the opening of the above mentioned Sanskrit books, and contains also the Fifth of the First book of the 'Hitopadesha.' The Fourth Persian story, 'of the Woman who wished to barter husked Sesamum for unhusked,' is the Second of the Second book of the 'Pancha-tantra'; the Fifth Persian story, that of the Wolf and the Bowstring,' is the Seventh of the First book of the Hitopadesha,' and the Third of the Second book of the 'Pancha-tantra.' The Fourth book is the Third and Fourth of the 'Hitopadesha' and the Third of the 'Pancha-tantra.' The First Persian story corresponds to the opening of the same books in Sanskrit; the Fourth Persian story, that of the Hare and the Elephants,' is the Fourth of the Third book of the 'Hitopadesha,' and the First of the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra'; the Fifth Persian story, of the Pious Cat,' is the Second of the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra'; the Seventh Persian story, of 'the Pious Man who was cheated out of a Sheep by confederate Rogues,' is the Third of the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra,' and the Tenth of the Fourth book of the Hitopadesha'; the Eighth Persian story, that of the Merchant's Wife and the Thief,' is the Eighth of the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra'; the Ninth Persian story, 'the Thief and the Demon who went to rob the Recluse,' is the Ninth of the 'Pancha-tantra'; the Tenth Persian story, 'the Carpenter and his artful Wife,' is the Eleventh of the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra,' and the Seventh of the Third book of the Hitopadesha'; the Twelfth Persian story, 'the Mouse that was changed into a girl,' is the Twelfth of the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra,' and the Sixth of the Fourth book of the 'Hitopadesha'; the Thirteenth Persian Story, 'the Snake and the Frogs,' is the Fifteenth of the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra,' and the Twelfth of the Fourth book of the 'Hitopadesha.'

The Fifth book is borrowed from the Fourth of the 'Pancha-tantra.' The First Persian story corresponds to the opening of the same book in Sanskrit; the Third Persian story of the Ass without Heart and Ears,' is the Second of the Fourth book of the 'Pancha-tantra.' Though the general plot of this book is borrowed from the Sanskrit, it differs in all except outline, and is nowise inferior to it, but, on the whole, may be pronounced the very best of all the fourteen books into which the 'Anvár-i Suhailí' is divided.

The outline is simple, natural, and well preserved; and the stories are vigorous and amusing.

The Sixth book is borrowed from the Fifth book of the Panchatantra.' The First Persian story, of 'the Devotee and the Ichneumon,' corresponds to the Second story of the said Sanskrit book; the Second Persian story is the Ninth of the Fifth book of the 'Pancha-tantra,' and the Eighth of the Fourth book of the 'Hitopadesha.' This is also an excellent

book, and decidedly among the best of the fourteen.

The Seventh book is said by Stewart to correspond to the Third book of the 'Pancha-tantra,' and I have inserted his remark; but on reference, I cannot find any agreement, and none of the stories are alike.

In the rest of the Books I can trace no connection with the Sanskrit. The Ninth and the Twelfth are decidedly the dullest and worst written, especially the latter, the plot of which is childish, ridiculous, and unnatural, and full of the most extravagant metaphors and conceits.

It will be seen, from the comparison which has been made, that the first Seven books, forming rather more than two-thirds of the whole work, have been in a greater or less degree borrowed from the Sanskrit, and chiefly from thePancha-tantra.' It is also from the Pancha-tantra' that translations have been made into most of the vernacular dialects of India, such as Gujaráṭhí, Maráthí, Braj-Bháshá, Bengálí, etc. It may be here remarked that the 'Pancha-tantra' has been generally supposed to be of an age anterior to the 'Hitopadesha.' Of course the question does not admit of proof; but on perusing the former book immediately after the latter, it would seem that the 'Hitopadesha' is the older of the two, as well from the style as from the greater amplification of the subjects in the 'Pancha-tantra.' Be that, however, as it may, it is quite clear that the larger portion of the 'Anvár-i Suhailí' has been borrowod from one or other of these Sanskrit works, and it is unnecessary to proceed to isolated expressions or general reasons for establishing the identity. At the same time it must be acknowledged that many of the stories which are of purely Persian origin, though somewhat different in character, are in no degree inferior to those taken from the the Sanskrit. Thus the story of the Gardener and the Nightingale,' the

Nineteenth of the First book; that of the Painter and his Mistress,' the Seventh of the Second book; of the Thief and the Monkey,' the Second of the Fifth book; of the Farmer's Wife,' the Second of the Seventh book; and of the Farmer and the Purse of Gold,' in the Fourteenth book, are equal to any of the stories in the 'Hitopadesha' or 'Pancha-tantra.'

Having said thus much of the Anvár-i Suhailí' itself, and of its Sanskrit originals, it remains that some notice be taken of the Translations which have been made into other languages, and of which the Baron DE SACY has given a full account in the Mémoire Historique' prefixed to his edition of Calila et Dimna.'. This profound scholar is of opinion, that, after the physician Burzuyah had brought the works of which the ‘Anvár-i Suhailí' is an expansion, into Persia (see p. 6 of this translation) during the reign of Núshírwán; they were immediately translated into Pahlaví, under the same reign, that is, circa A.D. 570. This version perished, no doubt, in the invasion of the Arabs. At least, no copy has yet been discovered.

