Notes on Editions Herein Included and Available Elsewhere

Some editions omit certain parts, but I wanted to make available the most extensive version. However, though other editions exist which include information from other authors, I did not include this additional information, with the following exceptions.

The 1891 version of Frederick Warne and Co. (London and New York) (which also includes additions of Savary which I did not include) includes a dedication of Sale to the John Lord Carteret, an “Advertisement”, and a “Sketch of the Life of George Sale” by R. A. Davenport which I did include below as they were absent in other versions. I did not include the original pagination for these elements, however, since I did not use the rest of this 1891 version.

There is an edition also of Frederick Warne and Co. (London and New York) which was apparently published in or after 1877 (reference was made in the introduction to a work published in 1877) (though the library from which I obtained the text seems to list the work as being from 1870). This edition includes an introduction by Sir Edward Denison Ross, who it might be noted, is referred to in Ruhíyyih Khánum’s the Priceless Pearl as as having given a letter to Shoghi Effendi (which he cherished) about his admired translation of The Dawn-Breakers.

I might also make mention of an American version of Sale’s translation which though it only includes an abridged form of the notes of Sale does also include an Introduction which is not available in other editions. I have not included it, however, particularly because I felt it did not contain much if any useful information on Islám, but rather was more of an uncharacteristically vituperative attack (indeed by Sale?), and which though indicating the writer’s leanings (and/or perhaps attempting to defuse the criticism of his Christian audience and critics), did not add much if anything of value on Islám, unlike Sale’s informative and mostly well-balanced “Preliminary Discourse”.

There is another edition of the Qur’án by Sale which I have been able to obtain which includes additional information which may be of interest to some, though I have not reprinted its information, with the exception of its chapter outlines, and its paragraph headings and addition for Sale’s Preliminary Discourse.

It is an edition by Reverend E. M. Wherry, M.A., reprinted in 1973 by Otto Zeller Verlag - Osnabrück from a 1896 edition (the introduction therein is dated December 31, 1881). This edition has been entitled “A Comprehensive Commentary on the Qur’án: Comprising Sale’s Translation and Preliminary Discourse, with additional notes and emendations together with a Complete Index to the Text, Preliminary Discourse, and Notes”

This edition was published in four volumes. The additions of Wherry have been made to the Preliminary Discourse as well as to the notes in the body of the text, including paragraph summary headings being added to the paragraphs of the Preliminary Discourse, and an outline being provided for each chapter (the latter two, as mentioned above are, unlike the other material, included here at this site (elsewhere)). Also the text itself was modified by dividing it into verses, according to the Roman Urdú edition of Malvi Abdul Qádir’s translation. His version also includes information as to the proposed dates and places of revelation according to different authors.

Although its tone is also rather vituperative and is explicitly stated to be for Christian missionary use, this latter version draws upon the notes of various sources, and does contain a good amount of information which may be of some interest. However, again, I have only included its outlines and Preliminary Discourse paragraph headings here, but I include the further information about it in the event anyone wished to obtain a print copy (which may be relatively more accessible, since it was reprinted as recently as 1973). None of this latter work’s additional information was actually done by Sale himself.

I have attempted to preserve the original pagination in the main sections, given that Sale heavily cross-referenced his notes.

Since the footnotes, being a great deal in number, were marked by letters rather than numbers in the fully annotated version, it may be particularly confusing to view this document in a form without superscripted footnote markers (particularly when the footnote marker was “s” and could be seen as an unintended plural). One can of course be helped somewhat by looking to the footnotes of that page to see the sequence of letters in order to find where the footnote may be if it is not obvious.

Also, I have divided Sale’s translation into verses (his own version never did so). It follows J.M. Rodwell’s versification scheme and includes numbering every ten verses. (This was done by myself also in hopes of being able to post a multilinear/parallel version on-line in the future, possibly at (try ) for those who wish to search for it in the future.)

B. Zamir





NOTWITHSTANDING the great honour and respect generally and deservedly paid to the memories of those who have founded states, or obliged a people by the institution of laws which have made them prosperous and considerable in the world, yet the legislator of the Arabs has been treated in so very different a manner by all who acknowledge not his claim to a divine mission, and by Christians especially, that were not your lordship’s just discernment sufficiently known, I should think myself under a necessity of making an apology for presenting the following translation.

