Andrew Ollett, Language of the Snakes. Prakrit, Sanskrit, and the Language Order of Premodern India

Cracow Indological Studies Vol. XIX, No. 2 (2017) https://doi.org/10.12797/CIS.19.2017.02.06

Andrew Ollett, Language of the Snakes. Prakrit, Sanskrit, and the Language Order of Premodern India . pp. 290. Oakland: University of California Press. October 2017.—Reviewed by Lidia Wojtczak (SOAS, University of London).

$QGUHZ2OOHWW¶VERRNSXEOLVKHGLQ2FWREHUFRQVWLWXWHVDUHYLVHG YHUVLRQ RI KLV 'RFWRUDO 7KHVLV RI 7KH ³ELRJUDSK\ RI 3UDNULW IURPWKHSHUVSHFWLYHRIFXOWXUDOKLVWRU\´ S LVDEROGVWDWHPHQWRI WKHDXWKRU¶VGHGLFDWLRQWRDFORVHDQGVHQVLWLYHUHDGLQJRIWKHOLWHUDWXUH RI SUHPRGHUQ 6RXWK$VLD7KH ERRN LV GLYLGHG LQWR VHYHQ FKDSWHUV HDFK D IDUUHDFKLQJ DQG LQGHSWK DQDO\VLV RI 3UDNULW¶V LPSDFW RQ and interactions with, the literary culture of early India. The volume LV VXSSOHPHQWHG E\ WKUHH YDOXDEOH DQG LOOXPLQDWLQJ DSSHQGLFHV DQG E\ FRSLRXV QRWHV ZKLFK EULQJ RXW WKH DXWKRU¶V HUXGLWH DSSURDFK WRWKHVXEMHFWPDWWHU 2OOHWW SRVLWV WKDW 3UDNULW LV WKH ³NH\ WR XQGHUVWDQGLQJ KRZ literary languages worked in premodern India as a whole and it pro- YLGHV DQ DOWHUQDWLYH ZD\ RI WKLQNLQJ DERXW ODQJXDJH´ S $V KHH[SODLQV3UDNULW¶VSODFHLQWKHLQWHUDFWLYHOLQJXLVWLFIUDPHZRUNRI ,QGLDDWWKHEHJLQQLQJRIWKH&RPPRQ(UD2OOHWWGLVWDQFHVKLPVHOI IURP PRGHUQ GLVFXVVLRQV RQ ZKDW VWDQGV EHKLQG WKH WHUP µ3UDNULW¶ DV RSSRVHG WR µ0LGGOH ,QGLF¶ DQG LQVWHDG ORRNV IRU KLV GH¿QLWLRQ LQSUHPRGHUQVRXUFHV3UDNULWKHWHOOVXV³LVZKDW3UDNULWWH[WVWHOOXV they are written in”, and most generally, it is “the language of literary WH[WVFRPSRVHGLQWKH¿UVWKDOIRIWKH¿UVWPLOOHQQLXP&(´ S 118 Cracow Indological Studies

,W ZDV D ³FODVVLFDO´ ODQJXDJH LQ PDQ\ VHQVHV RI WKH ZRUG²3UDNULW WH[WVZHUHMXGJHGFODVVLFDOE\WKHSHRSOHUHDGLQJWKHPIURPWKHEHJLQ - ning of the Common Era and the language was cultivated as a mark- HU RI ³LQWHOOHFWXDO FXOWXUH´ QRW RQO\ LQ ,QGLD EXW DFURVV 6RXWK DQG South-East Asia (p. 9). Literature was foundational to the formation of the “Sanskrit Cosmopolis”—the supra-regional, socio-political, and cultural order WKDW 6KHOGRQ 3ROORFN KDV LGHQWL¿HG DV H[LVWLQJ LQ WKH ¿UVW PLOOHQ nium CE. As the term itself suggests, this was a phenomenon that hinged on the