Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1LXXII, 2, 3, LXXXII, 2 belong to the Vendidad, and those in IV, 3-11, XVI, 3, XVIII, 3 belong to the Spend Nask, which is no longer extant. The large 1 Chaps. XII, 3-5, LXVII, 3-6, LXXI, 2, 3, LXXXVI, 2. 2 Chaps. XXVIII, 4, XCIV, 3, 4, XCVII, 3. INTRODUCTION. XXXIX proportion of quotations that cannot be now identified, or are no longer extant, is a strong argument in favour of the work being several centuries older than the oldest manuscripts in which it is now found. The translation of the prose Sad Dar, published in this volume, is based upon the text of La, the oldest manuscript of the work with which the translator is acquainted. This is No. 3043 of the Persian manuscripts in the India Office Library in London, which was presented to the East India Company’s Library, on the 31st August 1837, by Mr. J. Romer, who had brought it from India, most probably from Surat. This manuscript is an octavo volume, containing 144 folios of light-brown Indian paper which may be as much as three centuries old. The volume was last bound and repaired some time subsequent to 1818, as several English foolscap fly-leaves bear that date as a water-mark. Its Persian text has the peculiarity of being written in Avesta characters, in short sentences alternating with an old Gugarati translation in Devandgart characters which, for the sake of running in a continuous line with the reversely-written Avesta-Persian, is written upside down; each page containing generally thirteen lines. This Avesta- Persian is not PAzand, either in verbal forms or syntactical arrangement, but its orthography is as irregular and uncertain as in most Pazand texts written in Avesta characters. The text commences with a Sanskrit introduction, copied verbatim from that used by Nérydsang as a preface to all his Pazand-Sanskrit texts (see p. xx), with the clause containing the names altered as follows :—‘ This book, named Sad Dar, is brought together by me, the priest Rama, son of Kanhaksha, avd translated from the Parsi language into the Gugar language, and written from the difficult Parsi letters with the Avesta letters by his son, the priest Padama.’ And this preface is followed by the P4zand invocation that commences the Persian introduction, as translated on p. 255; which introduction contains a passage (§ 6) probably interpolated in the prose Sad Dar after the composition of the metrical version. The last chapter of the text in La is followed by two xl PAHLAVI TEXTS.
2255; which introduction contains a passage (§ 6) probably interpolated in the prose Sad Dar after the composition of the metrical version. The last chapter of the text in La is followed by two xl PAHLAVI TEXTS. Persian couplets in Avesta characters, with their translation in Gugarati; and, after a few more verses in Sanskrit, the colophon concludes with Sanskrit to the following effect :— ‘Inthe Samvat year 1631, the ninth day in the light half of the month Gyaishtha, on Wednesday, the Uttara [Ashada ?] lunar mansion; in the Parsi Samvat year 944, the 27th day Asman, the sixth month Shahrivar [18th May 1575]?, the Uzayéirina period (the afternoon), the book Sad Dar zs completely written dy an inhabitant of Bhrigu-kakkha *. Brought together by the priest Rama, son of Kanhaksha, and written in the handwriting of the priest Padama, his son, the book Sad Dar zs completed. Written, by another, for the purpose of reading azd for the purpose of reciting by Hiréka of the good religion, son of . . .3 of the good religion, and also by Adaraka of the good religion, son of Gaya of the good religion ; may it become auspicious and beneficial!’ Followed by ‘may it be healthful! may it be excellent! so may it be! ad more so may it be!’ in Pazand. It is possible that this colophon may have been copied from an older manuscript, but there are certainly some reasons for supposing that La is the original manuscript completed in 1575. In the first place, the appearance of the paper, on which it is written, favours such a supposition, and enquiries, made in Bombay, have not succeeded in discovering the existence of any other copy of this recension. Again, there are a few defects and inconsistencies in the Gugarati translation which are best explained by supposing that the translation was made at the time this manuscript was written. Thus, the greater part of Chap. LXXIII, after having been written on one side of a folio, is repeated by mistake on the other side of the same folio with several variations, most of which are alterations in the Gugarati translation, as if the writer were making the trans- 1 As the manuscript was written in India, the calendar used would be the Rasmf one. 2 The old name of Bhrés. . 5 This name, with one or two epithets, has to be extracted from the corrupt Sanskrit compound gnativyavyagihilda. INTRODUCTION. xli lation at the time when he wrote it. Also, in Chap. LX XVII, a blank having been left for some illegible word in the Avesta-Persian text, a similar blank has been left in the Gugar4ti translation, although it is hardly possible that any mere copyist would have found the same word illegible in both versions.
