Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1If, therefore, the reader should sometimes meet with strange idioms, or uncouth phrases, he must attribute them to a straining after correctness of translation, however little that correctness may be really attained. For the purpose of more effectually keeping a curb upon the imagination of the translator, and indicating where he has been compelled to introduce his own ideas, all words not expressed or fully understood in the original text are italicised in the translation. Occasionally, also, the original word is appended to its translation, where either the reading or meaning adopted is unusual, or where a scholar might wish to know the particular Pahlavi word translated. Some endeavour has likewise been made to introduce greater -precision than has hitherto been attempted, in the transliteration of Pahlavi words and names, by taking advantage of the italic system, adopted for this series of Sacred Books of the East, not only for distinguishing variations of sound (as in the use of g, &, and s for the sounds of j, soft ch, and sh, respectively, in English), but also to indicate the use of particular Pahlavi letters, when there are more than one of nearly the same sound. Thus, d is used where its sound is represented by wt; /and r where they are represented by } n, v, Q, or by ‘L Av. 0; v and z where they are represented by @ &; and 2d where those letters are represented by » 4. If, in addition to these particulars, the Pahlavi scholar will remember that the uncircumflexed vowels are not expressed in Pahlavi characters, and the vowel 6 is expressed, he will find no particular difficulty in restoring any of the transliterated words to their original character, by merely following the INTRODUCTION, XXI ordinary rules of Pahlavi writing. Without some such mode! of distinguishing the different Pahlavi letters used for the same sound, it would be practically impossible to restore the transliteration of any word, new to the reader, to its original Pahlavi form. And even the system here adopted requires the addition of @ and 4 to represent the vowel s» a, 4 when one of its turns is omitted in writing (as in ey ap, dv, used for Js ap, af; KY adin used for 94 adin, &c.), and of j or 7 to represent 5 y when it has the sound of g or English j, in order to distinguish it from eh, g.
2The general reader should, however, observe that these niceties of transliteration are merely matters of writing, as the exact pronunciation of Pahlavi cannot now be fully ascertained in all its details. There is every reason to suppose that the Semitic portion of the Pahlavi was never pronounced by the Persians as it was written (unless, indeed, in the earliest times); but to transliterate these Semitic words by their Persian equivalents, as the Persians certainly pronounced them, would produce a Pazand text, instead of a Pahlavi one. If, therefore, we really want the transliteration to represent the Pahlavi text correctly, we must transliterate the Semitic words as they are written, without reference to the mode in which we suppose that the Persians used to read them. With regard to the Persian words, if we call to mind the fact that Pahlavi was the immediate parent of modern Persian, we shall naturally accept the modern Persian pronunciation (stripped of its Arabic corruptions) as a guide, so far as Pahlavi orthography permits, in preference to tracing the sounds of these words downwards from their remote ancestors in ancient Persian or the Avesta. But the pronunciation of words evidently derived directly from the Avesta, as is the case with many religious terms, must clearly depend upon the 1 Dotted letters might be used, if available, instead of italics; but they are liable to the objection that, independent of the usual blunders due to the ordinary fallibility of human eyesight, it has been found by the translator that a dot, which was invisible on the proofs, will sometimes appear under a wrong letter in the course of printing. xxii PAHLAVI TEXTS. Avesta orthography, so far as the alteration in spelling permits. These are the general rules here adopted, but many uncertainties arise in their practical application, which have to be settled in a somewhat arbitrary manner. 2%. THE DADISTAN-! Dinik. The term Dadistan-t Dinik, ‘religious opinions or decisions, is a comparatively modern name applied to ninety-two questions, on religious subjects, put to the highpriest M4ndsihar, and his answers to the same. These questions appear to have been sent in an epistle from Mitrd-kharshéd,. son of Atdrvd-mah4n, and other Mazdaworshippers (Dd. heading and I, 2), and were received by MAndsfihar, who was the leader of the religion (Dd. I, 10, note), in the month of July or August (Dd. I, 17); but it was not till September or October, after he had returned to Shiraz from a tour in the provinces, that he found time to begin his reply which, when completed, was sent by a courier (Dd. I, 26) to his correspondents, but at what date is not recorded.