Sanskrit language, and it was intrinsically connected to the production of “courtly literature”, NƗY\D . However, Ollett under- VFRUHVWKHVLJQL¿FDQWLPSDFWWKDW3UDNULWKDGRQWKHGHYHORSPHQWRI NƗY\D DQGKHSURSRVHVWRWDNHXS³DQROGEXWPRVWO\IRUJRWWHQVXJJHV - tion that NƗY\D EHJDQDVkavva DQGWKDW6DQVNULWOHDUQHGWREHSRHWLF IURP3UDNULW´ S 2OOHWWUHÀHFWVWKDW3UDNULWLVDODQJXDJHZKLFKVWXEERUQO\UHIXVHV to conform to modern categories of language theory. This gives rise WRWKHTXHVWLRQRIWKHIXQFWLRQRI3UDNULW²LWZDVQRWDODQJXDJHRI D³FRPPXQLW\RIVSHDNHUV´RURIDUHOLJLRXVJURXSEXWXSKHOGZKDW FDQ RQO\ EH GH¿QHG DV D ³OLWHUDU\ FXOWXUH´ S 3UDNULW PXFK OLNH6DQVNULWZDVDQ³DUWL¿FLDO´ODQJXDJHZKLFKIXQFWLRQHGWKURXJK LWV WH[WV S DQG ERWK 6DQVNULW DQG 3UDNULW ³FDQ EH WKH VXEMHFWV RI D FXOWXUDO KLVWRU\ RI ODQJXDJH VLQFH WKH\ KDYH EHHQ GH¿QHG DQG deployed as cultural products all along” (p. 22). Ollett is not in favour RIVHDUFKLQJIRUWKHEHJLQQLQJVRI3UDNULWLQWKHPRVWDQFLHQW,QGLDQ WH[WV VXFKDV3DWDxMDOL¶V 0DKƗEKƗ܈\D DQGLQVWHDGDUJXHVWKDW3UDNULW EHJDQZKHQLWZDV³LQYHQWHG´DVDODQJXDJHRISRZHU7KLVPRPHQW of creation was part and parcel of the greater emergence of a set of FXOWXUDODQGSROLWLFDOSUDFWLFHVLQWKHFRQWH[WRIWKH6ƗWDYƗKDQD(PSLUH (1 st c. BCE–3 rd c. CE). 2OOHWWJRHVRQWRDUJXHIRUWKH³LQYHQWLRQ´RI3UDNULWLQWKHWZR following chapters. In Chapter Two, he provides the reader with a pen- HWUDWLYHVWXG\RIWKHHDUOLHVW6ƗWDYƗKDQDLQVFULSWLRQVDWWKH1Ɨ৆HJKƗ৬ 3DVV LQ WKH:HVWHUQ *KDWV7KH 6ƗWDYƗKDQDV UXOHG RYHU WKH 'HFFDQ Reviews 119

URXJKO\ EHWZHHQ %&( DQG &( DQG DV 2OOHWW ZULWHV ZHUH ³FORVHO\ DVVRFLDWHG ERWK ZLWK UDGLFDO LQQRYDWLRQV LQ LQVFULSWLRQDO GLVFRXUVHLQWKLVSHULRGDQGZLWKWKHLQYHQWLRQRI3UDNULWOLWHUDWXUH´ S $W1Ɨ৆HJKƗ৬ĝUƯ6ƗWDNDU৆LDQGKLVTXHHQ1ƗJDQLNƗFRPPLV - , L۬Ɨ܈VLRQHGWKHFDUYLQJRID3UDNULWLQVFULSWLRQLQZKLFK dharma and GDN as well as the Vedic rituals of UƗMDVǌ\D and DĞYDPHGKD play a central UROHDWWHVWLQJWRWKH6ƗWDYƗKDQD¶V³YLVLRQRISROLWLFDOSRZHU´ S 2OOHWW UHPDUNV RQ WKH XQPLVWDNDEO\ OLWHUDU\ QDWXUH RI WKH LQVFULS - WLRQ¶V ODQJXDJH²LW LV FKDUDFWHUL]HG E\ ORQJ VHULHV RI FRPSRXQGV ZKDWZRXOGODWHUEHFDOOHG ojas SRZHUE\WKHRUHWLFLDQV DQGE\¿J - XUHVRIERWKVRXQGDQGVHQVH S Ollett then discusses a roughly contemporaneous counter-practice RI XVLQJ 6DQVNULW LQ HXORJLVWLF LQVFULSWLRQV ZKLFK ZDV HPSOR\HG E\ WKH .