      The remembrance of the calamities brought on so many nations by the conquests of the Arabians may possibly raise some indignation against him who formed them to empire; but this being equally applicable to all conquerors, could not, of itself, occasion all the detestation with which the name of Mohammed is loaded. He has given a new system of religion, which has had still greater success than the arms of his followers, and to establish this religion made use of an imposture; and on this account it is supposed that he must of necessity have been a most abandoned villain, and his memory is become infamous. But as Mohammed gave his Arabs the best religion he could, as well as the best laws, preferable.

at least, to those of the ancient pagan lawgivers, I confess I cannot see why he deserves not equal respect–though not with Moses or Jesus Christ, whose laws came really from Heaven, yet, with Minos or Numa, notwithstanding the distinction of a learned writer, who seems to think it a greater crime to make use of an imposture to set up a new religion, founded on the acknowledgment of one true God, and to destroy idolatry, than to use the same means to gain reception to rules and regulations for the more orderly practice of heathenism already established.

      To be acquainted with the various laws and constitutions of civilized nations, especially of those who flourish in our own time, is, perhaps, the most useful part of knowledge: wherein though your lordship, who shines with so much distinction in the noblest assembly in the world, peculiarly excels; yet as the law of Mohammed, by reason of the odium it lies under, and the strangeness of the language in which it is written, has been so much neglected. I flatter myself some things in the following sheets may be new even to a person of your lordship’s extensive learning; and if what I have written may be any way entertaining or acceptable to your lordship, I shall not regret the pains it has cost me.

      I join with the general voice in wishing your lordship all the honour and happiness your known virtues and merit deserve, and am with perfect respect,

       MY LORD,
       Your lordship’s most humble
       And most obedient servant,

[from 1891 version]



      THE present Edition of Sale’s Translation of the Korân will, it is hoped, be found to possess some advantages over every other. Many useful notes, and several hundred various readings, are added from the French version by Savary. Of the various readings, the major part give a different meaning from that which is adopted by the English translator; while the others, though agreeing with his idea of the text, are more poetically expressed. Great care has been taken to prevent the work from being disfigured by typographical errors, which are peculiarly objectionable in a work of this kind, because they render it unsafe to be consulted. A Sketch of the Life of Sale is also prefixed, which, though brief, contains several particulars not hitherto stated by any of his biographers, and vindicates, and it is believed satisfactorily, his memory from some aspersions that have been illiberally cast upon it by the prejudiced or the ignorant.

[from 1891 version of Frederick Warne and Co.--Savary’s additions have not been added in my own edition; this version also contained a plan and view of the Mosque in Mecca and some genealogical charts of the Arabs--B. Zamir]





OF the life of GEORGE SALE, a man of extensive learning, and considerable literary talent, very few particulars have been transmitted to us by his contemporaries. He is said to have been born in the county of Kent, and the time of his birth must have been not long previous to the close of the seventeenth century. His education he received at the King’s School, Canterbury. Voltaire, who bestows high praise on the version of the Korân, asserts him to have spent five-and-twenty years in Arabia, and to have acquired in that country his profound knowledge of the Arabic language and customs. On what authority this is asserted it would now be fruitless to endeavour to ascertain. But that the assertion is an erroneous one, there can be no reason to doubt; it being opposed by the stubborn evidence of dates and facts. It is almost certain that Sale was brought up to the law, and that he practised it for many years, if not till the end of his career. He is said, by a co-existing writer, to have quitted his legal pursuits, for the purpose of applying himself to the study of the eastern and other languages, both ancient and modern. His guide through the labyrinth of the oriental dialects was Mr. Dadichi, the king’s interpreter. If it be true that he ever relinquished the practice of the law, it would appear that he must have resumed it before his decease; for, in his address to the reader, prefixed to the Korân, he pleads, as an apology for the delay which had occurred in publishing the volume, that the work “was carried on at leisure times only, and amidst the necessary avocations of a troublesome profession.” This alone would suffice to show that Voltaire was in error. But to this must be added, that the existence of Sale was terminated at an early period, and that, in at least his latter years, he was engaged in literary labours of no trifling magnitude. The story of his having, during a quarter of a century, resided in Arabia, becomes, therefore, an obvious impossibility, and must be dismissed to take its place among those fictions by which biography has often been encumbered and disgraced.
      Among the few productions of which Sale is known to be the author is a part of “The General Dictionary,” in ten volumes, folio. To the translation of Bayle, which is incorporated with this voluminous work, he is stated to have been a large contributor.
      When the plan of the Universal History was arranged, Sale was one of those who were selected to carry it into execution. His coadjutors were

