BOOK REVIEWS

Schmitt Rudiger, The Old Persian Inscriptions of Naqsh-i Rustamand Persepolis [Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum. Part I Inscrip-tions of Ancient Iran. Vol. I The Old Persian Inscriptions. TextsII]. London: School of Oriental and African Studies 2000, pp. 122,plates 68. ISBN 0-7286-0314-4.

This volume has been published as part of the well-known long-termseries entitled ‘Corpus Inscriptionum Iranicarum’, the purpose ofwhich is to collect and edit all written Old Iranian documents. Thecontent of this part encompasses approximately 30 Old Persianinscriptions from the Darius-tomb at Naqsh-i Rustam and fromPersepolis. Schmitt follows the good practice of including translitera-tion, transcription and translation. Notes and commentaries comple-ment this work. Plates mostly well-known from the secondaryliterature and some from the CII-archive are included for reference.Despite the critical comments to follow this work is a useful step for-ward and a helpful tool in the discipline of Indo-Iranian studies. Itdedicates considerable space to the discussion of linguistic problems.

The presently extisting corpus of the Achaemenid Cuneiforminscriptions is rather limited. However, due to the exclusively writ-ten tradition of this language, which is often only fragmentary, thetexts must be reconstructed in many cases. Fortunately the majorityof the texts treated in this volume have suffered less damage thanthe Susa or the Bisutun inscriptions. The contents do not posemuch difficulty for reading and interpretation. The only majordamage making understanding somewhat difficult appears in theDarius inscription of Naqsh-i Rustam (DNb). With the discoveryof a stone tablet XPla near Persepolis in 1967 new impulses stimu-lated the reinterpretation of DNb.

A few remarks on the mentioned inscriptions may be allowed.Thereby I apply the established transcription used by Kent, Hinzand Mayrhofer, slightly modified by K. Hoffmann who adds a dot

Indo-Iranian Journal 48: 133–166, 2005. �C Springer 2006DOI: 10.1007/s10783-005-8888-3

underneath the a where it is necessary to indicate the presence of aschwa (a

_) or in the case of a

_r to specify the result of the develop-

ment of old r� . Whatever it may have been at the time when theseinscriptions were written, it is certain that it was not r� anymore buthad developed into the sequence vowel+r where the vowel preced-ing r seems to be phonetically identical with the a

_in cases like

aha_y�aay�aa, etc.1 While Schmitt speaks of ‘‘Phonemic/Phonetic Tran-

scription’’ and even writes iaand u

a, he inconsequently does not

mark the schwa. In the transcription, one would certainly expect tofind pa

_rtanay�aa, aha

_y�aay�aa, xs�aaya#iyaha

_y�aa, daha

_y�aaus and the like, but

only finds pr: tanay�aa, ahy�aay�aa, xs�aaya#iyahy�aa, dahy�aauas instead.

According to these principles and for the sake of comparability Ihave converted the examples discussed here from Schmitt’s tran-scription into the more widely accepted transcription.

XPI5f. was not presented correctly by Schmitt. The reviewer hasrepeatedly examined this inscription during the last 25 years. Thecorrect readings and restitutions were subsequently presented, andin 1998 they were incorporated in the reviewer’s detailed edition onthe Old Persian inscriptions,2 which was not mentioned in Schmitt’swork. They have been elaborated upon more in a paper in memoryof Hartmut Katz.3

Xerxes writes in XPI5-9: #�aati]y : [Xsa]yaa: rs�aa : [xs]�aa dya#e[i]ya:vadse[n]d �aa: Ae½uramazd�aa�h�aa :d _aartae½m : dau�s½t�aa� : ½ah�miy : taya :rd �aae½sta�m : ddaeust d �aa : ahe ½miy� d: e mi#a : naiy : daus½t�d�aa e : ah½mi�y; ½:�dnae½i�dme �aa d: e dke �aama : taya : . . ., which I translate: ‘Proclaims Xerxesthe King: By the favour of Ahuramazda I am friend to the A

_rta4

(= I love the A_rta), I am friend of what is right, I am not friend to

falsehood/injustice. It is not my desire. . .’.

1 see Karl Hoffmann: ‘Zur altpersischen Schrift.’ in: Aufs€aatze zur Indoiranistik.Bd. 2. Wiesbaden 1976. pp.620–45.

2 Gunter Schweiger: ‘Kritische Neuedition der achaemenidischen Keilinschriften’.2 vols. Taimering 1998.

3 Gunter Schweiger: ‘Miscellanea lndoiranica’, in Fremd und Eigen, Untersuchun-

gen zu Grammatik und Wortschatz des Uralischen und lndogermanischen. in memo-riam HARTMUT KATZ. Wien 2001, pp. 235f. (written and submitted 1998).

4 daustar- Nomen agentis corresponds to the ACC.SG.NEUT. a_rtam. Apart

from compounds in names this is the only attestation of the a: rta in the Old Persian

inscriptions besides its occurrence in XPh.

134 BOOK REVIEWS

Whereas Schmitt follows the rendering of Hinz5 (who himself wasmisled by Kent’s representation of DNb): #�aatiy : Xsayaa: rsa :x�ss�aaya#iya : vasn�aa : Auramazd�aah�aa : adam : av�aakaram : ahmiy :taya : r�aastam : daeust�aa : ahmiy : mi#a : naiy : daust�aa : ahmiy : naim�aa :k�aama : taya : . . ., and he then necessarily follows Kent’s translationof DNb: ‘‘Proclaims Xerxes the King: By the favour of AhuramazdaI am of such a kind that I am friendly to the to right, (but) I am notfriendly to wrong. It is not my desire . . .’’.

DNb 13f. yacimaiy pa_rtanay�aa bavatiy � da

_rsam d�aaray�aamiy mana-

h�aa and XP115f. yacamaiy pa_rtan�aay�aa bavatiy� da

_rsam d�aaray �aamiy

manaha_y�aa : There is no need to assume exclusively defective writing

in yacamaiy (XPI). While yac]imaiy (DNb) means ‘even if (to) me’deriving from yaþ ciyþ -maiy; yacamaiy (XPI) expresses ‘and if(to) me’ (< yadþ ca). Of course the possibility of defective writingremains as an alternative interpretation.

Schmitt sees in pa_rtanay�aa and pa

_rtan�aay�aa the LOC of a neutral a-

stem and the LOC of a feminin �aa-stem respectively. Again followingHinz6 and rejecting the suggestion of Klingenschmitt7 forpa_rtan��a�ay�aa- ‘belligerency’ because of ‘‘the lack of a resumptive pro-

noun in the main clause’’ (Schmitt p. 41) he translates: ‘Whateveroccurs to me in a quarrel, I firmly hold back in my thinking.’According to Klingenschmitt’s proposition this clause must betranslated: ‘When belligerence tempts me, I suppress (it) firmly bymeans of my mental power’.8 Schmitt’s argument against Klin-genschmitt’s view does not hold up, since it is not too far-fetchedto assume the ellipsis of an anaphoric pronoun. In many languages,the ellipsis of anaphorical pronouns does not pose any problembecause comprehension derives from the context. This is also the casewith most of the Old-Indoeuropean languages, as we see in all likeli-hood in DNb 24f. martiya taya kunautiy yadiv�aa anuv tauman�ıı� �ssaiyxsnuta bav�aamiy . . .‘What a man does or brings according to his ability -(therewith) I become satisfied . . .’. XPl26 f. reads: . . . anuv taum�aavanasaiy xsnuta bav�aamiy . . .‘. . .according to his ability–by this of him

5 Walther Hinz: ‘Altiranische Funde und Forschungen.’ Berlin 1969. p.466 Hinz: loc.cit.7 Gert Klingenschmitt: ‘Das altarmenische Verbum.’ Wiesbaden 1982. p.90.

Klingenschmitt had already made this suggestion at earlier occasions.8 This interpretation is further supported by the Akkadian version of DNb, its

translation being given by the Chicago Assyrian Dictionary as: ‘. . . and even when

I have become angry, (lit.:) I keep it in me’ (emphasize by the reviewer).

135BOOK REVIEWS

I become satisfied. . .’. In DNb 26 Schmitt has without stringent justifi-cation emended the phrase to . . . anuv tauman�ıı�saiy < avan�aa >xsnuta ba�aamig . . . and thereby has not taken into consideration thepossible ellipsis of this pronoun.

It is indeed difficult for all of us to find, read and to integrate allthe secondary literature on a subject. Schmitt is not exemptedeither, as a few examples demonstrate.

- When dealing with XPm he writes: ‘‘Mayrhofer 1978, 20 [wronglyseen in relation to XPj]’’, and does not mention that it was Mayer-hofer himself who suggested it be labelled XPm. And Schmitt fur-ther writes: ‘‘So far no photograph of any of these fragments hasbeen published. . .’’. But there is at least one publication showing aphotograph of one column base found by Akbar Tadjvidi.9 Thisphotograph is reproduced in the reviewer’s edition. 10

- On p.36 Schmitt writes in the note for DNb 30f.:‘‘s-p-a-dy-te-i-dy-ae- � -y-a here according to the photographs avail-able and following s-p-a-y-t-i-y-y-a XP134f. (cf. Schmitt 1997,272f.), . . .’’. This particular word has been read and correctedindependently and at the same time by Gershevitch11 and thereviewer in 1979.12

- Dealing with A 3Pb Schmitt writes p. 119: ‘‘. . . the symbol ‘‘A3Pb’’ has been preferred here to the unsatisfactory ‘‘A?P’’’’. In thiscontext, one cannot disregard Krefter13, who initiated and justi-fied this association to Artaxerxes III. The arguments for label-ling A 3Pb and literature are given in the reviewer’scomprehensive edition (not included in Schmitt’s list of secondaryliterature).

9 apud ‘Al�ı S�aam�ıı: ‘P�aaitaxth�aa-ye �SSahans�aahan-eHax�aamanis�ıı.’ (�SS�uu�ss - Hagmat�aaneh- Taxt-e-Jam�ss�ııd). �SSir�aaz, Deym�aah 1348 Hj. (= Jan.1969). Photograph of XPm on

p. 235. Finding and reading such literature would however require good knowl-edge of New Persian (F�aars�ıı).

10 Schweiger: op.cit., p. 145.11 Iliya Gershevitch: ‘No Old Persian sp�a#maida’. apud FsSzem�eerenyi Teil I,

1979,291–295.12 Gunter Schweiger: ‘Sprachlicher Vergleich der lnschriften DNb und XPI.’

Paper delivered at the Philosophical Faculty IV of the University of Regensburgin 1979.

13 Friedrich Krefter: ‘Achamenidische Palast- und Grabturen.’ in: Archaologische

Mitteilungen aus Iran. Neue Folge (Berlin), vol.1, 1968, pp. 99–113.

136 BOOK REVIEWS

A word to the labelling of inscriptions: well established siglashould not be relabelled for lack of good reason, since confusionmay easily result (Examples XPn, XPo, XPq, XPr, or DPbH, thelater of which was renamed DPj).

A few minor points deserve perhaps to be mentioned, i.e.

- Unfortunately the transcription does not indicate which parts ofan inscription are preserved and which have been restituted, nordoes it indicate which words are emended. Emendations like theabove mentioned avan�aa (DNb 26) are prematurely inserted in thetransliteration and it is only there that they are marked as such.Because of this drawback the reader of the transcription is notaware of these circumstances and has to turn to the pages of thetransliteration, to uncover the original state.

