In 1898 Queen Victoria sent a recording of her voice to the Emperor Menelik of Ethiopia and his Queen, Itege Taitu, together with some phonograph apparatus. The following year Menelik and Taitu returned the compliment by making recordings of their voices and sending them to Queen Victoria. The latter recordings have been preserved in the Royal Library at Windsor Castle, but Queen Victoria's recording was later destroyed on her instructions. The text of her message has, however, been preserved and is reproduced here. The message was dated Osborne, 8 August 1898:

‘I, Victoria, Queen of England, hope your Majesty is in good health. I thank you for the kind reception which you have given to my Envoys, Mr. Rodd and Mr. Harrington. I wish your Majesty and the Empress Taitou all prosperity and success, and I hope that the friendship between our two Empires will constantly increase’.

Though not invariably susceptible of demonstration, the influence of Classical Arabic upon the popular literature of Arabic-speaking Muslims in North Africa may safely be assumed. ‘Popular’, indeed, the early Islamic verse forms (ši'r mawzūn) and the later stanzaic compositions (klam or ālat al-andalus) have remained, and in these, even when modified by local tradition, the source of inspiration is easily recognized. Less clear is the transfer pattern of classical elements in the strictly vernacular poetry (klam melḥūn) of the same people. It is this category of composition with which the following observations are concerned, and wḥich suggested selection of the term ‘vernacular’ rather than ‘popular’. A further factor contributory to isolation of this topic is the existence of a vernacular literature amongst non-Muslim Arabic speakers in North Africa: the Jewish communities. There, owing both to Judaeo-Arabic orthography and to confessional motives in the selection of theme, the tyranny of Classical Arabic is considerably weakened, to some extent a consequence of social (educational) lines of demarcation. Important, however, are the affinities between the vernacular compositions of both groups, especially in matters relating to rhetorical convention and prosodic structure.

As is well known, the Eastern (or Nestorian) vocalization of Syriac (henceforth ES) consistently distinguishes between ē and ī, whereas the Western (or Jacobite) tradition (henceforth WS), although having both e and i, also has in many cases (originally long) e coinciding with (originally long) i. The question arises of how it happened that in some cases (originally long) e was preserved, whereas in others it shifted to i. Brockelmann and Birkeland were, no doubt, correct in assuming that in Proto-Syriac (henceforth PS) there existed two long e sounds, ē and ē. In ES vocalization these two sounds were not differentiated, whereas in WS (originally long) ę was preserved, but ē shifted to i. Only the assumption of two different forms of ē in PS can account for the twofold representation of original ē in WS, by both ę and i.

Throughout the ages from antiquity until modern times the extraordinary prowess of the horse-archers of Asia has excited wonder and admiration in those who have had the opportunity of observing them in action or of hearing of their feats. From the comments of observers and historians, therefore, a reasonably instructive account of their capabilities might be assembled. There can be no doubt, on the other hand, that a picture based solely on data of this kind would have its limitations in that it would capture the impression of what the eye perceived rather than reproduce the details of technique which alone can enable us to distinguish between fact and fiction or probable and improbable in the accounts of our witnesses. By a happy chance the evidence of a Mamlūk writer goes far to fill the lacuna. The source of the testimony is a technical treatise bearing on the training of archers. Entitled Kitāb ghunyat al-ṭullāb fī ma'rifat al-ramy bi 'l-nushshāb, the work was written circa 769/1368 by a certain Ṭaybugha '-Baklamishi '1-Yūnānī, about whom we know almost nothing beyond what can be gleaned from his treatise. Unlike many Arabic technical manuals of a similar kind dating from the later Middle Ages, the Ghunya will bear examination by the expert, for Ṭaybughā has an essentially practical mind and a complete grasp of his subject-matter. To judge from the number of extant MSS—17 are traceable in published works of reference—the work would appear to have been long esteemed throughout the Middle East as an authoritative source of instruction, and it may be surmised that Ṭaybughā's own words provide a clue to one of the reasons for its popularity: ‘Since archery and riding are enjoined by authentic command of the Prophet and since I knew of no work by any predecessor on the subject of shooting from horseback I felt I should accord the two accomplishments joint treatment in a single work, seeking thereby to comply with the command of God and His Messenger and to render a service to those of my brethren who campaign and fight in the jihād’.