The Arabic translation of 'Abdu'lláh bin Al-Mukaffa

was made by the person whose name it bears, under the second Khalif of the 'Abbasís, Manşúr, (see p. 7 of this translation) between the years 186 158 of the Hijrah. This 'Abdu'lláh bin Al-Mukaff'a (wrongly alled by many, Al-Mukann'a, as at p. 7 of this translation) was born

Pia, and was, until converted, by religion, a Fire-worshiper. His full, who was collector of taxes in 'Irák, under Hajjáj bin Yusúf, had leon guilty of extortion, and was, therefore, put to the torture, and his hand remaining shrunken in consequence, he got the name of Al-Mukaff’a, 4#, thus that has shriveled hands.' He was put to death by the Governor of Bugrah, in accordance with a secret order despatched to him by Manşúr.

Of the Greek version of Simeon Seth.

This was made towards the close of the eleventh century, by order of the Emperor Alexis Comnenes. It is chiefly remarkable for the substitution of Greek proper names for the Oriental ones. Thus, a king

of the rats is called Tρwyλodúrηs, and three rats, his counsellors, are termed Τυροφάγος, Κρεοβόρος, and Οθονοφάγος.

Of the Hebrew version attributed to the Rabbi Joël.

Nothing certain is known of the Translator. The version contains two additional Chapters, the Sixteenth and Seventeenth, the former of which, being the story of the Two Swans and the Duck,' was found by M. de Sacy in one Arabic MS.: the latter, or the story of the Dove and the Fox,' he was unable to discover in any Arabic version.

Omitting a Syriac version doubtfully mentioned by M. de Sacy, and of which nothing certain is known, we come next to

Rudaki's Persian Version

(See p. 7 of this translation). This poet, called also Ustád Abú'l Ḥasan, was born blind, and flourished at the court of Sultán Nasr bin Ahmad, the third prince of the Sámánides, who, it is said, presented him with 80,000 dirams for his metrical version, which, however, seems not to have survived to modern times.

Of the Persian version of Abú'l M'aáli Naṣru'lláh.

This was executed (see p. 8 of this translation) by command of Bahram Sháh, thirteenth sultán of the Ghaznivites, who died A.D. 1151. It is filled with Arabic quotations, and difficult and obsolete words; and its reputation has been entirely lost sight of in the blaze of the more elegant version executed by Husain Vá'iz. As enough has already been said of the latter, we have only further to observe that it was made about the beginning of the 15th century, and proceed to notice

The more modern Persian version, called "Iyár-i Dánish.'

This was made by the celebrated Abú'l-Fazl, vazír of the renowned Akbar. His intention was to simplify the translation of Husain Vá’iz, and render it more intelligible. He further introduced two Chapters which Husain Vá'iz had retrenched. Of these the one is the Preface or Introduction of the Arabic translator, 'Abdu'lláh bin Al-Mukaff'a; and the other is the life

of Burzuyah before his journey to India to procure the Fables. Abú'l Fazl seems to have fallen into the error common to many others, of supposing that Buzurjmihr, the Grand Vazír of Núshírwán, and not Burzuyah, was the Pahlaví translator of the book. M. de Sacy has proved, however, that this is not the case.

Mr. Colebrooke says of this version, The "Iyár-i Dánish' comprises sixteen chapters, ten of which, as Abú'l Fazl states in his preface, were taken from the Hindí original, entitled 'Kartak and Damnak,' and six were added by Buzurjmihr; namely, the four last, containing stories recited by the Brahman Bídpáí in answer to the questions of King Dábishlím; and the two first, consisting of a preface by Buzurjmihr, with an introduction by Burzuyah. Both these introductory chapters had been omitted by Husain Vá'iz, as foreign to the original work: but he substituted a different beginning, and made other additions, some of which are indicated by him, and the rest are pointed out by Abú'l Fazl; who has, nevertheless, retained them as appendages not devoid of use, and therefore admissible in a composition intended solely to convey moral instruction. The whole of the dramatic part, including all the dialogue between Dábishlím, King of India, and Bídpáí, a Bráhman of Sarándíp, as well as the finding of Hashang's legacy, appears to have been added by the translators, although the appellations of the king and of the philosopher, are stated to be of Indian origin. For Abú'l Fazl has inserted the story at the close of the second chapter; after expressly declaring, in one place, that the substance of the work begins with the third; and in another, that the two first were added by the author of the Pahlaví translation.'

Of the Urith version, entitled Khirad-Afruz, or, 'The Illuminator of the Understanding.'

This is a close Hindústání translation of the "Iyár-i Dánish,' and was made * 10, by Maulavi Hafizu'd-dín, for the use of the College of Fort Willam, at the suggestion of Dr. Gilchrist. It is written in good plain language, and is a very useful book for students. The editor was Captain Thomas Roebuck, a scholar of extraordinary industry and ability, to whom