It has already been stated (ante, p. 918, Oct. 1906) that skandha, in the plural number, denotes the cervical vertebræ (not the shoulders). To the examples there given the following may be added:—

In the Atharva Veda, vi, 135, verse 1, we read:

On p. 938 (Oct. 1906), 1. 12, for “peak of the shoulder” read “nape of the neck.”

(fol.91b) According to a tradition, the Prophet had foretold to ‘Abbās that the Khalifate would go to his posterity (ṫab. iii, 23–4); other traditions follow on the names to be borne by them. Ibrāhīm the Imām died in prison, having settled the succession, and ordered the members of his house to go to Kūfa, where Saffāḥ was proclaimed, ib. 27–8. His birth (in 105 A.H.) and parentage are stated, ib. 88, and Fragm. 214; and (fol. 92a) that he was younger than his brother al-Manṣūr; and that his laqabs were Saffāḥ, Murtada, and Qāim, the origin of the first being explained. He stigmatised a denunciation sent under the title of ‘good advice,’ as repulsive alike to Allah and to himself.

Fa-Hian tells us that a journey of four yojanas to the east from Vaiśālī brought him to “the confluence of the five rivers,” and that then, crossing the river (the Ganges) and going south for one yojana, he arrived at Pāṭaliputra in the kingdom of Magadha.

The establishment of the town of Fusṭâṭ as a new capital of Egypt is an important event in the Arab conquest, inaugurating as it does the permanent occupation of the country by the Arabs. One has to look to Arab authorities alone for details. In the works that are generally available at the present time by having been printed, the particulars are but few. The direct references in these books to the foundation of the town, containing information beyond a mere mention of the fact, do not take long to sum up. Traced back as far as possible to their originals, so as to eliminate repetition which adds nothing to our knowledge, they appear to be included in the following passages:—

With the barsom (now) brought [forward; it is here (at this point in the ceremony) brought forward and put upon the barsom-holder] together with the žoaθra water of Aūharmažd, the Creator, the resplendent, the glorious, and of the Amešaspends, and for their sake (I desire (or ‘I invoke’) the consecration of this H(a)oma plant). [⃜ It has (now) been prepared (as I speak). (Not at all impossibly meaning ‘it has now; as I pronounce the prayer for it to be consecrated in this present ceremony, —it has now been made ready.')]

Mr. J. P. Rawlins, late of the Panjāb Police, who is well known to Indian numismatists as a successful collector of rare coins, some time ago sent me for publication a batch of curious copper coins which he obtained while serving in the Hoshyārpur District. These coins all come from a very remarkable locality, which has been explored by Mr. Rawlins, but seems to be unknown to other archæologists. It is described as the Plateau of Manaswāl, situated on the outer range of the Siwālik Hills, at an elevation of about two thousand feet, in the Hoshyārpur District. This plateau is extensive, being about ten miles in length and six in breadth. The principal village is Manaswāl, distant about thirty miles in a south-easterly direction from Hoshyārpur, between that town and Rūpar in the Ambāla (Umballa) District. Other villages, or hamlets, enumerated by Mr. Rawlins are Biniwāl, Hanand, Daleywāl, Kharali, and Bhawānipur. The whole region is full of ancient sites, marked by mounds, and all the villages named are included in the area containing the remains of ancient settlements, which may have formed one great city.

In the Mahāvibhāṣā, the well-known commentary on the Jñānaprasthāna of Kātyāyanīputra, there is a short passage which is of importance in the history of Sanskrit epic literature. The great commentary mentions, as an example of the contrast between Buddhist and non-Buddhist books, the size and contents of the Rāmāyaṇa.

I had not intended to write anything more about the inscription on the Piprahwa relic-vase, treated by me in this Journal, 1906. 149 ff., until I should have completed my examination of the tradition about the corporeal relics of Buddha, and should be able to offer a facsimile of the record. And it is only recently that the occasion has arisen for presenting sooner any further remarks, as the result of the criticism of my interpretation of the record advanced by M. Senart in the Journal Asiatique, 1906, 1. 132 ff., and by M. Barth in the Journal des Savants, 1906. 541 ff. That two such distinguished scholars should differ from me so radically, is an important matter. And I wish that I had seen M. Senart's remarks sooner; but, though issued early in the year, they did not become known to me until towards the end of September. M. Barth's paper, issued in October or November,— in which he has reviewed all the principal previous treatments of the record and suggestions made regarding it, and has endorsed M. Senart's conclusions except in the grammatical analysis of the compound sukitibhatinaṁ,— reached me after the writing of this article, but in time for me to make a few additions to it.

The missing Elphinstone Codex of the Bābar-nāma having been found in the Advocates' Library by the Keeper, Mr. William K. Dickson, a first-hand description of it can be offered in supplement of the earlier notices published in the R.A.S. Journal in July 1900 and 1902, and in October 1905.

It has more than once been said that the domain of Assyriology is one of surprises, and the more one follows the discoveries which are constantly, but for the most part unobtrusively, being made, the more one becomes convinced of the truth of this statement. The first texts deciphered were those of Persia—important documents for the history of that country, especially the great text of Behistun, gained for students at the risk of his life by that pioneer of research, the late Sir Henry Rawlinson, one of the most illustrious members of this Society, who afterwards brought to light many other important facts in “our glorious science,” as the Germans call the study of Assyrian texts. The reading of this document, with the other trilingual inscriptions of Persia, enabled the tablets found in the palaces of Assyria to be deciphered, and showed that the language was the same as that of the third system of writing in the records of the early Persian kings, opening out a literature which, at the present time, occupies many volumes, and is constantly and steadily increasing.