Swinton, eminent as an antiquary, and remarkable for absence of mind; Shelvocke, originally a naval officer; the well informed, intelligent, and laborious Campbell; that singular character, George Psalmanazar; and Archibald Bower, who afterwards became an object of unenviable notoriety. The portion of the history which was supplied by Sale comprises “The Introduction, containing the Cosmogony, or Creation of the World;” and the whole, or nearly the whole, of the succeeding chapter, which traces the narrative of events from the creation to the flood. In the performance of his task, he displays a thorough acquaintance with his subject; and his style, though not polished into elegance, is neat and perspicuous. In a French biographical dictionary, of anti-liberal principles, a writer accuses him of having adopted a system hostile to tradition and the Scriptures, and composed his account of the Cosmogony with the view of giving currency to his heretical opinions. Either the accuser never read the article which he censures, or he has wilfully misrepresented it; for it affords the fullest contradiction to the charge, as does also the sequent chapter; and he must, therefore, be contented to choose between the demerit of being a slanderer through blundering and reckless ignorance, or through sheer malignity of heart.
      Though his share in these publications affords proof of the erudition and ability of Sale, it probably would not alone have been sufficient to preserve his name from oblivion. His claim to be remembered rests principally on his version of the Korân, which appeared in November, 1734, in a quarto volume, and was inscribed to Lord Carteret. The dedicator does not disgrace himself by descending to that fulsome adulatory style which was then too frequently employed in addressing the great. As a translator, he had the field almost entirely to himself; there being at that time no English translation of the Mohammedan civil and spiritual code, except a bad copy of the despicable one by Du Ryer. His performance was universally and justly approved of, still still remains in repute, and is not likely to be superseded by any other of the kind. It may, perhaps, be regretted, that he did not preserve the division into verses, as Savary has since done, instead of connecting them into a continuous narrative. Some of the poetical spirit is unavoidably lost by the change. But this is all that can be objected to him. It is, I believe, admitted, that he is in no common degree faithful to his original; and his numerous notes, and Preliminary Discourse, manifest such a perfect knowledge of Eastern habits, manners, traditions, and laws, as could have been acquired only by an acute mind, capable of submitting to years of patient toil.
      But, though his work passed safely through the ordeal of criticism, it has been made the pretext for a calumny against him. It has been declared, that he puts the Christian religion on the same footing with the Muhammedan; and some charitable persons have even supposed him to have been a disguised professor of the latter. The origin of this slander we may trace back to the strange obliquity of principles, and the blind merciless rage which are characteristic of bigotry. Sale was not one of those who imagine that the end sanctifies the means, and that the best interests of mankind can be advanced by violence, by railing, or by deviating form the laws of truth, in order to blacken an adversary. He enters into the consideration of the character of Mohammed with a calm philosophic spirit; repeatedly censuring his imposture, touching upon his subterfuges and inventions, but doing justice to him on those points on which the pretended prophet is really worthy of praise. The rules which, in his address to the reader, he lays down for the conversion of Mo-
hammedans, are dictated by sound sense and amiable feelings. They are, however, not calculated to satisfy those who think the sword and the fagot to be the only proper instruments for the extirpation of heresy. That he places Islamism on an equality with Christianity is a gross falsehood. “As Mohammed,” says he, “gave his Arabs the best religion he could, preferable, at least, to those of the ancient pagan lawgivers, I confess I cannot see why he deserves not equal respect, though not with Moses or Jesus Christ, whose laws came really from heaven, yet with Minos or Numa, notwithstanding the distinction of a learned writer, who seems to think it a greater crime to make use of an imposture to set up a new religion, founded on the acknowledgment of one true God, and to destroy idolatry, than to use the same means to gain reception to rules and regulations for the more orderly practice of heathenism already established.” This, and no more, is “the very head and front of his offending;” and from this it would, I think, be difficult to extract any proof of his belief in the divine mission of Mohammed. If the charge brought against him be not groundless, he must have added to his other sins that of being a consummate hypocrite, and that, too, without any obvious necessity; he having been, till the period of his decease, a member of the Society for the Promoting of Christian Knowledge.
      In 1736 a society was established for the encouragement of learning. It comprehended many noblemen, and some of the most eminent literary men of that day. Sale was one of the founders of it, and was appointed on the first committee. The meetings were held weekly, and the committee decided upon what works should be printed at the expense of the society, or with its assistance, and what should be the price of them. When the cost of printing was repaid, the property of the work reverted to the author. This establishment did not, I Imagine, exist for any length of time. The attention of the public has been recently called to a plan of a similar kind.
      Sale did not long survive the carrying of this scheme into effect. He died of a fever, on the 13th of November, 1736, at his house in Surrey-street, Strand, after an illness of only eight days, and was buried at St. Clement Danes. He was under the age of forty when he was thus suddenly snatched from his family, which consisted of a wife and five children. Of his sons, one was educated at New College, Oxford, of which he became Fellow, and he was subsequently elected to a Fellow-ship in Winchester College. Sale is described as having had “a healthy constitution, and a communicative mind in a comely person.” His library was valuable, and contained many rare and beautiful manuscripts in the Persian, Turkish, Arabic, and other languages; a circumstance which seems to show that poverty, so often the lot of men whose lives are devoted to literary pursuits, was not one of the evils with which he was compelled to encounter.

