Generation- and age-set systems are found in many parts of the world. They are of particular importance in Africa, and especially in East Africa where some ethnic groups operate socio-political and cultural systems in which generation-sets play a dominant role. Ethnographic descriptions of generation-set systems abound, but their theoretical understanding seems still to be inadequate. With examples from the Toposa and Turkana, this paper aims to contribute to the theory of generation-set systems. Moreover, the processes described and the ideas expressed may also contribute to the general theory of socio-political and cultural systems.

Verb roots remain constant in most Sino-Tibetan languages. But in; Burmese the consonantal initial of some verb roots alternates from an unaspirated surd in the intransitive to the corresponding aspirated surd in the transitive. And in some Tibeto-Burmic languages, particularly in the Himalayas, we find verbs with a sonant initial in the intransitive and a corresponding surd in the transitive. Diversity of form reaches the extreme in Old Bodish (classical Tibetan), where no positional phoneme of the verb is necessarily constant—whether consonantal prefix, consonantal initial, medial vowel, “final” consonant, or “suffixed” consonant.

According to the Nihongi, a chronicle of Japan written in A.D. 720, the first Chinese calendar was brought to Japan in the year A.D. 554. It is now generally agreed that before this time there was no native calendrical system and that earlier dates given in the Nihongi were calculated retrospectively, and in some cases inaccurately, using Chinese systems (Nakayama, 1969: 7–8). The Chinese calendar was not only a method for keeping track of the days but also a complete astronomical system for calculating the movements of the heavenly bodies.

For too long study of ancient Near Eastern representational art and study of possibly related texts have been entirely separate disciplines, the one a branch of archaeology, the other of philology. This accounts for the very scanty results obtained and their frequently questionable character. In the case of Classical Greece and Rome art historians ordinarily command Greek and Latin so as to use written sources at first hand, but Near Eastern archaeologists have commonly been illiterate in their fields of study, while philologists often have limited knowledge of art and use that very amateurishly. Thus it is an occasion for rejoicing that a serious attempt has just been made on some very difficult material from Syria and Anatolia, and that one major break-through has resulted which opens up prospects of fuller understanding of certain aspects of ancient art. The author, E. Williams-Forte, is primarily an art historian with a speciality in ancient Near Eastern seals, and she has taken an interest in Ugaritic to be able to exploit that material. Her Columbia Ph.D. thesis: Mythic cycles: the iconography of the gods of water and weather in Syria and Anatolia during the Middle Bronze Age (ca. 2000–1600 B.C.) has not been published, but a lengthy article derived from parts of it has recently appeared. This starts from the tree and snake in the garden of Eden and investigates their possible Canaanite background. The original observation of major importance is that the storm god of Syria and Anatolia of the first half of the second millennium B.C., Anatolian Tarhunna, Syrian Hadad or Baal, Mesopotamian Adad, occasionally holds up a plant, branch or tree as a symbol.

In January of 1936 Dr. Ernest Mackay, director of the excavation of the American School of Indic and Iranian Studies at Chanhudaro, courteously arranged that I should have the use of a Brāhūī speaker and an interpreter for a number of sessions. The Brāhuāī, Dad Muhammad by name, belongs to the Nīchārī tribe of the Jhalawān division of the Brāhūīs. Some confirmatory note s were made as well with the aid of another of the Brāhūī speakers working at the excavation, of the same tribe and village as Dad Muhammad. The note s made were chiefly phonetic.

Up to this point I have attempted to show how Shen Nung was portrayed in late Warring States and early Han texts. I have also reviewed what we know about Nung (or Chu) and Lieh Shan shih, Keng-fu (Plough Father), and T'ien-tsu (Field Ancestor), since it may be one or all four of these figures that comes to be known as Shen Nung.

We can argue nothing for certain on this, and certainly T'ien-tsu in the Shih, was, we assume, a god of the Chou. But that point aside, there seems to be good reason to think that Shen Nung was originally a farming god of the Shang people. He is the hero who invented the plough, and the god to whom they turned when they needed rain. Ultimately, this may have been Hsieh, the first-born of the Shang people, known to us in our texts as Shu-chün or Yi-chün. That Shen Nung would become prominent only in texts that date from the late Chou should be no surprise; we should expect him to be overshadowed in early Chou times by their hero Hou Chi.

It is important to keep in mind as we proceed that in the materials we have examined so far, we have seen repeated references to ‘fire’ and ‘rain’ and ‘drought’. Ritual ways of producing rainfall and combating the drought could involve fire (yen-huo, in Shih, 211); they might also involve ‘invocations’, charging the drought demon to ‘Go to the north!’ (Shan-hai ching).

The higher-order subgrouping of Tibeto-Burman has been recently up for debate. The modern era of TB/Sino-Tibetan subgrouping began with Benedict 1972 (henceforth /STC), where that great comparativist refrained from offering a Stammbaum of the conventional type, leaving several individual languages and language groups unclassified, and placing Jingpho at the centre of diversity of the whole vast TB family (see Fig. 1.) Despite several peculiarities, notably the special position accorded Karenic and the lack of information on Baic (then called ‘Minjia’) or Qiangic, this scheme showed a healthily agnostic approach.

