This study is mainly based on the writings of two authors: Ibn FaḍAllāh al-‘Umarī (d. 749/1349) and al-Qalqashandī (d. 821/1418). Al-‘Umarī has in the first part of his encyclopedia Maslik al-absār fī mamālik al-amṣār a section, the fifteenth,1 dealing with the Arab tribes of his time.

Conventionally, the history of early and medieval India is viewed against a framework of a large number of dynasties, some local, others ‘imperial’, some ephemeral, others extending over several centuries.3 In this paper I argue that such a conceptualization is to some extent illusory, at least if a dynasty is defined as a series of genetically related rulers succeeding to a given office over time. The purpose of the paper is not to deny that many of these dynasties could have existed, or even that they did exist, but only to argue that the nature and extent of our evidence is not sufficient to permit many of the hypothesized reconstructions of them. In other words, the impression of a dynastic Indian past often has resulted from a maximum of inference based on a minimum of satisfactory data.

The important series of pre-Mughal monuments in the Lodi Gardens (the former Lady Willingdon Park), set in the midst of the residential area of New Delhi, is familiar to most visitors to the city. Apart from a handsome Mughal bridge (the Āṭhpula) and some small and insignificant outbuildings, there are five main structures which lie along a south-south-west to north-north-east axis. The most southerly monument is the domed octagonal tomb thought to be of Muhammad Shāh Sayyid (r. 838–49/1435–46): and the most northerly is another domed octagonal tomb in a square fortified enclosure thought to be that of Sikandar Shāh Lōdī (r. 894–923/1489–1517).

In recent years the question of the antiquity of gZer-mig1 has been brought to the surface by some Tibetologists, but the problem is still far from being solved.2 Neither its history nor its contents have yet been fully studied.

The name of Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī naturally appears frequently in early Buddhist texts, and in the Chinese translations a number of transcriptions and translated versions of the name are well known.1 The former need not detain us: with a few variations in the characters chosen, they represent clearly either Prakritic pajāpadī, pajāpadī, or Sanskrit prajāpatī. One Middle Indian version may be singled out as showing a different development:p***e-*** ***ayuâ-dei, i.e. piyāvadī.2 We shall come back to this later.

AN-NAN-KUO I-YO: VIETNAMESE VOCABULARY

In a recent article treating the location of ancient regions attested in early Sumero-Akkadian texts, the present writer proposed to identify the country of Meluḫḫa with a part of eastern Baluchistan in modern Pakistan (BSOAS, xxxvi, 3, 1973, 559–70). It was, however, also suggested that the name Meluḫḫa ‘may have been applied at times to regions which extended to the east of there’.1 This theory was not developed in the article because the possibility could not then be demonstrated factually.

The problem of the Iranian hindu- in the mountain name Us.hәndava and Old Indian síndhu- has already been subjected to frequent investigation. Up to 1972 these earlier interpretations are listed in M. Mayrhofer, Kurzgefasstes etymologisches Worterbuch des Altindischen, Lief. 23, 1972, s.v. síndhu-. Accepting a basic meaning ‘flowing water’, connexions have been offered with syandate ‘it flows’ from the time of Yāska till today, assumed as a variant to *syandh-: sindh-, which could be classed as a case of incremental variant -d-with-dh-to syan-, but it has also provoked a doubtful laryngal explanation of -d- with -H-; or assuming a connexion with Old Indian sedh-: sidh-‘to repel’ a doubtful meaning ‘boundary’ has been offered.

When surveying the examples listed below it will be noticed that there are no examples of iotized dental s(tem) i(nitial)s, the likely reason being that after dental s. i.s an original y was absorbed in the ensuing process of (full) palatalization. In the case of guttural s. i.s, however, we witness in some cases both the retention of y and its absorption by palatalization. This can be illustrated by the presence of such doublets as skyon-pa ‘to put astride ~ gśon-pa (IIA, ex. 4) or skyuṅ-ka (<*sklyuṅ-ka) ‘jackdaw’ ~ lćuṅ-ka (IIA, ex. 2).

The death of Marcel Cohen on 5 November 1974 was a grievous loss to linguistic scholarship, and to the study of Hamito-Semitic, above all of Ethiopian languages. Indeed, Hamito-Semitic studies owe to him their ‘ennoblement’ during the first half of this century. In Ethiopian studies Marcel Cohen acquired a pre-eminent position and became one of our masters along with Ludolf and Dillmann, Praetorius, Mittwoch and Littmann, Guidi and Conti Rossini, who had preceded him since the seventeenth century.

Professor R. C. Zaehner, who died suddenly on 24 November 1974, was, at the time of his death, Spalding Professor of Eastern Religions and Ethics in the University of Oxford and a Fellow of All Souls. He was born on 8 April 1913 of Swiss parents who had emigrated to England. He was educated at Tonbridge School and won a classical scholarship to Christ Church. After taking a second class in Classical Moderations, he transferred to Oriental Studies, specializing in Persian, and took a first class in 1936. In the years prior to the outbreak of the second World War, he continued his study of Old and Middle Persian under Professor (later Sir Harold) Bailey. As part of his war service he spent the years 1943–1947 at the British Embassy in Tehran, where his knowledge of Persian and understanding of Persia were of immense value. He made a large number of Persian friends, by whom he was regarded with enormous respect and affection. He returned to Oxford, where in 1950 he became University lecturer in Persian.