Islamic tradition records many precedents for expulsion of Jews and other non-Muslims. The authors of the two most important collections of ḥadīths, al-Bukhārī and Muslim, have chapters entitled ‘On exiling the Jews from Arabia’ or ‘On exiling the Jews from the Ḥijāz’. Similar chapters exist in other collections of traditions. These statements testify to Muḥammad's expulsion of ‘the Jews of Medina—all of them’, or report his will to expel the Jews—or in variants, the Jews and Christians or the Polytheists—from the Arabian Peninsula. Clearly, the traditions are interpreted with the widest possible reference regarding who is to be exiled: no non-Muslim is allowed to remain. But the geographical extent of the area from which non-Muslims are to be exiled is interpreted in narrow fashion: ‘What is meant by ‘the Arabian Peninsula” in this tradition is the Ḥijāz, not the entire Arabian Peninsula.’ This is so despite ample potential for broad interpretation in the language of the texts. In a tradition which supports a projected exile of the Jews of Medina, Muhammad tells the Jews, ‘Know that the land is the Lord's and his Apostle's.’ The word arḍ ‘land’ in the ḥadīth is understood to refer specifically to the plots of land the Jews had owned, now considered lo be held by them in tenancy. This could easily have been taken out of context by some interpreters and applied to all lands. A tradition used to support the prohibition of dhimmī residence in Ḥijāz reads, in some versions, ‘two religions (sometimes using the term qiblas—directions faced in prayer) may not exist in one land,’ in others, ‘two qiblas may not exist in Arabia’. In practice, this tradition was applied only to Ḥijāz and was not extended to all of Arabia or any other ‘land’. Chapter headings are often our only indication of how traditions were understood by those who collected them; Mālik's chapter heading has this tradition refer only to the expulsion of Jews from Medina.

Qur'ān 2: 198 states that it is no fault in the Muslims that they should seek the faḍl of their lord: laysa ‘alaykum junāḥun an tabtaghū faḍlan min rabbikum. This verse occurs within a series of godly ordinances pertaining to the Muslim ḥajj, and it is therefore quite obvious why Muslim exegetes thought that the faḍl of Allāh in our verse ought to be sought by the believers during the ḥajj. In order to convey this view, the exegetes used a simple device, they added the following clause at the end of the verse: fī mawāsim al-ḥajj—during the rites of, or, in the stations of the ḥajj. Several traditions in al-Ṭabarī contain this addition. Most of the isnāds of these traditions are Meccan, which implies that the scholars of this place were particularly interested in encouraging the believers to come to the holy places of the Meccan ḥajj. Thus, tradition no. 18 in al-Ṭabarī which contains the addition fī mawāsim al-ḥajj is transmitted from the Meccan ‘Ubaydallāh b. Abī Yazīd (d. 126 A.H.), who quotes Ibn al-Zubayr. In fact, the clause fī mawāsim al-ḥajj gained the rank of a qirā'a. In some traditions it is transmitted as such from the Meccan ‘Aṭā’ b. Abī Rabāh (d. 114 A.H.) on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbās. ‘Aṭā’ is quoted through the Meccan Talḥa b. ‘Amr (d. 152 A.H.), as well as through Ḥajjāj b. Arṭāt (d. 145 A.H.). The Medinese ‘Ikrima (d. 105 A.H.) also spread the same qirā'a. In al-Ṭabarī he is quoted by the Basrian Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī (d. 131 A.H.).

A discussion of the mathematical manuscripts of Mauretania requires an overall introduction to this almost completely unexplored literature.

Its foundations must first be established. Between the years 1978 and 1985 a project financed initially by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (BRD), then by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, was entrusted to Dr. Rainer Oßwald and myself by the Mauretanian Ministry of Cultural Affairs. Its objective was the collection and protection of the selected Arabic manuscript literature of Mauretania.

The various documents concerning Emperor Dāwit's embassy to the Republic of Venice in 1402 have been brought together in Carlo Conti Rossini's article of 1927 on European influence upon Ethiopian art before the coming of Jesuit missionaries in the mid sixteenth century. The purpose of this brief paper is to expand the story of Dāwit's embassy with a short document, which sheds some light upon the motives for this and subsequent Ethiopian embassies to European nations during the period before the Adalite invasions that began in 1529.

Section 1. Introduction 1.01. All the above-mentioned categories have been the subject of considerable interest in the last few years. T. Gotō (1987) has devoted a book to Class I presents (thematic presents with normal grade of the root and stable root accent) in Sanskrit, and H. Rix has published a monograph on Indo-European moods (1986) and an article on the middle voice (1988). B. Barschel (1986) has addressed the question of the antiquity of the subjunctive and optative, and their absence from the Anatolian branch of IE. The question of the special primary endings of the singular active in the thematic conjugation was reopened by W. Cowgill (1985). Yet despite all this attention some questions still remain puzzling.

Until recently, Kavi Karṇapūra has generally been accepted without question as the author of a book on the life of Śrī Kṛṣṇa Caitanya entitled ŚrīCaitanyacaritāmṛtamahākāvya [CCMK]. The date of this work is given as 1542 by the author himself in its final verse. In the two penultimate verses of the work, he identifies himself as the youngest son of Śivānanda Sena and as a mere child (śiśu). If Kavi Karṇapūra is indeed the author, it is certainly a matter of great interest as he is one of the most prolific and authoritative writers amongst the followers of Caitanya. His father, Śivānanda Sena, was a rich and influential devotee of Caitanya, responsible for the management of the yearly trips to Puri which played such an important role in the latter part of the great saint's life. Unfortunately, with the exception of a few such autobiographical words in Karṇapūra's own compositions, such as the Ānandavṛndāvanacampū [AVC], Caitanyacandrodayanāṭaka [CCN] and Gauragaṇoddeśadīpikā [GGD] the only information that we have about Karṇapūra's life is from Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja's Caitanyacaritāmṛta [CC].

It is well known that a large number of the accounts in the Kuo yü have matching counterparts in the Tso chuan. By my count there are at least 73 Kuo yü accounts with Tso chuan parallels; this out of a total of 241 separate Kuo yü accounts altogether. This means that by percentage of accounts (vs. percentage of text) 30% of the Kuo yü bears some textual relation to the Tso chuan, a proportion surely large enough to justify looking into the question of what that relation is. The degree to which each of these 73 Kuo yü accounts matches its Tso chuan parallel varies considerably. At one extreme there are cases where only a very few lines, names, or words signal the fact of an underlying textual relation. At the other extreme virtually the whole Kuo yü passage may appear with only slight variations in the Tso chuan. Most of the 73 fall somewhere in between these two extremes.

South-East Asia forty five years ago, with more than a hundred languages of six distinct stocks, only a handful of which had been even passably described, offered an unparalleled opportunity to linguistic inquiry. In opening up this field Eugénie Henderson, who died aged 74 on 27 July 1989, was the acknowledged leader in this country and widely respected outside it.