       R. A. DAVENPORT.

[from 1891 version]


THERE is surely no need to-day to insist on the importance of a close study of the Korân for all who would comprehend the many vital problems connected with the Islamic World; and yet few of us, I imagine, among the many who possess translations of this book have been at pains to read it through. It must, however, be borne in mind that the Korân plays a far greater rôle among the Muhammadans than does the Bible in Christianity in that it provides not only the canon of their faith, but also the text-book of their ritual and the principles of their Civil Law.
      It was the Great Crusades that first brought the West into close touch with Islam, but between the years 1096 and 1270 we only hear of one attempt to make known to Europe the Sacred Book of the Moslems, namely, the Latin version made in 1143, by Robert of Retina (who, Sale tells us, was an Englishman), and Hermann of Dalmatia, on the initiative of Petrus Venerabilis, the Abbot of Clugny, which version was ultimately printed by T. Bibliander in Basel in 1543, nearly a hundred years after the fall of Constantinople.
      During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, several translations appeared both in Latin and in French, and one of the latter, by André du Ryer, was translated into English by Alexander Ross in 1649. But by far the most important work on the Korân was that of Luigi Marracci which was published in Padua in 1698.
      George Sale’s translation first appeared in November, 1734, in a quarto volume; in 1764 it was first printed in medium octavo, and the reprint of 1825 contained the sketch of Sale’s life by Richard Alfred Davenant which has been utilized in the article on Sale in the Dictionary of National Bibliography. The Chandos Classics edition in crown octavo was first issued in 1877.
      Soon after the death of the Prophet, early Muhammadan theologians began to discuss, not only the correct reading

