^{page 773 note 1} The term Pahlaví, as has often been pointed out, is very loosely used by later Muḥammadan writers, and is commonly applied to the dialects spoken in various districts of Persia, as, for example, by Ḥamdu'lláh Mustawfí-i-Qazvíní in the Nuzhatu'l-Qulúb (a.h. 740), s.v: . Cf. Olshausen's, classical “Parthava und Pahlav, Mâda und Mâh” in the Monatsberichte der Akad. zu Berlin, 1876, p. 765Google Scholar.

^{page 781 note 1} As it is always well to have native evidence for such a statement, I may refer to p. 3 of Mirzā ḥabíb's Dastúr-i- Sukhun (Constantinople, a.h. 1289), where it is explicitly stated that the Persians pronounce and exactly like like and like like , and like .

^{page 791 note 1} Cf. also Quatremère, , Journal des Savants for 1840, p. 413Google Scholar; and Olshausen, , Monatsberichte d. k. Preuss. Akad. for 1876, p. 765Google Scholar.

^{page 794 note 1} As the MS. does not distinguish (g) from (k), I shall only do so in the following texts when there seems good reason to believe that g, not k, is the proper pronunciation.

^{page 795 note 1} is written over the line as a variant. It occurs again in the next beyt. Perhaps is the correct reading, as we find the form in the following miṣrá'.

^{page 796 note 1} This as a variant to , which I have rejected ob metr.

^{page 797 note 1} Or perhaps .

^{page 797 note 2} This as var. to

^{page 801 note 1} Exactly the same idea is expressed in the Gulistán, Bk. ii, story 16 (ed. , Platts, pp. 58–4)Google Scholar, especially in the Verse—

^{page 801 note 2} Cf. Gulistán, Bk. ii, Story 30 (ed. Platts, , p. 61)Google Scholar.

^{page 802 note 1} Compare a story with a very similar moral in Bk. ii of the Bustán (ed. , Graf, pp. 144–46Google Scholar; ll. 59–78, especially 1.73):—

and also Ibid. pp. 180–81, 11. 411–18, especially 11. 413–15.

^{page 807 note 1} Some portion of the explanation appears to be omitted here, as it is not clear wherein the punishment consists.

^{page 809 note 1} The MS. has , but an emendation seems required, not, perhaps, to give sense, so much as to give force and point. The with which each beyt ends = , and should probably be read é.. Cf. p. 781, 1. 2, supra.

^{page810 note 1} MS. , contra metrum. Moreover the preposition means ‘to,’ not ‘from.’ Cf. 1. 37; and comm. on 1. 5 supra.

^{page 812 note 1} MS. inconsistently has

^{page 815 note 1} In this beyt the MS. has for , and for , while in the second miṣrá' is omitted. I have emended the line so as to accord, as far as possible, with the requirements of the metre.

^{page 816 note 1} The MS. has

^{page 816 note 2} So MS., but the metre seems to require

^{page 816 note 3} The metre would seem to require the omission of

^{page 817 note 1} Cf. Layard's, Early Adventures (ed. 1894), pp. 186–89Google Scholar.

^{page 819 note 1} Several other poems by the same author given in my MS. occur also in the Wolff MS. and in the printed edition, but lack of space compels me to withhold them for the present. The specimen cited fairly indicates the extent of divergence between the different texts.

^{page 824 note 1} Cf. Chodzko, , op. laud., pp. 453–62, 465–66Google Scholar.