In the Cairo Museum of Arab Art there are more than three thousand slabs of marble and stone bearing Cufic inscriptions. Most of these slabs are tombstones found in the ancient cemeteries of Cairo and Aswan. On each of these tombstones are inscribed the name of the deceased and the date of his death; hence they are invaluable in working out the evolution of Arabic writing. Only two hundred of these slabs are exhibited in the Museum, the others being kept in the stores and recesses of the building.

A writer remarks, “If men at the lowest as well as the highest stage of civilization enunciate the same truths, the fact goes to prove that these truths are unimportant.” I can hardly assent to the conclusion, even were the premiss correct, whereas it is not. Those familiar with proverbial literature have remarked that some aphorisms are common in matter, and a few even in actual manner and form, to almost all nations and languages. The Syrian, for instance, will say, “The egg of to-day, not the hen of to-morrow;” and “A live dog is better than a dead lion.” On the other hand, the points of difference are far more important. Setting aside the sayings which “bear the stamp of their birthplaces, and which wear the colouring and the imagery of their native climes,” we find that there are proverbs peculiar to every race—proper to it, as are its syntax and its idiom; that each people speaks out the truth or the half truth which is in it, and, consequently, that for the most part neither the idea nor the wording bear comparison. Moreover, were it a fact that all enunciate the same truth, it by no means proves the latter to be unimportant, except to the few.

The following pages contain a rather circumstantial account of certain negotiations between the Buwaihid, 'Aḍud al-Daula, and the Emperor Basil, the slayer of the Bulgarians, consequent on the presence of Basil's defeated rival, Bardas Scleros, in honourable captivity at Baghdad. His defeat at Pancalia in A.D. 979 very nearly coincided with 'Aḍud al-Daula's final conquest of ‘Irāḳ, which was followed by the expulsion from Mosul of the Hamdanid Abu Taghlib. Between him and Scleros existed the tie of self-interest cemented by one of affinity: they had assisted each other against their respective adversaries, and had both been defeated. Abu Taghlib's defeat was final; driven from Diyār Bakr by the troops of 'Aḍud al-Daula, he fled to Syria and perished by a treacherous Arab hand. But no impassable barrier as yet interposed between Scleros and the object of his ambition. He had escaped to Mayyāfāriḳīn, which had lately submitted to ‘Aḍud al-Daula, and had sent thence his brother Constantine as his envoy to Baghdad with an appeal for succour and an offer of allegiance. Contemporaneously arrived at Baghdad an envoy from Basil with instructions to procure, at whatever cost, the surrender of Scleros, who was obviously a valuable pawn in the monarchs’ political game. 'Aḍud al-Daula thereupon caused him and his followers to be promptly conveyed to Baghdad, and the game proceeded.

The parchment fragment reproduced on Plate I was acquired some twenty years since by the British Museum, where it is numbered Or. 6201 C (1). It lay among a large quantity of Coptic papyrus and parchment MSS., the dialect, scripts, and incidental names of which confirm the seller's statement that all were bought together at Ashmunain. The ages of these manuscripts vary greatly; some of the parchment uncials should belong to the 5th or 6th century, others and some of the papyri to the 9th or 10th. The large majority of the latter are, however, of the 7th or 8th century. Obviously, from such facts none but the vaguest conclusions can be drawn.

A preceding essay on Indian philosophy contained a succinct account of the Carma-mímánsá. The present one will be devoted to the Brahma-mímánsá; which, as the complement of the former, is termed uttara, later, contrasted with púrva, prior, being the investigation of proof deducible from the védas in regard to theology, as the other is in regard to works and their merit. The two together, then, comprise the complete system of interpretation of the precepts and doctrine of the védas, both practical and theological. They are parts of one whole. The later mímánsá is supplementary to the prior, and is expressly affirmed to be so: but, differing on many important points, though agreeing on others, they are essentially distinct in a religious as in a philosophical view.

In the January number of this Journal there appeared a most interesting article by Mr. M. Longworth Dames on “The Portuguese and Turks in the Indian Ocean in the Sixteenth Century”. The article furnishes an admirable introduction to this engrossing, if little known, subject; and it is only by way of supplement that I am writing the following notes.

In 1824 the governor of the important southern Siamese city of Nakhon Sri Thammarat, and of the large region which fell under Nakhon's jurisdiction, was chao phraya Nakhon (Noi). He ruled the city from 1811–39 and was a man of extraordinary character, a vigorous and determined ruler who was reputed to be the son of a former king of Siam, Taksin. This attribution of royal birth was current in his own lifetime, and was recorded by Henry Burney in 1826, and by Lieutenant James Low a little later (Munro-Hay, in press). At that time the British, at war with Burma, Siam's western neighbour, were concerned by developments relating to the Rangoon expedition, and it was determined to send an envoy from the Government of India on a mission to the Siamese governor to discuss outstanding problems and possible co-operation.

In a previous article in this journal the writer gave an account of the forming in the Library of the University College, Ibadan, of a collection of manuscripts representative of the indigenous Arabic literature of the Western Sudan, and from this collection and other sources compiled a list of the Arabic writings of Shehu Usumanu ḍan Fodio, the Reformer, founder of the Fulani empire. From the same sources it has been possible to list by title most of the Arabic writings of Usumanu's brother, Waziri Abdullahi ḍan Fodio.