In the Manuscript Collection of the Cairo Library (Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriya), there is an unpublished and practically unknown manuscript (Kashf al-Asrār al-'Ilmiya bi Dār aḍ-Ḍarb al-Miṣriya), which contains a treatise dealing with problems of the Egyptian mint. It was composed by Manṣūr ibn Ba'ra a-ahabī al-Kāmilī. Although the manuscript is only a late copy of the original work, it constitutes an important source for the study of the monetary system and minting problems of medieval Egypt.

The term ḥalqa, as a name of a military unit, seems to be mentioned for the first time in 1174, when Tūrānshāh set out, under Ṣalāḥ ad-Dīn's orders, on his expedition to the Yemen. This unit is also mentioned a few times during the siege of Acre in 587/1191. The sources do not indicate the date of its founding, and no authoritative explanation of the meaning of its name is available. Two opinions as to the latter may be submitted with all due reservations: Quatremere thinks that the halqa was so called because it was a corps which surrounded the sultan and constituted his bodyguard, and indeed the sources' description of its position and part in combat support the impression that it was composed of the élite of Ṣalāḥ ad-Dīn's forces; A. N. Poliak disagrees, and holds that the name is derived from the special tactics the Turkish peoples used to employ in attack, i.e. that of surrounding the enemy in the form of a ring (ḥalqa). Poliak supports his view by alluding to the frequent recurrence of these tactics in the combat manoeuvres described in the furūsīya literature and in the hunting expeditions which the Ayyubid and Mamluk sultans frequently organized. In the present state of our knowledge, both explanations must be viewed as hypothetical, since no data are available to support either the one or the other; the writer inclines to favour Quatremere's view.

Arabic manuscript no. 4525 in the Istanbul University Library consists of what appears to be the first part of a history of Safed. The manuscript bears no indication either of the title of the work or of the name of its author. The text begins on the second page; the first contains only a brief quotation on Safed from the Mu‘jam al-buldān of Yāqūt.

A Cylindrical brass box then belonging to the collection of Mme Delort de Gléon (and now in the Louvre, Inv. No. 7438) was shown at the Exhibition of Muslim Art held in Paris in 1903. It was briefly described in the catalogue and the Arabic inscriptions which decorate it were published by M. Sobernheim. But, to the best of my knowledge, no illustrations of this box have so far been reproduced.

The territory of the present-day Soviet republic of Azarbayjan roughly corresponds to the ancient Caucasian Albania (in Armenian Aḷovan-k', or Aḷvan-k', in Arabic Arrān > al-Rān). Twenty-six languages were spoken in Albania and it had its own kings (Strabo, xi, 4). However, during the seven centuries between Pompey's expedition in 66–5 B.C., to which we owe most of our information on the ancient life of the country, and the Arab invasion in the 7th century A.D., great changes had taken place in the area, under the influence of the Persian expansion up to the Caucasian passes, the Khazar and Alān inroads from the north, and the Armenian cultural activities which resulted in the conversion of the surviving Albanians to the Armenian form of Christianity. The Arab geographers refer to the Arrānian language as still spoken in the neighbourhood of Barda'a (Persian: Pērōz-ābādh, Armenian Partav), but now only the two villages inhabited by the Udi are considered as the direct continuators of the Albanian linguistic tradition.

Stein MS. Ch. xlvi 0012 c contains part of a Vita of the teacher Prajñāttīrṇa of the city of Humädāṃ. The folio is numbered 3 on the margin.

Recto 1 paysānāma kṣamī vajrracchaidikyi prrajñā-pārme nva carya

2 tsūma ttāra tca'ca hīs|ma dharma-mūkha mūkha niṣkalyāme hīya padaja ‖

3 cu prrajñāttīrṇa āśi'rī mi|styau jāyaryau gaṃbhīra jaryau gaṃbhīra Verso 1 jāyaka brraṣṭe humädāṃ kītha ysāyī hāvä bujse | vīra anihvarrda biśä ysirrnai ba'ysna ba'ysūśtä kṣmä ṣi' mī tvaḍa bistä salī garrvā

2 māṃde | vara na śūjye nva dva mārgaupadeśā parāe' parrīyasta cu

3 biśe caignye jana ve vīra kalyīamittra ya hīya biśā'yūṃ jsa tvā gaṃbhīra jāyaka pacaāana ka ba

1. vajrracchaidikyi ‘Vajracchedikā’ exists in a Khotanese version edited in 1916 by Sten Konow. The sutra is preceded by introductory verses which offer an explanation of the name (2 a 4 ff.).

The problem of how human nature is constituted, we have good reason to believe, was current before Mencius and, from the time of Shyuntzyy onward, has been one of the central problems throughout the history of Chinese philosophy. The point at issue between Mencius and Shyuntzyy has traditionally been taken to be something like this. There is a thing called human nature, which is good according to Mencius, but bad according to Shyuntzyy. The same thing cannot be both good and bad at the same time, hence at least one of the two philosophers must be wrong. That this was how most thinkers of subsequent ages understood the position can be seen from the remedies they recommended. There were two ways of reconciling the conflicting views.

In my first article on this question the following conclusions were reached: (1) that all the five letters referred to were spurious; and (2) that letters 1, 2, and 3 were probably written by one and the same author. In this article I shall attempt to show that the themes, style, and atmosphere of the three letters in question lead to the further conclusion that their author was probably Jiang Ian of the Liang Dynasty (tzyh Wen-tong , A.D. 444–505). Before discussing this special case of literary ‘forgery’ it may be helpful to cast a glance at the practice of literary forgery in China generally, while directing our attention especially to the motives for such activities.

Wolfram eberhard's recent A History of China has attracted great interest. Reviewers have praised it for its readability and broad sweep and for the way in which it goes beyond a mere chronicle of political and cultural events and tries to penetrate to underlying causes. At the same time they have noted many errors of detail and have expressed surprise and incredulity at the many new generalizations presented with an air of established finality. It was, of course, impossible for Eberhard to present detailed evidence or argumentation in support of his views in a brief general history. The subsequent publication of Das Toba-Reich Nordchinas and Conquerors and Rulers has enabled us to form a better judgment of the value of at least a part of his work.

No one interested in the Classical Hindu Law could read Dr. S. K. Belvalkar's Critical Note to Śāntiparva, Adhyāya 121, śl. 14 and ff., without experiencing a great curiosity. The important account given by Bhīṣma of the nature and purpose of Daṇḍa (Punishment) incidentally produces an Indian counterpart to the Roman jus naturale, the full implications of which deserve investigation elsewhere. Amongst the details we find a description of Daṇḍa as follows:—

nīlōtpala-dala-śyāmaś=caturdaṃṣṭraś=caturbhujaḥ

aṣṭapān=naikanayanaś=śankukarṇōrdhvarōmavān

jaṭī dvi-jihvas tāmrāsyō mṛja-rāja-tanucchadaḥ ētad-rūpaṃ bibharty=ugraṃ Daṇḍō nityaṃ durāvaraḥ.