this Recueil is its want of finish. The stories are told after
perfunctory fashion as though the writer had not taken the
trouble to work out the details. There are no names or titles to
the tales, so that every translator must give his own; and the
endings are equally unsatisfactory, they usually content
themselves, after "native" fashion, with "Intiha" = finis, and
the connection with the thread of the work must be supplied by
the story-teller or the translator. Headlines were not in use for
the MSS. of that day, and the catchwords are often irregular, a
new word taking the place of the initial in the following page.

The handwriting, save and except in the first volume, has the
merit of regularity, and appears the same throughout the
succeeding six, except in the rare places (e.g. vi. 92-93), where
the lazy copyist did not care to change a worn-out pen, and
continued to write with a double nib. On the other hand, it is
the character of a village-schoolmaster whose literary culture is
at its lowest. Hardly a sheet appears without some blunder which
only in rare places is erased or corrected, and a few lacunae are
supplied by several hands, Oriental and European, the latter
presumably Scott's. Not unfrequently the terminal word of a line
is divided, a sign of great incuria or ignorance, as "Shahr |
baz" (i. 4), "Shahr | zad" (v. 309, vi. 106), and "Fawa |
jadtu-h" = so I found him (V. 104). Koranic quotations almost
always lack vowel points, and are introduced without the usual
ceremony. Poetry also, that crux of a skilful scribe, is
carelessly treated, and often enough two sets of verse are thrown
into one, the first rhyming in ur, and the second in ir (e.g.
vol. v. 256). The rhyme-words also are repeated within unlawful
limits (passim and vol. v. 308, 11. 6 and II). Verse is thrust