of the text itself, but also to work out on the basis of first-hand reports the story connected with the revelation of each chapter. As the book at present stands in its original form the chapters are arranged more or less according to their respective length, beginning with the longest; except in the case of the opening chapter, which holds a place by itself, not only in the sacred book of Islam, corresponding as it does in a manner to our Pater Noster, but also in its important ceremonial usages. The presumed order in which the various chapters were revealed is given in the tabular list of Contents, but it may be mentioned that neither Muhammadan theologians, nor, in more recent times, European scholars, are in entire agreement upon the exact chronological position of all the chapters.
      It is well for all who study the Korân to realize that the actual text is never the composition of the Prophet, but is the word of God addressed to the Prophet; and that in quoting the Korân the formula is “He (may he be exalted) said” or some such phrase. The Prophet himself is of course quoted by Muhammadan theologians, but such quotations refer to his traditional sayings known as “Hadîs,” which have been handed down from mouth to mouth with the strictest regard to genealogical continuity.
      It would probably be impossible for any Arabic scholar to produce a translation of the Korân which would defy criticism, but this much may be said of Sale’s version: just as, when it first appeared, it had no rival in the field, it may be fairly claimed to-day that it has been superseded by no subsequent translations. Equally remarkable with his translation is the famous Preliminary Discourse which constitutes a tour de force when we consider how little critical work had been done in his day in the field of Islamic research. Practically the only works of first-class importance were Dr. Pocock’s Specimen Historiœ Arabum, to which, in his original Address to the Reader, Sale acknowledges his great indebtedness, and Maracci’s Korân.
      In spite of the vast number of eminent scholars who have worked in the same field since the days of George Sale, his Preliminary Discourse still remains the best Introduction in any European language to the study of the religion promulgated by the Prophet of Arabia; but as Wherry says: “Whilst reading the Preliminary Discourse as a most masterly, and on the whole reliable, presentation of the peculiar doctrines, rites, ceremonies, customs, and institutions
of Islam, we recognize the fact that modern research has brought to light many things concerning the history of the ancient Arabs which greatly modify the statements made in the early paragraphs.”
      For many centuries the acquaintance which the majority of Europeans possessed of Muhammadanism was based almost entirely on distorted reports of fanatical Christians which led to the dissemination of a multitude of gross calumnies. What was good in Muhammadanism was entirely ignored, and what was not good, in the eyes of Europe, was exaggerated or misinterpreted.
      It must not, however, be forgotten that the central doctrine preached by Muhammad to his contemporaries in Arabia, who worshipped the Stars; to the Persians, who acknowledged Ormuz and Ahriman; the Indians, who worshipped idols; and the Turks, who had no particular worship, was the unity of God, and that the simplicity of his creed was probably a more potent factor in the spread of Islam than the sword of the Ghazis.
      Islam, although seriously affecting the Christian world, brought a spiritual religion to one half of Asia, and it is an amazing circumstance that the Turks, who on several occasions let loose their Central Asian hordes over India, and the Middle East, though irresistible in the onslaught of their arms, were all conquered in their turn by the Faith of Islam, and founded Muhammadan dynasties.
      The Mongols of the thirteenth century did their best to wipe out all traces of Islam when they sacked Baghdad, but though the Caliphate was relegated to obscurity in Egypt the newly founded Empires quickly became Muhammadan states, until finally it was a Turk who took the title of Caliph which has been held by the house of Othman ever since.
      Thus through all the vicissitudes of thirteen hundred years the Korân has remained the sacred book of all the Turks and Persians and of nearly a quarter of the population of India. Surely such a book as this deserves to be widely read in the West, more especially in these days when space and time have been almost annihilated by modern invention, and when public interest embraces the whole world.
      It is difficult to decide to what extent Sale’s citations in the notes represent first-hand use of the Arabic commentators, but I fear that the result of a close inquiry only points to very little original research on his part. He says himself in his Address to the Reader: “As I have no oppor-
tunity of consulting public libraries, the manuscripts of which I have made use throughout the whole work have been such as I had in my own study, except only the Commentary of Al Baidhâwi” . . . which “belongs to the library of the Dutch Church in Austin Friars.”
      Now with regard to these manuscripts which Sale had in his “own study” we happen to possess first-hand information, for a list of them was printed by the executor of his will under the following title: “A choice collection of most curious and inestimable manuscripts in the Turkish, Arabic and Persian languages from the library of the late learned and ingenious Mr. George Sale. Which books are now in the possession of Mr. William Hammerton Merchant in Lothbury where they may be seen on Wednesdays and Fridays till either they are sold or sent abroad. N.B. These MSS. are to be sold together and not separately.” They were purchased in the first instance by the Rev. Thomas Hunt of Oxford for the Radcliffe Library, and they are now permanently housed in the Bodleian Library.
      The British Museum possesses a copy of this list which is drawn up in English and French on opposite pages and comprises eighty-six works in all. The list contains very few Arabic works of first-rate importance, but is rich in Turkish and Persian Histories. What is most significant, however, is the fact that it contains hardly any of the Arabic works and none of the Commentaries which are referred to on every page of Sale’s translation of the Korân.
