434 NATIVE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE SUDAN iv.dt.

318 solar years. Secondly, the length of each reign must have been given in lunar years in the Arabic MS. consulted by Cailliaud, and if Cailliaud had wished to give in each case the exact equivalent in solar years he must have used fractions (which he did not do), or the total would have necessarily been wrong.

Thus, apparently, we have Cailliaud obtaining the figure 1484 A.D. by subtracting 337 lunar years from the solar date 1821 A.D., and not noticing that 337 lunar years only equal 327 solar years.

He also adds 12 years to 'Omara Dunkas's reign. Bruce and the MS. only give 30 years, but Cailliaud gives 42. The above, I think, accounts for the difference between the date 1504, which I take to be correct, and

Cailliaud's " 1484"; and it vitiates Cailhaud's chronology^.

^ Of the chronological list he accepted Cailliaud says (Vol. il, p. 255): "Je m'^tais procure, chez les erudits de la ville [Sennar], plusieurs listes chronologiques des rois Foungis du Sennar":. . .(etc., as quoted in the introduction). "Enfin. . . j'en obtins une du roi Bady lui-meme. . ."; and to this Cailliaud adds in a note

"Elle etait ecrite en arabe: j'en dois la traduction k I'obligeance de M. Agoub, professeur d'arabe au college royal de Louis-le-Grand." So if there is blame to be apportioned perhaps M. Agoub rather than Cailliaud should be the scapegoat.