With this article the series “Zurvanica” comes to an end. There still remain passages in the Dēnkart deserving of attention, notably in the fourth book. The author has, however, found the relevant passages in that book so obscure and so difficult that he cannot undertake to publish a translation of them for a long time yet. In the present article all passages of importance have been collected from the third book. To these have been added the celebrated Daharĩ passage in the Šikand GumāniīVazār and the conclusion of that book. The translation of certain Pahlavī terms has sometimes been a source of embarrassment.

The three terms which have been made the subject of the following investigation are all to be found in Greek sources. Two of them, γαζαρηνοί and φαρισαῖοι, only occur in biblical or Jewish historical works written in Greek. The third, ὑποκριταί although an old Greek concept, gained prominence mainly because of its occurrence in the Greek Bible in connexion with φαρισαῖοι. The first two terms are but transliterated Hebrew concepts used by the Greek writers as untranslatable loan-words. The third term is an original Greek word.

In the notes here published an attempt is made to explore some of the peculiar linguistic problems involved in the interpretation of epigraphic texts. As a subject for study these have certain advantages for the linguist: the material on which he bases his conclusions is, at any given time, complete, reducing the chances of his being afterwards confronted with evidence which he has overlooked; its nature limits the directions which his inquiries can take; and since the text is irrevocably committed to stone, he is not delayed by the possibility of infinitely refining his phonetic and phonological observations. It is a cardinal principle of the present investigations that such texts in dead languages carry an implication of utterance; it is equally cardinal that what that implication is cannot be determined, and is not to be educed.

The vocabularies of the present notice are due to Dr. W. M. Strong. They were collected at Panakrusima (Earle Island) in the east-centralpart of the Calyados Chain, about 48 miles south-east of Panaieti(Deboyne Island) and at Panatinani (Joannet Island), about 18 milesto the east, close to North-West Tagula (Sud-Est Island).

No one interested in the Classical Hindu Law could read Dr. S. K. Belvalkar's Critical Note to Śāntiparva, Adhyāya 121, śl. 14 and ff., without experiencing a great curiosity. The important account given by Bhīṣma of the nature and purpose of Daṇḍa (Punishment) incidentally produces an Indian counterpart to the Roman jus naturale, the full implications of which deserve investigation elsewhere. Amongst the details we find a description of Daṇḍa as follows:—

nīlōtpala-dala-śyāmaś=caturdaṃṣṭraś=caturbhujaḥ

aṣṭapān=naikanayanaś=śankukarṇōrdhvarōmavān

jaṭī dvi-jihvas tāmrāsyō mṛja-rāja-tanucchadaḥ ētad-rūpaṃ bibharty=ugraṃ Daṇḍō nityaṃ durāvaraḥ.