The gibla, the south-west of Mauritania, is a monotonous region of gum acacia trees, baobabs, ‘dead’ dunes, and hillocks. This ‘backwood’ is the last refuge of Znāga Berber, once spoken far to the north in whole regions of the Western Sahara. A number of short poems, a cycle of folk-tales, and a handful of masterpieces of extended odes in praise of the Prophet—some 200 years old and written in Arabic script—this is the meagre literary legacy of a proud and cherished tradition.

One of the great problems in the study of Zoroastrianism has been to determine what were the new elements in Zoroaster's teachings—elements which roused such bitter hostility among his own people that he was driven to seek exile and to find his first converts among strangers. It is a problem because, through comparison with the Vedic religion, it has been possible to establish a good deal about the religion of the Iranians before Zoroaster, and naturally even more is known about the religion of the Zoroastrian church after him; and the two are remarkably and disconcertingly similar, as if the second were in many respects a natural development of the first, without any break in continuity, whereas neither is very fully or clearly reflected in Zoroaster's own highly complex Gāthās. Western scholars have fairly generally sought to explain this apparent anomaly by postulating that in many points of doctrine the religion of the Zoroastrian church is not in fact that preached by its prophet; they suppose, that is, that the followers of Zoroaster fairly rapidly betrayed his teachings and evolved a syncretic religion in which they reverted to many ancient beliefs and observances which he himself had denounced.

Recent surveys of historical writing on the modern history of the Nilotic Sudan show the rather late appearence of critical historical studies which draw on contemporary Arabic source materials. Only in the last decade or so has the abundant contemporary Mahdist documentation been decribed, partly classified, and utilized by scholars. So far, few of these documents have been reproduced and, although some attempts to prepare critical editions of texts have been made, they remain unpublished.

No comprehensive study of the Ottoman fetvā has so far been carried out. Of the great many Ottoman fetvā selections in print and manuscript, very few have been published in a scholarly edition or translated into a Western language. The systematic inquiry into the application of Muslim law in the Ottoman Empire as reflected in the fetvās has hardly even begun. This article will not examine the decisions of Ottoman muftīs on specific questions of law but discuss some general aspects of the Ottoman fetvā—its form, the procedure of its composition and issuance, the subjects it deals with, the law it applies, and related matters.

A few years ago the author was invited to inspect a Persian door which at that time was on a firm in Oxfordshire. It was found to be a fine decorated lacquer-painted door, and the Department of Eastern Art at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford sought and obtained the permission of the owner, Martyn Skinner, Esq., to exhibit the door on loan at the Museum, where it remained on display for nearly two years between 1962 and 1964. It is now back in the owner's possession at Ilex House, Fitzhead, Taunton, Somerset.

Among the manuscripts in the National Library in Bangkok are a number of sმmut dam ‘blank books’ written in yellow orpiment on blackened paper. Many of these are in Thai, but a few, catalogued under the number XVII 37 are in two scripts that show very close affinities with South Indian Grantha.

Priyā Dās was the first commentator on Nābhā Dās's celebrated work, the Bhaktamāla. His commentary entitled Bhaktirasabodhinī is a most valuable exposition of the Bhaktamāla, and later commentaries are mainly based on Priyā Dās's work. It is both surprising and disappointing how little is known about Priyā Dās. Although all the writers on the history of Hindi literature have frequently referred to and quoted from the commentary, only a few sentences, in some cases not more than two or three, are devoted to the author. This paper attempts to throw light on some aspects of his life and his other works, and to remove certain misconceptions.

Kukotay (K) and Bok Murun (BM) have epithets and formulae of greater or lesser elaborateness in common. Some of the more interesting of these will be adduced and compared, as will some of the more interesting discrepancies between K and BM on the way, since they throw light on the nature of their common source and of the Kirgiz epic tradition.

In my article ‘A case of murder in eighteenth-century Mongolia’ I analysed and summarized five documents through which the course taken by a murder case could be traced from the level of the Banner, which made the initial investigations, up to that of the Imperial consent to the recommendations submitted to the Throne by the Li Fan Yüan, and then back again to the Banner as the executive organ which had to put the punishments into effect. That case arose in the Banner of the zasag or Banner Prince Ǖrjinjav, and amongst other things it demonstrated the gap between regulations and the way they might be applied. Reference was made in the article to another case which arose in Ǖrjinjav's Banner, one of attempted murder, the documents concerning which are to be found in the same printed collection. In the present article I propose to analyse these documents, which concern a girl called Omboh.

