1898.] M. A. Stein — New inscriptions discovered by Major Beane. 15 
Meagre as these details are they show yet clearly that in searching 
for the national and literary affinities .of the race which held the rule 
of Kia-pi-shi and Gandhara in Hiuen Tsiang’s time, we have to look 
to the Turkish tribes in the north and not in the direction of India. 
A century later Udyana too had passed under the same dominion. 
Whereas Iiiuen Tsiang speaks yet of independent kings in Udyana 
(TJ-chang-na, Si-yu-ki, i., p. 121), we see from a passage of the T'ang 
Annals (L’Itineraire d’Ou-K'ong, p. 349 note) that a.d. 745 this territory 
was already united with Gandhara and Kia-pi-shi under the same rule. 
In that }mar P'o-p'o, king of Ki-pin, is said to have received the imperial 
authority for assuming the title of ‘ King of Ki-pin and Ou-chang .’ 
This historical fact would allow us to account for the occurrence of 
Turkish inscriptions in regions like Swat and Boner which undoubtedly 
belonged to Udyana, notwithstanding the record which Hiuen Tsiang 
has left us as to the connection of the language and writing of Udyana 
with, that of India. 9 
The publications of the Danish Academy and the Finno-Ugrian 
Society, containing the Orkhon inscriptions, are to my regret not 
accessible to me at present. I am, therefore, unable to ascertain with 
which of the several types of writing distinguished above their 
characters show most affinity. 
Perhaps, a comparison of the Orkhon inscriptions will also throw 
some light on the relation of these types amongst each other. The 
first three as well as the fifth have undoubtedly numerous simple 
characters in common and might represent modifications of one and the 
same system of writing adapted to different languages or dialects. 
It is, however, evident that other explanations are also possible, and 
that all conjectures on the subject must for the present remain extremely 
hazardous. 
Gamp, Kashmir: 19th September, 1896, 
9 “ Their language though different in some points, yet greatly resembles that 
of India. Their written characters and their rales of etiquette are also of a mixed 
character as before.” See Si-yu-ki , i. p., 120. 
The local names of Swat and Boner, as far as shown on the map, with their 
frequent terminations in-gram and -Icot, seem to support the belief that these regions 
were at a time preceding the Pathan conquest inhabited by a population which in its 
great mass spoke an Indian language. This circumstance, however, could well be 
reconciled with a prolonged dominion over those territories of Turkish masters or 
even their temporary occupation by a Turkish-speaking population. 
Without going for analogies to Europe where, e.g., the Balkan Peninsula would 
furnish them in plenty, we may refer to the local nomenclature of the Upper 
Derajat along the right Indus bank and to that of Yusufzai-Gandhara itself. This 
has preserved its Indian character notwithstanding the fact that the great mass of 
the population in these tracts has for centuries back been speaking Pusthu. 
