The History of Indian Literature c10.62

c10.62

P. 247, note ²⁶⁸. Of importance are the names, communicated to me from Albírúní by Ed. Sachau, of the *menázil* in Soghd and Khvárizm, the list of which begins with *thurayyá*, *i.e.*, with *kṛittiká*, and that under the name *parví*; by this is evidently meant *parvíz*, *i.e.*, the name which stands *third* in the Bundehesh, whence it necessarily follows that the list of names in the latter is the modern one, commencing with *áśviní*; see *Jenaer Lit. Zeit.*, 1877 (7th April), p. 221. Some of the names here cited by Albírúní are distinctly Indian, as *frshtbáth*, *i.e.*, *proshṭhapáda*, the ancient form of name, consequently, (not *bhadrapadá*). Here, too, presumably, as in the case of China, the Buddhists were the channel of communication.