ৢDWUDSDV²WKH 6F\WKLDQ RU ĝDND NLQJV RI ZKDW LV PRGHUQGD\ *XMDUDW%\UHIHUULQJWRDSDLURILQVFULSWLRQVVSRQVRUHGE\WKHĝDNDUXOHU 8ৢDYDGƗWD RQHLQ3UDNULWWKHRWKHULQDPL[RI3UDNULWDQG6DQVNULW 2OOHWWSURYHVWKDWOLQJXLVWLFFKRLFHVKDGDNH\IXQFWLRQDOLW\LQHVWDE - OLVKLQJ WKH FRQFHSWLRQV RI SRZHU LQ WKH ¿UVW FHQWXULHV RI WKH &RP - mon Era and that these choices had lasting effects on the political and cultural discourse. 7KHFKDQJHVZKLFKOHG6DQVNULWWREHFRPH the language of power WRRNSODFHDV2OOHWWQRWHVRQDQDHVWKHWLFYHFWRUDQGZHUHQRWLQÀX - HQFHGE\UHOLJLRXVFRQFHUQV+HUHIXWHVWKHWKHRU\WKDW6DQVNULWZHQW “hand-in-hand” with Brahmanization, pointing out that the early Brah- minical society had never expressed itself as a SROLWLFDO or cultural HQWLW\LQ6DQVNULW,QIDFWDV2OOHWWDUJXHV%UDKPLQVZRXOGKDYHEHHQ VWURQJO\DJDLQVWWKHXVHRIWKHODQJXDJHRIWKHJRGVE\IRUHLJQLQYDGHUV VXFKDVWKH.ৢDWUDSDV SS± Ollett challenges the role of Sanskrit as a legitimizing agent and questions the importance of Sanskritization in creating a language of politics. He points to the contradictions which arise when one links Sanskritization to the Brahmanization of cultural discourse. He writes WKDW³>L@WLVRQO\ZKHQZHORRNDWFXOWXUDOFKDQJHVDQGDERYHDOOWKHFUH - DWLRQDQGFRQWHVWDWLRQRIDSRHWU\RISROLWLFVEHWZHHQWKH6ƗWDYƗKDQDV 120 Cracow Indological Studies

DQGWKH.ৢDWUDSDVWKDWZHFDQXQGHUVWDQGWKHJHQXLQHO\QHZUROHVWKDW 6DQVNULWDQGLWVRWKHUVRFFXSLHGLQWKH¿UVWFHQWXU\DQGWKHFRPSOH[ ways in which these roles redetermined the languages that occupied them” (p. 48). In the conclusion to Chapter Two, Ollett also proposes WRORRNDWWKHSURFHVVHVWDNLQJSODFHLQWKH,QGLDRIWKH6ƗWDYƗKDQDV DQG .ৢDWUDSDV WKURXJK WKH OHQV RI ³OLWHUDUL]DWLRQ´ ZKLFK KH GH¿QHV DV ³WKH SURFHVV E\ ZKLFK DQ H[LVWLQJ GLVFRXUVH WDNHV RQ µOLWHUDU\¶ features” (p. 48). &KDSWHU7KUHH³,QYHQWLQJ3UDNULW7KH/DQJXDJHVRI/LWHUDWXUH´ FHQWUHV RQ WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI -DLQ 3UDNULW OLWHUDWXUH 2OOHWW SURSRVHV WKDW WKH KLWKHUWR KHOG UHGXFWLYH GLYLGH RI HDUO\ 3UDNULW LQWR ³-DLQ´ DQG³FRXUWO\´3UDNULWKDVVNHZHGRXUXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIWKHDQDORJLHV EHWZHHQWH[WVVXFKDVWKH³QRQ-DLQ´ 6DWWDVDƯ and the “Jain” 7DUD۪JDYDWƯ (p. 51). In presenting his