3Also, in Chap. LX XVII, a blank having been left for some illegible word in the Avesta-Persian text, a similar blank has been left in the Gugar4ti translation, although it is hardly possible that any mere copyist would have found the same word illegible in both versions. With regard to the source whence the Avesta-Persian text of La was derived, there can be little doubt that it was originally transliterated from a manuscript written in the Perso-Arabic character, as there are several blunders in La which can be best explained as owing to the mutual resemblance ‘of certain letters in that character. Thus, the fact that the modern Persian letters b, n, t, y differ only in the number and position of certain dots, which are sometimes omitted or misplaced, accounts for such blunders as ba and y4 for ta, kh4na for ‘Zayah. While, owing to similar resemblances, the transliterator has written kusti for géti, muluk for balkih, guza for gésh, and having been doubtful, in one place, whether to read r6z or zér, he has written both words, one above the other. Somewhat more recent than this Avesta-Persian manuscript is Lp, No. 2506 of the Persian manuscripts in the India Office Library in London, which was presented to the Library by Mr. J. Romer at the same time as La. This manuscript is a small octavo volume, in which the prose Sad Dar occupies the first forty-six folios of Indian paper, written generally fifteen lines to the page in the Perso-Arabic character. In its present state it contains no date, the last folio of the colophon being lost, but the paper is not much newer than that of La. The colophon is written in the Avesta character, and is to the following effect :—‘ This book is the book Sad Dar, a Nask of the religion of Zarathustra, the good religion of the Mazdaworshippers. Z/ese hundred questions of the proper and improper are extracted from this good religion of the Mazda-worshippers, and fran-shah, son of Yazad-yér, . . .;’ the rest being lost. Another important copy of the Persian text of the prose Sad Dar is contained in B29,a two-volume, quarto Rivayat, xlii PAHLAVI TEXTS. No. 29 in the Bombay University Library. In this Rivayat, or miscellany of traditional lore, the prose Sad Dar occupies fourteen folios (17-30) in the first volume, each page containing twenty-one closely-written lines. The Persian colophon at the end of the last chapter is to the following effect :—‘ This book of the prose Sad Dar is completed on the day Ast4d of the auspicious month Dat of the year 1048 of Yazdagard, the king of kings of happy frAn, of the race of SAsAn. And the writer of the lines am I, the servant of the good religion of the Mazda-worshippers, the priestlyborn priest DArfb, son of the priest Hormazy4r, son of Qavamu-d-din, son of Kai-Qub4d, son of Hormazyar! of the surname Sang4nd, of the family of the priest Néryésang Dhaval.’ The date mentioned in this colophon corresponds to the 28th September 1679, new style.
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.
1LXXII, 2, 3, LXXXII, 2 belong to the Vendidad, and those in IV, 3-11, XVI, 3, XVIII, 3 belong to the Spend Nask, which is no longer extant. The large 1 Chaps. XII, 3-5, LXVII, 3-6, LXXI, 2, 3, LXXXVI, 2. 2 Chaps. XXVIII, 4, XCIV, 3, 4, XCVII, 3. INTRODUCTION. XXXIX proportion of quotations that cannot be now identified, or are no longer extant, is a strong argument in favour of the work being several centuries older than the oldest manuscripts in which it is now found. The translation of the prose Sad Dar, published in this volume, is based upon the text of La, the oldest manuscript of the work with which the translator is acquainted. This is No. 3043 of the Persian manuscripts in the India Office Library in London, which was presented to the East India Company’s Library, on the 31st August 1837, by Mr. J. Romer, who had brought it from India, most probably from Surat. This manuscript is an octavo volume, containing 144 folios of light-brown Indian paper which may be as much as three centuries old. The volume was last bound and repaired some time subsequent to 1818, as several English foolscap fly-leaves bear that date as a water-mark. Its Persian text has the peculiarity of being written in Avesta characters, in short sentences alternating with an old Gugarati translation in Devandgart characters which, for the sake of running in a continuous line with the reversely-written Avesta-Persian, is written upside down; each page containing generally thirteen lines. This Avesta- Persian is not PAzand, either in verbal forms or syntactical arrangement, but its orthography is as irregular and uncertain as in most Pazand texts written in Avesta characters. The text commences with a Sanskrit introduction, copied verbatim from that used by Nérydsang as a preface to all his Pazand-Sanskrit texts (see p. xx), with the clause containing the names altered as follows :—‘ This book, named Sad Dar, is brought together by me, the priest Rama, son of Kanhaksha, avd translated from the Parsi language into the Gugar language, and written from the difficult Parsi letters with the Avesta letters by his son, the priest Padama.’ And this preface is followed by the P4zand invocation that commences the Persian introduction, as translated on p. 255; which introduction contains a passage (§ 6) probably interpolated in the prose Sad Dar after the composition of the metrical version. The last chapter of the text in La is followed by two xl PAHLAVI TEXTS.
