of Yūsuf Ṭoghrul Khān and son of Ṭafghāch Boghrā Khān” (?); Hārūn Bughrā Khān passed (‘abara) Kāshghar, made Hārūn (? mistake for Ṭoghrul-tagīn) prisoner; the army of the latter submitted to him, and he took possession of Kāshghar, Khotan, and the neighbouring districts to Bālāsāghūn, where he reigned twenty-nine years and died in 496. These statements can, of course, not be quite correct; if Bughrā Khān Hārūn was the brother of Ṭoghrul Khān, he must have been a son of Yūsuf Qadír Khān, and is, in fact, called so by Ibn al-Athīr himself on the previous page. The reigns mentioned by Ibn al-Athīr, and said to have extended from 439 to 496 (fifty-seven years), do not cover all that time, but nearly ten years less. We know, indeed, from an earlier author, Abu-I-Faḍl Baihaqī, that the first Bughrā Khān (called by Ibn al-Athīr Maḥmud) died not in 439 but in 449. Bughrā Khān Hārūn must have reigned in this case from 467 to 496, Ṭoghrul Khān from 451 to 467; the Qudatqu Bilik, composed in 462, was therefore written in the reign of Ṭoghrul Khān, but Bughrā Khān seems to have been a co-regent of his brother; Ibn al-Athīr speaks of the war made by the two brothers against Shams al-Mulk, Khān of Samarqand. Therefore it was quite natural to come to the conclusion that the Bughrā Khān mentioned by Yūsuf Khāṣṣ Ḥājib was Bughrā Khān Hārūn ibn Yūsuf, and such an opinion has been expressed in my article “Bughrā Khān” in the Encyclopædia of Islām.

This paper examines the social currency of copper-plate charters on the basis of Persian copper-plates from the Deccan. Indic religious systems have a long tradition of conferring land grants using this medium, partially rooted in beliefs of metaphysical qualities attributed to metals. The objects from this region are highly unusual because there are no other recorded instances of a sultan issuing or authorizing land grants on copper-plates. The Persian-language copper-plates appear from the sixteenth century onwards, and seem to be later copies of (or extracts from) paper-based charters issued by Bahmani sultans and other kingdoms in the Deccan. Issues of authenticity and forgeries, fakes and copies are also raised in this paper. This study examines objects that combine material culture and textual content. While the textual content of these objects has always been privileged as being a source of history, the medium – which itself has a history of reception – has not been given its own historical narrative. The paper provides new perspectives on what we might call the “social life” of different documentary formats in medieval and early modern India, in particular the copper-plate grant.

The mid-fifteenth-century Taoist Canon (Zhengtong daozang 正統道藏) contains five specimens of a religious artefact called “Great Peace Symbol” (“Taiping fu” 太平符), dispersed between five texts spanning about a millennium. The introduction to this paper discusses the meaning of the Chinese word fu 符 and its most widely used English rendition, “talisman”. The article briefly presents the source of each specimen, attempts a deconstruction of its morphology, and analyses its modus operandi, thus providing a basic methodological model to outline the historical evolution of the category of “fu” artefacts from early medieval portable devices endowed with specific apotropaic functions – like charms and amulets – to multipurpose ritual implements designed for use within the framework of early modern Taoist liturgy. The epilogue introduces a sixth specimen, differently named but morphologically and functionally related to the latest three “Great Peace Symbols”.

This article will discuss the dating formula in the Dadanitic inscriptions. So far, some of these have been interpreted to refer not only to the reign of the local king (mlk lḥyn), but also to another political official called rʾy. The article will discuss the merit of this interpretation based on both the questionable etymology of the term rʾy and the problematic interpretation of the terms following this word as personal names. Instead, a new interpretation of this formula as a reference to a local calendar will be explored in light of the occurrence of a similar word rʾy in Safaitic dating formula, and comparison to other ancient methods of time reckoning in the region.

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.

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.).

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).

In the of the Fuad I University, vol. 9, part 1, May, 1947, pp. 25–27, Dr. K. Y. Nami has published an interesting boundary inscription now in the possession of that University. In his treatment of the inscription, however, he has overlooked the fact that a parallel text is to be found in the Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum, iv, 949. This is unfortunate, since a correlation of the two texts is most helpful in understanding the formula contained in them.

The following are the two texts, with the renderings proposed by Nami for his inscription and by Rhodokanakis for the Corpus text.

The Mahānubhāvas are a Maharashtrian bhakti sect founded in the second half of the thirteenth century. Like other Indian bhakti sects, the Mahānubhāvas practise exclusive devotion to one god, but do not thereby deny the existence of other gods. Rather, Mahānubhāvas hold that ‘the gods’ form a category of real beings distinct from jīvas, the world, and God. Mahānubhāva thought pays a good deal of attention to the gods; yet this attention does not compromise Mahānubhāva monotheism.