vision of the interconnected and multi-lingual emergence of poetic language in India, Ollett coins the phrase “ NƗY\D movement” which he understands as “a cultural-political formation, lasting roughly from the second to the twelfth century and spreading over much of southern Asia, that was imagined through the universal- izing discourses of Sanskrit” (p. 52). 7KHIROORZLQJVHFWLRQVGHDOZLWKWKHEHJLQQLQJVRI3UDNULWOLWHUDWXUH DQGWKHPDLQGLIIHUHQFHVWKDWDUHVHHQWRH[LVWEHWZHHQ-DLQDQGQRQ -DLQ 3UDNULW ZRUNV IRUPDO WKHPDWLF OLQJXLVWLF FRQWH[WXDO 2OOHWW emphasizes that these differences were not present in the earliest stages RIWKHGHYHORSPHQWRI3UDNULWOLWHUDWXUHDQGSURFHHGVWRDQLQGHSWK analysis of the 6DWWDVDƯ —theories on its dating, its self-representation (p. 59), its literary and ideological context, and its courtliness. The 6DWWDVDƯ FRPSRVHG LQ WKH FRXUW RI WKH 6ƗWDYƗKDQD NLQJ +ƗODZDVDVWDUWLQJSRLQWIRUWKHFRXUWO\3UDNULWSRHPDQG2OOHWWXVHV LWV DQDO\VLV WR IRUP WKH JURXQGZRUN IRU TXHVWLRQV DERXW WKH EHJLQ - QLQJVRI-DLQ3UDNULWOLWHUDWXUH+HGLVFXVVHVWKUHHDFFHSWHGFRQVWDQWV of Jain literature: its continuity with Jain teachings; the continuity ³EHWZHHQ -DLQ ODQJXDJH SUDFWLFHV DQG GHPRWLF µHYHU\GD\¶ ODQJXDJH SUDFWLFHV´DQGWKHLGHQWL¿FDWLRQRI-DLQODQJXDJHSUDFWLFHVDV3UDNULW (pp. 69–72). Ollett studies the development of literature composed in Reviews 121

³-DLQ0ƗKƗUƗৢ৬UƯ´ZLWKVSHFLDOIRFXVRQWKHODQJXDJHRIWKHHDUOLHVW FRPPHQWDULDO WUDGLWLRQV +H WKHQ PRYHV RQ WR H[DPLQH 3ƗOLWWD¶V - 7DUD۪JDYDWƯ D YHUVHG 3UDNULW QRYHO ZKLFK VXUYLYHV RQO\ LQ DEULGJ ments, and which he refers to as, “the missing piece that links the two KLVWRULHVRI3UDNULWOLWHUDWXUHWRHDFKRWKHU´ S 3ƗOLWWDZDVD-DLQ SRHWDVVRFLDWHGZLWK+ƗODFRPSLOHURIWKH6DWWDVDƯ . This association, together with the features of the 7DUD۪JDYDWƯ VKRZ WKDW LQ 3ƗOLWWD¶V WLPHV ³WKH FRXUWO\ DQG WKH -DLQ KLVWRULHV RI 3UDNULW DUH FURVVHG RU UDWKHUWKH\KDYHQRW\HWEHHQVHSDUDWHGIURPHDFKRWKHU´ S 2OOHWW¶VPRVWLPSRUWDQWFRQFOXVLRQLQWKLVFKDSWHULVWKDWWKHHURWLF FRXUWO\3UDNULWWH[WVDQGWKHPRUHGLGDFWLF-DLQ3UDNULWSRHWU\FRRSHUDW - HGLQWKHFUHDWLRQRIWKH³QHZGLVFXUVLYHSKHQRPHQRQ´WKDWZDV3UDNULW OLWHUDWXUH+H]HURHVLQ³RQDPRPHQWZKHQ3UDNULWOLWHUDWXUHZDVJLYHQ the form that it would take for more than a millennium