- We find notes that are unnecessary or even wrong like p. 101,where Schmitt’s note to XPl52 reads: ‘‘b-b-t-n-i-y XPla (notnoticed by Hinz 1969, 46b), to be corrected in accordance withDNb 47 b-r-. . . . . .’’. In reality, Hinz had very well observed thisfact in the said publication a few pages later.14 Here Hinzremarks simply: ‘‘In Zeile 52 hat das r in brtanaiy einen waage-rechten Keil in der Mitte zu wenig.’’ This is short and to thepoint, since it is obvious that b-r-. . . was meant.

The scholar would certainly like to see more critical annotationsand discussion on the possible readings of the destroyed characters,which would enable him to make his own evaluations and to takepart in the adventure of the quest for the original text. Despitethese minor points, the book is linguistically enriching and wellworth the scholarly attention it demands.

GUNTER SCHWEIGERBahnweg 9D - 93104 Taimering

14 Hinz: op.cit., p. 51 b.

137BOOK REVIEWS

Cardona, George and Dhanesh Jain [Eds.], The Indo-Aryan Lan-guages. [Routledge Language Family Series]. London: Routledge,2003, pp. XIX, 1061. 5 maps, 7 figures. ISBN 0-7007-1130-9. £165,-.

This monumental volume intends to provide a ‘‘language-familydescriptive book’’ replacing earlier works such as G. A. Grierson’s‘‘Linguistic Survey of India’’ published between 1903 and 1928,J. Bloch’s ‘‘L’indo-aryen du veda au temps modernes’’ (1934, Eng-lish 1965) or the brief, but well informed survey by G. A. Zograf‘‘Jazyki Ju�zznoj Azii’’. Moscow 1990, which is not mentioned.Moreover, it supplements the earlier volume on Indian languages inthe same series, ‘‘The Dravidian Languages’’ edited by SanfordB. Steever and published in 1998.

The overall plan of this carefully conceived book is outlined indetail in the introduction, where also those topics are mentioned,which could not be included, because no competent or willing con-tributor could be found in spite of continuous efforts by the edi-tors. Thus, there is no chapter on Marwari, and none on thetypology of the Indo-Aryan languages. Consequently features suchas the Dardic metathesis (Mittelindisch1§ 19, 93) are nowherementioned. Moreover, Indo-Aryan languages outside India are notincluded, which are surveyed, e.g., by Hans Henrich Hock in hisarticle ‘‘Out of India? The linguistic evidence’’.2 There is a briefremark on Bangani (p. 25) pointing out the unfortunate contro-versy, which has spoiled this potentially highly interesting mate-ria1.3

Before the individual languages are described, the general intro-duction by G. Cardona and a chapter on the sociolinguistics by

1 O. v. Hinuber: Das altere Mittelindisch im Uberblick. Osterreichische Akade-mie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte, 467.

Band. Veroffentlichungen der Kommission fur Sprachen und Kulturen Sudasiens,Heft 20. Wien 22001.

2 In Johannes Bronkhorst and Madhav M. Deshpande [Eds.], Aryan and Non-

Aryan in South Asia. Evidence, Interpretation and Ideology [Harvard OrientalSeries Opera Minora, Vol. 3]. Cambridge, MA, 1999.

3 Perhaps all parties involved should bury their animosity for a while and clarifythe issue by joint field research, which seems to be the only way to save this

important material from eternal unusibility.

138 BOOK REVIEWS

D. Jain introduce the reader to the subject. A chapter on script(R. Salomon) outlines the general palaeographic developments,while the scripts of the individual languages are treated in therespective chapters.

The languages are described and arranged according to theirimportance in present day India taking typological features intoaccount as well. The historical background is provided by threechapters on Sanskrit (G. Cardona), Asokan Prakrit and P�ali (Th.Oberlies), Pr�akrits and Apabhrasa (V. Bubenik). Unsurprisingly,Sanskrit is decribed from the view point of a P�a �nin�ıya in asuperb piece of scholarship. The setback, however, is a consciousomission (p. 106) of Sanskrit varieties such as epic or Pur�an: ic,even in the bibliography in the section ‘‘further reading’’ foundat the end of all chapters. The ‘‘Grammar of Epic Sanskrit’’ byTh. Oberlies appeared simultaneous with the book (Berlin 2003),but, e.g., R. Salomon, The Vis:n: u Pur�an: a as a specimen of ver-nacular Sanskrit, WZKS 30. 1986, pp. 39–56 might have beenmentioned. Furthermore, colloquial Sanskrit did not find anyattention, cf. again R. Salomon, The Ukti-vyakti-prakaran: a as amanual of spoken Sanskrit, IIJ 24. 1983, pp. 13–25 or M. Desh-pande, On Vernacular Sanskrit: The G�ırv�a �nav�a

�nmanjar�ı ofDhu :n :dir�aja Kavi.4 Although Buddhists and Jains are mentionedas writers of texts in Sanskrit (p. 106) – one might add Mus-lims5–, the peculiar variety used in both these religious literaturesis not described.

In the paragraph on ‘‘further reading’’ on Sanskrit the reader issurprised by a reference to R. Hauschild ‘‘Register zur AltindischenGrammatik’’. Most likely, only a limited number of students willread this extremely useful index from cover to cover without gettingslightly bored before finally reaching the last entry ‘‘-hvti- a 206,aa 113; e 633’’.

Needless to say that these are minor points, which might havebeen taken into consideration. However, any reader is richly

4 In M. M. Deshpande, Sanskrit and Prakrit. Sociolinguistic Issues. Delhi 1993,

33–51. Sanskrit as spoken today is investigated, e.g., by R. N. Aralikatti, SpokenSanskrit in India. A Study of Sentence Patterns. Tirupati 1989.

5 Cf. Jatindra Bimal Chaudhuri: Contributions of Muslims to Sanskrit Learn-ing. Calcutta. Vol. II. Kh�an Kh�an�an Abdur Rahim 1954; Vol. III (Muslim

Patronage to Sanskrit Learning) Works of Rudrakavi: Kh�an-Kh�an�an-Carita;D�an�a-S�aha-Carita, Khurm-Carita. 1959. Vol. I is not accessible to me.

139BOOK REVIEWS

rewarded by the learning of the author and by his discussions ofnumerous aspects of Sanskrit among them the Middle Indicforms found in Sanskrit grammarians such as �aan:apayati,a technical term of the Maurya administration (Asoka: dev�a-na :mpiye �aanapayati, cf. Mittelindisch § 241), which survived inS�atav�ahana inscriptions, e.g., in N�asik (Gotamiputo . . . �aanapayati,EI 8. 1905/06, 73 line 2) and found its way even further southto the Pallavas (Sivakha :mdavammo . . . �aanapayati, EI 6. 1900/01, 86 line 4 = T. V. Mahalingam: Inscriptions of the Pallavas.Delhi 1988, no. 2) before it was replaced by a different formular(Na :mdiva :mmassa vacan:ena . . . bh�aan: itavv�aa, EI 31. 1955/6, 5line 6).

The chapter on Pr�akrit is marked some strange blind spots.G�andh�ar�ı is not mentioned at all, though it figures briefly inR. Salomon’s chapter on script, nor are Prakrit inscriptionsreferred to except in the (wrong) statement (p. 212) that R. Pi-schel did not include them in his Prakrit Grammar. He did:Inscriptions known during his time were duly noted, cf. Pischel §8. It is also a bit astonishing that the author still follows A. Gri-erson and locates Pais�ac�ıı in the Northwest(!) (p. 208).6 And itis equally puzzling that no mention is made in the bibliographyto the important works by C. Caillat particularly on the lan-guage of the Jains nor to, e. g., G. H. Schokker’s importantarticle ‘‘The Prakrits of the Drama: Their Literary Function asIllustrated by the Karp�uuramanjar�ıı,’’7 or others. On the otherhand, the really outdated investigation by Hianlin Dschi (JiXian-lin, quoted as ‘‘Hian-lin, D.!) on the endings -a :m / -o / -uin Buddhist Sanskrit has been retained. F. Edgerton’s ‘‘BuddhistHybrid Sanskrit’’ is, however, missing.

The description of modem languages begins with one of theoutstanding contributions dealing with Hindi (M. C. Shapiro),although one misses here as almost everywhere any reference tothe rich Russian researches on modern Indo-Aryan languages,the only exception being as a matter of course E. Bashir inhere very detailed and comprehensive treatment of the Dardiclanguages.

6 On the possible origin of Pais�ac�ıı cf. Mittelindisch § 98–102.7 Sambodhi 5, No. 2–3, 1976, S. 148–165.

140 BOOK REVIEWS

While the articles on Hindi and Urdu (R. L. Schmidt), thelatter being twice as long as the description of Hindi, pay dueattention also to the historical background of both languages,this is almost completely missing in other contributions such asthe one on Marathi (R. Pandharipande), although traces of thislanguage are rooted far back in the past. As V. V. Mirashi noted,8

the B�asim copper plates of the V�ak�at:aka ruler Vindhyasakti II (mid4th century) attest the old Marathi gen. ending in -si( :m) in namessuch as Ven: hujjesi : Vis:n: v�aryasya, a fact that seems to have beenoverlooked in descriptions of the history of Marathi.

In addition, the book contains surveys of the following lan-guages: Bangla (P. Dasgupta), Asamiya (G. C. Goswami; J.Tamuli); Oriya (T. R. Ray); Maithili (R. Yadav); Magahi(S.Verma); Bhojpuri ( M. K. Verma); Nepali (T. Riccardi); Pan-jabi (C. Shackle); Sindhi (L. M. Kubchandani); Gujarati (G.Cardona; B. Suthar); Konkani (R. V. Miranda); Sinhala (J. W.Gair); Kashmiri (O. N. Koul). The Sinhala part, which alsorefers to Dvivehi, is now to be supplemented by Sonja Fritz,The Dvivehi Language. A Descriptive Historical Grammar ofMaldivian and Its Dialects. Wurzburg 2002. Thus the book cov-ers some languages not dealt with in the Russian series ‘‘JazykiNarodov Azii i Afriki’’, which, however, comprises in addition avolume by T. V. Ventce1’, Cyganskij jazyk. Moscow 1964 andby Ju. A. Smirnov, Jazyk Lendi. Moscow 1970.

This comprehensive and impressive handbook on the modernIndo-Aryan languages offers a wealth of information, which willbecome really evident only after using the book over a longer per-iod. In praising editors and contributors for their achievements,one should not forget those anonymous members of ‘‘Ratna Sagar’’in Delhi, who had the nightmarish task of providing indices, whichthey did with care and circumspection. Thus, this is really a volumethat must find its place on the desk of all studying the Indo-Aryanlanguages in spite of the exorbitant price: An affordable paperbackedition is urgently called for.

O. v. HINUBERKartauserstrasse 138D-79102 Freiburg i. Brsg.Deutschland

8 V. V. Mirashi, Inscriptions of the V�ak�at:akas. CII V. Ootacamund 1963, p. 94.

141BOOK REVIEWS

Jayawardena-Moser, Premalatha, Grundwortschatz Singhalesisch-Deutsch mit grammatischer €UUbersicht. 3., €uuberarbeitete Auflage. Wies-baden: Harrassowitz Verlag 2004, pp. XIV, 216. ISBN 3-447-05027-6. C¼ 34,-.

