Michel has been working on the full catalogue for Lao
inscriptions for a long time. It should be a masterful work.
He is a methodolical scholar. His dissertation is very good.
He takes things one step at a time and produces high quality
work. He also works closely with Lao scholars and monks and
learns from them. He is always very busy though. He has a lot
of responsibilties to the EFEO and Nat. Univ. of Laos. He also
travels for conferences and to France often. I am glad that
you got to see some of his work. I cite a few other articles
by him in a recent article on Lao history. That should be out
soon. I hope.
How has contact with the UN gone? I have been learning more
about their "Quiet in the Land" project in Luang Phrabang,
from a friend of mine in Los Angeles. Would you be working on
that?
Best,
jm
---- Original message ----
>Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 03:38:07 -0700
>From: "Eisel Mazard" <Parajanaka@...>
>Subject: [palistudy] Pre-8th century inscription Mon/Pyu
>To: palistudy@yahoogroups.com, "David Wharton"
<davidwharton@...>
>
>Well, I found the EFEO library --contrary to earlier
indications, it
>is open to the public, so I need not sully myself by joining
the EFEO
>in order to use its collection.
>
>Lorrillard showed me two _in situ_ photographs of the
inscription in
>question --I must assume that the Mon specialists he showed
it to are
>only familiar with much later inscriptions, as it seemed to
me quite
>clear and easy to transliterate. I made notes in advance
based on
>what I expected to see (i.e., given that it is 8th century or
earlier,
>possibly in Sanskrit, and based on the other scant details that I
>could glean from the article) --these proved to be
adventitious notes.
> The orthography was just about exactly what I had expected,
i.e.,
>looking as much like Pyu (of the period) as Mon, with a lot
of glyphs
>being directly comparable to South-Indian (e.g., Kadamba)
forms of the
>same time.
>
>Lorrillard evidently wants to conduct the rest of the
research himself
>(as is his right), after further cleaning and rubbing the
stone; he
>did not deign to provide me with a copy or print-out of the
>inscription --although he insisted that he had shared it with
a large
>number of experts, none of whom could transliterate it.
However, I
>honestly think that I could have transliterated it fairly
easily; the
>simple fact is that while the people who produced that stone
were (it
>seems) ethnically Mon, it isn't really useful to think of it
as "Mon
>script". In the 8th century you've got a soup of Pallava and Pyu
>elements being used to write Sanskrit and Pali; someone whose
>expertise is in fully-developed Mon orthography (Dvaravati or
later)
>would indeed find this very wierd. If you're familiar with the
>earliest range (i.e., from Ashokan to Pallava) it doesn't seem so
>cryptic at all.
>
>In any case, I'm sure Lorrillard is capable of bringing the
study to a
>conclusion; but I find it strange that he complained (in the
article
>that drew my attention to the case) about the difficulty of
getting it
>transliterated, and the need for the help of others to do so
--but he
>now seems satisfied to proceed to do it himself --when, in my
opinion,
>there does not seem to be any special difficulty in so doing.
>
>Although I looked at it for less than two full minutes, one could
>immediately see that it is indeed a work in verse, with the
Sanskrit
>spelling of "Sri" (not a conclusive criterion as to its
language, BTW;
>the spelling of "Sri Lanka" also defies the Pali convention).
>
>E.M.
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
______________
Dr. Justin McDaniel
Dept. of Religious Studies
2617 Humanities Building
University of California, Riverside
Riverside, CA 92521
909-827-4530
justinm@...