“I was acquainted with several great and learned men in India, both natives and Persians: on perusing the works of Timour, I was led to make the same enquiry which you have made, whether they were, or were not authentic? The answers I received were always in the affirmative, and attended with some tokens and expressions of surprize, that I should, or could, doubt their being genuine. Shaah Aulum, the present Mogul, has a beautiful copy of the History and Institutes of Timour; which he holds in such esteem, and of which he is so exceedingly careful, that though he granted me the use of any other book in his possession, this he positively excepted by name, as a work so rare and valuable, that he could not trust it to the care of any person whatever.[5] “Upon the whole, if the learned of the East, for several generations, have been induced to give implicit credit to the Institutes and History of Timour, which is certainly the case, I do not see how Europeans can, with any degree of propriety, doubt their authenticity. The Oriental critics have the very best materials on which to form their opinions; our small stock of knowledge in the language, and still smaller stock of Asiatic Historians, render us very incompetent judges of the point in question. There are a great number of Oriental Manuscripts in the libraries of the learned; but I am convinced, that there are still many, very many, which never have found, and possibly never will find, their way into Europe; and therefore, though no _historical_ evidence can be produced to prove the authenticity of the works of Timour, yet no one can pretend to say, that such _historical_ proofs do not exist. The learned of the East must be the best judges whether they do, or do not merit their belief and veneration; and they have thought proper to bestow upon them both the one and the other. It is much to be regretted, that the Life of Timour, written by himself, is not to be found in Europe: if that, and the Institutes could be translated and published together, such is the accuracy of the narrative, such the importance of the matter, and such the lights that they would mutually reflect on each other, that it would, I conceive, be impossible for any one to read them, without acquiescing in their authenticity from the _internal_ evidence alone.[6] Yours, most assuredly, WILLIAM DAVY.” ----- Footnote 1: See Note at the end of the Preface. Footnote 2: Monsieur Langlès says in the sixth page of his Preface; “ces superstitions sont, pour le philosophe, des renseignemens certains sur les mœurs et sur l’esprit des hommes. J’engage donc M. M. Davy et White à faire cette restitution, si ce n’est pas à l’érudition, du moins à la Philosophie.” Footnote 3: The Tūrky language differs as much from the modern Turkish, as the Saxon does from the English. Footnote 4: