________________
370
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.
that the first syllables of each quarter sloka spell aprasikha.
In conclusion, readers of Mr. Yates' edition of the Nalodaya will, of course, understand that I do not offer the above two stories as the
CORRESPONDENCE AND MISCELLANEA.
M. DEHARLEZ ON ZOROASTRISM.
M. de Harlez complains that I have misunderstood his hypothesis about the origin of Zoroastrism, when writing my notice of his essay on that subject (ante, pp. 274-276); that he does not suppose that Zarathushtra lived about the time of Darius Hystaspes (as he may have lived some centuries before), but he believes that the oldest portion of the Avesta, which contains the doctrines of the Zoroastrian reform, was composed about the time of that monarch, or perhaps a century earlier; and that these doctrines were not accepted in Persia proper till after the time of Darius, though they may have been generally taught in Media Atropatene, Khvaresmia, and Mazanderan as early as B. c. 700, about which time he supposes that the Iranian religion, in its progress from the east, first came in contact with Jews in Media, and, further, that the Turanians from whom Zoroastrism may have borrowed some of its customs were not the north-eastern Turanians (the deadly enemies of Iran), but those of Media and parts adjacent.
Admitting, of course, that all Turanians were not at all times enemies of Iran, the extent of my error appears to have been that I too hastily assumed that the radical reform connected with the name of Zarathushtra was supposed to have been carried out in Persia by Zarathushtra himself; whereas M. de Harlez seems to be of nearly the same opinion as myself, namely, that the Zoroastrian religion had already assumed its purest form long before it entered Persia proper from the east or north-east. We differ, however, as to the probability of the reform having been due to Jewish example, which is certainly rendered far less possible by this view of the hypothesis. And the faith of Darius in Adramazda also requires some special explanation if it be assumed that he was not a Zoroastrian.
With these remarks I may leave the readers of M. de Harlez' essay to judge whether my notice of his theory was not otherwise fairly correct. E. W. WEST.
München, 22nd October 1881.
[DECEMBER, 1881.
only instances of Sanskrit acrostics known. The essay on alliteration attached to that work contains several examples of much more complete acrostics than either of the two given here.
A FOLK-LORE PARALLEL. Many of the readers of the Antiquary will no doubt remember the story of Intaphernes, as
told in the IIIrd book of Herodotus, chapters 118-120. He had been guilty of an outrage in the palace of Darius, and that monarch seized him, his sons, and all his relations, with the intention of putting the whole family to death. The wife of Intaphernes kept coming to the palace of the king and lamenting, and at last moved Darius to compassion. He accordingly sent her the following message: "Lady, king Darius grants you the life of one of your relations who are in prison, so that you can save any one of them, that you may select, from capital punishment." The lady thought over the matter for some time, and answered: "since the king grants me the life of one, I choose my brother out of the whole party." When Darius heard this, he was astonished at her speech, and he sent her the following message: " Lady, the king wishes to know on what ground you choose to rescue your brother from death, instead of your husband and children, for he is less near to you than your sons, and less dear to you than your husband." Thereupon she gave the following answer: "O king, I might get another husband, if it should please God so to ordain, and other children if I were to lose these; but as my father and mother are dead, I could not possibly get another brother; this was the reflection that prompted my answer." Herodotus tells us that Darius was so much pleased with her sagacity that he granted her the life of her eldest son also.
It has been often pointed out that there is a great similarity between the answer given to Darius by the wife of Intaphernes, and the following somewhat unromantic sentiments put into the mouth of Antigone by Sophocles, (vv. 909-912):
πόσις μὲν ἄν μοι, κατθανόντος, ἄλλος ἦν καὶ παῖς ἀπ ̓ ἄλλου φωτὸς, ἐι τοῦδ ̓ ἤμπλακον. μητρὸς δὲν Αιδου καὶ πατρὸς κεκευθότοιν οὐκ ἔστ ̓ ἀδελφὸς ὅστις ἂν βλάστοι ποτέ.
Dr. Donaldson was of opinion that Herodotus was in this case the borrower. Blakesley remarks, "the argument comes in so strangely in the play, introduced by the question,
τίνος νόμου δὴ ταῦτα πρὸς χάριν λέγω ;that it is difficult not to conceive it taken from some popular imported story, rather than the home growth of Sophocles' imagination. If, therefore, there be any truth in the story of Plutarch,
