Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1A.M. May we make our Songs to reach to the place of praise’. The lanman in line a was regarded by the Pahl. trir. as a sufficient expression for the first person in vyddaresem. The gloss ychevinéd enforces a needless interruption in the syntax. That the Pahl. trlr. was able to render a 1s pl. opt. freely seems proved by Y. 30, 9, and other places, yet, unless we read yehabind in e, and understand the distant lanman with difficulty from a, it would seem that the trlr. fails to render the 1st pret.-conj. here. See Ner. line e. Without gloss, omitting 7, read d ‘knowing A. in truth’, see the Gatha. Notice the force of dard effectively rendered — in Ner. by tato ’dhikam, which may be intended to mean merely ‘up’. He follows of course the 3r4 personals of the Pahl., concluding however with his 18 pers. nidaddmahe in e. Notice that the sense must necessarily be active here, notwithstanding the form. Perhaps vettd should be understood after yah; ‘who is a knower of M.’, see the Gatha. 9. See line e as to the caesura. With some forgetfulness of the difference in tone between Gatha and Rik, we might render verezend(nt.) ‘stalls’; buta orydna(m.)may=‘strength’ (L. G.) even inthe Rik as well as ‘stalls’, and var(e)je = var), oriy expresses ‘energy’ far oftener than ‘enclosures’. The Gathic party did not need herds, stalls, etc. like the freebooting Daé(é)va-worshippers. Their Dheni was on the defensive; they wished to save what they had (cp. Y. 29, etc.). Reading verezénydo as = a oryanydn(s)(m,) in the sense ‘householders’, ‘community’, ep. °7dnda(h) RY. VIL, 32, 27 (of hostile hordes), (also of citizens), cp. dharmé bhuvad ortjanyasya( nt.) r@ja---., RY. IX, 97, 23. I formerly yielded to the force of verezi in verezi - déithra, etc., rendering; ‘endow us with energy’, and in view of vivareshé, v. 8, and Mathrem vareshenti, v. 3, together with the well-nigh universal sense of var(e)je in the Avesta, I thought that view at least a desirable alternative. But I now doubt the existence of such a word as vereei; 9 = Pahl. y with inherent a; the word is verezya. Huzithwdd(t) to huzentu = ‘good citizen’(?) is interesting, but the zaztu is not Gathic. Sujdtd, sujéniman, and supatata may be recalled, and huzathwacha, of Sraosha, Y. 57, 23, _is suggestive as well as anhéus 2athwéi (or 2athét) paouruyé(e)hya, Y. 48, 6. I should either render ‘by the nobleness of His Good Mind ’, or ‘by the revival of it’. Usen looks more like an acc. pl. neut, (?) here than in Y. 44, 10. If it were | such, I should compare Ved. wea, as in uegddhak. But it is altogether im- probable that no instances of the defective Ved. term. an, Nn. s. m. of the f pres. part., should appear beside the terminations 6 for as = @s — ants, which, together with its fuller form, preserves the sign of the nom. s, lost in the Sansk. uncovered term.; cp. ugdn of Agni, Indra, etc.