The tenth chapter in the Lalita-vistara, entitled Lipiśālāsaṃdarśanaparivarta, is well known for the list of 64 different forms of writing which were mastered by the Bodhisattva in his schooling. The text continues by describing how his 10,000 fellow-pupils, by reason of his supernatural power (adhiṣṭhānena), when they pronounced the individual syllables (mātṛkā), produced for each sound a symbolic or esoteric phrase beginning with the syllable in question. Thus, yadā akāraṃ parikīrtayanti sma, todā anityaḥ saroasaṃskāraśabdo niścarati sma ‘When they recited the syllable a, then there arose the sound (phrase) “Non-eternal are all the saṃskāras”’. (I refrain from attempting to improve the dubious grammar of the edition; but the sense is not in doubt.) The remainder of the Sanskrit syllabary is dealt with in a comparable manner, in the normal order, a, ā, i, ī, … ka, kha, ga, gha, ṅa … ha.

Dirayta (ɗiraytá) is an Eastern Cushitic language spoken by a people calling themselves Diraaŝ (ɗiráaŝ), who live in the immediate vicinity of Gidole. Within Ethiopia generally the language is known as Gidoliñña. Dirayta and Musiya (Bussa or Busiñña) constitute the northernmost dialects of the Konsoid dialect chain, a linguistic entity first clearly established by Paul Black (forthcoming).

The Kushan god μοζδοοανο is attested on a group of rare coins of Kanishka I, where he is depicted as a bearded male bearing a trident in his right hand and riding a two-headed horse. It has been universally assumed that the name μοζδοοανο is connected in some way with that of Ahura Mazda, the supreme deity of the Zoroastrian religion, the second element of the Bactrian form being generally interpreted as an epithet meaning ‘victorious’.

IN the Introduction to his edition of the Āvaśyaka tales the late Professor Leumann wrote on p. 1 : “ Since-as may be easily understood—Jacobi, when he endeavoured to utilize the language and contents of the Jaina tales for Indology, started with the Uttarādhyayana Ṭikā, of Devendra which was in his possession, and since this author, belonging as he does to the period of decadence and therefore more familiar with Sanskrit, writes a rather doubtful Prakrit—therefore the editor was chiefly concerned with the establishing of a thoroughly reliable Prakrit text … that was to be suitable for clearing the way for a more correct judgment and utilization of medieval Jaina Prakrit.” The appearance of the first portion of Leumann's text was welcomed by Pischel in his Pkt grammar (§ 21) in the following terms: ” The most important text in JM is : Die Āvaśyaka-Erzählungen. Herausgegeben von Ernst Leumann. 1. Heft. Leipzig 1897. The absence of any commentary unfortunately renders the understanding rather difficult; some passages remain wholly obscure. But even these few forms show that from texts in JM we may yet expect much new and important material.”

A new volume of literary texts from Nimrud has been in gestation for a very long time. Tablets were first found in Max Mallowan's excavations at Nimrud in 1949, with many more tablets found in subsequent seasons. In 1963 the decision was made to publish all the literary tablets from the Nabû Temple in hand copy, and this effort has finally culminated in the form of Literary texts from the Nabû temple, edited by J. A. Black and D. J. Wiseman (Cuneiform Texts from Nimrud 4, 1998). As is so often the case with the publication of new literary texts, these copies often solve many problems and create just as many new ones for editors of texts; many of the copies could benefit from collation. Furthermore, the catalogue describing the tablets is extremely sparse, and much more could have been done by the editors to identify the tablets and note published duplicates. Nevertheless, the volume makes a valuable contribution to the field of Assyriology by publishing a large number of literary texts in cuneiform copy.

There is very little published material of the Galab (Geleba, Dasenech, Dathanaik, or Marille) language which is spoken around the northern shore of Lake Rudolf in the Gamu Gofa Province of south-western Ethiopia and in the adjacent areas of northern Kenya. Several attempts to determine the linguistic position of this language have been made, nevertheless no generally accepted classification exists as yet. This is, of course, due to lack of adequate descriptive data. I would therefore like to present in this paper a preliminary analysis of my own field data on Galab in the hope that it will at least provide a somewhat sounder basis for future work on the classification of the language.

