The association of man and elephant dates back to remote antiquity. The bones of the animal unearthed at Mohenjodaro, the realistic figurines, and the representations on the seals of the Indus sites point to the beginnings of this fateful friendship; the docility, intelligence, and easy obedience of the elephant must have quickly led to its domestication, once it was known and captured. That the prosperous civilization of the Indus used the elephant for riding and other purposes, appears almost certain; “the representations on the seals show the two breeds recognized today in India, the Kamooria Dhundia with its flat back, square head, and stout legs, and the inferior Meergha, less heavily built and with a sloping back.” The proto-Australoids were perhaps the first people to domesticate and train the elephant; the words gaja and mātaṅga have been traced to the pre-Aryan peoples of India speaking Austric languages.

Students of early Indian history are aware that the Yuga-purāṇa section of the Gārgī-saṁhitā contains an account of the Yavanas or Indo-Bactrian Greeks, important because it speaks of a Yavana invasion of Puṣpapura (i.e. the city of Pāṭaliputra, the capital of the Mauryas) and some other areas apparently forming parts of the Maurya empire, and assigns it to a date shortly after Śāliūka who was a descendant of Aśoka and flourished about 200 b.c. So the Yavanas invaded Pāṭaliputra not long before the Brāhmaṇa general Puṣyamitra killed his master, the last Maurya king Bṛhadratha, and occupied the Maurya throne about 185 b.c. There can be little doubt that the success of the Greeks against the Mauryas is associated with the dynastic revolution, and that the rise of Puṣyamitra was due to the Greek occupation of Maurya territories.

In the epigraphic and literary records of medieval Hindu India the term sāmanta is used to mean vassals and nobles. Thus the sāmantas were vitally connected with the structure of Indian society. But, in spite of its importance, the term has not received a full-length study.

According to its derivation the term sāmanta is an adjective and means ‘being on all sides’, ‘neighbouring’ or ‘bordering’. In earlier works we find it used in this sense.

The following is an attempt to gain a deeper understanding of Mu'tazilite theology by looking at the political attitudes of its exponents. I am much indebted to H. S. Nyberg's pioneer work, notably his article Mu'tazila in the Encyclopedia of Islam and his edition of Kitāb al-Intiṣār. If different conclusions are reached, that is because his work has made possible a more radical estimate of the sources.

This list contains the titles of the Raffles and Farquhar MSS., drawn from Van der Tuuk's catalogue as edited by R. Rost in Miscellaneous Papers relating to Indo-China and the Indian Archipelago, vol. ii, 1887, pp. 1–56 (after the original in JRAS., N.S., vol. ii, pp. 85–135, revised from the Dutch translation in BKI, III, 1, pp. 409–474, and with additional notes by Rost). I have added dates of MSS. and references to Van der Tuuk's notes about them found in some Leiden MSS. For the Maxwell collection this list reproduces Blagden's inventory (JRAS., 1899, pp. 121–129) with small corrections and the addition of other Malay manuscripts since presented by other donors. Some references to printed editions for which the R.A.S. MSS. have been used are also added. In a few cases some new notes about the contents of the texts have been given, mostly taken from information supplied by Sir R. O. Winstedt, who has also made the descriptions of the additional MSS. Maxwell 106 et sqq.