« 이전계속 »
probably be considered for a long time to come the leading authority on its subject. *
M. Edmund Drouin has published, in the “ Babylonian and Oriental Record” for November, 1892, a short paper entitled “ A Symbol on Turko-Chinese Coins,” in which he notes that a certain symbol found on these coins is also found on the coinage commonly attributed to the Sunga kings, and on other ancient Indian issues. He suggests that this symbol may be derived from the Egyptian scarabæus.
Mr. Rea, in the Progress Reports of the Archæological Survey of Madras, submitted by him from time to time to the Local Government, frequently notes facts of numismatic interest. These valuable reports are distributed to a considerable number of learned societies and individuals, and I have no doubt that the Madras Government would gladly supply them to any scholar likely to make use of them. The Government of the North-western Provinces and Oudh has recently, for the first time, issued a similar Progress Report for the year 1891-92. In this document Dr. Führer shows that the original name of the site now known as Râmnagar, and called Ahikshetra, Ahikshatra, or Ahichchhatra in the Mahâbhârata, Harivansa, and Pâộini respectively, was Adhichhatrâ. When excavating a Saiva temple at this site he found (among other discoveries of high importance) 16 copper coins of the Kings Dhruvamitra, Sûryamitra, Bhânumitra, Bhâmimitra, Phalgunimitra, Agnimitra, Brihaspatimitra, Indramitra, Vishnumitra, and Jayamitra.
I have not been able to search systematically for the year's publications, and the above rough notes are all that I am in a position to give. I submit them, such as they are. at Dr. Leitner's request, and hope that they may be of some use.
February 22, 1893.
* Cunningham (Sir Alexander), “Coins of the Indo-Skythians : Sakas and Kushans,” 5 parts in i vol, 8vo., map, 27 plates of Coins, alphabets, etc.; cloth, 30s. (Quaritch, 1893). This is a collection of six papers printed in the Numismatic Chronicle, but here reduced to a whole in order to facilitate the attentive study which they demand.-Publisher's Note.
ORIENTAL TRANSLATIONS OF ENGLISH
By Dr. G. W. LEITNER.
Many disasters can be traced to our linguistic shortcomings. Millions of money and multitudes of men have been sacrificed in order to save the prestige of a mistake in translation committed “by authority.” As a Chief Interpreter during the Russian War in 1855-56 I first felt and pointed out the grave inconvenience of leaving to Levantine subordinates a monopoly in the command of languages which should be acquired by Englishmen to be trained in England for careers in the East.
In London I founded the Oriental Section at King's College, which had such pupils as the present Dr. Wells and others who have distinguished themselves as Oriental scholars. Before I left it for my Indian appointment in 1864, it grew to 22 students, taking up four Oriental subjects each; after all, not a satisfactory result in the Metropolis of the greatest Oriental Empire, but still more so than its present condition of barely numbering half-a-dozen students, amalgamated though it is with the Oriental Classes of University College, and enjoying, as it does, the inestimable patronage of the Imperial Institute.
Considering, however, that its President, H.R.H. the Prince of Wales, as early as 1866, encouraged the establishment of an Oriental Society and University in the Panjab, and that the Imperial Institute will be formally opened on the 23rd May next by the Queen-Empress, who is herself a student of Urdu, we may be at the beginning of a new Era of living Oriental studies in this country, which are indispensable to its culture and material welfare.
Hitherto these studies have been the mere stalking-horse of so-called Orientalists unable to speak a single Oriental language. The reason of their real neglect is not far to seek. When a Clergyman need not master Hebrew, the language of the Old, and the true interpreter of the New, Testament, why should Indian Governors learn Urdu? When there are natives of various parts of the East who know, or mutilate, English, why trouble ourselves to obtain full and faithful information and the confidence of the Oriental masses, by acquiring their languages and by a sympathetic attitude towards their religions, customs, arts, and aspirations ?
The East is now often misrepresented by europeanized specimens, as England is flooded with the writings of popularity-seekers, whose knowledge of English and of English audiences constitutes the real secret of their reputation as Orientalists. These publications have often diverted intending students from Oriental research in its original languages, which is the only road to Oriental learning. The public is satisfied with diluted and distorted information obtained at secondhand from those whose aim, in this age of hurry, is "to get on,” not "to know" or to impart a linguistic knowledge that would destroy the rule of the one-eyed among the blind.