Nachdem sich die Verf.in bereits mit der vierten Auflage desSinghalesischlehrbuches von K. Matzel um die Verbreitung derHauptsprache Ceylons verdient gemacht hat, (IIJ 47. 2004, pp.63f.), legt sie nun ein auf die praktischen Bedurfnisse auch einesSelbststudiums zugeschnittenes Hilfsmittel vor. Das Werk, dessenNutzen durch die Zahl der Auflagen dokumentiert wird, hat sichzum Ziel gesetzt, einen auf der Grundlage von Statistiken ermittel-ten Wortschatz von 2530 Wortern zu sammeln, mit dessen Hilfedie Lekture von Zeitung oder Kurzgeschichte gelingt. Dem eigentli-chen Worterverzeichnis geht eine Schriftlehre und ein knapper gram-matischer Abriss voran. Das ganz besonders durch die glucklichgewahlte singhalesische Type selbst fur einen der Schrift nochwenig kundigen Anfanger gut lesbare Buch wird von jedem amSinghalesischen Interessierten auch in der neuen Gestalt dankbargenutzt werden und bietet durch die Erarbeitung des Grundworts-chatzes des Singhalesischen selbst der Wissenschaft ein nutzlichesHilfsmittel.

O. v. HINUBERKartauserstrasse 138D-79102 Freiburg i. Brsg.Deutschland

Davis, Richard H., Worshipping Siva in Medieval India. Ritual in an

Oscillating Universe. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass 2000, pp. xvi, 200.

ISBN 81-208-1747-8. Rs 295, -.

Rodrigues, Hillary Peter, Ritual Worship of the Great Goddess. The

liturgy of the Durg�a P�uj�a with interpretations. Albany: State University of

New York Press 2003, pp. xvi, 417, 25 figures. ISNB 0-7914-5399-5

(paperback: ISBN 0-7914-5400-2-5). $ 71,50 (23,95).

142 BOOK REVIEWS

The publication of Helene Brunner-Lachaux’s edition and translation,

over the years, of the Somasambhu-paddhati has been a milestone in the

academic study of tantric or agamic ritual. That work has begun to impact

upon the Anglophone world. The two books under review are further

contributions to this understanding.

Richard Davis’ book is a reprint of the 1991 Princeton University Press

publication under the reverse title of Ritual in an Oscillating Universe:

Worshipping Siva in Medieval India. In this book Davis provides an

excellent account of Saiva Siddhanta theology and how it articulates with

Saiva ritual, thereby arguing for a link between knowledge ( jnana) and

ritual action (kriya) in the tradition: that Saiva Siddhanta ritual is per-

vaded by theology and cannot be understood without it. He mainly draws

on two texts, the Kamikagama and Aghorasiva’s Kriyakramadyotika,

but accompanied by fieldwork and a particularly helpful and knowledge-

able informant, Sr�ı K.A. Sabharatna Sivacarya of Madras (who has, ifI am not mistaken, appeared as a younger man in Brunner-Lachaux’searlier volumes of the Somasambhu-paddhati). The introduction locates

the Saiva Siddhanta in the context of Cola history and the construction of

the magnificent temples of Tamilnadu and provides an introduction to

Saiva Siddhanta as a system. The first chapter, ‘Ritual and Human

Powers,’ describes the fundamental Saiva categories of the Lord ( pati),

bound souls ( pasu) and fetters ( pasa) and how the bound soul becomes

free from its fetters through daily Saiva worship. Chapter two offers an

account of cosmology and the ‘oscillating universe,’ describing cosmic

emanation and reabsorption of the categories or tattvas, pointing out some

similarity and difference with Advaita Vedanta and ‘Kashmir’ Saivism, and

showing how this oscillating pattern maps on to the body through the use

of mantras. Davis gives a good account of the purification of the body in

the bhutasuddhi and the reconstitution of a purified, divine body through

imposing mantras upon it. The book is one of the few English publi-

cations to present these details. The third chapter discusses ‘becoming a

Siva,’ showing how in Saiva Siddhanta theology the soul is ontologically

distinct from the Lord Siva and remains so even in liberation. The text

discusses how liberation is brought about through initiation and, using the

Kamikagama, recapitulates Helene Brunner’s general account of different

types of initiation. Chapter four describes summoning the Lord in

different forms, particularly as he is invoked in the li �nga, in mantras, and

in the body of the practitioner. Next we have an interesting discussion of

relations of worship in puja and how the worshipper, the offerings, and

Siva, express the relationships between the three categories of being. A

143BOOK REVIEWS

short conclusion reiterates how knowledge of Siva is embedded within

ritual action. While the book does not go much beyond Brunner–

Lachaux’s account of Saiva Siddhanta ritual, it is nevertheless a well

researched, good, solid book that makes available, in some textual detail

for a wider audience, the complexity of Saiva Siddhanta theology and

ritual. The book is clearly written and is convincing in showing how ‘the

propositional discourse of philosophical knowledge’ and the ‘practical

discourse of ritual action’ are integral to each other (p. ix).While Davis’ book is principally an account of Saiva Siddhanta

theology and ritual as it was practiced in around the ninth to eleventh

centuries, complemented by contemporary fieldwork, Rodrigues’ book is

principally an account of the Durga Puja as practiced today, comple-

mented by textual study. The book was Rodrigues Ph.D. dissertation

which he has transformed into an interesting and clearly written book.

The book has a fairly narrow focus, the Durga Puja as practised in

Banaras during the ninenight festival (Navaratra) during the Indian lunar

month of Asvina, focussing especially on the Bengali-style puja in the

home of Bengali brahmin family. Part 1, ‘Context and Overview,’ pro-

vides an account of what the Durga Puja is, who performs it and for

whom. It also gives in summary form a description of the rite which the

book then proceeds to fill out in full detail in Part II, ‘Description of the

Durga Puja’. A clay image of the Goddess and with her entourage of

deities is installed in the house to which worship is offered and Rodrigues

takes the reader through each day of the Puja, describing the specific

events that occur, including the sacrifice of a goat at the Durga Kal�ıtemple, although such blood offerings are rapidly disappearing, one of

Rodrigues’ informants describing the rite as ‘a ghastly affair’ that ‘should

be avoided by substitution’ (p. 215). Part III, ‘Interpretations’, offers

some discussion on the nature of Puja, the nature of the Goddess, and the

social function of the Durga Puja, pointing out, for example, the close

relationship between blood sacrifice, connected to fertility and woman-

hood, and virgin worship. What is particularly interesting is the in-

tegration of ‘tantric’ and ‘vedic’ ritual, with sometimes vedic mantras

being used and other times tantric mantras. We have here an example of

tantric ritual which has become integrated into a mainstream vedic

tradition. This book is extremely rich in detail and provides a thick

ethnography of the rites.

Both books provide detailed accounts of tantric rites and are fine

contributions to our understanding. Reading both books together, this

reviewer is struck by the parallel ritual processes involved, such as the

144 BOOK REVIEWS

pervasive purification of the elements in the body (bhutasuddhi) and the

divinisation of the body through imposing mantras upon it (nyasa). Yet

one is also struck by the text and tradition specificity of the rites within a

more general, ritual framework. As Davis observes, the actions of ritual

are not personal but traditionally prescribed. Indeed, that the rites are

textually informed is an important observation; the Saiva agamas and

ritual manuals in one case, the ritual manual called the Purohita Darpana,

in the other. Both books are well illustrated, illustrations which bring to

life the ritual details described. These books are good contributions to our

understanding of what might be called tantric ritual in both its medieval

origin and contemporary expression.

GAVIN FLOODDepartment of Religious StudiesUniversity of StirlingFK9 4LA, Stirling, UK

Vievard, Ludovic, Vacuite (sunyata) et compassion (karu �na) dans le

bouddhisme madhyamaka [Publication de l’Institut de Civilisation

Indienne. Fascicule 70]. Paris: De Boccard 2002, pp. 340. ISBN

2-86803-070-X.

Western scholarship on Madhyamaka has long been focused on the

latter’s analytical approach to reality or emptiness, while neglecting the

Mahayana context, equally important to it, of a Bodhisattva career, which

requires complementing one’s intellectual assessment that everything

lacks an own-being with compassion by giving rise to bodhicitta. In

Vacuite et Compassion Vievard tries to fill this gap by adding to his

presentation of emptiness (chapter 1) an equally long chapter on

compassion. The last third of the book, finally, is devoted to a

demonstration of the compatibility of compassion with emptiness.

Vievard’s points are well documented by quotations and translations

from a huge range of mainly Indian Mahayana texts. The translations are

examplary and show the philological competence of the author. There

are, however, a few methodological concerns with regard to the selection

and interpretation of the Mahayana material that need to be addressed.

Even though Vievard acknowledges a variety of positions with regard

to the discussed topics, he presents the latter as if there had been one

coherent Madhyamaka school down through the centuries from Nagarjuna

145BOOK REVIEWS

till Candrak���rti and Santideva. In his introduction (p. 21) Vievard admits

that he himself follows the ‘‘Prasa �ngika school’’ of Madhyamaka, even

though a school with such a name never existed in India (the distinction

between Prasa �ngika and Svatantrika being rather Tibetan in origin).

Vievard’s book reads like a brilliant work by a Buddhist scholastic well

anchored in an Indo-Tibetan tradition. With the imprimatur of the College

de France one would expect, however, a study that describes the historical

development of Madhyamaka thought independently of any particular

hermeneutic strategy which discusses away dierences and arranges the

huge corpus of Sutras and Sastras into a consistent whole.

Obviously influenced by such a traditional hermeneutic approach,

Vievard bases his general statements on the Mahayana or the Madhya-

maka on a wide range of texts, including some of questionable origin,

such as the Bodhicittavivarana. The latter quotes the Guhyasamajatantra

and can thus not be by Nagarjuna, but Vievard (p. 55) uncritically refers

to the Bodhicittavivara �na together with the Mulamadhyamakakarika as

Nagarjuna’s own view on the necessity of meditation. Equally disturbing

is the fact that Vievard frequently quotes the *Mahaprajnaparamitasastra

whose Sanskrit original is not available (it is not clear whether

Kumaraj�ıva was partly its author or only its translator). Thus Vievard

fully endorses this sastra’s distinction between the Sravakayana and the

Mahayana in a subchapter called ‘‘Du bouddhisme ancien au Mahayana’’

(pp. 31–6), approving as he does the stance that the Sravakas only teach a

sattvasunyata, while the followers of the Mahayana also maintain a

dharmasunyata alongside the latter. Vievard then concludes that the

Buddha thought in terms of only one mode of emptiness, which he merely

dierentiated with respect to dierent objects or realms that are empty (p.

35). Such a presentation of emptiness is untenable, however. It is not only

that Abhidharma ontology knows of short-lived dharmas which really exist

in terms of their own-being (svabhavena); but the Yogacaras and

proponents of the Tathagatagarbha, too, had quite dierent ideas on what

emptiness means. Suce it to remark here that the sarvadharmasunyata

and the (sva)lak�sa�nasunyata of the Prajnaparamitasutras (which are

usually interpreted as referring to the lack of an own-being in all phe-

nomena and specifically characterized entities) become the emptiness

with respect to all Buddha-properties and the emptiness of major and minor

marks of a Buddha respectively in the Madhyantavibhaga, (see MAV- �t�ıka I.

