1868 ] Contributions to Persian Lexicography. 49 



" It is from obstinacy that the Persians call this town Jahanabad, 

 and not Shah -jahanabad." The emperor Shahjahan was often ridiculed 

 by the Persians for assuming the title Sh&h of the world. Even the 

 then Sultan of Constantinople ( fjy j[£«Wj4 ) made once in a letter a 

 satirical remark on the emperor's magniloquence, when his clever 

 court poet Kalim got him out of the difficulty by composing an ode, 

 in which the following verse occurs (metre muszari') — 

 vi*.*»|yjAjA* l5 j1^s , *1.-w t_)lla^ \j&£> C^—Jjij ^^.j^yk ^^^j)) iy^=»- j &*>& 



" The words" <u* (5 + 50 -j- 4 — 59) and e% "(3 -f 5 + 1 + 

 " 50 = 59) are in point of value the same ; hence the emperor has a 

 clear right to the title Shdhjahdn." For this clever verse Kalim 

 received from the A-W? his weight in gold, and his ode was sent to 

 Constantinople. 



,*=*. cliappar, p. 560 ; this word is the Hind, j*$*±- chhappar. 



Jklx^. clietal. p. 607, This is a mistake often to be met with in. 

 Persian books printed in Europe. The correct form is cU-J^-, with a 

 g jim. The word is spelt by Abulfaszl in the A. A., p. 27, 1.4. 

 Nor is it a numus cuprinus, but an imaginary division of a dam, one 

 silver Rupee (of Akbar) being equivalent to forty copper dams.- 

 " Accountants have divided the dam into 25 jetdls." A. A., 1. c. 



jJfjvi, p. 918, a coin, the 8th of a gold muhur. Thus Vullers 

 from Johnson. It is the eighth part of a rupee, not of a gold muhur. 



dytfdjd, dud dlud, p. 923, 3) n. s. nom. magni oppidi in Hindustan 

 F. sine exemplo. This absurdity is likewise supplied by the praeclarum 

 ojncs of F. Whoever heard of a town Duddiud in India ? It a blunder 

 for ^bfoJjo Daitlatab&d. 



<J.&, II. p. 797 ; a reference to J3^ was required. So likewise, 

 p. 920, under Jy, to li^f ; and under «y, p. 479 b., 1. 24., to |jj*3. 



Vullers is also most unfortunate with his ci>LjLe|. As the Iszafat 

 of the Persians is very badly treated in the existing Persian grammars, 

 I trust I shall be excused for inserting here a few notes on the fakh 



* Iszafat ( cu>l^| ci> ), or the omission of the Iszafat, reserving some of 

 Vullers' mistakes for foot notes. 



The Iszafat is omitted 



a. After ua^ ~m> } J^Le, &+■$>£, v^> er'->< f*^ J~v ( not m 



r, o o n 



prose), t>L<i ; as — Jjn— ^L^ dU^ t^w&X^ js j .j#o an admiral, ^X&jJjj** 



7 



