Today we know and connect the words ‘Bactrian language’ with the name of Nicholas Sims-Williams. Within the last thirteen years, he has published the most important works on this language. Besides his contributions in reading and the translation of a large number of Bactrian documents, he has produced many valuable articles on different aspects of Bactrian grammar, focusing on phonology, morphology, and syntax. In further articles and works, he has described the outstanding historical and cultural characteristics of this language. His book, Bactrian Personal Names and the article, “The Bactrian Calendar”, are two examples of this type of work.

Previous to 2000, our knowledge of Bactrian was limited to the two inscriptions from Surkh Kotal and Rabatak, and some titles and names of gods and kings on coins and seals. In 1989, Nicholas Sims-Williams published the articles “Bactrian” in Compendium Linguarum Iranicarum (Sims-Williams Reference Sims-Williams and Schmitt1989) and “Bactrian language” in Encyclopaedia Iranica III (Sims-Williams Reference Sims-Williams and Schmitt1989a). In these articles, he describes important grammatical points of Bactrian. These articles provided the most detailed description of Bactrian and its morphology that existed up to that time. In 1993, the Rabatak Inscription was discovered and published (cf. Sims-Williams and Cribb Reference Sims-Williams and Cribb1996, and for the new reading, cf. Sims-Williams 2004 [2008]). Besides its contribution to linguistic studies of Bactrian, this inscription is of particular importance for historical and religious studies.

An important development in the history of Bactrian language took place in 2000, when Bactrian Documents I (BD I) was published. It was the first of the planned three volumes, consisting of two text volumes and one volume of plates. BD I included 68 legal and economic documents mostly from 332/333 AD to 771/772 AD. The second volume Bactrian Documents II, published in 2007, included 78 letters, Buddhist texts and fragments of uncertain character, which are mostly dated from 359/360 AD to 472/473 AD. The great majority of these documents belong to the collection of Dr. Nasser David Khalili in London. Both of these volumes contain references, list of documents, notes on orthography and grammar, texts and translations, and finally glossary and indices. In the glossary, we find many valuable comments on phonology, morphology, and syntax.

In the present article, two volumes are under review: the third volume of Bactrian documents comprising the plates (referred to as BD III) and the revised version of BD I. In the volume BD III containing the plates, images of the Bactrian documents in BD I and BD II are published. The principle components of BD III are the references, the catalogue of documents, the index of Bactrian documents of the Khalili Collection, the list of plates, and finally, the plates.

All of the Bactrian documents included in BD I and BD II are written on leather or parchment, with the exception of C and za, which are on cloth, zd, which is written on birchbark, and a series of very short texts inscribed on wooden sticks, as mentioned by Sims-Williams on page 9. He notes also that the group of documents illustrated on Plates 228–230 are written in Bactrian script but not in the Bactrian language, and includes two magical texts written on wooden boards.

In this volume (BD III), seven groups of documents are presented: 1. Legal documents, such as receipts and contracts, which are dated; 2. Legal documents of uncertain date; 3. Lists and accounts, including the group of wooden slips; 4. Letters; 5. Fragments of uncertain character; 6. Buddhist texts; and 7. Non-Bactrian texts in Bactrian script.

In the chapter “Catalogue of Documents”, basic details are given for every document, such as the name of collection, date, format, the number of lines, and the place of publication. In this chapter, different types of formats of the documents are discussed. In the chapter “List of Plates”, the number of plates is given in front of the name of the document. This information helps the reader to compare the texts with the plates. In the volume, we find 230 plates. In most cases, there is more than one plate for each document. The different plates of a document help the reader to better understand and read a document more easily. For example, in the case of document S, we have 6 plates (61–65e). Pl. 61 shows a complete view of document S, recto. Plate 62 focuses on lines 1–13, recto, plate 63 shows lines 11–21, recto, plate 64 presents lines 17–28, recto, plate 65a-d shows line 29 in detail, and plate 65a is an image of document S, verso, where the names are written. According to these images, the reader can see that the names are always written in verso in the case of legal and economic documents, and the address in the case of letters. All images are in black and white. The quality of the images of documents which belong to the Khalili collection are very good, whereas the images of documents in other collections are considerably varied. In the documents, three of them have drawings. These drawings are the only samples of drawing on textile in the history of the Bactrian art. The first drawing is found in document za, which is written on a strip of cloth and contains a Buddhist text. The subject of this text is homage to Buddha and bodhisattvas. Above and below the text are two drawings. The first figure above the text is probably a seated Buddha. The sitting posture and the manner of draping (only visible at the right side of figure) might suggest the Buddha image. Buddhist symbols are reflected in architecture, sculptures, wall painting, terracottas, and ceramics in the Kushan period. The terracotta figurines (cf. Abdullaev Reference Abdullaev1997/8) of the Buddha and the comparison of them with the figure of our Buddha on the cloth can help us to date the document za. Because of several tears and holes in the cloth, it is difficult to study all the details of iconography. For example, the pose of the hands is unclear, and it is not possible to determine if he is in the meditation posture. The head of Buddha is the only part that is in good condition. The Buddha has a large head with probably a protuberance on top (Ushnisha). As for the hairstyle, there are rounded curls. The eyes and lip are in full face, whereas the nose is in profile. The style of this face is completely different from the face of Buddha in the wall paintings in Kucha (Xinjiang). In those paintings, the face of Buddha is presented in quarter face. The form of the eyebrows, eyes, and lips is very unique in the drawing in document za. It seems that on the one hand, the textile has caused the simple character of the lines, and on the other hand, it has resulted in a non-detailed figure. The iconographic characteristics are of particular importance, because sometimes they can represent the date of a figure. One of this characteristic is the styling of the hair. Our Buddha shares some similarities with two seated Buddha terracottas from Karaul-tepa and Ak-kurgan, which belong to V-VI AD and IV-V AD (Abdullaev Reference Abdullaev1997/8: 176). The form of the nose is closer to that of the Buddha figure from Karaul-tepa, and the form of his head and hair style is similar to the Buddha from Ak-kurgan.