17-9) since in the latter emptiness equates to the negation of duality of a

perceived object and a perveiving subject, which does not exclude the

existence of mental factors etc. in terms of being svabhava or svalak�sa�na.

In other words, the sarvadharma- and (sva)lak�sa�nasunyata of the

146 BOOK REVIEWS

Prajnaparamitasutras do not really fit the Madhyantavibhaga (which is

Yogacara, but still Mahayana) and are thus reinterpreted. Much could be

said about the history and great variety of ideas relating to sunyata in India

(even among the Madhyamikas), and it is amazing how confidently

Vievard presents the Mahaprajnaparamitasastra’s understanding of

emptiness as the doctrine of Madhyamaka, and sometimes even Mahayana

in general.

This leads to another problematic part in Vievard’s book: the biased

presentation of Yogacara and its hermeneutics. Vievard (p. 74–5), for ex-

ample, quotes the definition of emptiness in the tattvartha chapter of the

Bodhisattvabhumi and identifies without comment vastumatra with the

dependent nature ( paratantrasvabhava), even though the trisvabhava the-

ory plays no role at all in this early Yogacara work (it is only in the later

Viniscayasa �mgraha �n��� portion of the tattvartha chapter that a trisvabhava

theory is formulated, and the attribution of the ‘‘three natures’’ to the key-

terms of the Bodhisattvabhumi is everything else than clear). In the part of

the tattvartha chapter Vievard refers to, vastumatra is equated with the

inexpressible suchness which lies within the experiential range ( gocara)

of non-conceptual wisdom. If anything, vastumatra should thus be re-

lated with the perfect nature ( parini�spannasvabhava). Still, Vievard con-

cludes that: ‘‘La ‘chose nue’ (vastumatra) correspond au ‘referent

objectif’. Elle est rien d’autre que le paratantra vide de parikalpita,

c’est-a-dire le parini�spanna, et donc la sunyata elle-meme’’ (p. 75). To

call the experiential object of wisdom (both of which are beyond the

duality of a perceived and a perceiver) a ‘‘referent objectif’’ is mislead-

ing, and all the more so since Vievard himself does not accept such

an ‘‘objective point of reference’’ in the context of Madhyamaka (see

below).

Vievard further criticizes the Madhyantavibhaga’s definition of emp-

tiness as the non-existence of duality and ‘‘l’existence reelle (sadbhava)

de cette inexistence’’ (p. 75). Neither in the Madhyantavibhaga (MAV)

nor in its commentaries by Vasubandhu and Sthiramati (see the bha�sya

and �tika on I.13) is such a sadbhava of the non-existence of duality

found. Only the term bhava (Tib. dngos po) is used, which is equated

with svabhava by Vasubandhu (Nagao (ed.): MAVbha�sya, Tokyo: Suzuki

Research Foundation, 1964, 22, l. 24 – 23, l. 1: tasya cabhavasya

bhava�h sunyataya lak�sa�nam ity abhavasvabhavalak�sa�natva �m. . .). Here

it means rather ‘‘state’’ or ‘‘own-being’’ of the non-existence of duality.

Of this own-being it is then said in MAV I.13c (in bold letters) that

neither existence nor non-existence apply to it (MAVbha�sya, 23, 11. 2–3:

tad(=dvaya)abhavasvabhava�h sa na bhavo napi cabhava�h).

147BOOK REVIEWS

Vievard then adduces Mulamadhyamakakarika (MMK) XIII.7 (If s.th.

non-empty existed, there would be s.th. empty. Since there is no such

thing which is not empty, where can the empty then be?) in order to

show that the Madhyamikas do not agree with such a definition of

emptiness, namely, that s.th. empty exists. Based on this Vievard infers

that emptiness is only a linguistic element which eliminates the possibility

of attributing any predicate to anything (pp. 75–6). As such emptiness

even does not exist without a sage (p. 255: ‘‘Puisqu’il n’y a point de

compassion sans compatissant (karu�nika), ni de vacuite sans sage

( prajna), il est indispensable de proposer une approche anthropo-

logique’’). In other words, Madhyamaka’s emptiness is interpreted as

a meta-linguistic enterprise, in which emptiness has no ‘‘referant

objective’’; it should not, therefore, be confounded with ultimate truth

and the like.

In my opinion, MMK XIII.7 in no way proves that emptiness cannot be

taken as the ultimate. Moreover, I do not see that much of a contradition

between it and the Madhyantavibhaga, except, of course, that the

negandum in the MAV is duality, and in the MMK an independent

own-being (svabhava) of phenomena. For Candrak�ırti (who is consideredto be authoritative for a ‘‘Prasa �ngika’’ interpretation of the MMK), verse

XIII.7 shows that ‘‘emptiness itself does not exist, because one realizes

here that emptiness is the general characteristic of all phenomena,

wherefore phenomena which are not empty do not exist.’’ (La Vallee

Poussin (ed.): Mulamadhyamakakarikas (Bibliotheca Buddhica 4), Delhi:

Motilal, 1992, 246, ll. 1–3: iha hi sunyata nameti sarvadharma�na �msamanyalak�sa�nam ity abhyupagamad asunyadharmabhavad sunyataiva

nasti / ), and emptiness is also taken as a samanyalak�sa�na in MAVbha�sya

I.13 (Nagao 1964:23, l. 10). A careful study of Candrak�ırti’s Prasanna-

pada on MMK XV.2cd also shows that emptiness which is equated,

among other things, with the dharmata, svarupa, and svabhava of

phenomena (La Vallee Poussin (ed.) 1992:264, ll. 11ff.) can be the

experiential object of the Noble Ones: ‘‘Entities which have come under

the influence of the eye disease [known as] ignorance – in which form

they attain, through the practice of not seeing [them], to the state of being

the object of the Noble Ones, whose eye disease, ignorance, has

been removed – precisely this [form] is their own-being, their essential

nature. . . .’’ (La Vallee Poussin (ed.) 1992:265, ll. 3–5: avidyatimirapra-

bhavopalabdha �m bhavajata �m yenatmana vigatavidyatimira�nam arya�nam

adarsanayogena vi�sayatvam upayati tad eva svarupam e�sa�m svabhava iti).

This ‘‘practice of not seeing’’ describes in a similar way how suchness

(equated with emptiness) is the experiential object of wisdom in the

148 BOOK REVIEWS

Madhyantavibhaga. Suchness and wisdom, that is, should not be

misunderstood as a perceived object and a perceiving subject. Since

Vievard accepts the Bodhicittavivara�na as being by Nagarjuna, I may also

refer to verse 57 of the latter which says: ‘‘I claim that the nature of all

phenomena is emptiness, in the same way as sweetness is the nature of

sugar and hotness that of fire’’. (Cf. Lindtner: Nagarjuniana, Delhi: Motilal

1987, 202–3).

Further MMK XXIV.18 (ya�h pratityasamutpada�h sunyata �m ta �mpracak�smahe / sa (or: sa) prajnaptir upadaya pratipat saiva madhyama)

is adduced in order to show that emptiness is a metaphorical designation.

Vievard (p. 78) takes the verse to be ambiguous but follows de Jong (who

translates the third pada as: ‘‘La vacuite est la designation metaphorique’’,

Vievard (p. 79)) without even discussing Nagao’s (‘‘From Madhyamika to

Yogacara: An Analysis of MMK, XXIV.18 and MV, I.1–2’’, Madhyamika

and Yogacara, Albany: SUNY, 1991, 189–99) convincing arguments, such

as that once dependent arising is ascertained as being emptiness by an

enlightened mind, the phenomenal world of ordinary life is then under-

stood as a ‘‘designation based on some material’’. To be sure, I do not

attempt to outright deny that there are strands in the Madhyamaka litera-

ture which support Vievard’s interesting interpretation, but those who

study the latter’s book should remember that they read only one particular

understanding of Madhyamaka that disapproves of other equally impor-

tant aspects.

Finally, the question of hermeneutics needs to be addressed. When

presenting Madhyamaka as an independent Mahayana school in all its

aspects, as the present study under review tries to do, one faces the

problem that the analytical works of Nagarjuna etc. lack a detailed pre-

sentation of common Mahayana elements such as the path, compassion,

and bodhicitta. Tradition thus attributed a number of texts to Nagarjuna

(the Dharmadhatustotra or the Bodhicittavivara�na, for example) in order

to have authoritative ‘‘Madhyamaka works’’ to refer to which explain the

ten Bodhisattva-levels or bodhicitta. In this respect, it is also of interest

that the Sutrasamuccaya (also said to be by Nagarjuna) quotes and

discusses certain Mahayana sutras which restrict the dictum that all

phenomena lack an own-being (i.e., their emptiness) to the level of the

phenenomenal world (Sr���maladev���sutra) or the imagined nature

(La �nkavatarasutra). In order to show that there is ultimately only one

single yana, the compilers of the Sutrasamuccaya (Pasadika: Nagarjuna’s

Sutrasamuccaya, Copenhagen: Akademisk Forlag i Kommission, 1989,

129–30) even quote from the Dhara�n���svararajasutra the example of

the threefold purification of a vai�durya stone, which illustrates the

149BOOK REVIEWS

successive teachings of the three dharmacakras. This implies that the

second dharmacakra, which teaches the emptiness of the Prajnaparami-

tasutras, is outshone by a final dharmacakra that describes the ultimate in

positive terms. A work of Vievard’s scope should have addressed these

facts and discussed how some Madhyamikas could pick certain passagesfrom the above-mentioned sutras without being forced to endorse, for

example, the entire Sr��maladev��sutra literally, and thus claim that the

Buddha-nature (equated with the ultimate by the Anunatvapur�natvanir-

desaparivarta) is empty of all defilements which are separable, but not

empty of the inseparable Buddha-qualities. In view of this, Vievard (pp.

73–5) should have been more careful not simply to disqualify the

Sa �mdhinirmocanasutra and some of the Yogacara works from his

Madhyamaka point of view without taking their hermeneutics into

serious consideration.

Comparing dierent models of interpretation against the backdrop of

the historical development of Mahayana thought would have provided

the necessary framework for properly dealing with the huge amount of

material discussed by Vievard.

Asien-Africa-Institut KLAUS-DIETER MATHES

University of Hamburg

Germany

Metzger, Mathias, Die Sprache der Vaki.l-Briefe aus Rajasthan. [Beitrage

zur Sudasienforschung. Sudasien-Institut der Universitat Heidelberg 193].

Wurzburg: Ergon Verlag 2003, pp. XI, 240. ISBN 3-89913-278-5.

This book presents a grammatical survey of the type of Rajasthani

found in a number of ‘‘vakil reports’’ and ‘‘arzdashtas’’ that date back to

the late 17th and early 18th century. As the author observes, historical

studies of this period are all too often based on Persian-language sources,

whereas those in Rajasthani, too, among them the documents here

discussed, have much to offer to the historian – an observation confirmed

even by the isolated sentences quoted in this study. Therefore, the book is

aimed, not only at linguists but also at historians who want to learn the

language. It may be stated at the outset that this aim will be reached only

if the learner has already mastered Hindi or a related language. The book

150 BOOK REVIEWS

is not a course in Rajasthani but a conventional grammatical survey, and

the information it provides will satisfy those who already know a South

Asian language of the Hindi-type but is too scanty for those who do not.

