Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1The use of such Semitic words, scattered about in Persian sentences, gives Pahlavi the motley appearance of a compound language; more especially as Persian terminations are often added to the Semitic words. But there are good reasons for supposing that the language was never spoken as it was written. The spoken language appears to have been purely Persian ; the Semitic words being merely used as written representatives, or logograms, of the Persian words which were spoken. Thus the Persians would write malkan malka, ‘king of kings,’ but they would read shahan shah. This is still the mode in which most Parsis read their Pahlavi literature; and it is only by assuming it to have been their universal practice, in former times, that we can account for the total and immediate disappearance of the Semitic portion of the Pahlavi, from their language, when the Persians adopted their modern alphabet. As the Semitic words were merely a Pahlavi mode of writing their Persian equivalents (just as ‘viz.’ is a mode of writing ‘namely’ in English), they disappeared with the Pahlavi writing, and the Persians began at once to write all their words, with their new alphabet, just as they pronounced them. In the meantime, the greater part of the nation had become Muhammadans, and a new influx of Semitic words commenced, but of a very different character. The Semitic . XIV PAHLAVI TEXTS. portion of the Pahlavi writing was nearly pure Chaldee, and was confined (as already stated) to the graphic representation of most of the simplest and commonest words unconnected with religion; but it seems to have formed no part of the spoken language, at all events in later times. Whereas the Semitic portion of modern Persian is borrowed from Arabic, and includes most words connected with religion, science, and literature; in fact, every class of words except that which was usually Semitic in Pahlavi writings; and these Arabic words form an essential part of the spoken language, being as indispensable to the modern Persian as words of Norman-French origin are to the English. In Pahlavi writings, moreover, besides the four hundred Semitic logograms already mentioned, we also find about one hundred obsolete forms of Iranian words used as logograms; much in the same way as ‘ye’ may be used for ‘the, and ‘ Xmas’ for ‘Christmas’ in English. The use of all these logograms was, however, quite optional, as their usual Persian equivalents might be substituted for any of them at any time, according to each particular writer’s taste and discretion. But whenever they are employed they form what is called the Huzvdris portion of the Pahlavi; while the other words, intended to be pronounced as they are spelt, form the Pazand portion.
2But whenever they are employed they form what is called the Huzvdris portion of the Pahlavi; while the other words, intended to be pronounced as they are spelt, form the Pazand portion. Many attempts have been made to explain the word Huzviaris, but it cannot be said that any satisfactory etymology has yet been proposed. Like the word Pahlavi it seems hardly to occur in any old Pahlavi text, but only in colophons, chapter-headings, and similar notes of modern writers ; it seems, therefore, more reasonable to trace it to modern Persian than direct to any more ancient source. Its Pahlavi form, hQzv4ris or adzv4risn, appears to represent the modern Persian uzvd4ris, which is rarely used ; the usual Persian form of the word being zuvaris. Now zuviris is precisely the form of an abstract noun derived from the crude form of a verb zuvAridan, which has been admitted into some Persian dictionaries on the authority of Golius}, 1 See Castelli Lexicon Heptaglotton, Pars altera, London, 1669. INTRODUCTION. XV with the meaning ‘to grow old, to become thread-bare.’ If such a verb really exists in Persian, although its meaning may imply ‘decrepitude or decay’ rather than ‘antiquity or obsoleteness,’ yet its abstract noun would not be altogether inapplicable to the logograms used in Pahlavi, which are, in fact, last remnants of older writings. The word Pazand is probably derived from Av. paitizanti, with the meaning ‘re-explanation,’ that is, a further interpretation of the Pahlavi Zand in the Persian vernacular. This term is applied not only to the purely Persian words in Pahlavi texts, but also (as already noticed) to transliterations of the said texts, either in Avesta or modern Persian characters, in which all the Huzvaris words are replaced by their Pazand equivalents. These transliterations form what are called Pazand texts; they retain the exact idiom and construction of the Pahlavi original, and represent the mode in which it was read. It may be remarked, however, that all such PAzand texts, as have been examined, seem to have been written in India, so that they may be suspected of representing some corrupt Gugarati pronunciation of Persian, rather than the peculiar orthography of any period of the Persian language.
