Book Reviews

Author(s): J W De Jong
Publisher: J W De Jong

Page 34

220
REVIEWS
of this volume in a preface. Do we have to guess that Pr. was meant to contain contributions introducing problems connected with sources in different languages and that St. is the first volume of a series of studies devoted to the examination of those problems? According to the subtitles of Pr. (Collection of the sources for the history of pre-Islamic Central Asia) and St. (Collection of the sources on the history of pre-Islamic Central Asia, Series I, Volume II), both volumes form part of a major undertaking to publish sources on the history of pre-Islamic Central Asia. Probably Series I will contain studies on the sources and series II the publication of the sources. It is to be hoped that the editor(s) of future volumes will give more information on this project. One wonders whether, for instance, it is their intention to publish only unpublished sources or also sources which have not been satisfactorily edited.
The Prolegomena are divided into twelve sections dealing with: I. Greek and Latin s. (= sources) ; II. Byzantine s.; III. Old Iranian s.; IV. Middle Iranian s.; V. Old Indian s.; VI. Aramaic s.; VII. Syrian s.; VIII. Arabic s.; IX. Chinese s.; X. Tibetan s.; XI. Numismatic s.; XII. Archaeological s. From an introduction to the problems of historical sources one is entitled to expect a survey of the available sources, an evaluation of their value, a report on the work which has been done regarding the edition and the study of the sources and, finally, an outline of future tasks stressing the most urgent desiderata. Moreover, in the case of Central Asian studies such an introduction has to take into account that, as stated on the dustjacket, sources on the history of pre-Islamic Central Asia are written in over twenty languages. The study of Central Asia is not a single discipline but a conglomerate of different disciplines. It is therefore very desirable for specialists in one discipline to be informed about the study of sources in other disciplines.
The Prolegomena do not provide a complete introduction as outlined above, because many contributions are more concerned with the study of specific problems than with introducing the sources and the problems connected with them. In the absence of any preface or explanatior by the editor, it is of course not possible to know the exact purpose of this volume and it would therefore be unjust to reproach the authors for not having fulfilled a task which perhaps was not expected of them. However this may be, it is to be hoped that future volumes of this series will supplement the information given in Pr. in order to provide a full survey of the sources on pre-Islamic Central Asia.
The Prolegomena contain 28 articles and the Studies 18 articles. It is of course not possible to list the titles of all 46 articles; we must limit ourselves to mentioning a few which are of special interest to readers of this journal. J. Harmatta has contributed to Pr. an article entitled 'Sogdian Sources for the History of Pre-Islamic Central Asia' (pp. 153-165) in which he discusses the date of the Sogdian Ancient Letters. According to Henning (BSOAS 12, 1948, pp. 601-615), these letters were written in 312-313 A.D. The second letter mentions that Lo-yang was burnt. This happened in 190, in 311 and in 530-532-534. Henning wrote: “We can unhesitatingly exclude the events of the sixth century from consideration, on the general grounds given above. This leaves us with 190 and 311. The choice is made easy: in 311 Lo-yang, and with it the power of Chin, is destroyed by the Hsiung-nu: in the Sogdian Letter the Hūns are mentioned as the adversaries of the Chinese. As there can thus hardly be a doubt that the Letters were written in or shortly after 311, reference is made in what follows to events pertaining to that period only" (op. cit., pp. 603-604). The colophon of the second letter indicates the date: 'the year 13 of the Lord of cyrosw'n'. Henning proposed to explain cyrosw'n as a transcription of Chiu-ch'uan, the old name of Su-chou. The Lord mentioned in the date was the governor-general of the province of Liang, Chang Kuei, who had been appointed in 301 and who died on 8th July 314. His thirteenth year is the year 313. Harmatta proposes an entirely different explanation for cyr sw'n. According to him it is a transcription of Chin. tzu ('this', cf. Giles no. 12346) liu ('six', Giles no. 7276) hsün ("a period of ten years'. Giles no. 4864). The 13th year of the Lord of the current Cycle of Sixty is the year 196, the first year of the cycle being the year 184. Harmatta does not give any references for the use of tzu liu-hsün in the meaning "this current cycle' and Enoki has already indicated his doubts