The terms ‘‘arzdashta’’ (arzdast, ‘‘request’’) and ‘‘vakil report’’ (vak���l,i.e., ‘‘agent’’) are those mentioned in the titles of the printed catalogues of

the Rajasthani State Archives but do not give a proper impression of the

contents of the documents. Metzger’s study covers the Rajasthani

documents written by two authors, Pancoli Jagjivan Das and Divan

(di.van) Bhikhari Das, who were ‘‘apparently’’ (p. 11 n. 1) representatives

of the maharaja of Amber at the Mogul court and reported to him on all

sorts of matters of primarily political interest, though affairs of human

interest such as a prostitute’s flight from a brothel or an effort to ride a

rutting elephant are also reported. Both authors have also written reports

in Persian, of which the contents are not discussed by Metzger – it would

be interesting to know whether there is any difference in contents between

them and those written in Rajasthani, and whether any reason can be

detected why a specific language was chosen.

As for documentation, Metzger provides in Appendix I three examples

of the texts, in full transcription and translation and with a photograph of

one page of each, while in the grammatical survey, passages quoted from

the documents are identified by means of the number the document has in

the published catalogue of the Rajasthan State Archives, the page number

if available in the document, and the number of the line (the second

example of such references furnished on p. 9 is a misprint). Nowhere in

the book, however, Metzger provides a list of the documents studied by

him, and the reader wonders about the size of the corpus. His website,

mentioned in the book, provides the text of all documents he has studied

but even so, as an independent source the book should have contained at

least a list.

According to Metzger, the language of the texts is �Dhu �n�dhar�ı (p. 15),a type of Eastern Rajasthani spoken in the vicinity of Jaipur, but in spite

of his promise in the Preface to do so (‘‘wie noch zu zeigen sein wird’’,

p. 3f), he furnishes no linguistic argumentation for this identification, for

example, by means of a comparison with other types of Rajasthani.

Moreover, there is some confusion about the spelling of the name itself.

Grierson, in the Linguistic Survey of India (IX, 2, p. 32), writes

‘‘�Dhu �n�dhar�ı’’, and Masica (The Indo-Aryan Languages, p. 427) spells

‘‘Dhundhari=�dhu �m�dha�ri.’’. In his Introduction (p. 15), Metzger writes

‘‘�Dhu �n�dhar�ı’’ while we find ‘‘Dhundhari (�dhu �m�dari.)’’ (p. 3) in his Pre-

face and �Dhu �n�dar�ı on p. 160. Most Rajasthani dictionaries consulted by

me give ‘‘�Dhu �m�dha�r�ı’’.

151BOOK REVIEWS

The grammatical survey furnished by Metzger, starting with a table

of characters and a discussion of spelling matters, is quite elaborate and

satisfactory. Nevertheless, attention may be drawn to a few errors and

dubitable points. One of the occasional errors is the statement (p. 90) that

the verbal construction -bo kar- is characteristic of Eastern Rajasthani.

It is in fact also found in Braj, Avadhi and other New Indo-Aryan lan-

guages, and a similar observation applies to the conjugation of the ‘‘im-

perfective present tense’’ (p. 101f). It is further stated that the absolutive

may function as a postposition or adverb (p. 90), but both examples

of that phenomenon show the absolutive in its basic meaning of indi-

cating an action that is prior to or simultaneous with the action of the

main verb.

Section 2.7.6.1 (pp. 112–118) is devoted to ‘‘vector verbs’’

(‘‘Vektorverben’’), defined as compounds consisting of two verbs

(p. 111). The term itself draws attention – it is used by Hook (1974) for

those verbs in Hindi and related languages that following another verb

build compound verbs or (in a different terminology) Verbal Expressions

together with that other verb, but here it is used for the compound verbs

themselves. Metzger does not mention the numerous discussions of

compound verbs by Hook, Nespital or Porızka, and limits himself to a

reference to Hacker’s publication on ‘‘Hilfsverben’’ in Hindi, that predates

them. One can imagine that in view of the aim of his study, the author

did not want to be drawn into the controversies that surround the sub-

ject, yet some reference to more up-to-date secondary literature espe-

cially on this subject would have been in order, and readers interested in

compound verbs would like to know what Metzger’s definitions of the

use of specific vector verbs are based on, such as his explanation of

absolutive + pa�r- as a vector verb expressing ‘‘the sudden start of an

action’’ (‘‘der unvermittelte Eintritt einer Handlung’’, p. 115). Moreover,

the term ‘‘vector verb’’ has a more comprehensive meaning here than

what is usually termed ‘‘compound verb’’, because it also covers a

phenomenon like the progressive present tense (absolutive + rah- which

in two out of three examples shows the past-tense form but has present-

tense meaning, as in Standard Hindi, p. 116 cf. 88) or the verbal noun

followed by pa�r- expressing an obligation (p. 115). Metzger’s statement

(p. 117) that another verb of this category, pa-, is in Hindi always

preceded by the absolutive is not entirely correct – as Porızka has

observed in his Hindi course (1963, § 129,7b), it may be preceded by the

oblique infinitive in the meaning of ‘‘to manage to’’, ‘‘to get the chance

152 BOOK REVIEWS

of’’, ‘‘to be allowed to’’, especially in negative contexts, as is in fact the

case in Metzger’s example. Similarly, the combination of an invariable

perfect participle in -a with the verb cah- (p. 116) is not entirely unknown

in Hindi either – according to Gatzlaff-Halsig, in her grammar of Hindi

(1967, § 364), it indicates an action that one has planned and is about to

perform.

The grammatical survey is followed by a chapter devoted to not-

strictly-grammatical features of the language of the documents. Its initial

section concerns characteristics of court language, that is, the use of

formal words and expressions. Some of them, such as padhar- ‘‘to go, to

leave’’, are even today found in formal Hindi usage. The second section

deals with the language of the introductory formulas. The third and final

section discusses ‘‘interference’’ in the documents, that is, the interesting

fact that most texts of especially one author, Bhikhari Das, feature a

mixture of Rajasthani and Hindi. The entire grammatical survey shows

accordingly tables with both ‘‘Rajasthani’’ and ‘‘Hindi’’ features as found

in the documents. The background of this interference is not easily

explained but Metzger’s demonstration of its details in both lexicon

and grammar may lead to its further analysis. One note: the observa-

tion that the Western Rajasthani genitive postposition ro, also found in

the documents, would be comparatively easy to understand for speakers

of Eastern Rajasthani because their language has the same genitive post-

position in the possessive pronouns mharo and tharo (p. 163) is histori-

cally incorrect, because these pronouns do not contain the postposition ro

but have a different origin (cf. Oberlies, Historische Grammatik, 1998: 19).

One may well doubt that the existence of these pronouns helped speakers

of Eastern Rajasthani, who have ko, to understand the postposition ro.

Besides the above-mentioned appendix that contains three docu-

ments in full, there is an appendix that lists the denominative verbs with

kar- (and their intransitive counterparts with ho-) found in the studied

documents, and a glossary of non-Hindi words they contain, whether or

not they occur in the examples in the main body of the book, but in

contrast to the examples without any identification of their location. The

study is concluded with a bibliography, a subject index, and an English

summary.

In conclusion, it should not be forgotten that the above criticism is just

a matter of nibbling at the leaves of a tree that is firmly rooted. Metzger

deserves full praise for the meticulous way in which he has analysed the

texts and documented their language.

153BOOK REVIEWS

REFERENCES

Gatzlaff-Halsig, M. (1967) Grammatischer Leitfaden des Hindi. Reprint: 1978 Leipzig:

VEB Verlag Enzyklopadie.

Grierson, G.A. (1908) Linguistic Survey of India, IX, 2. Reprint: 1968 Delhi, M.

Banarsidass.

Hacker, P. (1958) Zur Funktion einiger Hilfsverben im modernen Hindi. Mainz:

Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur/Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner.

Hook, P.E. (1974). The Compound Verb in Hindi. s.l.: The University of Michigan.

Masica C.P. (1991) The Indo-Aryan Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oberlies, Th. (1998) Historische Grammatik des Hindi. Reinbek: Dr. Inge Wezler.

Porızka, V. (1963) Hindi Language Course I. Praha: Statnı pedagogicke nakladatelstvı.

Indologisch Instituut Kerna THEO DAMSTEEGT

Nonnensteeg 1-3, Postbus 9515

NL-2300 RA, Leidien

Holland

McGrath, Kevin, The Sanskrit Hero. Kar�na in the Epic Mahabharata.

[Brill’s Indological Library, 20]. Leiden: Brill 2004, pp. XI, 260. ISBN

90-04-13729-7. C¼ 69,-

Kar �na is perhaps the most puzzling of the Mahabharata’s main char-

acters, so a book that studies his contradictory behaviour – by turns

loutish and stubbornly self-sacrificing – and attempts to make sense of its

portrayal is to be welcomed. Since the book gives every appearance of

being a published version of the author’s doctoral dissertation (although

this is nowhere stated), Epic Studies clearly has a new scholar in the

making.

McGrath sets out the scope of his work with admirable clarity: it is to

examine the concept of the hero as ‘‘a martially and verbally gifted

figure with some degree of divine genealogy who is separated or isolated

from his community and is returned to that community only after death,

via the medium of praise and lament’’. He focuses on Kar�na, as rep-

resenting ‘‘an ideal typology for heroic-aryan ideals, both from an

archaic and a classical point of view’’. Taking as his basis the ‘‘k�satriya

parts’’ of the Mahabharata (defined pp. 4–5, p. 12), as presented by the

Critical Edition, he proposes to illustrate ‘‘the unique importance of the

Mahabharata as an IE epic that still functions in modern society’’ ( p. 1).

Accordingly he makes several references to the Iliad, the Tain Bo

154 BOOK REVIEWS

Cuailnge, and to the Rajasthani epic Pabuji., among others, and con-

cludes his book with translated transcripts of two performances in 1999

that ‘‘represent popular traditions of the ‘Kar �na epic’’’.

McGrath views the portrayal of Kar �na as ‘‘archaic’’. It is fundamental

to his definition that Kar �na is by birth the son of Kunt�ı by Surya, and

much of the book is devoted to working out the implications of this

relationship and the consequent antagonism with Arjuna: Kar �na seen

as son of the god representative of fire and heat in general, and Arjuna

as son of the rain god Indra. Kar �na’s rearing in the home of the suta

Adhiratha may account for the ‘‘capacity for skilful verbal assault’’ which

McGrath sees him displaying ( p. 3).

In the second chapter the author examines the significance and

implications of the name ‘Kar �na’, linking it to the earrings with which he

is born – more than a common epic trope, but ‘‘an emblem for his

identity or life’’ ( p. 32). Several examples of wordplay are noted. Next

he examines the term katha, equating it with ‘epic’, then investigates the

similes and other figures of speech by which Kar �na is portrayed, finding

them chiefly in the descriptions of battles, while noting that differing

usages are apparent between dierent areas of the text. With the terms

vi.ra and sura he has to admit ‘‘the evidence was insufficient to enable

me to argue for a forceful case of dierence between these words. Syn-

onymity once again wins out, although I presume this was not always

the case’’ ( pp. 55–56), contrary to the impression he has been giving the

reader throughout this chapter ( p. 28 and n. 8, p. 32 and n. 20, p. 40

n. 40, p. 48 n. 60).Chapter III concerns the very different relationships Kar �na has with

three of his peers: Arjuna, Bh�ı�sma, and Duryodhana, and Chapter IVcomments in turn on the hero’s dialogues with six further characters:

Surya (3,284–86), Indra (3,294), K�r�s �na (5,138–41); Kunt�ı (5,142–44),K�rpa (7,133) and Salya (8,26–30). These exchanges lead McGrath to the

conclusion that ‘‘Speech is what raises Kar �na above every other figure

in the poem and is thus totally isolating for him. . . . It is Kar �na’s use ofspeech as a form of assault that sets off the movement of the poemtowards Kuruk�setra’’ (pp. 176–77).