3I, 17); but it was not till September or October, after he had returned to Shiraz from a tour in the provinces, that he found time to begin his reply which, when completed, was sent by a courier (Dd. I, 26) to his correspondents, but at what date is not recorded. Regarding the residence of these correspondents, and the year in which these transactions took place, we have no positive information. The correspondents seem to have thanked M4ndséihar for sending them one of his disciples (Dd. I, 3, 4) to act probably as their high-priest ; and, from the mode in which the land of Pars is mentioned in Dd. LXVI, 28, LXXXIX, 1, it seems likely that they were not inhabitants of that province; but this conclusion is hardly confirmed, though not altogether contradicted, by the further allusions to Pars in Dd. LXVI, 3, 15,21, LX XXVIII, 1. With regard to the date of this correspondence we may conclude, from the less authoritative tone assumed by MAndsfihar in his reply (Dd. I, 5-7, 11), as compared with that adopted in his epistles (Ep. III, 17-19), that he was a younger man when he composed the Dadistan-i Dinik than when he wrote his epistles; we may, therefore, probably assume that the Dadistan-i Dinik was written several years before A.D. 881, INTRODUCTION. xxiii Although the subjects discussed in the Dagist4n-i Dinik cover a wide range of religious doctrines, legends, and duties, they cannot be expected to give a complete view of the Mazda-worshipping religion, as they are merely those matters on which Mitré-khdrshéd and his friends entertained doubts, or wished for further information. It is also somewhat doubtful whether the whole of the questions have been preserved, on account of the abrupt transition from the last reply, at the end of Dd. XCIII, to the peroration in Dd. XCIV, and also from the fact that a chapter is alluded to, in Dd. XVII, 20, XVIII, 2, which is no longer extant in the text.
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.
1If, therefore, the reader should sometimes meet with strange idioms, or uncouth phrases, he must attribute them to a straining after correctness of translation, however little that correctness may be really attained. For the purpose of more effectually keeping a curb upon the imagination of the translator, and indicating where he has been compelled to introduce his own ideas, all words not expressed or fully understood in the original text are italicised in the translation. Occasionally, also, the original word is appended to its translation, where either the reading or meaning adopted is unusual, or where a scholar might wish to know the particular Pahlavi word translated. Some endeavour has likewise been made to introduce greater -precision than has hitherto been attempted, in the transliteration of Pahlavi words and names, by taking advantage of the italic system, adopted for this series of Sacred Books of the East, not only for distinguishing variations of sound (as in the use of g, &, and s for the sounds of j, soft ch, and sh, respectively, in English), but also to indicate the use of particular Pahlavi letters, when there are more than one of nearly the same sound. Thus, d is used where its sound is represented by wt; /and r where they are represented by } n, v, Q, or by ‘L Av. 0; v and z where they are represented by @ &; and 2d where those letters are represented by » 4. If, in addition to these particulars, the Pahlavi scholar will remember that the uncircumflexed vowels are not expressed in Pahlavi characters, and the vowel 6 is expressed, he will find no particular difficulty in restoring any of the transliterated words to their original character, by merely following the INTRODUCTION, XXI ordinary rules of Pahlavi writing. Without some such mode! of distinguishing the different Pahlavi letters used for the same sound, it would be practically impossible to restore the transliteration of any word, new to the reader, to its original Pahlavi form. And even the system here adopted requires the addition of @ and 4 to represent the vowel s» a, 4 when one of its turns is omitted in writing (as in ey ap, dv, used for Js ap, af; KY adin used for 94 adin, &c.), and of j or 7 to represent 5 y when it has the sound of g or English j, in order to distinguish it from eh, g.
