The school of opinion, represented in Poetics by the alaṁkāra-portion of the Agni-purāṇa apparently follows a tradition which departs in many respects from the orthodox systems, and which is further developed in later literature by Bhoja in his Sarasvatī-kaṇṭâbharaṇa.

“ Rough list of Dr. Stein's MSS. sent by Dr. Barnett ”—with brief descriptions.

1. (1) “ 9, 1 Brāhmī fol. C.A.,” unknown language, probably a Prajñā-pāramitā.

(2) Inner cover marked C xlvi (Suppl.) Large C.A. leaf 6.vi.07 ; outer cover marked Ch. Large C.A. Brāhmī frgt.; part of the former.

The Assyrian and Babylonian copies of the Seventh book of the Epic of Gilgames, which recorded the destruction of the demoniac Khumbaba and the death of Engidu, the companion of Gilgames, have not yet been recovered. It is, therefore, interesting to find that among the Hittite tablets from Boghaz Keui, now in Berlin, there are fragments of two or three different copies of it, not only in Hittite, but also in “ Kharrian ”, that is to say, Mitannian. There was, however, a reason for this. The home of Khumbaba was “ the Cedar forest” of the Amanus region, and the story of the struggle between him and the Babylonian hero possessed a special interest for the people of Asia Minor.

The mosque named after the eccentric Khalif al-Ḥākim was commenced, according to Maqrīzī, by the Khalif al-‘Azīz in Ramadān 380 (November–December, 990), and opened for worship in 381 (991–2) before being finished. Al-Ḥākim recommenced the construction in 393 (1002–3), and was still engaged thereon in 401 (1010–11). In 403 (1012–13) he had it furnished and decorated.

Amongst the dramatic works of the Hindus a peculiar position is occupied by the Mudrā-Rākṣasa, the one work known under the name of Viśākhadatta. Neither the superior genius of Kālidāsa, nor the pathetic sublimity of Bhavabhūti, nor even the versatility and skill of Śrī-Harṣa has been in any way rivalled by this author, nor can he perhaps lay claim to a very high rank as a stylist, although some of his verses are certainly among the loftiest passages in the classical literature of India. But he excels them all in the marvellous power of characterizing his personages ; and, if Rāma, Jīmūtavāhana, and even Śakuntalā often appear to us, with all their praiseworthy qualities, somewhat pale and lifeless, like fair spirits from a wonderland far away from the sin-stained earth, nothing of that sort could ever be said of the figures acting the play of Viśākhadatta. For there is certainly no lack of real life either in the diabolical plotting and unbending energy of Cāṇakya, or in the noble bitterness of Rākṣasa, or the stubborn blockheadedness of Malayaketu. Besides, the whole theme of the play is political intrigue and preparations for war, the hard work of men, and there is nothing at all about love and sentimentality, except the little scene between Candanadása and his family at the beginning of the last act, which is of absolutely no importance for the development of the play. Even religion and pious feelings seem to have been looked upon by the author as rather unimportant things—his interest is politics and nothing but politics.