2her im- probable that no instances of the defective Ved. term. an, Nn. s. m. of the f pres. part., should appear beside the terminations 6 for as = @s — ants, which, together with its fuller form, preserves the sign of the nom. s, lost in the Sansk. uncovered term.; cp. ugdn of Agni, Indra, etc. Some scholars 545 render khshathrd in the sense of ‘fields’, but shdithréd = kshétrani would be the more natural text for that. Ved. kskatrd, used of Varuna, Indra, and others, hardly descends to the fields, and in the Gathdas Khshathra, as the personified Sovereign Power of the Iranian Deity, is actually besought ‘to come’ to the invoker in formal association with Vohu Manah, Asha, and Ar(a)maiti. Read my former printing, every thing, and, ours. Some able scholars would colour: ‘Him will I propitiate in common with the faithful: may He afford them, as they wish it, plenty and success. May M. A. grant lands and fields for our nourishment, till the faithful in reality form an intelligent community’. Pahl. Whereas we have a 224 sg. imper. rendered by a 34 sg. else- where, we have in line ¢ the 3" sg. conj. rendered by a 274 sg. imper. Vadinyén might better be taken as an imper. 2"¢ sg. with pdnakth, as iteration of idea in yehabindi. Pdnakih is intelligent gloss. Frédahishno hémanam seems to show that the prophet was supposed to pray for grace that he might further the prosperity of his people. Haozathwdd(t) was read hazd°. The trlr. had elsewhere no difficulty in rendering hu°, as in Y. 32, 5 hi-z2tvishnih = hujydtois, etc. As to °eathwad(t), see 2athwd = 2dko in Y. 44, 3, ete. Correct of course Ner.’s asmah, read my former printing yat. But the impossible (?) yam is now explained by the original MS. J.3 as a part of vayam; °cha should be read va; vayam smah, and this in spite of a desired cha. Sansk. v could be easily misread ch, and one MS., Jie is especially doubtful. 10. Anmaint would be naturally compared with anmd Y. 28, 7, and ammainé(é) in Y. 44, 20, but the suggestion of the Pahl. may lead us to a still better explanation; **andmni (sic) might be loc. adverbial = ‘ (famed) beyond our power to name’; ‘who is heard of in unnamed measure’. My rendering in S. B. E. XXXI. where dan is taken for dédm, acc. infin., and also my alternative rendering here must both of them labour under the difficulty that the two dat. hd with a verb, like choist (see also ahmdi stot), would seem to bear especial receptive dative force, the infin. (?) din (dim) being unusually distant. Unwilling to violate the language, I had previously ‘taken chdist as expressing the act of the worshipper, whose offering explained the extension of Ahura’s fame, dan also expressing the ascription of Weal and Immortality to Ahura, which he possessed for His people. I now once more think dan suspicious as an infin., for it may well be a pres. part. (or aor. pres. part.); cp. wsén (wedn), as it is improbable that the loss of s from ucdns, etc.
3of Ahura’s fame, dan also expressing the ascription of Weal and Immortality to Ahura, which he possessed for His people. I now once more think dan suspicious as an infin., for it may well be a pres. part. (or aor. pres. part.); cp. wsén (wedn), as it is improbable that the loss of s from ucdns, etc. should not have begun in the Zend. Line c, hyad(t) hoi Asha Vohuché chéist Mananhd might be parenthetic, dén being in agreement with Ahurd understood from 0; see Y. 43, 3 where line ¢ comes e awkwardly 546 after Ahuré. Some might render, with slight change of text: ‘With these festive words of devotion will I rejoice Him who is called A. M., as He really in grace has promised to grant in the kingdom Welfare and Life (?), and to the people power and help’. J.* has chéistd = ‘sacrifices are directed’. Notice the rendering of the reduplication in mimaghzhd by haméshak. The trlr., having twice rendered forms of anman by astéibd, here from some unknown reading renders a form of naman with the @ priv. and translated with especial intelligence what he understood as a word meaning ‘in his unnamed character’ by ‘in his ‘other’ name ’, also curiously departing from his nearly universal custom, in that he renders Mazdéo Ahiiro, not as a mere proper name. As to the syntax of the (syntactically only) difficult 6, he relieves himself with a gloss aighash gift, and by the above-mentioned description of Mazddo Ahuré, as if it might represent some other person than the supreme Deity. He could not credit chéist - - - hdi (see above) nor hd. In line e he gives positively an alternative rendering; s¢éi was regarded as a dat. infin. of std, and rendered as a pres., expressive of ‘con- dition’. But the trlr. at the same time would not reject a meaning ‘for the land’ which had descended in tradition; accordingly he adds Spendarmads, which he understood, as Ner. so often does, as a Synonym for ‘earth’, Din was probably taken as the pres. part., and rendered ‘he gives’, and his valman might well be regarded as in oblique case by position, omitting va with MSS. I formerly used a too severe impartiality. Read alternatively : ‘That one is to be magnified by us, etc... . (c) who revealed to that one righteousness and the good mind, the royal power, weal and immortality, to him (= his) és the giving one (= he who gives) the energy which is (2) the powerful characteristic(s)’, Alternative gloss ‘to Spendarmad (= ‘earth’, ‘land’) ‘who gives ’, etc. Critically treated the Syntax should follow the Gatha with almost total disregard of the ordinary syntactical force of the mechanically enforced Sequence of the words. In Ner. J 3, J.* have caktimatah. Agni is mentioned because the ‘fire’ in the later Avesta was closely as- sociated with Ashavahishta, Read my former printing tasya ’smdkam, sadai va, ghatitd ’si, So, better. Adhyavyavasdyasya J.4, C., P., is not an impos- sible form; ep. vya°. 11. As to caesura after the 4th, see d, and e(?). If v. 10 originally preceded v.