      I have therefore been forced to the conclusion that with the exception of Al-Baidhâwi, Sale’s sources were all consulted at second hand; and an examination of Marracci’s great work makes the whole matter perfectly clear. Sale says of Marracci’s translation that it is “generally speaking very exact; but adheres to the Arabic idiom too literally to be easily understood . . . by those who are not versed in the Muhammadan learning. The notes he has added are indeed of great use; but his refutations, which swell the work to a large volume, are of little or none at all, being often unsatisfactory, and sometimes impertinent. The work, however, with all its faults is very valuable, and I should be guilty of ingratitude, did I not acknowledge myself much obliged thereto; but still being in Latin it can be of no use to those who understand not that tongue.”
      Such is Sale’s own confession of his obligation to Marracci–but it does not go nearly far enough. A comparison of
the two versions shows that so much had been achieved by Marracci that Sale’s work might almost have been performed with a knowledge of Latin alone, as far as regards the quotations from Arabic authors. I do not wish to imply that Sale did not know Arabic, but I do maintain that his work as it stands gives a misleading estimate of his original researches, and that his tribute to Marracci falls far short of his actual indebtedness.
      It must be mentioned that Marracci not only reproduced the whole of the Arabic text of the Korân but furthermore gives the original text and the translation of all his quotations from Arabic writers. It is indeed a profoundly learned work and has never received the recognition it deserves. Marracci had at his disposal rich collections of MSS. belonging to the Libraries of Italy. How he learnt his Arabic we do not know. Voltaire says he was never in the East. He was confessor to Pope Innocent XI, and his work which appeared in Padua in 1698 is dedicated to the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I. By way of Introduction to his Korân Marracci published a companion folio volume called Prodromus which contains practically all that was known in his day regarding Muhammad and the Religion of Islam.
      It may in any case be claimed that the present work presents to the Western student all the essentials of a preliminary study of Islam: for Sale’s translation and footnotes will give him as clear an idea as can be obtained, without laborious years of study in Arabic, of what is regarded by so many millions of men from Fez to the Far East as the revealed word of God and the unshakable basis of their faith.
      George Sale was born about 1697 and died in 1736. Every biography calls attention to the statement made by Voltaire in his Dictionnaire Philosophique to the effect that Sale spent over twenty years among the Arabs. I think this must have been a lapsus calami on Voltaire’s part, because it is unlikely that he would have invented such a story. Sale must also have been well versed in Hebrew, both biblical and post-biblical, as his numerous allusions to Rabbinical writings testify.
      Two years after the publication of his great work Sale died in Surrey Street, Strand, his age being then under forty. In 1720 he had been admitted a student of the Inner Temple–son of Samuel Sale, citizen and merchant of London–and the same year the Patriarch of Antioch had sent Solo-
mon Negri (Suleiman Alsadi) to London from Damascus to urge the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, then established in the Middle Temple, to issue an Arabic New Testament for the Syrian Christians. It is surmised that Negri was Sale’s first instructor in Arabic, though Dadichi, the King’s Interpreter, a learned Greek of Aleppo, guided him, we are told, “through the labyrinth of oriental dialects.”
      Whatever Sale may have known before–and he certainly had the gift of languages–it is on the Society’s records that on August 30, 1726, he offered his services as one of the correctors of the Arabic New Testament and soon became the chief worker on it, besides being the Society’s solicitor and holding other honorary offices. That translation of the New Testament into Arabic was followed by the translation of the Korân into English.
      In this edition the proper names have been left for the most part as in the original, but the reader must understand that in Sale’s day there was a freedom in regard to oriental orthography that allowed of many variations. In spite, however, of the want of a scientific system, Sale’s transcription is on the whole clear, and far less confusing than those adopted by contemporary Anglo-Indian scholars, who utterly distorted Muhammadan names–including place names in India–by rendering the short a by u and so forth. As a few examples of names spelled in more than one way, the correct modern way being given first, we have Al-Qor’án, Coran, Korân, etc.; Muhammad, Mohammed, Mahomet, etc.; Al-Baidhâwi, Al-Beidâwi; Muttalib, Motalleb, Motaleb, etc.; Jalâl ud-Dîn, Jallâlo’ddîn; Anas, Ans; Khalîfa, Caliph, Khalif, etc.
      It is only within quite recent times that scholars have troubled to render each letter of the Arabic alphabet by an equivalent and distinct letter of the Roman alphabet–and although no particular system has been universally adopted by European orientalists, every writer has some system by which any reader with a knowledge of Arabic is able to turn back every name into the original script. The chief advantage of any such system is that a distinction is made between the two varieties of s, k, and t, and the presence of the illusive Arabic letter ‘ayn is always indicated.

              E. DENISON ROSS.

Sir Edward Denison Ross
C.I.E., Ph.D., ETC.


in or after 1877 (reference was made in the introduction to a work published in 1877) (though library seems to list it as 1870)

It might be mentioned that Sir Edward Denison Ross was apparently acquainted with Shoghi Effendi according to a letter published in Ruhíyyih Khánum’s Priceless Pearl which indicated that Sir Ross praised Shoghi Effendi’s translation of The Dawn-Breakers.