the work. To Dr. Rieu I have written without hesitation whenever I required information about MSS. in the British Museum, and have always received a prompt, courteous, and full reply. I am also greatly indebted to Mr. Blochmann, of the Calcutta Madrasa, who has taken a lively interest in the progress of this work, and has pointed out errors and suggested improvements in the spirit of a true scholar. Distance has prevented frequent communication with him, and I regret that I have been unable to profit more by his deep and extensive knowledge of Muhammadan historians. The care and intelligence with which the work has been printed by Messrs. Austin has saved me much trouble, and deserves my acknowledgment.

It has been my constant intention to give full credit to those translators whose MSS. have been printed in these volumes, to name the sources from which materials have been drawn, and to acknowledge every help that has been rendered. If I have ever failed in doing this, it has been through ignorance or accident, and in spite of my best intentions.

The articles in this volume are numerous, and it is not possible to give a complete list of the translators. The bibliographical notices, with the exception of a few compiled by the Editor, are no doubt the work of Sir H. M. Elliot, for although they have been copied out fair by his amanuensis, the original drafts of many of them still remain in Sir Henry's handwriting. Some of the Extracts were apparently translated by munshís. The following list gives the names of the translators as far as the Editor has been able to ascertain them:

LXXXV.—Khulásatu-t Tawáríkh—Editor.
LXXXVII.-Tazkira-i Chaghatáí-Editor.

XCIII. Jauhar-i Samsám-Major Fuller.

XCIV.-Tazkira-i Anand Rám Mukhlis-Lieut. Perkins.
C.-Táríkh-i Ahmad Sháh-Sir Douglas Forsyth.
CI.-Bayán-i Wákí'-Lieut. Prichard.

CII. Táríkh-i 'Alamgír Sání-Editor.

CXIX. 'Ibrat-náma-Editor.

CXXI.—Táríkh-i Ibráhím Khán—Major Fuller.
CXXVI.-Gul-i Rahmat-Editor.

CXXVIII.-Táríkh-i Muzaffarí—Editor.

CXLII.-'Imádu-s Sa'ádat-Editor.
CXLIII.-Nigár-náma-i Hind-Major Fuller.

Copious Indexes to the whole work, in three divisions, Bibliographical, Geographical, and General, are given at the end of this Volume. The want of partial Indexes has been felt as the Volumes have appeared; but the superior facilities afforded by the complete Indexes now supplied will more than compensate for the temporary inconvenience experienced during the progress of the work.

EXAMINATION OF MAJOR RAVERTY'S CRITICISMS OF THE TABAKAT-I NASIRI' AS TRANSLATED IN VOL. II. OF THIS WORK.

In the Preface a reference has been made to Major Raverty's criticisms of a portion of this work. They are here noticed and examined seriatim.

Major Raverty begins the section relating to the Ghaznívides with a note condemning the text printed in the "Bibliotheca Indica" and the MSS. belonging to the India Office and the Royal Asiatic Society. These MSS., according to Major Raverty, "are the most defective and incorrect of any" he has "collated." The Editor of this work used the MS. of the Asiatic Society and one belonging to Sir H. Elliot, but they were inferior to the printed edition, and so the latter was the text used. Major Raverty has collected thirteen MSS., and they may have all the excellences which he attributes to them, but the fullest MSS. are not always the best. The interpolations of ignorant or halfinformed scribes are worse than omissions-for they lead astray and bewilder the reader. These MSS., however, have cleared away some errors in the texts that I used, and I have gladly adopted such new readings as seem to be improvements.

I.-Page 68. The opening of the history of Subuktigin gives Major Raverty occasion for a long and laboured note. The translation he gives of the passage is as follows: "He had heard that his (Subuktigin's) father used to be called by the name of Kará Bah-Kam; and that his (proper) name was Húk; and that Ghar-gháú in the Turkish language is called Bah-Kam; and that the meaning of Kará Bah-Kam would be the Black Tátar Bull."