Beneath the text of this document are several floral motifs which separate another male figure from the main text. Sims-Williams introduces him as a wine-drinker in BDII, p. 33. The style of this drawing is very casual. The figure's face exhibits the same characteristics as Buddha. The man has a narrow-necked vase or bottle in his right hand. This vase reminds us of a wall painting, “Brahman”, in Kucha (Xinjiang) from probably 6/7 AD., in which the Brahman also has a vase in his right hand (cf. Gaulier et al Reference Gaulier, Jéra-Bezard and Maillard1976: 53, pl. 120). He is wearing a turban, and it seems that he has no top and that his attire consists of only short trousers or something unidentifiable which is rendered in the lower part of the figure. The style of his feet is very unique. The feet are represented in complete form, but they do not cross each other, which is not very usual, since the feet typically appear as crossed in the wall paintings of Kucha. There are also two other documents containing drawings: plate 229 and 230, which are written in the Bactrian script, though not in the Bactrian language. These drawings appear to be very unprofessional. The first drawing (plate 229) may show a religious scene because of the existence of an aureola and a halo. This image reminds us of double shape Buddhas or two Bodhisattvas in Kizil (Xinjiang) from probably the ninth century AD (Yaldiz Reference Yaldiz and Chuvin1999: 200, pl. 251), although the style of our image is completely different from the Kizil image. Both heads are encircled by a halo consisting of many rows, and it seems that an aureola surrounds the two figures. If we assume that this image is a double-shaped Buddha, then it is possible that it refers to a legend, according to which a Buddha image became doubled in the delivery by a painter due to a miracle (cf. Julien Reference Julien1856, I: 110). As the language of the content of this text is unclear, we cannot be sure about the correctness of our interpretation of this drawing as a double shape Buddhas or two Bodhisattvas.

The last plate in this book (pl. 230) also represents that which is probably a religious subject relating to Buddhism. In the middle of this image, a male figure is presented in quarter face. Above this figure, a vajra is presented. This form reminds the reader of the vajra in the wall painting “Vajrapāni” in Kizil, Kucha (cf. Yaldiz Reference Yaldiz and Chuvin1999: 223, pl.269). The figure that appears here could be either Buddha or Vajrapāni. Vajrapāni was typically used in Buddhist iconography to represent one of the three protective deities or familiar spirits surrounding the Buddha. As Vajrapāni in Kizil, it seems that our figure is wearing an armband. But the styles of our drawing and the Kizil wall painting are completely different from each other. This drawing in Plate 230 is extremely abstract. At the left side of our image, there is a sword, and below the drawing, there is a hand holding a cane. Manjushri is depicted very often as a male bodhisattva wielding a sword. As well as vajra could be a symbol for Vajrapāni, this sword might symbolise Manjushri. The lower part of the object at the right side of this image is similar to a musical instrument. But the identity of the straight line as the upper part is not clear. These four objects surround the figure and writings as a frame.

There are other important iconographical details in these plates to be studied in more depth. Especially in the case of last two plates written in an uncertain language, these iconographical details support my theory relating to the Buddhist character of the drawing.

Saloumeh Gholami

Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main

Nicholas Sims-Williams. Bactrian Documents from Northern Afghanistan I: Legal and Economic Documents (revised edition). Studies in the Khalili Collection, Vol. 3. CIIr. Pt. 2, Inscriptions of the Seleucid and Parthian Periods and of Eastern Iran and Central Asia. Vol. 4, Bactrian. By Nicholas Sims-Williams. pp. 171. Oxford, The Nour Foundation in association with Azimuth Editions and Oxford University Press, 2012.