3It may be remarked, however, that all such PAzand texts, as have been examined, seem to have been written in India, so that they may be suspected of representing some corrupt Gugarati pronunciation of Persian, rather than the peculiar orthography of any period of the Persian language. This theory of the origin and development of Pahlavi writing could hardly be upheld, unless we could trace the same artificial mixture of Huzvaris and Pazand in all accessible Pahlavi records, from their earliest appearance to the present time. This we are able to do, even in the scanty materials afforded by the legends on the provincial Persian coins of the third century B.C. and second century A.D. already mentioned. But we can trace it with greater certainty not only in the coin legends, but also in the rock inscriptions of the earlier Sasanian kings (A.D. 226-388), in the latest of which we find the written language differing very slightly from that contained in the manuscripts preserved by the Parsis of the present day, although the characters differ very much in form. And, finally, in the legends on the coins of the later Sasanian kings (A.D. 388- 651) and on seals of their times, we find even this difference in the shapes of the letters disappearing by degrees. In \ Xvi PAHLAVI TEXTS. fact, all the materials at our disposal tend to show that Huzvaris has been an essential constituent of all Pahlavi writings from the time of Alexander’s successors to that of the disuse of Pahlavi characters; but we have no reason to suppose that the spoken language of the great mass of the Persian people ever contained the Semitic words which they thus used as Huzvaris in their writings. Although the use of Huzvaris, until explained recently, rendered the nature of the Pahlavi language very obscure, it added very little to the difficulty of understanding the Pahlavi texts, because the meaning of nearly every Huzvaris logogram was well known; being recorded in an old glossary preserved by the Parsis, in which every logogram is explained by its proper PAzand equivalent. The extant copies of this old glossary generally contain the Huzvadris and Pazand words written in the Pahlavi character, together with their traditional pronunciation, either in Avesta or modern Persian letters; there is, therefore, no particular difficulty in reading or translating the Huzviris portion of a Pahlavi text, although doubts may often be entertained as to the accuracy of the traditional pronunciation.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1The use of such Semitic words, scattered about in Persian sentences, gives Pahlavi the motley appearance of a compound language; more especially as Persian terminations are often added to the Semitic words. But there are good reasons for supposing that the language was never spoken as it was written. The spoken language appears to have been purely Persian ; the Semitic words being merely used as written representatives, or logograms, of the Persian words which were spoken. Thus the Persians would write malkan malka, ‘king of kings,’ but they would read shahan shah. This is still the mode in which most Parsis read their Pahlavi literature; and it is only by assuming it to have been their universal practice, in former times, that we can account for the total and immediate disappearance of the Semitic portion of the Pahlavi, from their language, when the Persians adopted their modern alphabet. As the Semitic words were merely a Pahlavi mode of writing their Persian equivalents (just as ‘viz.’ is a mode of writing ‘namely’ in English), they disappeared with the Pahlavi writing, and the Persians began at once to write all their words, with their new alphabet, just as they pronounced them. In the meantime, the greater part of the nation had become Muhammadans, and a new influx of Semitic words commenced, but of a very different character. The Semitic . XIV PAHLAVI TEXTS. portion of the Pahlavi writing was nearly pure Chaldee, and was confined (as already stated) to the graphic representation of most of the simplest and commonest words unconnected with religion; but it seems to have formed no part of the spoken language, at all events in later times. Whereas the Semitic portion of modern Persian is borrowed from Arabic, and includes most words connected with religion, science, and literature; in fact, every class of words except that which was usually Semitic in Pahlavi writings; and these Arabic words form an essential part of the spoken language, being as indispensable to the modern Persian as words of Norman-French origin are to the English. In Pahlavi writings, moreover, besides the four hundred Semitic logograms already mentioned, we also find about one hundred obsolete forms of Iranian words used as logograms; much in the same way as ‘ye’ may be used for ‘the, and ‘ Xmas’ for ‘Christmas’ in English. The use of all these logograms was, however, quite optional, as their usual Persian equivalents might be substituted for any of them at any time, according to each particular writer’s taste and discretion. But whenever they are employed they form what is called the Huzvdris portion of the Pahlavi; while the other words, intended to be pronounced as they are spelt, form the Pazand portion.