Here it is obvious that the sentence about ghar-gháú is altogether superfluous, and it may be blotted out without making any difference

in the sense of the passage. This can hardly have been the intention of the author. The original words as given in the printed text are▬▬

شنید که پدر سبکتگین را قرا بحکم گفتند و نامش جوق بود و غوغارا بتركي بحكم خوانند و معني قرا بحكم سياه غوغا باشد

Major Raverty gives the variants of eleven MSS. The differences are only in the words here given as jauk and ghaughά. He adopts the form Húk in preference to jauk. After running through all the variants of the other word, he comes to the conclusion that "the word must be ghajz-gháo," although the form ghajz never once occurs, and then, by arbitrarily changing the of gháo into, he brings forth his "Black Tátar Bull." Then comes his criticism: "In Elliot (Vol. II. p. 266) the passage in question is thus translated. 'His (Subuktigin's) father was called Jauk (troop), and in Turki they call a troop bahkam (on whose authority I wonder?), so that the meaning of the name Kará-bahkam is black troop.' From this it will be seen that the translator has discarded altogether bothûne of MSS. 10 and 11, and L of the printed text, and has given the person's Turkish real-name as the equivalent (the Persian equivalent, it must be supposed) of his Turkish nick-name; so according to this theory

means troop, and also means troop, but what becomes of the Persiana etc., the translator sayeth not! Jauk however is Arabic for a party, a troop, etc., but what may mean remains to be proved." It is unnecessary to follow him through the alterations of letters and the guesses by which he arrives at the conclusion that it means "Black Wolf," and supposes this to be in some way identical with his "Black Tátar Bull."

The whole of Major Raverty's censure of the translation in Elliot evidently springs from his ignorance of the meaning of the word ghaughά, which among other meanings has that of "company, assembly, multitude of people." If he had consulted his dictionary, instead of indulging in guesses and alterations of letters, he would have seen that the printed text has a clear and coherent meaning, and that the translation which he censures is exact and complete, no word is omitted. The unintelligible words of the MS. have certainly been discarded, but in favour of the siyah ghaugha of the print.

II. In page 76 Major Raverty begins a long note about Waihind.

In this he censures my rendering a passage of Rashídu-d din at p. 47, Vol. I., by "uniting near the fort of Dirúna, (the waters) fall into the Nurokirát." Reinaud's rendering of the original passage in Bírúní is, "Near the fort of Dirúna it is joined by the waters of Núr and Kirát." This was unknown to me at the time. I had the Persian version, which might be rendered as "the river Núrokirat," or "the river of Núr and Kirát." Curiously enough, Major Raverty cites the Arabic version which decided my reading. The words are

'jä, sil

But if the

which he translates "into the river of Un Núr and Kirát." first letter is the article un, where does he find "into"? The words say simply "into Núrokirát"; the word "river" is Major Raverty's addition. There can be no doubt that the Arabic translator understood his Persian original to mean "the river Núrokirát," and as the Persian text has that meaning, I made my translation so as to be in accord with both versions. Reinaud's translation of Bírúní, "the waters of Núr and Kirát," shows that the Arabic translator of Rashídu-d dín took a wrong, though justifiable, view of his text, and led me into error. Major Raverty seems to be so well acquainted with "the darah of Núr" that it is a pity he did not describe it more distinctly. Sir H. M. Elliot's knowledge did not extend beyond what this passage supplies.

III.-Page 80. Major Raverty says: "In Vol. II. page 269 of Elliot a passage is thus translated: On the same night that he (Mahmúd) was born, an idol temple in India, in the vicinity of Parshawar, on the banks of the Sind, fell down!!' There is nothing like giving a bold translation." The words of the text are

آن شب که ولادت او بود بتخانه بهند که در حدود پر شاور بود بر لب در آب سند بشکست

It would be difficult to make a more precise translation of this than the one above given. Major Raverty's translation is, "The idol temple of Wahand or Bihand (it may also be read Wahind or Bahind), which was situated on the confines of Barshábur, on the bank of the Sind, split asunder." This shows that the fault is in the text, not in the translator. If any MS. gives A, instead of, that reading may be readily accepted; but in the absence of such reading, it would have been bold to alter the text.