The second book under review here is the revised edition of the first volume BD I. In this book, some corrections are listed in BD II under ‘Corrigenda’, and other corrections are incorporated. The revised book consists of two parts. The first part is comprised of a list of documents at the beginning of the book. Under the heading ‘List of Documents’ is a description of the standard formats of these documents. Details for each document are also given: the type of document, the date (in the case of the dated documents), a description including the format, the page (recto or verso), the number of lines, other visible characteristics, sealing, and at the end, the name of collection. The last part of this chapter is a list of documents from the Khalili Collection included in this volume.

The next and the last part before the texts and translations is a note on the presentations of the texts. Under this part, special symbols used in the volume are presented and described. The chapter of texts and translations consist of the following documents: 1. Dated legal documents such as contracts and receipts; 2. Legal documents such as contracts and receipts of uncertain date; 3. Lists and accounts; and 4. Wooden slips. Some sections of BD I such as ‘Abbreviations’, ‘Bibliography’, ‘Notes on orthography and grammar’, ‘Glossary’, ‘Reverse index’ and ‘Index of words’ are omitted from the present edition.

In the following list, the specific changes to the texts and translations published in BD I are provided. The Corrigenda to BD I, which is published in BD II (pp.35–37), is not repeated here. In the revised volume, we find some documents such as “Aa, Nn, Ss, Tt, Uu, an” which were not published in BD I, but were edited in a series of later articles (Aa in Sims-Williams 2005[2006]: pp.185–196, Nn in Sims-Williams 2001[2005]:pp. 9–29 and 2005 [2009]: pp.191–198, “Ss, Tt, Uu, an” in Sims-Williams 2001[2005]:pp. 9–29). Some documents such as O’, R, S, am, are published in BD I and reviewed and published later in two further articles (“O’, R, S” in Sims-Williams 2001[2005]:pp. 9–29 and “am” in Sims-Williams 2008: pp.525–532). In the case of documents “O’, R, S” and “am”, I compared the revised edition with the later version, not with BD I. It must be added that Sims-Williams used subscript points (e.g. ọ) to indicate uncertain reading. I use an underline here instead of subscript points:

• A15, 17 tr. “world” for “land”

• D5 ι]αo[ι] for ι]αο[]

• Aa1 tr. “The year” for “(It was) the year”

• Aa2 tr. “.” after Din for “;”

• Aa3“There has been received by me, Basuk” for “(when) I, Basuk, received”

• Iv 1–2 fn. nr. 26 in the revised edition (p. 45) “Two lines corresponding to one sealing” for fn. nr. 24 in BDI (2000:51) “Two lines written beside one sealing”

• m 5 “[Thus. . .] has also been given to you (sg.) by us. . .” for “[Thus. . .] has also been given by us . . .”

• m6 “and there has also been given to you by us” for “and there has also been given by us”

• m12 “you” for “you (sg.)”

• Nn6, Nn'5 tr. “signed document” for “copy”

• N9' αρηγο for μαρηγο

• N10' μασο for ασο

• Ν22' ναβισιδo~ for ναβισιδo

• Nn19' γωζαναγγο for γωζ(ογ)αναγγο which is offered in Corrigenda to volume 1 in BD II

• O2' delete fn. a (in: Sims-Williams 2001[2005]: p.15)

• O6', O10', O12', O14' tr. “quarrel” for “dispute”

• O7' tr. “(I) quarreled (with) you in this way, that I struck (your) brother with a sword” for “The dispute occurred in this way, that through me, Yobig-I struck (your) brother with a sword”

• O8' tr. “outlawed” for “denounced”

• O15' tr. “the citizens” for “my (fellow-)citizens”

• O12, O'9 tr. “I have given you” for “I have given”

• P6 tr. “brothers [. . .for]” for “brothers. . . [. . .for]”

• S7 “Akhsh” for “Akhshang”

• Ss2 αχþ[ο. . .. . .. . .. . ..] for αχþ[αγγο. . .. . ..] and tr. “Akhsh[(?). . .]” for “Akhsh[ang (?). . .]”

• Ss 3 fn. 112 *βωχαρο(σ)ιγο for *βωχαρο(οσ)ιγο (fn. b in Sims-Williams 2001[2005]: p.19)

• T6, T6'-7' tr. “was given to you (sg.!) by me” for “was given by me”

• T7, T7' tr. “the prince” for “We-burug” (for further discussion cf. Sims-Williams 2010: p. 105)

• Tt12 tr. “given to you (sg.!) the . . .” for “given the . . .”

