^{page 447 note 1} It is the “Spraehe II” of ProfessorLeumann, : see his articles in JGOS., lxi, p. 651Google Scholar; lxii, p. 83. His “Spraehe I” is the Tokhari of the German savants mentioned below.

^{page 447 note 2} They present, however, in no case anything bilingual; so I am informed by Dr. Stein, who has had the Chinese writing examined by M. Chavannes.

^{page 448 note 1} e.g., in the Weber MSS., and in Dr. Stein's palm-leaf MS. from Miran, of the third or fourth century a.d.

^{page 448 note 2} According to the testimony of Chinese pilgrims of the sixth and seventh centuries, the script of Khotan and its district was that of the Brahmans. This, however, may, and probably does, refer to the upright Gupta script, which was current in those parts of Eastern Turkestan alongside of the “cursive” Gupta. See DrStein's, Ancient Khotan, vol. i, p. 90Google Scholar, where the authorities are quoted.

^{page 452 note 1} There has been some dispute as to the precise meaning of the Chinese word chang, whether it means “table” (Legge) or “section” (Julien) or “chapter” (Watters) or “composition” (Takakusu). The evidence of the rolls supports the meaning “section”. But the translation “table”, if not literal, is at least more suggestive of what the thing really was.

^{page 456 note 1} The roll is in a very soiled condition, and has not come out in the photograph as clearly as one could wish.

^{page 456 note 2} Bracketed letters are badly written and cancelled.

^{page 457 note 1} See n. 2 on p. 456.

^{page 457 note 2} co had originally been written cu; afterwards u was crossed through, and o substituted.

^{page 457 note 3} After the siddham-chang there comes a short text, in twelve lines, at present not intelligible, which, however, is written again in fairly good cursive Gupta characters.

^{page 458 note 1} On a still smaller fragment of the same roll, measuring only 6 by 4 inches, the commencement of a syllabary in precisely the same peculiar order is repeated, viz., ka, va, ya, kha, ca, la.

^{page 460 note 1} In this connection it may be worth noting that, as DrWaddell, points out in his Buddhism in Tibet, p. 353Google Scholar, in Japanese Skt. vaiḍūrya becomes binzura. The southern unknown language has vaiṇḍarya (see pl. v, 1. 23 of the Dhāraṇī on Roll Ch. 0041).

^{page 461 note 1} Anec. Oxon. om. bracketed words.

^{page 461 note 2} See n. 2 on p. 456.

^{page 461 note 3} Apparently wrong for vara-vacane.

^{page 462 note 1} The double dot and single dot appear to be marks of interpunctuation; they do not signify the visarga and anusvāra respectively.

^{page 462 note 2} Note the peculiar serpentine mark under ḫ in Il. 4, 15, 17. It seems to correspond to the semicircular mark which is found in the upright Gupta script.

^{page 462 note 3} Wrong for uṣṇnīṣa.

^{page 462 note 4} See n. 2 on p. 456.

^{page 462 note 5} See n. 1 on p. 461.

^{page 462 note 6} The bracketed passage is not found in the Hodgson MS., No. 77. Instead, it has the usual conventional opening: evaṁ mayā śrutaṁ kasmir samaye bhagavān deveṣṭa-trayastṛṁśeṣu viharati sma | sadharmāyāṁ deva-sabhāyāṁ mahatā bhikṣu-saṁghena mahatā bodhisattva-saṁighena Śakreṇa devānām Indreṇa sārdhaṁ ∥

^{page 462 note 7} na is inserted below the line; and the insertion is marked by a cross above the line.

^{page 462 note 8} The Hodgson MS., No. 77, has sāpāyūdhānāṁ namo sāyānugraha°.

^{page 463 note 1} Hodgson MS., No. 77, om. the bracketed words.

^{page 463 note 2} See n. 2 on p. 456.

^{page 463 note 3} See n. 2, p. 462.

^{page 463 note 4} Wrong for Nārāyaṇāya.

^{page 463 note 5} Hodgson MS. reads vidrāpaṇa for vikṣsepaṇa.

^{page 463 note 6} The full reading of the Hodgson MS., No. 77, is: adhimuktika kāśmīra-mahāśmaśdna°. The Eastern Turkestani adhimūḫanta = Skt. adhimukta, with °ḫanta for kata = kta.

^{page 463 note 7} The Hodgson MS., No. 77, reads vandita-sahitāya for namaskṛtāya.

^{page 463 note 8} The Hodgson MS., No. 77, omits the bracketed final three clauses. Dr. Stein's gigantic roll omits the first and second clauses, but it has the third clause referring to bhaiṣajya-guru.

^{page 468 note 1} Compare, e.g., täand nä, sixth and third letters from the right, on 1. 3 of fol. 3 rev. on the accompanying plate; or ti and ni, third and fourth letters from the left, on 1. 2 of fol. 32 obv.

^{page 469 note 1} Apparently cancelled.

^{page 469 note 2} The original text seems to read namāṁ, but the apparent āṁ is merely a very crudely formed cursive au.

^{page 470 note 1} See ProfessorLeumann's, remarks in JGOS., vol. lxii, p. 87, footnote 1Google Scholar.

^{page 471 note 1} My readings of the names in JASB. have to be amended as above.