On p. 132 add the following note to the first sentence of the last paragraph:- In K. the word ~~~ has been inserted above the line before the words ~~~. If we accept this reading (which is, however, unsupported by Rosen's as by the present text) the sentence will translate as follows:- "They have misrepresented matters before the presence of the King in such a way that if any ill deed proceed from anyone not of this sect they account him as [a follower] of the religion of these servants."
On p. 138, l. 5, add the following note after "Book":- K., supported by Rosen's text, inserts a sentence whereof this is the translation:- "Some men, when they are unable to answer their opponent, lay hold of the rope of textual corruption; whereas mention of textual corruption occurs [only] in special passages." This Persian sentence, if admitted, would seem to come more naturally at the end of the passage in Persian (omitted in the present text, translated in the foot-notes on pp. 137-138) than where it stands at present in the midst of a piece of Arabic. As regards sequence of ideas, too, it would be much more appropriately placed there than in its present position, where it has no obvious connection with the context.
On p. 141, ll. 5-6, add the following note:- K., as well as Rosen's text, reads "we have sprinkled" instead of "we have made manifest."
On p. 142, l. 20, add the following note:- Rosen's text agrees with K. in reading ~~~ (celebrated, notorious) instead of ~~~ (apparent, evident).
Passages of which the original is in Arabic are printed in italics in the translation. Words supplied to complete the sense are enclosed in square brackets.