1. THE URDU NATIONAL ANTHEM. As I consider it to be most important, if not indispensable, that every person, from the Secretary of State for India downwards, who is connected with the administration of that country, should be, at least, a master of Urdu, its lingua franca, I wish to point out, as I have since 1859, the inconveniences that arise from our continued neglect of Oriental Linguistics. I will begin with the Urdu translation of the “ National Anthem," a task to which, it might have been supposed, that even our Chamber-Orientalists would have addressed the fulness of their attention and knowledge, but which was, practically, left to a Persian who was only imperfectly acquainted with that language. A movement, which cost or spent much money, time and labour, for rendering the Anthem into various Oriental languages, took place ten years ago, but beyond the Bengali and, perhaps also, the Gujerati versions (which I am not competent to criticize) a more lamentable exhibition of want of linguistic insight and scholarship, especially in the Urdu translation, could not be conceived. As I see that this production is actually republished with praise, in a recent “upcountry " paper in England, I must again expose its defects and the carelessness of those who recommended it for adoption, but none of whom really knew Urdu.* I will
* I make an exception in favour of the late Professor W. P., who is alleged to have approved it, and of Sir W. M., who is, however, not so much an Urdu as an Arabic scholar, and who, therefore, advocated the official adoption of the title “Kaisar-i-Hind,” which I had invented and carried into popular acceptance, on grounds that make it inapplicable to India. I may here mention, as an instance of unconscious superciliousness, due to want of sympathy with linguistic research, that when Her Majesty was to be proclaimed “ Kaisar-i-Hind,” at the Delhi Imperial Assemblage to the Chiefs and the peoples of India, the proclamation was actually going to be read out in English only, had I not, being accidentally on the Committee for the reception of addresses, heard of this intention, and interposed at the last moment to get it translated into Urdu for the benefit of those whom the new title directly concerned, and in aid of whose identification with Great Britain I had started a polyglot journal called “Qaum-i-Qaisari,” ==“The Imperial or Cæsarian Nation.” I do not recollect any instance in History of even an Asiatic conqueror ever proclaiming his intentions to the conquered in his own, and not their, language, especially when he proposed to confer a favour or an honour on them.
then proceed to analyze the translations of certain missionary publications, which can only 'pervert 'the Oriental Pagan or Muhammadan, and I will also refer to the impression created by the public utterances of some special Envoys, Viceroys, Philanthropists and others, who endeavour to rule or to influence natives of the East without knowing their language or studying their history, religions, and customs. The Treaties or Letters translated into pigeon-Urdu, kitchen-Persian, and porter-Turkish or Arabic by irresponsible “native" subordinates of careless English superiors, also deserve attention, because of the mischief which they have wrought to British interests. The interviews of European Envoys with Eastern potentates should be described in the ipsissima verba of their interpreters, so that they may be compared with the official account rendered by our last hero or saint to the Foreign Office or to the Press. Nor are the vagaries of our Indian Census and other Reports unconnected with incorrect or too literal translations of an English model. It is high time that the present system of self-stultification should cease, and that the British public should know precisely how Eastern affairs are managed. There is, e.g., now an unnecessary, or rather suicidal, project for a Delimitation Commission of the unknown Pamirs and adjoining countries. I have not yet heard of any person in connection with it, who could, if he would, understand the merits of a case that should be decided, not by either English or Russian preconceptions, but by a sole regard to truth and to the facts, that can only be elicited by a knowledge of the languages, history, and vested rights of the peoples concerned. However, to return to the “National Anthem.” For the small sum of fifty rupees I obtained a dozen versions, including the one to which Sir W. Andrew awarded a prize of five hundred rupees, and which I criticized in the last issue of the Asiatic Quarterly Review. They are all far better than the subjoined translation of the “ London National Anthem Society," which, amidst much blowing of trumpets, demanded thousands of pounds for what it called a “gift to
India," whereas the sole raison d'être of a truly “ National Anthem" in India would have been its spontaneity in that country, as, inter alia, shown by, practically, entailing no cost whatever. At the same time, there is no reason why, as an “ Imperial Anthem,” “the British National Anthem" should not be properly translated into the various languages of Her Majesty's subjects. This cannot, however, be done by Chamber-Orientalists or by uneducated Oriental natives in this country, whose translations or quotations are sometimes intentionally derogatory to the European objects of their praise. [Of this, a notable instance has occurred lately.] I cannot conceive how anyone at the India Office could have commended a translation, the very heading of which for “ National Anthem ”is scarcely appropriate. It is “Haqq Kaisar-Ka Yár ho.” Again, the heading is followed by an explanatory note which, if not utterly meaningless, confines the invoked blessing to the present and the past and the Anthem itself to churches (if we read the hybrid “Kilisiáôn” rightly). The note literally is: “This pamphlet (1) for churches composed (water? to take ?) its conclusion thanks to God upon past and present protection ” =“ Ye nuskha Kilisiáôn ke liye tartîb páni khatima uska tashakkur Khudá ko mázi aur hál ki himayat-par.” Spelling, grammar, construction, sense, and intention, all are wrong, and in two lines the loyalty, religion, and good taste of our fellow-subjects are alike insulted. Instead of all this “explanation,” some heading like “Naghma-i-Kaisari” or “Sarôd-i-Kaisari” for “ Imperial Anthem” or “the Anthem of the Kaisar "-[i-Hind] would have told its tale without offence to anyone.
THE LONDON NATIONAL ANTHEM SOCIETY AND ITS
URDU TRANSLATION OF “THE NATIONAL ANTHEM,” WITH SUPPLEMENTARY STANZAS FOR INDIA.
First VerseLine 1.-Khuda bachawe Kaisar ko. 2.–Be hadd barhawe Kaisar 1. GOD save our EMPRESS QUEEN ; ko.
2. Long live our Gracious QUEEN ; 3.-Haqq Kaisar ká yar ho.
3. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.