1868.] Contributions to Persian Lexieoc/rapliij. 19 



lexicographer had done. Nearly all subsequent dictionaries follow 

 Burhan's arrangement. His sources were the FJ., the first edition of 

 Sur., the Surniah i Sulaimani and the £ihah uladwiyah. MSS. 

 of the last two are not obtainable here ; but they cannot be 

 very valuable, as the Burhan contains nothing which is not in the 

 Fai'hang or Sururi. Barman is a careful compiler ; only a few words 

 that are given in the Parhang, appear to have been omitted. As an 

 example I may mention *J^y pakhtah cotton, which the Farhang gives 

 ^b <uij ~yJL*> Jj\ b. If Burhan had omitted the useless meanings 

 of the Farhang, his compilation would be more useful than it is. 



The printed editions of Capt. Roebuck and Hakim 'Abdul Majid arc 

 accompanied by appendices of words not given in ' the Burhan. 

 These appendices which are known under the name of cMj olAsr^ 

 Mulhaqdt i Burhdn, are not written by Durban, nor are they found in 

 numerous MSS. of the dictionary ; but were made under the direction 

 of Capt. Roebuck from the works of several lexicographers of the 

 18th and even of the beginning of the 19th century. They are 

 untrustworthy and full of the most glaring blunders. Vullers has 

 embodied them ; but we trust that no lexicographer after him will use 

 them. Whatever good they contain, will be found in the original 

 dictionaries written after Burhan. 



Burhan's dictionary has produced in India a good deal of critical 

 discussion. During this decade, a book was printed in Delhi, written 

 by Asad ullah Khan, known also under the name of Mirzd Naushah 

 and, as a poet, under the takhalluc of c_JU. The author is the best 

 Persian writer which India now-a-days possesses. We have from his 

 pen a collection of letters, called uX^f^J, a Diwiin, a historical book 

 on Indian kings, entitled jsj^jv*, and also a book written in pre- 

 classical Persian on the Indian mutiny of 1857, entitled ^jaJJLo. 

 The name of the book in which he attacks Burhan, has the title 

 tjUy £_J-li. It has seriously damaged his reputation as a critical 

 scholar. Throughout the book he is abusive, and even obscene. 

 Burhan whom he styles i j*f* or ^^1 ty> ^1, is throughout repre- 

 sented as an independent lexicographer, although Burhan in his preface 

 distinctly says ^>\j *i o-»| cuiJ v b>| gQj oUJ £cU>^j&». Hence 

 most of Ghalib's attacks are easily refuted by turning up the Farhang 

 or Sururi. But his book is also full of wilful misstatements, whilst 



