This issue features two research articles and a research note. Darakhshan Khan’s “In Good Company: Reformist Piety and Women’s Da‘wat in the Tablīghī Jamā‘at” is an original, meticulously researched, deeply thoughtful, and timely contribution. Her research, which is edifying and brilliant on a topic of great and continued significance, throws into sharp relief the crucial role women and family structure played in the history of even a movement that is often stereotyped as an all-male affair. Dr. Fareeha Khan and Dr. Usha Sanyal’s rejoinders to the article greatly add to an already significant contribution; they highlight its strengths and tease out some of the avenues in which further exploration could be fruitful.

 Paul Shore’s “Lexical Choice and Rhetorical Expression in Ignazio Lomellini’s 1622 Translation of and Commentary on the Qur’ān” is an erudite study of a unique seventeenth-century and rarely studied document housed in the University of Genoa library and consisting of the entire text of the Qur’ān in Arabic along with a Latin translation of same and commentary. Authored by Lomellini, a Jesuit priest, it is of considerable value as an example of how early Western Christian scholars of the Qur’ān grappled with lexical, syntactical and exegetical problems. Shore examines a series of lexical choices made by Lomellini and touches on some of his exegetical discourses, and sheds light on the question of its intended audiences, possible sources and informants, and particularly the tension between Lomellini’s mission to propagate the Catholic faith and in doing so attack rival religious traditions, and his desire to produce a translation faithful to the meaning of the original. Dr. Peter Feldmeier and Dr. Elliot Bazzano offer penetrating insights into the phenomenon that Shore has so ably explored.

 Finally, James Morris’s fascinating research note explores the biography and visit of the first Muslim visitor to Japan, Sādōulǔdīng, who arrived in Japan as part of a Mongol envoy in 1275CE and was ultimately executed. Given the paucity of research on the topic, this note provides a valuable evaluation of the relevant primary sources on the subject. Morris suggests that the visitor may not have been a Uyghur or an Arab, as previously thought, but rather a Persian, and goes on to discuss the significance of this episode in history.