afterwards” S DQGSRVLWLRQVLWDVWKHSRLQWRIRULJLQRIDOLWHUDUL]HG3UDNULW² “of new discursive spheres, new genres and practices to occupy them, and new disciplines to regulate them” (p. 83). &KDSWHU)RXU³7KH)RUPVRI3UDNULW/LWHUDWXUH´DLPVWRGLVFXVV 3UDNULW ³SKHQRPHQRORJ\ DQG DHVWKHWLFV´ ZLWKRXW FRQWUDVWLQJ WKHP with their Sanskrit counterparts (p. 85). Ollett examines various DSSURDFKHV WRZDUGV OLWHUDU\ ODQJXDJH DQG REVHUYHV RQFH DJDLQ WKDW 3UDNULWFDQQRWEHIRUFHGLQWRDQ\RIWKHH[LVWLQJPRXOGV+HWKHQSUHV - HQWV KLV UHDGHUV ZLWK ZKDW PDGH 3UDNULW D OLWHUDU\ ODQJXDJH DFFRUG - LQJWRWKHSHRSOHXVLQJLW²³VZHHWV\OODEOHV´³TXDYHULQJUK\WKP´DQG ³XQERXQGFKDUDFWHU´ S 7KHVHFWLRQRQWKH¿UVWLVDQH[DPLQDWLRQ RIWKHSKRQHWLFFKDUDFWHULVWLFVRIWKH3UDNULWODQJXDJH²WKHVFDUFLW\RI FRQVRQDQWVFRPELQHGZLWKWKHSUHGRPLQDQFHRIRSHQYRZHOVRXQGV gives the impression of musicality (pp. 88–94). The section Quavering Verses LV DQ DGYDQFHG VWXG\ RI 3UDNULW YHUVL¿FDWLRQ DQG WKH RPQL - present and versatile JƗWKƗ metre, which was also employed in sung YHUVHDQGIXUWKHUDGGHGWRWKHSRHWU\¶VPHORGLRXVQHVV SS± ,Q Inexhaustible Collections SS± 2OOHWWQRWLFHVWKDWPRVW3UDNULW JƗWKƗ verses were poems in themselves. This allowed the majority of 3UDNULWSRHWU\WRH[LVWLQDQWKRORJLHVRIVLQJOHVWDQ]DVDQG³HQFRXUDJHG 122 Cracow Indological Studies poems to circulate promiscuously, to appear in diverse contexts, to mean different things to different people” (p. 110). 2OOHWWLVLQVSLUHGE\,PPDQXHO.DQWDQGHVSHFLDOO\1DRNL6DNDL WRDGRSWDVFKHPDLQDQDWWHPSWWRGHVFULEHWKHODQJXDJHRUGHURISUH - PRGHUQ,QGLDLQ&KDSWHU)LYH³)LJXULQJ3UDNULW´+HQRWHVWKDWWKLV is a novel approach towards language in the Indological context, which tends to favour sociolinguistic methods (p. 112). Ollett outlines four main features of what he calls the “archetypal schema”: “the opposi- WLRQEHWZHHQ6DQVNULWDQG3UDNULWWKHLGHQWLW\RI6DQVNULWDQG3UDNULW WKHWRWDOLW\RIWKHSUDFWLFHVWKHVFKHPDUHSUHVHQWVDQGWKHLWHUDELOL - ty of its distinctions” (p. 114). As he takes his readers through these IRXUSRLQWVLQWKHIROORZLQJVHFWLRQV SS± 2OOHWWEULQJVRXW the interconnectedness of the representations of languages in premod- HUQ,QGLD+LVVFKHPD³VXSSOLHVWKHEDVLFFDWHJRULHV²LQFOXGLQJWKHODQ - JXDJHVWKHPVHOYHV²DQGFDOLEUDWHVDFRPSOH[VHWRIUHODWLRQVFRQVWLWXWLQJ DIUDPHZRUNZLWKLQZKLFKODQJXDJHFDQEHWKRXJKW´ S 7KHVWXG\RI3UDNULWDVDQREMHFWRINQRZOHGJHIRUPVWKHFRUHRI &KDSWHU6L[³.QRZLQJ3UDNULW´7KLVLQFOXGHVNQRZOHGJHRIWKHSODFH RI 3UDNULW WH[WV ZLWKLQ OLWHUDU\ WUDGLWLRQV DV ZHOO DV WKH WUDGLWLRQV RI NQRZOHGJH DERXW 3UDNULW DV D ODQJXDJH 3UDNULW JUDPPDU 2OOHWW SRLQWVRXWWKDWNQRZOHGJHRI3UDNULWZDV³SKLORORJLFDO´DQGWKDWLWZDV ³QRWDµPRGHORI¶DOLQJXLVWLFUHDOLW\ZLWKDQLQGHSHQGHQWH[LVWHQFHEXW DµPRGHOIRU¶WKHFRQWLQXRXVUHFUHDWLRQ²WKURXJKUHDGLQJFRPPHQW - LQJ DQWKRORJL]LQJ UHFRPELQLQJ DQG FRPSRVLQJ DQHZ²RI OLWHUDU\ traditions” (p. 142). :KDWIROORZVLVDQH[KDXVWLYH³DUFKDHRORJ\´RI3UDNULWNQRZOHGJH ³DQ DWWHPSW WR FRQVWUXFW D KLVWRULFDO QDUUDWLYH RQ WKH EDVLV RI WH[WV that resist it: lost texts, fragmentary texts, poorly preserved texts, cor- rupt texts, authorless texts, imaginary texts, mythical texts” (p. 144). 2OOHWWGUDZVRQPDQ\3UDNULWVRXUFHVEXWIRFXVHVPDLQO\RQ9DUDUXFL¶V 3UƗN܀WDSUDNƗĞD WKHHDUOLHVWIXOO\H[WDQW3UDNULWJUDPPDU+HUHLWHUDWHV /XLJLD1LWWL'ROFL¶VREVHUYDWLRQWKDWWKLVLVQRWDJUDPPDURIDODQJXDJH LQWKHEURDGHUVHQVHEXWDJUDPPDURIWKH³3UDNULWOLWHUDU\WUDGLWLRQ UHSUHVHQWHGDERYHDOOE\ Seven Centuries ” (p. 148). Ollett launches into Reviews 123 a study of the textual history of the 3UƗN܀WDSUDNƗĞD , emphasizing what KHEHOLHYHVWREHDOLPLQDOSRLQWLQ³3UDNULWNQRZOHGJH´LHWKHDGGL - WLRQRIFKDSWHUVRQRWKHUODQJXDJHVQDPHO\0ƗJDGKƯDQGĝDXUDVHQƯ ZKLFKUHSUHVHQW³DSOXUDOL]DWLRQRIWKHFDWHJRU\RIµ3UDNULW¶´ S 7KH ¿QDO VHFWLRQ RI WKLV FKDSWHU Grammar, Metagrammar and the Regional GHDOV ZLWK WKH FRQYHQWLRQV RI 3UDNULW JUDPPDU PRVW prominently with its three core categories of tatsama , tadbhava and GHĞƯ 2OOHWWSUHIHUV³PHWDJUDPPDU´IRUWKHVH ZKLFKKDYHWKHLUEHJLQQLQJV LQ 'D৆ঌLQ¶V .ƗY\ƗGDUĞD 3UDNULW LV WKHQ FRQWH[WXDOL]HG LQ LWV UHODWLRQ - VKLSZLWKWKHYHUQDFXODUODQJXDJHVRISUHPRGHUQ,QGLDDQG2OOHWWUHÀHFWV RQLWVUROHLQWKH³9HUQDFXODU0LOOHQQLXP´3UDNULWKHDUJXHVSURYLGHG WKHPRGHOIRUYHUQDFXODUODQJXDJHVWREHFRPHQRWRQO\OLWHUL]HGEXWDOVR OLWHUDUL]HGLHUH¿QHGWRVHUYHWKHSXUSRVHVRIOLWHUDWXUH S LWSURYHG that there could exist a “counterpractice to Sanskrit” (p. 164). 