2The general reader should, however, observe that these niceties of transliteration are merely matters of writing, as the exact pronunciation of Pahlavi cannot now be fully ascertained in all its details. There is every reason to suppose that the Semitic portion of the Pahlavi was never pronounced by the Persians as it was written (unless, indeed, in the earliest times); but to transliterate these Semitic words by their Persian equivalents, as the Persians certainly pronounced them, would produce a Pazand text, instead of a Pahlavi one. If, therefore, we really want the transliteration to represent the Pahlavi text correctly, we must transliterate the Semitic words as they are written, without reference to the mode in which we suppose that the Persians used to read them. With regard to the Persian words, if we call to mind the fact that Pahlavi was the immediate parent of modern Persian, we shall naturally accept the modern Persian pronunciation (stripped of its Arabic corruptions) as a guide, so far as Pahlavi orthography permits, in preference to tracing the sounds of these words downwards from their remote ancestors in ancient Persian or the Avesta. But the pronunciation of words evidently derived directly from the Avesta, as is the case with many religious terms, must clearly depend upon the 1 Dotted letters might be used, if available, instead of italics; but they are liable to the objection that, independent of the usual blunders due to the ordinary fallibility of human eyesight, it has been found by the translator that a dot, which was invisible on the proofs, will sometimes appear under a wrong letter in the course of printing. xxii PAHLAVI TEXTS. Avesta orthography, so far as the alteration in spelling permits. These are the general rules here adopted, but many uncertainties arise in their practical application, which have to be settled in a somewhat arbitrary manner. 2%. THE DADISTAN-! Dinik. The term Dadistan-t Dinik, ‘religious opinions or decisions, is a comparatively modern name applied to ninety-two questions, on religious subjects, put to the highpriest M4ndsihar, and his answers to the same. These questions appear to have been sent in an epistle from Mitrd-kharshéd,. son of Atdrvd-mah4n, and other Mazdaworshippers (Dd. heading and I, 2), and were received by MAndsfihar, who was the leader of the religion (Dd. I, 10, note), in the month of July or August (Dd. I, 17); but it was not till September or October, after he had returned to Shiraz from a tour in the provinces, that he found time to begin his reply which, when completed, was sent by a courier (Dd. I, 26) to his correspondents, but at what date is not recorded.
3I, 17); but it was not till September or October, after he had returned to Shiraz from a tour in the provinces, that he found time to begin his reply which, when completed, was sent by a courier (Dd. I, 26) to his correspondents, but at what date is not recorded. Regarding the residence of these correspondents, and the year in which these transactions took place, we have no positive information. The correspondents seem to have thanked M4ndséihar for sending them one of his disciples (Dd. I, 3, 4) to act probably as their high-priest ; and, from the mode in which the land of Pars is mentioned in Dd. LXVI, 28, LXXXIX, 1, it seems likely that they were not inhabitants of that province; but this conclusion is hardly confirmed, though not altogether contradicted, by the further allusions to Pars in Dd. LXVI, 3, 15,21, LX XXVIII, 1. With regard to the date of this correspondence we may conclude, from the less authoritative tone assumed by MAndsfihar in his reply (Dd. I, 5-7, 11), as compared with that adopted in his epistles (Ep. III, 17-19), that he was a younger man when he composed the Dadistan-i Dinik than when he wrote his epistles; we may, therefore, probably assume that the Dadistan-i Dinik was written several years before A.D. 881, INTRODUCTION. xxiii Although the subjects discussed in the Dagist4n-i Dinik cover a wide range of religious doctrines, legends, and duties, they cannot be expected to give a complete view of the Mazda-worshipping religion, as they are merely those matters on which Mitré-khdrshéd and his friends entertained doubts, or wished for further information. It is also somewhat doubtful whether the whole of the questions have been preserved, on account of the abrupt transition from the last reply, at the end of Dd. XCIII, to the peroration in Dd. XCIV, and also from the fact that a chapter is alluded to, in Dd. XVII, 20, XVIII, 2, which is no longer extant in the text.
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.