In general outline the pattern of government in Outer Mongolia during the Manchu dyasty in not unfamiliar and it is a well-known fact that there was no judiciary as such, the administration of justice being only one of the various duties of local officials at various levels. A certain amount of work has been done on problems of law and justice, but there remain many problems of detail to be both raised and commented upon. Two lines of inquiry are open. On the one hand it is instructive to see how the processes of investigation and trial worked—how an alleged offence came to offical notice, who investigated, how evidence was recorded, what instances a case passed through, and how, and on what legal basis, it was disposed of. Other closely related technical questions concern the form and language of official documents. On the other hand, examination of criminal cases will afford insight into the social status, living conditions, and perhaps the psychology, of the persons concerned. It is in fact largely through the medium of legal and other official documents that we shall glean whatever information there is to be had about the day to day lives of individual persons in Mongolia under the Manchus, since other sources of information—journalism, biography, fiction, letters, memoirs, and so on—are non-existent. Apart from reports of criminal cases, some of which have been dealt with in model fashion by Klaus Sagaster, much information can be found in other types of official document, such as complaints submitted by ordinary people against officials, but in the present article we shall be concerned exclusively with the report of one criminal case dating from the late eighteenth century.

Stanzas 201 and 202 of PuṟanāṆūṟu are addressed by Kapilar to Iruṅkoveḷ. The following are the principal matters known about Iruṅkoveḷ from the stanzas and their old gloss:

He was an important chief among the Veḷir and his ancestors were the rulers of the well-fortifiied Tuvarai—‘Tuvarāpati’ according to the gloss—for 49 generations. He was obviously not at Tuvarai in Kapilar's time.

The Smert' Kukotay-khana i ego pominki (henceforth K) recorded by Chokan Valikhanov in 1856 and translated by him Russian Between 1861 and 1865, and Bok Murun (BM) recorded by V.V. Radlov in 1862 are two poems of remarkably ‘heroic’ temper that derive from a common source. The deal with the funeral feast of Kökötöy-kan, which is proverbial in Kirgiz as Kökötöydün aši, than which there was no greater funeral repast. Of the two poems, the former is apparently the more archaic, yet the latter too has archaic features. Regrettably, the Kirgiz original of K is lost but for some three couplets cited by Valikhanov in separate essays. Nevertheless, Valikanov evidently translated closely, since it is possible to recognize not only the ‘parallelistic’ structure of lines in various passages but also traditional epic formulae, including epithets, that occur in other Kirgiz heroic poems, including BM. The translation seems to be so close that if a Kirgiz bard, a good scholar, and a cryptographer could ever be brought together, it should prove possible to reconstruct much of the text of the lost K. Even this translation, alas, is unfinished. To supplement it very barely indeed there is in Valikhanov's published works a prose résumé of the Manas cycle, including the Kukotay (Kökötöy) episode. The latter does not entirely agree with K. It will be referred to here below as ‘the Résumé’. Radlov's Kirgiz text of BM is accompanied by a German verse-translation in another volume. Both require a word of assessment.

The extent and nature of Chinese penetration into Central Asia during the third century and the problems raised by the Chinese and Kharoṣṭhī documents that have been found at the various sites of Lop-nor, Niya, and elsewhere have recently formed the subject of articles by two scholars. Professer Brough has suggested that the territory of the state of Shan-shan was incorporated into the Kuṣāṇa empire for a short period, perhaps in the middle of the second century, before independent rules took over control. He believes that a further change was marked by the adoption of the royal title jiṭuṃgha from the seventeenth year of king Aṃgoka, and that thereafter the country was subject to Chinese control (or at least nominally so) for the period of about 60 years until the end of King Vaṣmana's reign; and he suggests that the seventeenth year of king Aṃgoka can be identified with 263. Professor Enoki has recently taken the opportunity to revise his earlier theory that the year in question should be identified as 609; and he now believes that the five kings mentioned by name in the Kharoṣṭhī documents should be dated from the middle of the third century to the decade starting in 330.