2OOHWWRSHQV&KDSWHU6HYHQ³)RUJHWWLQJ3UDNULW´ZLWKDQH[WUHPHO\ useful and clear summary of his dense and wide-ranging work. He goes RQ WR GLVSXWH WKH QDUUDWLYH RI 3UDNULW¶V ³GHFOLQH´ QRWLQJ VRPH NH\ SRLQWVWKDWKDYHEHHQRYHUORRNHGE\WKRVHZKRDFFHSWWKLVQDUUDWLYH He proposes to analyse this complex process from multiple points of YLHZ7KH ¿UVW RI WKHVH LV WKH SHUVSHFWLYH RI ³GLVSODFHPHQW´ ZKLFK KHXQGHUVWDQGVDV³3UDNULW¶VGLVSODFHPHQWIURPDSRVLWLRQRILPSRU - WDQFHERWKLQDFWXDOSUDFWLFHVDQGLQWKHFRQFHSWXDORUGHULQJRIWKHVH SUDFWLFHV´ S $QRWKHUSURFHVVWKDWLQÀXHQFHG3UDNULW¶VORVVRI importance was “vernacularization”, in which vernacular languages HGJHG3UDNULWRXWRIWKH³VFKHPDRIFR¿JXUDWLRQ´ YLVjYLV Sanskrit S 7KHVH SURFHVVHV HQDEOHG RU SHUKDSV HQFRXUDJHG WKH SXVK WRFUHDWHDEULGJPHQWVRI3UDNULWOLWHUDWXUHDQGWRWUDQVODWH3UDNULWZRUNV into Sanskrit (pp. 178–180). 2OOHWWKLJKOLJKWVWKDWWKHSURFHVVHVRI³GLVSODFHPHQWDEULGJPHQW DQGWUDQVODWLRQDOOSRLQWWRWKHSUHFDULRXVSRVLWLRQWKDW3UDNULWKDGJRLQJ LQWRWKHWZHOIWKDQGWKLUWHHQWKFHQWXULHV´ S $OWKRXJK3UDNULW¶V role continued to diminish, over the following centuries many com- PHQWDULHVDQGWUHDWLVHVRI3UDNULWJUDPPDUZHUHZULWWHQLQ³LPSRUWDQW centers of political and intellectual power, and some were produced 124 Cracow Indological Studies

E\WKHPRVWOHDUQHGVFKRODUVRIWKHLUDJH´ S 6FKRODUVUHWDLQHG interest in reworking and re-conceptualising the knowledge of this ³G\LQJODQJXDJH´EHFDXVHLWZDVDPDUNHURI³SKLORORJLFDOH[SHUWLVH´ S ZKLFK2OOHWWGHPRQVWUDWHVRQWKHH[DPSOHRI*KDQDĞ\ƗPD¶V ƖQDQGDVXQGDUƯ (18 th F&( D3UDNULWURPDQWLFFRPHG\ VDܒܒDND ). ,QWKHRSHQLQJSDJHVRIKLVERRN$QGUHZ2OOHWWZULWHVWKDW3UDNULW ³LVWKHPRVWLPSRUWDQW,QGLDQODQJXDJH\RX¶YHQHYHUKHDUGRI´ S However even for those of us fully aware of the existence and of WKHLPSRUWDQFHRI3UDNULWLQWKHFXOWXUDOGLVFRXUVHRISUHPRGHUQ,QGLD “The Language of the Snakes” is eye-opening. Ollett does not hesitate to question the hitherto functioning theories and terminology connect- HG ZLWK WKH K\EULGLW\ RI ODQJXDJHV %UDKPDQL]DWLRQ 6DQVNULWL]DWLRQ and legitimization, to name a few. Instead, he provides much more sophisticated and thoughtful interpretations of the necessarily compli- cated linguistic, political and cultural landscape of India in the early FHQWXULHVRIWKH&RPPRQ(UD+HUHDGVWH[WVQRWLQLVRODWLRQEXWDVSDUW RIDJUHDWHUDQGPRUHE\]DQWLQHVWUXFWXUHRIZHEVRILQÀXHQFHDQGGRHV not settle for reductive answers to the most perplexing questions.