Derbend-nämeh or the History of Derbend. 443 
“joy into: bütterness *:. sometimes: by the: omission of a single letter he writes fire (or 
water *, and at another time-by scratching out à black speck he blinds the eye !° 
2. The partiality and self-confidence of many transcribers, or possessors of books, 
whicl lead them to change. some parts of their MSS. by various additions and omissions. 
or. to embellish them with explanatory notes of their own etc. 
This is also a species of tyramny to which many works in the East. have been sub- 
jected, and from which even the Koran itself might have suffered in the earliest pe- 
riods of Islam”. The variety of versions of many ancient books on religion, espe- 
cially those of traditions, as well. as the diversity of versions of many historical works 
eurrent among Mussulmans of both the principal sects, is chiefly owing to this cause. If 
we were to comparé; for example, two versions of any ancient history of the Khalifs 
and their successors etc., the oné transcribed_in Bukhara, or in some parts of Méwe- 
réun-nahr, and the other in Persia, the result of our research would clearly show the 
truth of our opinion. The two chapters at the end of the version of Dr. Dorn (see ( 3.) 
entitled lui Dl nl DL and J al sl +, as well as the conclusion of the 
IX part of our version (see Part IX Rem. 3. note g.), — with some other parts which 
we shall notice in their proper places — are mostly additions of this kind. 
3. The existence of two versions of the Derbend-ndmeh: — the one the original 
Turkish, and the other, the retranslation from the Persian translation of this work. 
We know ône Persian translation of this work (see hereafter À 3) from the ori- 
ginal Turkish, by a certain 4li-yar, made some #5 years ago. Even taking it for grant- 
éd that the translator was faithful to the text, without making any addition of his own 
o* éven omitting any part of the original (both which cases are very doubtful ‘?), a re- 
translation of this work again into Turkish, must certainly have produced à separate 
version, wholly different — at least in the style of the language — from the original 
Turkish versions. — But if we add to this, that both Ali-yar and the translator of his 
8 J3* without any dots signifies Joy, entertainment, etc.; whereas by the addition of three dots over the 
first letter it expresses bitterness etc. 
ÉE Nâsir, a protector — uw quantity of water in a channel (the vowel x is added in English to 
express ts pronunciation), by throwing out the QK s will be Nâr, which. means fire. 
10 Ghuz with à dot (59) means the eye, but kour (399) without thé dot signifiés the blind. 
TT See Sale’s Koran, The Prelim. discourse p. 84. 
1? See $ 3. There does not exist a translation of any work, either in Persian or Turkish, that is not 
defective either in the détails of some of its parts où in the contraction of others. The same freedom in 
adding of omitting any thing, to which we haävé above alluded, is yet more liberally exercised by the 
Musulmans in their translations than in their copies. Every énquirer will be convinced of the truth of this, if 
enabled to comparé any part of Téberi, Having before him different versions ôf that eminent work in 
the Arabic, Pérsian, Turkish and Djaghatai langüages. 