In Chapter V the author studies a variety of family relationships

between heroes and gods, ending with his interpretation of the curious

way the Pa �n�davas, Draupad�ı and Dhaumya leave court for their exile inthe forest as ‘‘some very specific rite’’, ‘‘a very real . . . k�satriya ritual’’

( p. 209), and rounds o the core of this wide-ranging book with some

remarks on cult aspects of epic heroes in Chapter VI.

155BOOK REVIEWS

It is a pity that the author’s work has received inadequate support

from the publisher; a more rigorous editorial process ought to have

eliminated the frequent errors, imprecision and inelegancies of presen-

tation that impede the reader. Some re-ordering and amalgamation of

the material would carry the reader’s attention along and enable the

author to develop his arguments more fully; this process might include

re-considering the function and purpose of footnotes, incorporating

some of them into the text and eliminating those that distract the read-

er’s attention without contributing to the argument. Conversely, there are

several instances where blocks of text clearly have been moved without

consequential adjustment to the surrounding passage, but I am unable

to reconstruct the sequence involved in the passage on p. 35 beginning

‘‘Not long after this . . . ’’.It would of course be unrealistic not to expect a few detailed errors of

fact to escape the author’s attention; nevertheless the writer of a work of

comparativist interest has a particular responsibility to be meticulous in

matters, in themselves superficially trivial, that may mislead readers with a

non-Indological background and cause them to repeat and compound the

error in their own publications. I list some examples of such imprecision.

The victory of the Kauravas over the Pa �n �davas ( p. 12 n. 39) noted in

‘‘Blackburn et al, 1989, p. 148’’ occurs, as the author of that contribution

(actually Karine Schomer) makes clear, not in a ‘‘modern and ‘vernacular’

account’’ of the Mahabharata, but in a sequel to the epic, where such role-

reversal is much less surprising.

The idea that Kar �na venerates the sun ‘‘from noon onwards’’, i.e., in its

decline ( p. 28, referring to 1,104.16) is curious; the simpler and more usual

interpretation of this passage, that he bows down to it with excessive zeal, is

supported by the text at 5,142.29, where he persists in his worship until it

has reached the zenith.

To assume that the son of Kunt� whose birth drives Gandhar��� in despair to

abort the Dhartara�s �tras is not Yudhi�s �thira but Kar �na ( p. 28, p. 112) is a

strange reading of the text (1,107.9–10, cf. 107.24 and 114.1).

Arjuna’s success at Draupad �’s svaya �mvara does not consist solely in

stringing the bow but in hitting the target once he has strung the bow ( p. 79

and MBh 1,176.9–11,34; 177.22; 178.15–16; 179.16,22; his competitors

cannot complete even the first part of the task).

The woman whose confusion of two trees at the time of conception leads to

the confusion of Rama Jamadagnya’s var �na status is not his mother Renuka

but his grandmother Satyavat��� ( p. 102 n. 63; MBh 3,115.23–28).

I,127,38 is a slip for I,126,38 ( p. 115).

Vasudeva is not the same person as Vasudeva ( p. 115 n. 92).

156 BOOK REVIEWS

The presence of Siva is an unusual interpretation of MBh 3,294.28 ( p. 140).

‘‘outcaste’’ is presumably an unfortunate error for ‘‘outcast’’ ( p. 206).

Tod’s Annals and antiquities of Rajasthan was first published in 1829 (the

1929 edition cited must be a reprint), and so cannot be a reliable witness to

cult observance in ‘‘contemporary western India’’ ( p. 226; also cited p. 42

n. 43, p. 168 n. 78, p. 215 n. 18 and p. 216 n. 26).

McGrath provides an extensive Bibliography; even so, it could be

further strengthened if he would take into account the findings of lin-

guists publishing in Europe (including Russia) and Japan, and so dispel

the misconception held all too commonly in some quarters that linguistic

work on the Sanskrit epics ended with Hopkins (e.g., p. 59).

The book is concluded by a two-page Index.

The thoughtful reader will be intrigued by numerous hints of fresh

lines of enquiry which might elucidate this troublesome character’s

role, even if tantalised where these hints have been left hanging, and

will look eagerly to the author for further, more detailed exposition.

Meanwhile McGrath deserves his colleagues’ thanks for providing

them with a source book of references to Kar �na; let us hope they too

will be stimulated by his ideas to further exploration of Radheya, the

sutaputra.

3 Eskvale Court MARY BROCKINGTON

Penicuik

Midlothian

EH26 8HT

UK

Doctor, Raiomond, The Avesta: A Lexico-Statistical Analysis (Direct

and Reverse Indexes, Hapax Legomena and Frequency Counts) [Acta

Iranica 41]. Lovain: Peeters 2004, [V], 666. ISBN 90-429-1493-9.

"105, -.

Der Autor dieses stattlichen Bandes ist nicht zu Unrecht der Meinung,

daß es bislang keinen vollstandigen Wortindex zum Avesta-Corpus gibt,

der wirklich samtliche Belegstellen fur samtliche Worter prasentiert.

Sich einen vollstandigen Uberblick uber die Belegsituation eines Wortes

zu verschaffen, war bisher nur auf Umwegen moglich, denn Christian

Bartholomaes Altiranisches Worterbuch (Strassburg 1904) verzeichnet

157BOOK REVIEWS

bekanntlich nicht alle Parallelstellen der so zahlreichen Wiederholungen

innerhalb des Avesta – hierzu konnte man sich aber der entsprechenden

Konkordanz bei Bernfried Schlerath, Awesta-Worterbuch. Vorarbeiten

II (Wiesbaden 1968) bedienen –, und er hat bei haufigerem Vorkommen

der Worter oft auch bloß eine mehr oder weniger begrenzte Auswahl

der Belegstellen aufgenommen. Raiomond Doctor will diese Lucke nun

mit dem Index, der die erste Halfte des Bandes ausmacht (Ch. I: A

Direct Index to the Avesta, S. 9–333), schließen. Der Index ist mittels

Computer erstellt und darnach, heißt es, manuell bearbeitet worden. Er

basiert jedoch ausschließlich auf der zwar bis heute nicht ersetzten, aber

bekanntlich nicht vollstandigen Ausgabe von Karl Friedrich Geldner,

Avesta: Die heiligen Bucher der Parsen. I–III (Stuttgart 1886–1895), von

der schon Bartholomae (a.a.O., S. VIII) vor 100 Jahren geschrieben hat,

sie sei ‘‘ein Stuckwerk geblieben, das sich an Vollstandigkeit noch nicht

einmal mit WESTERGAARDS ‘Zendavesta’ [von 1852–54] messen

kann, obwohl inzwischen eine ganze Anzahl weiterer awestischer Texte

bekannt geworden ist’’.

Von der gewahlten Textbasis, also Geldners sog. ‘Neuausgabe’,

weicht Doctor insofern ab, als er einerseits einige Stucke des Khorda

Avesta unberucksichtigt ließ, um unnotige Wiederholungen zu vermei-

den, andererseits aber alle von Geldner vorgenommenen Verkurzungen

stereotyp wiederholter Passagen vollstandig herstellte. Ansonsten folgt er

Geldner ganz sklavisch, abgesehen davon, daß alle Worter in Umschrift

geboten werden, �aa la Bartholomae, wie es heißt,1 u.a. deshalb, weil

dessen System ‘‘especially transparent to computational analysis’’ (S. 5)

sei. Dies bedeutet, daß ii und uu fur inlautende y bzw. v vermieden

werden (was fur die sprachliche Analyse ja nicht ohne Folgen ist). Dieser

starre Anschluß an Geldner hat zur Konsequenz, daß alle Korrekturen,

Emendationen usw. bei Bartholomae, der oft genug von Geldner

abweicht, und uberhaupt die gesamte Forschung zum Avesta-Lexikon

seit mehr als 100 Jahren hier unbeachtet bleiben. Fur Yt. 5, 63 wird

also nach wie vor, um nur ein paar Beispiele anzufuhren, das Hapax

legomenon java genannt, das Karl Hoffmann langst in jasa korrigiert

hatte, fur Yt. 19, 92 vaed em weitergeschleppt statt des von Jochem

Schindler uberzeugend hergestellten vad em und fur Yt. 10, 113 die

Unform astayo, fur die nach meiner Uberzeugung arstayo zu lesen ist.

Man muß sich deshalb wirklich fragen, welchen Zweck die am Ende des

Bandes (S. 665 f.) beigegebene kurze Bibliographie eigentlich hat, wo

1 Dies stimmt nicht ganz, da Doctor namlich die drei Zeichen s, .s, s konsequent

auseinanderhalt.

158 BOOK REVIEWS

doch die ganze avestologische Literatur von Doctor gerade nicht aus-

gewertet worden ist.

Der Index erfaßt jedes Wort, genauer: jede Wortform, die bei Geldner

vorkommt, und zwar mit samtlichen Belegstellen. Dabei hat der

Verfasser aber in vollig absurder Weise alle Komposita oder sonstigen

Wortformen, die mit dem ublichen Worttrennungspunkt geschrieben

sind, als zwei Worter behandelt! Das Pendant von ved. su-.sakha ‘‘guter

Freund’’, iran. *hu-saxa > avest. hus.haxa Y. 32, 2 ist also auf die zwei

Eintrage haxa (S. 310a) und hus (S. 326a), ein ‘ghost-word’ reinsten

Wassers, aufgespalten. Bei der Akkusativform hus.haxaim Y. 46, 13

verfahrt Doctor nur deshalb anders, weil sich in Geldners Text an dieser

Stelle die Form hushaxaim ohne Punkt findet. Bei Komposita mit der

Calandform auf -i- im Vorderglied steht es genauso: Akk. tizi.arsti.m Yt.

10, 102 findet man unter (dem selbstandig nicht vorkommenden) tizi (S.

124b) und arsti.m (S. 36b); aber als Kompositum fehlt diese Form neben

den Belegen mit Schreibung tizyarst� Yt. 13, 101 und Yt. 15 mehrfach(S. 124b). Gleiches gilt fur die Zahlwortkomposita mit bi- und #ri-!

Des weiteren sind in dem Index Homonyme nicht voneinander ge-

schieden; es stehen also z.B. die Belege von tuirya- ‘‘tur(an)isch’’ und

tuirya- ‘‘vierter’’ in bunter Mischung nebeneinander.

Die Belegstellen werden in alphabetischer Folge der fur die Texte

verwendeten Abkurzungen (von A. = Afri.nagan bis Yt. = Yast) und

in numerischer Reihung2 prasentiert. Ihnen geht eine Angabe uber

die Gesamtzahl der Belege voran. Die haufigste Form ist ubrigens

yazamaide mit 1998 Belegen (zu denen noch die 51 mit altavest.

yazamaide und dreimaliges yazamadaeca hinzukommen). Diese Zahlen-

angaben sind angesichts der oben aufgezeigten grundlegenden

Schwachen dieses Index naturlich mit einigen Vorbehalten zu versehen.

