The influence of English law upon Indian history and politics has been considerable and merits further examination. One approach to this lies through a study of the nineteenth century Law Members, of the Viceroy's Council, who held a distinctive position among the high officials of Indian government. They were not normally professional administrators or Indian residents; coming out from England, they brought to bear upon Indian affairs a point of view which-reflected current English conditions far more closely than that of their colleagues. Among the eminent men who held the office were T. B. Macaulay, H. S. Maine, and C. P. Ilbert. Another important figure whose work as Legal Member deserves reassessment is J. F. Stephen, whose short tenure (1869–72) marks an important stage in the completion of the Indian codes. When he was appointed in 1869 he was a man of forty. After Eton and Trinity College, Cambridge, he had become a moderately successful barrister, who had written on the history and principles of the criminal law. He had also made a considerable reputation as a journalist, and had been a leading light, both of the Saturday Review and of the Pall MallGazette. His stay in India was cut short by financial worries and family responsibilities, but, after he went home, he maintained a great interest in Indian affairs. He wrote on them in newspapers and periodicals, and his attack on English Liberalism, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity (1873), was primarily inspired by his Indian experiences. He was the friend and confidential correspondent of Lord Lytton (Viceroy, 1876–80).

Writers on the early history of South-East Asia have frequently referred to a country known to the Chinese as (Tun-sun), but so far no one has collated all the available texts to furnish the fullest possible description of this shadowy state. The following notes are an attempt to show that their assembly provides one of the earliest extant accounts of the Malay Peninsula.

Yaḥyā b. 'adī played an important role in the history of Aristotelian studies in Islam. By his extensive activity as translator, as textual critic, and as interpreter, he gave a new impetus to the study of Aristotle. He can clearly be recognized as the head of a distinct school of philosophers, and his influence remained discernible for several generations, especially in the school's tradition of Aristotelian interpretation.

The important rôle which the Kārimī merchants played in Oriental trade at the end of the Middle Ages has been touched upon by some outstanding orientalists. The last to treat the subject exhaustively was W. J. Fischel in his paper “Über die Gruppe der Kārimī-Kaufleute”, published in 1937 in the series Analecta Orientalia (of the Pontifical Bible Institute) no. 14. The Arabic historical works of the later Middle Ages contain, however, additional material, which partly corroborates and partly modifies Fischel's conclusions. A good many of the notices on the Kārimīs to be quoted in this paper are taken from the hitherto unpublished chronicle Inbā' al-ghumr bi-abnā al-'umr of Ibn Ḥajar al-'Asqalānī (d. 1449), MS. Constantinople, Yeni Cami 814 and the Who's Who of the fifteenth century composed by al-Sakhāwī (d. 1497) and called ad-Ḍau' al-lāmi' fī a'yān al-qarn al-tāsi' (Cairo, 1353–55).

Kitāb al-Nafs al-mansūb li Isḥāq ibn Ḥunayn, published by Dr. Aḥmad Fu'ād al-Ahwāni along with the Talkhīṣ Kitāb al-Nafs of Ibn Rushd (Imprimerie Misr S.A.E., Cairo, 1950), appears to be the earliest extant Arabic commentary of the De Anima of Aristotle. The edition is based on the only known manuscript, in the Escorial Library of Madrid. Though the opening words of the text clearly indicate that it is the translation of Aristotle's De Anima, it is in fact a commentary and not a translation. Hartwig Derenbourg, the cataloguer of the Escorial Library, was misled by the opening words of the manuscript and has, therefore, ascribed it to Isḥāq ibn Ḥunayn. Casiri, an earlier cataloguer, was equally wrong when he ascribes the work to Ibn Rushd. Terms and expressions clearly demonstrate that the work is either a maiden attempt of Isḥāq, or done by somebody who preceded him and was not associated with his school. Terms such as (form), (matter), (the final cause) and (the common sense), and the like which occur in the work were represented by Isḥāq and his school by expressions such as , and respectively. It is, therefore, difficult to accept the ascription of the work to Isḥāq ibn Ḥunayn.

Turcologists will all be extremely grateful to Mr. Sinor for his paper on Qapqan in JRAS., Pts. 3 and 4, 1954. It is most important that “delousing” operations of this kind should be performed before delusions get too firm a grip on the public mind. With his general thesis that the word is purely Turkish and not Iranian I wholeheartedly agree, but, with respect, I do not agree with his suggested etymology, and I should be grateful for an opportunity to make some supplementary observations.

In a previous article in this journal the writer gave an account of the forming in the Library of the University College, Ibadan, of a collection of manuscripts representative of the indigenous Arabic literature of the Western Sudan, and from this collection and other sources compiled a list of the Arabic writings of Shehu Usumanu ḍan Fodio, the Reformer, founder of the Fulani empire. From the same sources it has been possible to list by title most of the Arabic writings of Usumanu's brother, Waziri Abdullahi ḍan Fodio.

In 1953 I was able to purchase an interesting late sixteenth-century Armenian manuscript written extensively on paper and beautifully illuminated and adorned with fine miniatures in colour and gold. This manuscript, now incorporated in my collection of Armenian manuscripts, contains a rare Armenian glossary with a wealth of linguistic and grammatical information and the most complete extant text of the arithmetical tables prepared originally by the great seventh-century Armenian scientist, Anania of Shirak. The part that interests us here, however, is that which depicts a number of different alphabets with the name of each letter transliterated into Armenian script. This part contains among others the alphabet of the Ałuank', the Caucasian Albanians, which, according to Koriwn, was invented by St. Mesrop, the inventor of the present Armenian and Georgian alphabets. For fifteen hundred years the information given by Koriwn remained totally uncorroborated, for not a single character was found on stone, metal, vellum, or paper that could be recognized for sure as Caucasian Albanian.