1. The following article is primarily an attempt to explain the equations, Sanskrit mārjāraḥ = Gujrāti mājār = Marāṭhī mājar; Sanskrit śmaśānáḥ = Gujrāti masāṇ = Marāṭhī masaṇ; Sanskrit palāśáḥ = Marāṭhī palas; Sanskrit upasthnam = Marāṭhī vaṭhāṇ.

In the new volume of the Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der königlichen Museen zu Berlin (Heft xii, 1915) Dr. Otto Schroeder has published a revised copy (No. 202) of what is known as the Second Arzawa Tablet found at Tel el-Amarna and now in Berlin. As I was the first to point out many years ago (Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archæology, xi, 1889), the text of the tablet, like that of the First Tablet addressed to the king of Arzawa, is in the Hittite language. The revised copy of the Second Tablet is a great improvement on what has been previously at our disposal, and with the help of the Hittite Vocabularies (for which see JRAS. October, 1914) and various other tablets from Boghaz Keui, it is now possible to present a translation of it. The tablet contains a letter from a Hittite named Labbaya who was employed in escorting the caravans from Khalirabbat or Eastern Cappadocia to Canaan, and who with his two sons was accused of intriguing with the enemies of the Pharaoh and even occupying Canaanitish cities. We hear a good deal about him in the Tel el-Amarna correspondence, which includes two letters from him in Semitic Babylonian, rebutting the accusations that had been brought against him and protesting his fidelity to the Egyptian Government.

In the course of my registering and describing the collection of manuscripts of Sir Aurel Stein's second expedition in Eastern Turkestan, I have come across two sets of fragments which appear to me to preserve portions of an early recension of the Saddharma-puṇḍarīka; earlier, that is to say, than the ordinary recension published by Professor Kern in the .Bibliotheca Buddhica, x. They were discovered by Sir A. Stein in September, 1906, in the sand-buried ruins of Khadalik, as described by him in his Ruins of Desert Kathay, vol. i, pp. 239 ff.

This official designation, belonging to Seleucid and Ptolemaic times, is not a quantity that we should expect to see expressed in Indian letters; but to find it a second time is more than surprising, and it may be termed significant, more especially as both occurrences belong to the limited range of Kharoṣṭhī inscriptions.

The general injunction in the Ḳurān to “eschew evil and do good” was held sufficiently definite to be the basis of a jurisdiction distinct both from that of the Ḳaḍi and of the police (shurṭa). Māwardi contrasts its powers with those of the Ḳaḍi's court and of the Maẓālim tribunal; but it may be that in practice the distinction was of small account, for I have found no trace of the Muḥtasib's authority ever being called in question, nor indeed much definite trace of its exercise. The wide and minute range of its duties should have made it an important factor in commercial life, but perhaps in this, as in other fields, Māwardi's work includes theory unsupported by much practice.

The Chinese people have two systems in current and concurrent use for writing their Numerals.

Of these, one is the ordinary notation with characters of pictographic origin, except the first three cyphers.