In the Dark Ages there was a break in the ruling dynasty of Ethiopia, and the kingdom fell into the hands of a line called Zāguē, of Agaw origin from Beguenā. (Bugnā), which made its capital at Roha in Lāstā. There is much that is obscure about the events that led to the Zaguē usurpation; the orthodox Ethiopian view, as expressed in the Be'ela nagaśtāt, was that God was angry with the House of David (the dynasty which they believe to be descended from Menilek son of Solomon and the ‘Queen of Sheba’) and gave the kingdom to the Zāguē. According to a document at Dabra Libānos in Šimezana, 2 a woman called Terde'a Gabaz transferred the kingdom to the Zāguē after the reign of Ḥezba Nañ, ‘and they reigned for 133 years, 700 years from the bringing of the Faith to Ethiopia’ (= A.D. 1033). This suggests that Terde'a Gabaz was the daughter of Ḥezba Nañ and married the first Zāguē king, thereby establishing him on the throne. These Zāguē, being Agaw, are referred to in the Chronicles as ‘not Israelites’, as in the Paris Chronicle, f. 2: ‘Anbasa Wedem begot Delna'ād, from whom the throne was taken3 and given to others who were not Israelites’. The end of the Zāguē line came in 1268, when ‘Takla Hāymānot restored the kingdom to Yekuno Amlāk’ (Paris Chron., f. 3), a descendant of the last king before the Zāguē. That there was a break and a restoration cannot be doubted, but the manner of the restoration is not clear and the evidence is conflicting, as well as of late date.

It is surprising that not a single page has hitherto been devoted to the treatment of Khotanese syntax, even though Khotanese is unique among the attested later Iranian languages in preserving, for the most part distinctly, at any rate in Old Khotanese (OKh.), in the singular, six of the eight cases normally attributed to Indo-European (IE), and in the plural, five. M. J. Dresden, in his ‘Grammatical notes’ introducing his edition of the Khotanese Jatakastava (Trans. Am. Phil. Soc, NS, XLV, 5, 1955), called attention to the need for a treatment of Kh. syntax. He commented (p. 419): ‘Superfluous to say that the efforts of future research should be turned to this subject’.

When Lord Salisbury's long administration came to an end in the summer of 1892, there ended also an era in British diplomacy. This was not immediately apparent because the development of the ‘new course’,2 different from Lord Salisbury's, took more than a decade. Lady Gwendolen Cecil has described Lord Salisbury's policy as ‘neighbourliness’. Dame Lillian Penson has called it ‘practical co-operation’. This policy had by 1892 secured for his country a position of political authority in Europe which was unique, in that it ‘owed nothing to military pre-eminence or that subtle manipulation of international jealousies, which was the chief weapon of Prince Bismarck's genius’. Its weakness was that it was his alone and depended for its success upon personal characteristics which could not be passed on to a successor.3

In 1961, while on a visit to Cambodia, I first came to know of this work from the chief Abbot of Vat Unālom of Phnom Penh. I was informed by the learned Abbot of the existence of a ‘Mahāyānist’ work known as Dibbamanta.The work was not available there but subsequently a palm-leaf MS of this work was found in the National Museum of Bangkok, a microfilm copy of which was made available to me through the courtesy of the curator of that Museum. The MS consists of 48 folios1, written in Cambodian characters. It is not dated and does not carry any information regarding the author or the scribe. As it was a common practice in Siam to copy Buddhist texts in Cambodian script, and as the work is not in use at the present day either in Siam or in Cambodia, it is hard to locate the original place of this MS. But on the basis of certain internal evidence which will be noted below I am inclined to believe that it could be of Cambodian origin.

Between 1690 and 1720 Śridhar narrated in simple Marathi verse nearly all the basic, perennial stories of the Indian tradition: the epics in Rāmavijaya and Pāṇḍava-pratāpa, the essential puranic tales in Harivijaya and Śivalīlāmṛta. As a consequence he is still read very widely by the devout

In another place I have suggested that some of the works ascribed to Haribhadra contradict each other so sharply on matters of doctrine and usage that it is scarcely credible that they can have been written by the same author.

English Translation: The ‘Song Of Bagauda’ In the name of God the Merciful, the Compassionate. May God bless our Lord Muḥammad and his family, and his Companions, and his wives, and his offspring, and grant them peace.

October 2, 1964, was the ninetieth birthday of Mrs. E. 0. Ashton, and the School of Oriental and African Studies would like to take this opportunity of paying its respects to one of its oldest and most loved colleagues. It is no exaggeration to say that Africa, and especially East Africa, is full of men and women, many of them old themselves, who look upon her with esteem and affection.