Im ubrigen muß man gerade bei einem Textcorpus wie dem des

Avesta, von dem wir wissen, daß uns nur etwa ein Viertel dessen

erhalten ist, was noch in sasanidischer Zeit vorhanden war, selbstver-

standlich alle statistischen oder die Frequenz oder Distribution von

Formen und Wortern betreffenden Aussagen mit großter Vorsicht

betrachten.

Auf diesem Index baut dann der rucklaufige Index auf (Ch. II: Reverse

Index to the Avesta, S. 335–427); im Gegensatz zu den Indices bei

Bartholomae (a.a.O., Sp. 1901–2000), der außer bei den Indeklinabilia

2 Hier sind mir allerdings bei Stichproben haufiger Abweichungen aufgefallen.

159BOOK REVIEWS

die Wortstamme verzeichnet hat, prasentiert dieser Index die in dem

Direct Index verzeichneten Wortformen. Fur die sprachwissenschaftliche

Arbeit ist ein solcher Wortformenindex bei einer voll flektierenden

Sprache wie dem Avestischen allerdings nur von begrenztem Wert – fur

Fragen der Stammbildung etwa kann man ihn praktisch uberhaupt nicht

verwenden –, selbst wenn man davon absieht, daß all die Schwachen des

Hauptindex, sich fortzeugend, hier wiederum hervortreten: Auch hier

stoßt der Leser wieder auf Stichworter wie ti�zzi, hus, bi usw. (vgl. oben).

Fur einen rucklaufigen Index ware es im ubrigen sinnvoll, die einzelnen

Formen rechtsbundig untereinanderzusetzen, um dadurch die Ubersicht-

lichkeit zu erhohen und rasche Information zu ermoglichen. Auf die

Wiederholung der Frequenzangaben fur die einzelnen Formen aus dem

Hauptindex, die hier ganz fehl am Platze sind, hatte man dafur gerne

verzichtet.

Da alle avestischen Wortformen (der Geldnerschen Ausgabe, wie man

nicht oft genug wiederholen kann) nun schon einmal im Computer

gespeichert waren, hat Doctor dem Buch noch weitere erganzende lexiko-

statistische Listen beigefugt, die ebenfalls mittels Computer erstellt sind.

Die erste (Ch. III: Hapax Legomena, S. 429–475) verzeichnet die 5206

nur einmal in dem Corpus vorkommenden Wortformen. Aber da fragt

sich wohl mancher Benutzer, was ihm mit der Angabe gedient ist, daz

ae#rapatois, ae#rapatayo und ae#rapaitinamca je einmal belegt sind,

wo sie doch als Gen. Sing., Nom. Plur. und Gen. Plur. zu ein und

demselben Paradigma gehoren und der Stamm ae#rapati- also uberhaupt

nichts mit einem Hapax legomenon gemein hat.

Die verschiedenen Frequenz- und Distributionslisten (Ch. IV: Lexi-

costatistical Data, S. 477–658) versprechen dem Benutzer Hilfe bei der

Bestimmung einzelner formaler Punkte: Liste A (S. 479–528) gibt die

Haufigkeit einzelner Laute bzw. Zeichen und Lautfolgen bzw. Zeichen-

gruppen fur Anlaut, Inlaut und Auslaut sowie in ihrer Gesamtzahl an, bei

den Konsonanten von C3 bis CCCC (namlich stry, stry usw.), bei den

Vokalen von V bis VVVV (aeui einmal im Inlaut), bei den gemischten

Gruppen von CV bis CCCVCCC und CCCCVCC. Aber diese Angaben,

bei denen die Zahlenkolonnen ebenfalls linksbundig (!) untereinander-

gereiht sind, stellen sich naturlich sehr rasch ganz anders dar, wenn man

der Avestaschrift folgt, diese streng transliteriert und im Inlaut statt -y-,

3 Diese Tabelle (S. 479) weist einen gravierenden technischen Fehler auf: Bei den

Angaben zur Gesamtzahl fehlt jeweils die erste Ziffer (so daß sich bei dem Zeichen.

h aus

23 + 191 + 0 die Summe 14 statt 214 ergibt, usw.).

160 BOOK REVIEWS

-v-vielmehr -ii-, -uu- schreibt. Im ubrigen findet man sich in diesen

Listen wegen der undurchschaubaren idiosynkratischen Reihenfolge der

Konsonanten-Zeichen kaum zurecht. Bemerkenswerterweise werden

auch zwei y-Zeichen – offenbar _y und y (= Zeichen Nr. 43 und 44 nach

dem System von Karl Hoffmann–Bernhard Forssman, Avestische Laut-

und Flexionslehre, Innsbruck 1996, S. 41 ff.) – unterschieden, die aber

nicht in der Form differenziert werden, sondern nur durch unterschied-

liche Einordnung auffallen.

Liste B (S. 529–567) bietet, unterschieden nach Konsonanten und

Vokalen, eine Liste von Minimalpaaren. Eine solche hat es meines

Wissens bisher nicht gegeben, und da es hierfur mehr auf die bezeugten

Wortformen als auf die Lemmatisierung der Wortstamme ankommt,

machen sich hier die oben angefuhrten Schwachen nicht so deutlich

bemerkbar. Aber auch hier muß man jedes einzelne Paar, das genannt

wird, genauestens uberprufen, denn viele halten dann doch nicht stand,

weil eben in mehr als nur einem Punkt ein Unterschied besteht oder

weil eines der Vergleichsstucke, aus welchem Grund auch immer, inexist-

ent ist. Zum Teil sind die zitierten und gegenubergestellten Formen auch

gar nicht vollstandig; so ist etwa statt ‘‘fravah–gravah’’ (S. 531b) richtig

fravahe – gravahe zu lesen. Die (nicht nur manuelle, sondern auch

geistige) Aufbereitung des vom Computer bereitgestellten Materials fehlt

hier also in ganz eklatanter Weise. Aber indem man dieses Rohmaterial

durcharbeitet, konnte man wohl relativ einfach eine brauchbare Liste

von tatsachlichen avestischen Minimalpaaren erstellen. Und Liste C (S.

569–658) bietet zu guter Letzt eine Aufstellung der bezeugten Wort-

formen in einer Anordnung nach aufsteigender Zeichenzahl, von a usw.

(1 Zeichen) bis draejistot emae.svaca und mazdayasnaeibyascit~

(19

Zeichen), – wobei letzteres alleiniger Spitzenreiter ist, sobald man -y-/-

v-in -ii-/-uu- auflost.

Alles in allem genommen, bestatigt dieses Buch die Ansicht, die ein

bedeutender romischer Autor, C. Plinius Secundus, der ‘altere’ Plinius,

nach dem Zeugnis seines Neffen C. Plinius Caecilius Secundus (Epistulae

3, 5, 10) vertreten hat: dicere etiam solebat nullum esse librum tam

malum, ut non aliqua parte prodesset ‘‘er pflegte auch zu sagen, daß kein

Buch so schlecht sei, daß es nicht in irgendeiner Hinsicht von Nutzen

sei’’.

Hafenstrasse 1 B RUDIGER SCHMITT

D-24235, Laboe

Deutschland

161BOOK REVIEWS

Nartamongæ. The Journal of Alano-Ossetic Studies: Epic, Mythology &

Language. Vol. I–II. Vladikavkaz/Dzæwd�zzyqæw–Paris: The Abaev Centre

for Scytho-Alanic Studies 2002–2003. XXXVI, 168 + 229, pp.

Auf Initiative des nach Vasilij I. Abaev (1900–2001) benannten

Zentrums fur Skytho-Alanische Studien des Nordossetischen Zweiges

der Russischen Akademie der Wissenschaften und in Kooperation mit

dem Institut National des Langues et Civilisations Orientales in Paris

erscheint jetzt erstmals eine Zeitschrift, die speziell der Erforschung von

Epik, Mythologie und Sprache, daruber hinaus aber allgemein der Kultur

und Geschichte der Osseten und ihrer skythisch-sarmatisch-alanischen

Vorfahren gewidmet ist und die nach der Wunderschale der Nartensage

den Namen Nartamongæ tragt. Von ihr liegen inzwischen zwei Hefte

vor, die vom Technischen her erfreulicherweise hoheren ‘westlichen’

Maßstaben durchaus Genuge tun. Als Herausgeber zeichnen Franois

Cornillot (Paris) und Vitalij Gusalov (Vladikavkaz/Nordossetien) verant-

wortlich, Mitherausgeber sind Agustı Alemany (Barcelona) und Jurij A.

Dziccojty (Cchinvali/Sudossetien).Aufmacher von Band I ist ein nachgelassener Aufsatz des großen

ossetischen Ossetologen V. I. Abaev uber ‘‘The Ossetes: Scythians of

the 21st Century’’ (S. XI–XXXVI), bei dem die ossetische Nartenepik

im Zentrum steht. Damit wird zugleich der Schwerpunkt kat’ exochen

angeschlagen, der in dieser Zeitschrift verfolgt werden soll. In Band II

steht an entsprechender Stelle der Wiederabdruck eines zusammenfas-

senden Artikels uber die Nartenepik von H. W. Bailey (S. 7–40), der

zuerst in einem Sammelwerk zur Heldendichtung (Traditions of Heroic

and Epic Poetry. I, London 1980) erschienen war.

Am Ende beider Bande finden sich – und es ist zu vermuten, daß dies

weiterhin so geschehen soll – ‘‘Selected Nartæ Tales’’ (I, S. 133–168; II,

S. 199–229) in englischer Ubersetzung von Walter May. Eine Quelle

wird fur diese Texte unverstandlicherweise nicht angegeben, und es

fehlen auch Erlauterungen aller Art, so daß Fernerstehende wohl ihre

Schwierigkeiten damit haben werden. Die Probleme beginnen bekannt-

lich schon mit dem Namen der Nartæ, der fur Abaev (I, S. XIII) wie

die ossetischen Familiennamen gebildet ist (also eine Pluralform auf -tæ

darstellt), wahrend Bailey (II, S. 8) dies ausdrucklich ausschließt; und F.

Cornillot (I, S. 51 ff.) geht von einem Abstraktum *hunar-#a-

‘‘Fahigkeit’’ (~ avest. hunar

e

tat-, ved. sunr˚

ta-) aus und rechnet weiter

mit einer semantischen Umdeutung in dem Kompositum Nartamongæ.

Auch in weiteren Beitragen spielen die Nartenepen eine große Rolle.