2But whenever they are employed they form what is called the Huzvdris portion of the Pahlavi; while the other words, intended to be pronounced as they are spelt, form the Pazand portion. Many attempts have been made to explain the word Huzviaris, but it cannot be said that any satisfactory etymology has yet been proposed. Like the word Pahlavi it seems hardly to occur in any old Pahlavi text, but only in colophons, chapter-headings, and similar notes of modern writers ; it seems, therefore, more reasonable to trace it to modern Persian than direct to any more ancient source. Its Pahlavi form, hQzv4ris or adzv4risn, appears to represent the modern Persian uzvd4ris, which is rarely used ; the usual Persian form of the word being zuvaris. Now zuviris is precisely the form of an abstract noun derived from the crude form of a verb zuvAridan, which has been admitted into some Persian dictionaries on the authority of Golius}, 1 See Castelli Lexicon Heptaglotton, Pars altera, London, 1669. INTRODUCTION. XV with the meaning ‘to grow old, to become thread-bare.’ If such a verb really exists in Persian, although its meaning may imply ‘decrepitude or decay’ rather than ‘antiquity or obsoleteness,’ yet its abstract noun would not be altogether inapplicable to the logograms used in Pahlavi, which are, in fact, last remnants of older writings. The word Pazand is probably derived from Av. paitizanti, with the meaning ‘re-explanation,’ that is, a further interpretation of the Pahlavi Zand in the Persian vernacular. This term is applied not only to the purely Persian words in Pahlavi texts, but also (as already noticed) to transliterations of the said texts, either in Avesta or modern Persian characters, in which all the Huzvaris words are replaced by their Pazand equivalents. These transliterations form what are called Pazand texts; they retain the exact idiom and construction of the Pahlavi original, and represent the mode in which it was read. It may be remarked, however, that all such PAzand texts, as have been examined, seem to have been written in India, so that they may be suspected of representing some corrupt Gugarati pronunciation of Persian, rather than the peculiar orthography of any period of the Persian language.
3It may be remarked, however, that all such PAzand texts, as have been examined, seem to have been written in India, so that they may be suspected of representing some corrupt Gugarati pronunciation of Persian, rather than the peculiar orthography of any period of the Persian language. This theory of the origin and development of Pahlavi writing could hardly be upheld, unless we could trace the same artificial mixture of Huzvaris and Pazand in all accessible Pahlavi records, from their earliest appearance to the present time. This we are able to do, even in the scanty materials afforded by the legends on the provincial Persian coins of the third century B.C. and second century A.D. already mentioned. But we can trace it with greater certainty not only in the coin legends, but also in the rock inscriptions of the earlier Sasanian kings (A.D. 226-388), in the latest of which we find the written language differing very slightly from that contained in the manuscripts preserved by the Parsis of the present day, although the characters differ very much in form. And, finally, in the legends on the coins of the later Sasanian kings (A.D. 388- 651) and on seals of their times, we find even this difference in the shapes of the letters disappearing by degrees. In \ Xvi PAHLAVI TEXTS. fact, all the materials at our disposal tend to show that Huzvaris has been an essential constituent of all Pahlavi writings from the time of Alexander’s successors to that of the disuse of Pahlavi characters; but we have no reason to suppose that the spoken language of the great mass of the Persian people ever contained the Semitic words which they thus used as Huzvaris in their writings. Although the use of Huzvaris, until explained recently, rendered the nature of the Pahlavi language very obscure, it added very little to the difficulty of understanding the Pahlavi texts, because the meaning of nearly every Huzvaris logogram was well known; being recorded in an old glossary preserved by the Parsis, in which every logogram is explained by its proper PAzand equivalent. The extant copies of this old glossary generally contain the Huzvadris and Pazand words written in the Pahlavi character, together with their traditional pronunciation, either in Avesta or modern Persian letters; there is, therefore, no particular difficulty in reading or translating the Huzviris portion of a Pahlavi text, although doubts may often be entertained as to the accuracy of the traditional pronunciation.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.