202 Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal. [N.S., XVII, 
3? 
finiis gesta sunt. 
~~ T ought to say here that I am indebted to Sir F. Goldsmid’s 
article on Timur in the Encyclopaedia Brittanica for introduc- 
ing me to a knowledge of Jean du Bec’s book. But 1 can 
‘hardly say that Sir Frederick’s article is a good one. He was 
‘a good man and an excellent public servant, but he should 
have left Timur alone. He gives a wrong title to Arab Shah’s 
The translations are by Vattier and 8. H. Manger; the latter 
being in Latin and published at Leovardia(?) in 1767. There 
is a. much better account of Timur in D’Herbelot though he 
ture that Jean du Bec is less untrustworthy as regards Western 
Asia. 
The next attempt to write a fictitious account of Timur 
was made by a Persian, a native of Turbat in Khurasan who 
was called Abu Talib Alhusaini. This last title resembles the 
: . v ying 
that the manuscript was found in Yemen which of course is 
a long way to the south of the two holy cities. And 
“Mr. Erskine and Professor Dowson have thought that Abu Talib 
to say as to what became of them or whether he brought the 
original or a copy to India. He never says that he showed 
either original or copy to Shah Jahan. And it shows the un- 
critical spirit of one of the writers (Major Davy) in the White 
