DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.36954#0017
cooperative, and the investigation of yet unknown areas became
his special interest. He made many excellent photographs for his
department.
All other participants were specialists, necessarily confined to
their "own" discipline, and often interested in a particular
period.
Prof. FUSSMAN had made valuable contributions to the political
and cultural history of the states and statelets in the North-West
during the Early Buddhist period; so his focus was on Kharosthi
inscriptions. Prof. O. v. HINUBER had splendidly dealt with the
problems raised by the Gilgit Manuscripts, so he deciphered and
interpreted the Brahmi-inscriptions, well aware of their impor-
tance for Buddhist studies. His published results are intended for
experts in this field. Coordination, with the sometimes diverging
views of art-historians (e.g. Prof. HARTEL), is still a task for the
future.
Relevant work was done by a specialist for Indian palaeography,
Dr L. SANDER, and by scholars in the field of Iranian studies:
especially in respect of more than 500 Sogdian inscriptions, by
Dr LIV§IC, Prof. Dr H. HUMBACH and Dr N. SIMS-WILLIAMS.
The results are available to collaborators of the project, but only
a part are published so far. In respect of the restricted number of
Chinese and Tibetan inscriptions we are in the same situation.
Translations were proposed by qualified and interested colleagues
either by a short article — by the late MA YONG — or by person-
al letters (from Prof. D. SECKEL, Prof. H. FRANKE, Prof. L.
LEDDEROSE, Prof. K. SAGASTER and others); but they have
not been properly discussed in print so far.
I was involved in this work since its modest beginnings, later on
entrusted with the commitment to write the regular report on
the last campaign, and the application for the following one. So I
could hardly avoid trying to sketch a broad overview on the basis
of the complementary or conflicting views of these specialists,
correlating them with my own observations. An initial problem
was to bring the material into a chronological sequence, and to
discern the presence of ethnic and social groups expressing their
sentiments and intentions by signs, images and written texts.
Petroglyphs and nothing else form the "archaeological record"
here. Excavations were beyond the frame of the licence granted
XIII
his special interest. He made many excellent photographs for his
department.
All other participants were specialists, necessarily confined to
their "own" discipline, and often interested in a particular
period.
Prof. FUSSMAN had made valuable contributions to the political
and cultural history of the states and statelets in the North-West
during the Early Buddhist period; so his focus was on Kharosthi
inscriptions. Prof. O. v. HINUBER had splendidly dealt with the
problems raised by the Gilgit Manuscripts, so he deciphered and
interpreted the Brahmi-inscriptions, well aware of their impor-
tance for Buddhist studies. His published results are intended for
experts in this field. Coordination, with the sometimes diverging
views of art-historians (e.g. Prof. HARTEL), is still a task for the
future.
Relevant work was done by a specialist for Indian palaeography,
Dr L. SANDER, and by scholars in the field of Iranian studies:
especially in respect of more than 500 Sogdian inscriptions, by
Dr LIV§IC, Prof. Dr H. HUMBACH and Dr N. SIMS-WILLIAMS.
The results are available to collaborators of the project, but only
a part are published so far. In respect of the restricted number of
Chinese and Tibetan inscriptions we are in the same situation.
Translations were proposed by qualified and interested colleagues
either by a short article — by the late MA YONG — or by person-
al letters (from Prof. D. SECKEL, Prof. H. FRANKE, Prof. L.
LEDDEROSE, Prof. K. SAGASTER and others); but they have
not been properly discussed in print so far.
I was involved in this work since its modest beginnings, later on
entrusted with the commitment to write the regular report on
the last campaign, and the application for the following one. So I
could hardly avoid trying to sketch a broad overview on the basis
of the complementary or conflicting views of these specialists,
correlating them with my own observations. An initial problem
was to bring the material into a chronological sequence, and to
discern the presence of ethnic and social groups expressing their
sentiments and intentions by signs, images and written texts.
Petroglyphs and nothing else form the "archaeological record"
here. Excavations were beyond the frame of the licence granted
XIII