• Tt 22 οσαρο for (ο)οσαρο

• U 15 tr. “vines and” for “vines, . . . and”

• U19 tr. “Wakhsh-mareg Urolan” for “Wakhsh-mareg son of Urol”

• U20' tr. “Ukhsh-mareg Urolan” for “Wakhsh-mareg son of Urol”

• Uu32 βοαδο ~ for βοαδο and delete fn. i “written with a final flourish” (Sims-Williams 2001[2005]: p. 21)

• V10, V10', V17 tr. “has been given to you (sg.!) and” for “has been given ”

• V34' tr. “sons and descendants” for “(our) sons and our descendants”

• V41' tr. “(in respect of our)” for “(in respect of) (our)”

• W6 tr. “Gandara . . .” for “Gandar”

• aa3 ϕρομουδ[ομαργο] for ϕρομουα[ομαργο] and tr. Frumu[d-marg

• aa8 ϕ[ρομ]oυδομαργιγo for ϕ[ρομ]oυαομαργιγo and read [Frum]ud-marg

• aa11–12 ϕρομoυ[δο]μαργo for ϕρομoυ[αο]μαργo and read Frumud-marg

• ad2–3 α]μαχο for μαχο

• ag18 δαιηνανο for δδιηνανο and tr. Dayenan for Dyenan

• ai5 χoδδη. . . for χoαδη. . . and read “Khudew-” for “Khwadew-”

• al20 tr. “vessels of glazed (procelain)” for “vessels of earthenware (?)” and add fn. “See Sims-Williams, “Some Bactrian terms for realia”, forthcoming in Bulletin of the Asia Institute, XXI, 2012.”

• am2A add a fn. for •“possibly a first attempt at the following -γ. Less likely ι.”

• am fn. 223 “Apparently not -ομο” for fn. b (Sims-Williams 2008: p. 529) “Apparently not -ομο. The preceding single letter is possibly a first attempt at the following -γ, Less likely ι.”

• am3A delete fn. c in (Sims-Williams 2008: p. 526)

• am5+6B, am9A, am21B, am 29 tr. “. . .”

• am 30+37 βα [νδ]αγο αζγαμο for am 30 βα[νδαγο. . .] and translate “Allocation (received) through the servant Wer”

• am32+33 fn. for γανδ(ομο) “Uncertain” instead of “Sic, presumably an abbreviation” in (Sims-Williams 2008: p. 529).

• am37 see am30+37 for [βα νδ]αγο αζγαμο and for tr.

Here, I would like to focus on two of these new readings and corrections: λαμο translated as “land” in document A (A15, 17) in BD I. In the glossary of BD II, we find the following information about λαμο “noun “land” (?) <*dāman-, cf. Av. dāman-, Sogd. δʼm “world”, Yidgha lāmo “village” (Sims-Williams 2007:p. 225). As we know, *d is changed to l via δ in Bactrian in both internal and initial position. The change of *d to l can also be found in some Modern Eastern Iranian languages such as Pashto, Munji, and Yidgha. Avestan dāman- has two different meanings: In Old Avestan, according to Bartholomae “Stätte, Wohnstätte”, that is, “place, dwelling place” and in Younger Avestan “Geschöpft, geschaffenes Wesen”, that is, “creature, created beings” (Bartholomae Reference Bartholomae1904: p. 683). In Sogdian δʼm means “creation”, “being”, and “world”. It is not easy to find the exact meaning of this word in Bactrian, as it is attested two times in Bactrian, and only in document A and in the expression σαγωνδο αβο μο λαμο νοβανδανο “as (is) established custom in the world”, as translated by Sims-Williams in the revised edition of BD I:

• 

The other possibility, besides “land” and “world”, could be “place”, which we have in Old Avestan. As we know in Bactrian, μο can be used as both an article and a demonstrative pronoun. For example in the following example, it has the function of a demonstrative pronoun:

• 

If we accept that μο in A14–15 is a demonstrative, we can translate αβο μο λαμο “in this place” (?).

In BD I, the ergative constructions such as πιδοροβδο μανο “There has been received by me” are translated into English with passive voice. In further articles, for example, in (Sims-Williams 2005[2006] and 1997[2000]), translation with active voice is used:

• 

In BD II the ergative constructions are notably translated with active instead of passive voice. In the revised book, it can be observed that the passive translation had been chosen again in the case of ergative constructions, for example, in Aa 3. These different translations clearly demonstrate that an ergative construction can be interpreted both actively and passively.

This volume is of great value to scholars interested in Bactrian. It is very practical to have access to so many documents in one volume, which were previously published as individual articles in different journals and books. Of particular importance are the new readings and corrections, which are mentioned above.