REVIEWS 189

SchmidtNachtr�age), kat.apra (25.33 see Schmidt),�sr.n. uka(31.4). Otherwords are known fromko�sas: makkola(17.21),makura(22.2), �sid. ga(13.22, 14.16 see Schmidt sv.s. i _nga). Two words are compounded withk�ara: bh�a _nk�ara (17.29; 24.16 see Schmidtbh�am. k�arin) andkre_nk�ara(21.11 see Schmidt).�Simik�a (28.4) andg�ayada(31.18) are not foundin the dictionaries which I consulted. In oneupaj�ati verse one findsd�ara (vayomr.ge d�aradar�ıs.u k�ırn. e 26.2b). Is metri causad�ara used fordh�ar�a?

A systematic study of the vocabulary of the text may help to throwlight on its composition and date. A detailed index would therefore bevery welcome.

4 Jansz Crescent J.W. DE JONG

Manuka A.C.T.Australia

Zhongxin Jiang & Toru Tomabechi,The Pa~ncakramat.ippan. �ı ofMuni�sr�ıbhadra. Introduction and Romanized Sanskrit Text (SchweizerAsiatische Studien / Etudes asiatiques suisses, Monographien / Mono-graphies Band / Volume23). Bern-Berlin-Frankfurt am Main–NewYork–Paris–Wien, 1996, xxvii, 77 pp. sFR 37,– ISBN 3-906756-20-3

The Pa~ncakramat.ippan.�ı Yogimanohar�a of Muni�sr�ıbhadra is a commen-tary on N�ag�arjuna’s Pa~ncakrama. Muni�sr�ıbhadra considers thePin.d.�ıkrama and the Vajraj�apakrama to be the first two kramas anddoes not comment upon the Anuttarasandhi. According to the colophonMuni�sr�ıbhadra was a pandit from Magadha and belonged to the Jagad-dala monastery. The editors suggest that he fled from Magadha wherethe Buddhist monasteries were destroyed by the armies of Islam andtook refuge in the Jagaddala monastery. They place his activities aroundA.D. 1200. The Yogimanohar�a was translated into Tibetan by Bu ston(1290–1364) and written down by his disciple sGra tshad pa Rin chenrnam rgyal.

The Sanskrit manuscript of the Yogamanohar�a was kept in the Libraryof the Cultural Palace of the Nationalities of Beijing, but has recentlybeen transferred to Lhasa along with the rest of the collection of Sanskritmanuscripts. It was first discovered in 1938 by R�ahula�S�a_nkr.ty�ayana at�Za lu Ri phug monastery. According to the editors the manuscript maywell have been copied by some Indian refugees in Tibet. They describethe script as being a variant of Proto-Bengali of the early 13th century,

Indo-Iranian Journal 41: 189–190, 1998.

190 REVIEWS

influenced by some Nepalese elements. The manuscript comprises 58folios, each side containing five lines (a few folios contain six linesand the last one four lines on the recto and nothing on the verso).

The editors present a romanized text, adding for each line a referenceto the corresponding pages of the Derge and Peking editions of theTibetan translation. Corrections are put between brackets. Information oncorresponding Tibetan passages, uncertain readings, missing passages,etc. are given in notes at the end of the line.

The Yogamanohar�a is a detailed commentary and the only one avail-able in both Sanskrit and Tibetan. It is to be hoped that this diplomaticedition of the Sanskrit text will be followed by an edition of the Tibetantext and an annotated English translation.

4 Jansz Crescent J.W. DE JONG

Manuka A.C.T. 2603Australia

Richard N. Frye,The Heritage of Central Asia. From Antiquity to theTurkish Expansion. Princeton, Markus Wiener Publishers, 1996. 264 pp.ISBN 1-55876-110-1 (hc) 1-55876-111-X (pb)

Richard Frye, the well-known Iranian scholar, presents a survey ofthe history of Central Asia in sixteen brief chapters from antiquity tothe Turkish expansion. In the first chapter he sketches the geographyof Central Asia. The second chapter entitled “Peoples, Languages,Customs and Beliefs” deals mainly with the coming of the Indo-Europeans and their customs and beliefs. Frye rejects both the theoryof an Anatolian homeland and an origin in Gansu and considers a southRussian homeland more plausible. He mentions briefly Dum�ezil’stheory of a tripartite division of Indo-European society and religionand observes that no consensus about his theory is in sight. In thischapter Frye examines the differences between nomads and settledfolk. According to him nomads expanded their power through conquestby confederation, or the joining of a defeated tribe with that of thevictor. He distinguishes two kinds of tribes. In some tribes an individualbecomes leader by his status in the clan, in others a chief is elected in anassembly. The settled states accepted rulers with few if any restrictionson their authority, since they were godlike or of divine origin. Societyremained unchanged for centuries. For settled states, conquest usually

Indo-Iranian Journal 41: 190–192, 1998.