2255; which introduction contains a passage (§ 6) probably interpolated in the prose Sad Dar after the composition of the metrical version. The last chapter of the text in La is followed by two xl PAHLAVI TEXTS. Persian couplets in Avesta characters, with their translation in Gugarati; and, after a few more verses in Sanskrit, the colophon concludes with Sanskrit to the following effect :— ‘Inthe Samvat year 1631, the ninth day in the light half of the month Gyaishtha, on Wednesday, the Uttara [Ashada ?] lunar mansion; in the Parsi Samvat year 944, the 27th day Asman, the sixth month Shahrivar [18th May 1575]?, the Uzayéirina period (the afternoon), the book Sad Dar zs completely written dy an inhabitant of Bhrigu-kakkha *. Brought together by the priest Rama, son of Kanhaksha, and written in the handwriting of the priest Padama, his son, the book Sad Dar zs completed. Written, by another, for the purpose of reading azd for the purpose of reciting by Hiréka of the good religion, son of . . .3 of the good religion, and also by Adaraka of the good religion, son of Gaya of the good religion ; may it become auspicious and beneficial!’ Followed by ‘may it be healthful! may it be excellent! so may it be! ad more so may it be!’ in Pazand. It is possible that this colophon may have been copied from an older manuscript, but there are certainly some reasons for supposing that La is the original manuscript completed in 1575. In the first place, the appearance of the paper, on which it is written, favours such a supposition, and enquiries, made in Bombay, have not succeeded in discovering the existence of any other copy of this recension. Again, there are a few defects and inconsistencies in the Gugarati translation which are best explained by supposing that the translation was made at the time this manuscript was written. Thus, the greater part of Chap. LXXIII, after having been written on one side of a folio, is repeated by mistake on the other side of the same folio with several variations, most of which are alterations in the Gugarati translation, as if the writer were making the trans- 1 As the manuscript was written in India, the calendar used would be the Rasmf one. 2 The old name of Bhrés. . 5 This name, with one or two epithets, has to be extracted from the corrupt Sanskrit compound gnativyavyagihilda. INTRODUCTION. xli lation at the time when he wrote it. Also, in Chap. LX XVII, a blank having been left for some illegible word in the Avesta-Persian text, a similar blank has been left in the Gugar4ti translation, although it is hardly possible that any mere copyist would have found the same word illegible in both versions.
3Also, in Chap. LX XVII, a blank having been left for some illegible word in the Avesta-Persian text, a similar blank has been left in the Gugar4ti translation, although it is hardly possible that any mere copyist would have found the same word illegible in both versions. With regard to the source whence the Avesta-Persian text of La was derived, there can be little doubt that it was originally transliterated from a manuscript written in the Perso-Arabic character, as there are several blunders in La which can be best explained as owing to the mutual resemblance ‘of certain letters in that character. Thus, the fact that the modern Persian letters b, n, t, y differ only in the number and position of certain dots, which are sometimes omitted or misplaced, accounts for such blunders as ba and y4 for ta, kh4na for ‘Zayah. While, owing to similar resemblances, the transliterator has written kusti for géti, muluk for balkih, guza for gésh, and having been doubtful, in one place, whether to read r6z or zér, he has written both words, one above the other. Somewhat more recent than this Avesta-Persian manuscript is Lp, No. 2506 of the Persian manuscripts in the India Office Library in London, which was presented to the Library by Mr. J. Romer at the same time as La. This manuscript is a small octavo volume, in which the prose Sad Dar occupies the first forty-six folios of Indian paper, written generally fifteen lines to the page in the Perso-Arabic character. In its present state it contains no date, the last folio of the colophon being lost, but the paper is not much newer than that of La. The colophon is written in the Avesta character, and is to the following effect :—‘ This book is the book Sad Dar, a Nask of the religion of Zarathustra, the good religion of the Mazdaworshippers. Z/ese hundred questions of the proper and improper are extracted from this good religion of the Mazda-worshippers, and fran-shah, son of Yazad-yér, . . .;’ the rest being lost. Another important copy of the Persian text of the prose Sad Dar is contained in B29,a two-volume, quarto Rivayat, xlii PAHLAVI TEXTS. No. 29 in the Bombay University Library. In this Rivayat, or miscellany of traditional lore, the prose Sad Dar occupies fourteen folios (17-30) in the first volume, each page containing twenty-one closely-written lines. The Persian colophon at the end of the last chapter is to the following effect :—‘ This book of the prose Sad Dar is completed on the day Ast4d of the auspicious month Dat of the year 1048 of Yazdagard, the king of kings of happy frAn, of the race of SAsAn. And the writer of the lines am I, the servant of the good religion of the Mazda-worshippers, the priestlyborn priest DArfb, son of the priest Hormazy4r, son of Qavamu-d-din, son of Kai-Qub4d, son of Hormazyar! of the surname Sang4nd, of the family of the priest Néryésang Dhaval.’ The date mentioned in this colophon corresponds to the 28th September 1679, new style.
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.