210 R. Hoernle— Remarks on General Cunningham's Notes. [Atret. 
moulds, and laid upon coarse canvas cloth to set. This was most probably 
done intentionally, as the rough back of the cast would adhere more firmly 
to the wall when it came to be fixed. 
Dr. Hoernle said— 
The principal objections of Major-Genl. A. Cunningham to my 
notices of the coins seem to be those referring to the interpretation of 
the Arian Pali legend on the coins of Kadphises, and of the word Korano 
on the coins of Kanerki. As to the first, I did not claim the interpre¬ 
tation given by me either as my own or as something new. I mentioned it 
as being the best of the interpretations hitherto given, and I took it in the 
main from E. Thomas, who, as I said, does not mention its author. I did 
not know then, that it was substantially the one given by Genl. Cunning¬ 
ham. I sincerely regret the circumstance ; as I should not wish to appear 
to fail in rendering to Genl. Cunningham that high consideration to which, 
on account of his long-continued and very successful labours in the cause 
of Archaeological Science, he is so fully entitled at the hands of all who 
follow similar pursuits. My contribution consisted in the reading of 
sagcla for sarva. The latter, I admit, accords well with the characters as 
traced on coins Nos. I to IX. But on No. X the conjunct is traced 
differently. They may be merely two different forms of the same conjunct 
( rv ). In any case the variety is worth noting. 
As to Korano, I was not unaware of the explanation referred to by 
Genl. Cunningham. It was in my mind, when I wrote the remark about 
Lassen. I took it from Lassen, who, I think, omits to mention that 
he had it from Genl. Cunningham. I can only repeat my sincere regret, 
that I was misinformed as to the authorship of the explanation. But 
I must still think, as I thought then, that the identification of Korano with 
Kushano has not been satisfactorily made out. I do not say that the 
identification of Korano with Koiranos is quite satisfactory either. I only 
ventured to express the opinion, that the latter identification may yet 
prove to be correct. The mainstay of the other theory appears to be a certain 
assumed “ peculiar law of the Turki language by which sli and z are changed 
to r.” It is not quite clear, whether this means that what is sh or z in 
Turki becomes r in Greek ; or what is r in Turki becomes sh or z in Pali; 
probably the former. In either case it does not seem to me, that we really 
know what the Turki sound was. We have the corresponding sets of 
names : Kanerki, JETverki and Kanislika, Kuvishka. Of these, I suppose, 
the former is the Greek, the latter the Indian equivalent of a Turki 
name ; and clearly the Greek r corresponds to the Indian sh ; but what the 
Turki sound may have been, which they both equally represent, it seems to 
me, we do not know. But admitting that law for the sake of argument, 