Ausgehend von osset. wac ‘‘heilig’’, versucht F. Cornillot (I, S. 11–76)

162 BOOK REVIEWS

‘‘Les racines mythiques de l’appellation des Nartes’’ aufzudecken. Er

leitet wac aus iran. *hu-vacah- ‘‘mit guter Rede’’ her (dessen Anlaut

infolge ‘skytho-sarmatischer Apharese’ geschwunden sei) und kommt

letztlich auf eine indoiranische ‘Theologie des heiligen Wortes’. Dabei

werden die avestischen Belege von huuacah- besprochen und wird des-

sen Verbindung mit yuuan- ‘‘Jungling’’ betont, wahrend humanah-/

husiia#na-, mit denen huuacah- immer verbunden ist, und uberhaupt

die Triade vacah-/manah-/siiao#na-, von der naturlich auszugehen ist,

nicht gebuhrend berucksichtigt werden. Jedenfalls ist nicht huuacah-

(sondern hochstens vacah-) der essentielle Begriff im Mazdaismus, der

es nach Cornillot sein soll (S. 71). hnlich orientiert ist der erste Teil

einer Studie ‘‘Du titre ossete Ældar aux sources de l’Iran’’ desselben

Autors (II, S. 57–84), der wiederum vornehmlich der Namendeutung

gewidmet ist und etliche Probleme der (ossetischen, letztlich auch der

indoiranischen) historischen Lautlehre bespricht. Der Versuch, die

Namen Soslan und Sozyryqo aus einem Gegenstuck zu altindoar.

sau�sira-/sau�sira- ‘‘Aushohlung, Hohle’’, also als ‘‘Sohn der Hohle’’ zu

deuten, scheint mir jedoch vollig mißgluckt, denn sau�sira- ist offenbar

auf das Indoarische beschrankt und die lautgeschichtliche Argumenta-

tion, die darauf aufgebaut wird, vollig haltlos. Yu. A. Dzittsoity (I, S.

87–92) sucht, parallel zu der bekannten altpersischen Kollokation von

haina- ‘‘Feindesheer’’, dusiyara- ‘‘Mißernte’’ und drauga- ‘‘Lug’’ in DPd

15–20, da osset. digor. fud-anz ‘‘Miß-jahr’’ ganz analog gebildet ist, nachentsprechenden trifunktionalen Zeugnissen hierfur in den Nartenepen.

Einen Kernpunkt von Band I (S. 107–132) bildet auch das Gedenken

an den 100. Geburtstag von Emile Benveniste (1902–1976), der sich um

die Ossetischforschung vor allem durch seine Etudes sur la langue ossete

(Paris 1959) verdient gemacht hat. Aus diesem Anlaß werden Wurdi-

gungen durch F. Bader und G. Lazard, eine Besprechung der Etudes

durch J. Kuryłowicz und ein Brief Benvenistes (dieser im Faksimile)

nachgedruckt.

Daruber hinaus finden sich in Band II einige wichtige Beitrage zur

Alanen-Geschichte. Aspekte der Alanensiedlungen an der Loire im 5.

Jahrhundert n. Chr. (mit toponymischen Spuren bis heute) diskutiert Ja.

Lebedinskij (II, S. 107–126). C. Zuckerman macht meistens ubersehene

Quellen (v.a. eine Passage bei Konstantin Porphyrogennetos und einen

anonymen hebraischen Brief mit Angaben zur Geschichte der Chasaren)

uber ‘‘Les Alains et les As dans le haut moyen age’’ (II, S. 127–162)

bekannt, die zeigen, daß Alanen und As (‘‘Osseten’’) bzw. ’A1!3ı! und

’AKı! als eigenstandig, wenn auch benachbart, voneinander getrennt zu

halten sind (wobei ’AKı! ostlich von ’A1!3ı! an der Kaukasischen

163BOOK REVIEWS

[Alanischen] Pforte zu lokalisieren ist). Erst durch die Einfalle der

Mongolen im 13. Jahrhundert – die Quellen zu den ersten alanisch-

mongolischen Kampfen ab 1220 inventarisiert und analysiert P. Ognibene

(II, S. 163–186) – sind sie dann auseinandergerissen worden; die Alanen

im westlichen Georgien (Mingrelien) werden 1797 von Jan Potocki zum

letzten Male erwahnt, die As/Osseten dagegen ‘‘retrouvent un second

souffle’’ (S. 158). Zuckermans Beitrag, der zur Aufhellung der Geschichte

der Alanen und der Fruhgeschichte der Osseten von großter Bedeutung ist,

schließt mit einem Hinweis auf das sich nach seinen historisch-

geographischen Studien zu den Quellen herausstellende Paradoxon, daß die

zur Russischen Foderation gehorige, auf altem As-Gebiet bestehende

Republik Nordossetien sich neuerdings offiziell auch als ‘‘Alanija’’

bezeichnet.

Historisch orientiert sind ferner die Beitrage von D. Rayevsky

(‘‘Scythian Cultural Cliches’’; I, S. 1–10) uber Herodots ‘Skythischen

logos’, von A. Alemany (I, S. 77–86) uber den Titel *Ba+atar, fur den er

chasarischen Ursprung in Erwagung zieht, und von S. M. Perevalov (II,

S. 47–56), der sich um ein Verstandnis der Legende BAKOYP A0ANA

‘‘Bakur, der Alane’’ auf einem Siegelstein aus Zinvali (Georgien, 3.

Jahrhundert n. Chr.) bemuht, aber nicht zu der Identifizierung mit einem

der bekannten Trager des Namens F!.v>vB/latein. Pacorus/armen.

Bakowr usw. kommt. Daß diese kurze Inschrift bei A. Alemany,

‘‘Sources on the Alans’’ (Leiden/Boston/Koln 2000) fehlt, ist denn auch

ein Punkt, den Perevalov in seiner Rezension dieses Buches (II, S.

187–198) zur Sprache bringt.

An philologisch-sprachwissenschaftlichen Beitragen findet sich quali-

tativ sehr Unterschiedliches: T. N. Pachalina bietet recht spekulative

‘‘Skifo-osetinskie etimologii’’ (I, S. 101–106) zu den Ethnonymen

Chorsari (bei Plinius) und osset. Twaltæ. Zum anderen stellt D. Testen

waghalsige Hypothesen zu ‘‘The Amyrgian Scythians and the Achaemenid

Empire’’ auf (I, S. 93–100), indem er den in seinem zweiten Teil noch

immer recht ratselhaften Namen altpers. Haumavarga- (vgl. zusammen-

fassend R. Schmitt, Encyclopaedia Iranica 12/1, New York 2003, 63 f.)

vollig von Hauma-/Soma- trennt und als ‘‘Gabenbringer’’ (im Sinne von

‘‘Verbundeten’’) deutet (zu osset. xwyn/xunæ ‘‘Geschenk’’ und iran.

*bara-ka-). Dabei wird aus der ungrammatischen Throntragerbeischrift

A3Pb (‘‘A?P’’) 14 allen Ernstes geschlossen, daß ‘‘the Persians seem not

to have been familiar with the singular form of the name’’ (S. 96); so

etwas kann sich nur ein Linguist ausdenken, der das philologische

Handwerk nicht gelernt hat und deshalb den Beleg der Form nicht in

seinem Kontext angemessen beurteilt.

164 BOOK REVIEWS

Hiervon stechen die zwei bisher noch nicht genannten Artikel auf das

wohltuendste ab. A. Christol untersucht unter Heranziehung auch

allgemein-sprachwissenschaftlicher Literatur zu Farbbezeichnungen ‘‘Le

lexique des couleurs en ossete – (pre)histoire d’un champ lexicale’’ (II,

S. 85–106): Er zeigt, daß einige der die Grundfarben bezeichnenden

Worter – erinnert sei an Roland Bielmeiers Studien zum ossetischen

Grundwortschatz – indoiranische Erbworter sind (saw ‘‘schwarz’’, urs

‘‘weiß’’ sowie syrx ‘‘rot’’, dies im Gegensatz zu ved. sukra- ‘‘leuchtend,

weiß’’, das als Beiwort des Feuers [im Avestischen nur so verwendet]

und dann des erhitzten, gluhenden Metalls zu ‘‘rot’’ geworden ist),

wahrend bei anderen Elementen dieses Wortfeldes die Lage sowohl

hinsichtlich der bezeichneten Farbe als auch der sprachlichen Beziehun-

gen viel verwickelter ist, etwa bei c’æx ‘‘grun/grau/blau’’ oder bei dem

Komplex ‘‘grau/blau/Taube’’ (vgl. ved. kapota- ‘‘Taube’’, altpers.

kapautaka- ‘‘blau’’). Dabei kommt auch der Name des Schwarzen

Meeres zur Sprache, altiran. *Axsaina-, aber leider fast ohne Beruck-

sichtigung der sprachlichen Gegebenheiten alterer Perioden und deshalb

mit manchen anfechtbaren Feststellungen; ich erlaube mir daher den

Hinweis darauf, daß der Name des Schwarzen, d.h. ‘‘nordlichen Meeres’’

nach meinem Dafurhalten nicht auf die Skythen zuruckgehen kann,

sondern von den achaimenidenzeitlichen Persern stammt (vgl. die

entsprechende sprachlich-historische Studie in meinen Selected Ono-

mastic Writings, New York 2000, S. 158–163). Da auch bei dem von

Christol wegen einer entsprechenden fruheren Deutung beilaufig (S. 87

Anm. 6) besprochenen Namen des Bulgarenkhans Asparuch die Dinge

nicht so einfach sind, wie es nach seiner Darstellung den Anschein hat,

erinnere ich auch hier ‘‘in eigener Sache’’ an meine fruheren, an (aus

iranistischer Sicht) entlegeneren Stellen erschienenen Behandlungen

dieses Namens: ‘‘Iranica Protobulgarica’’, Balkansko ezikoznanie (Sofia)

28/1, 1985, S. 13–38, bes. S. 20–23, sowie ‘‘Iranica Protobulgarica

suppleta’’, in: Natalicia Johanni Schropfer . . . oblata, Munchen 1991, S.365–373, bes. S. 367–370.

Was fur die Alanenforschung aber am wichtigsten sein durfte, ist

die Entdeckung neuen alanischen Sprachmaterials, die von S. Engberg

und A. Lubotsky, ‘‘Alanic Marginal Notes in a Byzantine Manuscript:

A Preliminary Report’’ (II, S. 41–46) angekundigt wird, die auch

eine Ausgabe mit ausfuhrlichem palaographisch-sprachlich-liturgischem

Kommentar vorbereiten. Es handelt sich um Randglossen aus dem 14.

oder 15. Jahrhundert in einer griechischen liturgischen Handschrift,

einem sog. Prophetologion, von 1275 aus St. Petersburg. Drei Beispiele

solcher Glossen in griechischer Schrift, aber fremder (eben alanischer)

165BOOK REVIEWS

Sprache – sie ‘‘ubersetzen’’ die Angaben uber die kirchlichen Festtage,

fur die die jeweiligen Lesungen aus dem Alten Testament bestimmt sind

–, die hier (auch auf hervorragenden Abbildungen) vorgestellt werden,

lassen Interessantes erwarten. Genannt sei hier nur K->)� 3 .!�2 :!� 3 �osset. zæri

.n kom bon ‘‘Tag (bon) des Goldmundes’’ (zær���n ‘‘Gold’’,

kom ‘‘Mund’’), das Datum fur die Lesung am 13. November, dem Tag des

Johannes Chrysostomos, dessen Name griech. X>HAoACo2oB‘‘Goldmund’’ hier wie in vielen anderen Sprachen ubersetzt worden ist.

Die neue Zeitschrift wird zur Belebung der skythisch-sarmatisch-

alanisch-ossetischen Studien einen wichtigen Beitrag leisten und die

wissenschaftliche Diskussion uber alle Grenzen hinweg wesentlich

erleichtern. Moge sie deshalb in Ost und West weite Verbreitung finden

und auch kunftig kompetente Mitarbeiter gewinnen!

Hafenstrasse 1 B RpDIGER SCHMITT

D-24235, Laboe

Germany

166 BOOK REVIEWS