When Buddist works in Sanskrit were first introduced into Europe, it was at once obvious that the language of some of them as it appears in the manuscripts was, in comparison with Classical Sanskrit, frequently ungrammatical, and on occasion barbarously so. The immediate and natural reaction of scholars accustomed to the regularity of Sanskrit was to stigmatize these shortcomings, and to attempt to remove as many irregularities as possible by forcibly emending the text. It was, however, very soon recognized that many of the seeming anomalies could not be abolished, and that they must be accepted as genuine in their own context. This was especially clear in the case of the verses of some of the older texts, where the metre often guaranteed non- Pāηinean forms; and the language of these verses, variously called the Gāthādialect, mixed Sanskrit, or hybrid Sanskrit, was recognized as something in its own right. The same courtesy was readily extended to the prose of the Mahāvastu, which in places could only have been made to resemble Sanskrit by completely rewriting the text. The prose of the other texts, being in many waysvirtually Sanskrit, took considerably longer to win the same recognition; but for many years now it has been generally admitted that here also is a language which must be judged according to its own standards, and not exclusively by the canons of classical Sanskrit grammar.

The German Turfan collection includes fragments of two Early New Persian manuscripts in Syriac script, a bilingual (Syriac and New Persian) Psalter and a pharmacological handbook containing prescriptions similar to those in the Syriac Book of Medicines published by E. A. W. Budge. Both texts make use of certain non-Syriac characters, some of which were also used for writing Sogdian while others may have been created especially for writing Persian in Syriac script. The Syriac text of the Psalter fragments is that of the Peshitta; the translation is particularly valuable for the vocalization of the Persian words. In addition to many unusual and interesting words, the pharmacological fragments attest the rare Syriac numeral symbols derived from those of ancient Aramaic. The present article contains a transliteration and translation of all these texts together with a glossary and full philological discussion.

It is a fundamental point of comparative and historical linguistics that genealogical affiliation can only be established on the basis of concrete linguistic features, the more central the feature the more important for classificatory purposes. While there is no absolute consensus about how a central linguistic feature be identified, it can be taken as axiomatic that long-term reconstruction and classification rests most fundamentally on phonological and morphological criteria. Of these two, Hetzron (1976b) has argued that it is the morphological which is the most important because morphology represents the level of grammar that is both more complex and more arbitrary in the sense that the sound-meaning dyad has no natural basis. Precisely this arbitrariness ensures that morphological correspondences are relatively unlikely to be due to chance.

At Sāmarrā’ there are the remains of a number of ‘Abbāsid walled tracks which appear to be racecourses. Ernst Herzfeld found one track in the course of the German expedition of 1911–13 to the ‘Abbāsid capital at Sāmarrā’, and the outline of two more became known from a series of maps of the Sāmarrā’ district made by the Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force in 1917. Herzfeld published his first brief discussion of these courses in 1948 in his Geschichte der Stadt Samarra’, and a further description was published posthumously in his Persian empire in 1968. At about the same time in 1948, a fairly extensive discussion was published by Ahmad Susa in his Rayy Sāmarrā’, though without much illustration. Sūsa enumerated five courses, but it has proved necessary to exclude two, for they seem not to have been for racing. One further course has been added here, not identified before.

The applicability of Western concepts to an understanding of gender in other cultural settings has become increasingly problematic. We need to elicit an understanding of how particular societies define sexual difference, and derive locally grounded ideas of self and the materiality of the body as a starting point for analysis. This paper examines some of the wider implications of this view for notions of cultural context and comparison. Its ethnographic examples come from Latin America. They build on the regional interest in spiritual and symbolic forms as ‘scripts’ for gender identifications, exploring the diverse ways in which idealizations, images and icons are read in ways that encompass both ‘local’ and ‘non-local’ narratives. However, the discussion aims to be relevant beyond this geographical location, suggesting that both secular and sacred discourses appear to work at a number of different, sometimes contradictory, levels, often drawing together transcultural notions of being, and generating a field of meaning in which gender, value and morality are constituted.

The two famous monuments known as the Orkhon Inscriptions, erected in honour of the two Turkish princes, Kül-Tegin and his brother Bilgä Kagan, though mentioned in Chinese histories, remained forgotten and ignored down to quite recent times. They stand near the Lake Kocho Tsaīdam, to the west of the River Orkhon, about 50 miles north of the monastery of Erdentso (the site of the ancient city of Kara Korum), and about 25 miles to the north-west of the ruins of the capital of the Uighurs, Kara-Balgassun. They are two great square monoliths, which originally reposed in two sockets. Both these sockets are still in their original position, but the monuments have been thrown down, with the result that Monument II is in four pieces. They contain long Turkish inscriptions in Runic characters on three sides, and on one side (the western) the inscription is in Chinese. The Chinese inscriptions are very beautifully cut; the Runic inscriptions, which are also probably the work of the Chinese stonecutters, are less elegant. It may be mentioned that the Chinese inscriptions differ entirely in their contents from the Turkish.

Since the publication of the catalogue of manuscripts in Indonesian languages in British public collections (Ricklefs and Voorhoeve, 1977), further MSS have of course come to light, as have some of those errors which inevitably attend such a work. It seems appropriate to publish here a list of additions and substantive corrections known to the authors by the beginning of 1981. The authors of the catalogue are grateful to those librarians and scholars who have brought such things to their notice, and particularly to Dr. A. C. Milner for offering his descriptions of Malay MSS found in the Wellcome Institute for publication here.