in documents, decrees, etc., of the government are transacted in Persian, even in Kokand. The reason of this is that every official always has a Mulla, who of course writes Persian. I have often had occasion to see these official documents written. The official just gives the Mulla the substance of the writing, and only seals it, while the other does all the rest.

Under these circumstances, the continual inroad of foreigners is not to be surprised at. But what helps to break up the language more is, that the foreign words continue their independent existence, as was the case with the interlarding of French phrases among the German aristocrats of the last century. Only here the confusion increases, because there is no reaction by which the language should be purified.

Although, generally speaking, people are not slow to see that such occupations as investigating and learning are good for the mind and strengthen the judgment, it is unfortunately just the opposite here. Only the uneducated seem to have a sound judgment and a certain acuteness.

The language of the Kirghiz is pleasing and eloquent; they are witty and sarcastic in questioning and answering, and often even very sharp, and even the least educated Kirghiz is complete master of his language. A Kirghiz story-teller has a fresh and fascinating way of relating. The Kara-Kalpak, the Turkoman, and the Uzbek resident of the Zarafshan Valley is even more helpless than the uneducated nomad, but the educated classes among the townspeople are very heavy in their conversation, devoid of expression, and exceptionally wearisome in their talk. How could it be different? They occupy themselves mostly with what they cannot understand from a linguistic point of view. The Kirghiz hears his fairy tales, myths, and songs in his own language, and so he gets impressions which remain, and incite to imitate. The Uzbek, on the contrary, listens to the simplest stories in a language the greater part of which he only half understands, and the more he studies, the thicker becomes the mist around him. They get used to guessing VOL. XX.-[NEW SERIES.]

29

the sense of what they have read or heard, and learn the jingle of words by heart, like a parrot. Through this only one function of the mind, the memory, is practised, while the other functions are not called upon at all. The scholar requires from fifteen to twenty years to master the difficulties of the language, a victory which is the aim of every student. There are very few who have been fortunate enough to carry off the victory.

ART. XI. Further Notes on Early Buddhist Symbolism. By R. SEWELL, Esq., Madras Civil Service, M.R.A.S.

In an article on Early Buddhist Symbolism, in Vol. XVIII. Part 3, of the Royal Asiatic Society's Journal (1886), I expressed my belief that the three objects of worship and ornament so commonly seen on Buddhist sculptures in India, the svastika, the chakra, and the triśūla, were not indigenous Indian emblems, but symbols of Western Asian originwhether Semitic or Aryan matters little-adopted of old by the Hindus, and accepted, originally by Buddhists, not as being in themselves Buddhist symbols, but as being symbols of religious signification in general use among the people. I stated my conviction that they were in their inception sunsymbols, the svastika representing probably sun-motion; the chakra a fiery circle or orb emblematic of sun-power, the sun, for instance, in an Asiatic noon-day, as well as the giver of light, the vivifier; and the doubtful triśūla (and this was the point of my story) in all probability derived from the Egyptian scarab. The paper was enriched with several illustrations, showing the transition of the scarab into various forms in Assyria, Phoenicia, Persia, and, thence, in Buddhist India. To prove that this novel theory was not lacking in common sense, I gave a concise resumé of the historical aspects of the case, pointing out that Northern India had been, for perhaps a thousand years prior to the teaching of the Buddha, and for quite a thousand years prior to the construction of such Buddhist buildings as now remain to us, in much closer communication with the countries of Western Asia than has been commonly supposed. I am not alone in my belief that several Indian forms have been derived from forms in religious use further west. Mr. Fergusson, for