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.
1A.M. May we make our Songs to reach to the place of praise’. The lanman in line a was regarded by the Pahl. trir. as a sufficient expression for the first person in vyddaresem. The gloss ychevinéd enforces a needless interruption in the syntax. That the Pahl. trlr. was able to render a 1s pl. opt. freely seems proved by Y. 30, 9, and other places, yet, unless we read yehabind in e, and understand the distant lanman with difficulty from a, it would seem that the trlr. fails to render the 1st pret.-conj. here. See Ner. line e. Without gloss, omitting 7, read d ‘knowing A. in truth’, see the Gatha. Notice the force of dard effectively rendered — in Ner. by tato ’dhikam, which may be intended to mean merely ‘up’. He follows of course the 3r4 personals of the Pahl., concluding however with his 18 pers. nidaddmahe in e. Notice that the sense must necessarily be active here, notwithstanding the form. Perhaps vettd should be understood after yah; ‘who is a knower of M.’, see the Gatha. 9. See line e as to the caesura. With some forgetfulness of the difference in tone between Gatha and Rik, we might render verezend(nt.) ‘stalls’; buta orydna(m.)may=‘strength’ (L. G.) even inthe Rik as well as ‘stalls’, and var(e)je = var), oriy expresses ‘energy’ far oftener than ‘enclosures’. The Gathic party did not need herds, stalls, etc. like the freebooting Daé(é)va-worshippers. Their Dheni was on the defensive; they wished to save what they had (cp. Y. 29, etc.). Reading verezénydo as = a oryanydn(s)(m,) in the sense ‘householders’, ‘community’, ep. °7dnda(h) RY. VIL, 32, 27 (of hostile hordes), (also of citizens), cp. dharmé bhuvad ortjanyasya( nt.) r@ja---., RY. IX, 97, 23. I formerly yielded to the force of verezi in verezi - déithra, etc., rendering; ‘endow us with energy’, and in view of vivareshé, v. 8, and Mathrem vareshenti, v. 3, together with the well-nigh universal sense of var(e)je in the Avesta, I thought that view at least a desirable alternative. But I now doubt the existence of such a word as vereei; 9 = Pahl. y with inherent a; the word is verezya. Huzithwdd(t) to huzentu = ‘good citizen’(?) is interesting, but the zaztu is not Gathic. Sujdtd, sujéniman, and supatata may be recalled, and huzathwacha, of Sraosha, Y. 57, 23, _is suggestive as well as anhéus 2athwéi (or 2athét) paouruyé(e)hya, Y. 48, 6. I should either render ‘by the nobleness of His Good Mind ’, or ‘by the revival of it’. Usen looks more like an acc. pl. neut, (?) here than in Y. 44, 10. If it were | such, I should compare Ved. wea, as in uegddhak. But it is altogether im- probable that no instances of the defective Ved. term. an, Nn. s. m. of the f pres. part., should appear beside the terminations 6 for as = @s — ants, which, together with its fuller form, preserves the sign of the nom. s, lost in the Sansk. uncovered term.; cp. ugdn of Agni, Indra, etc.
2her im- probable that no instances of the defective Ved. term. an, Nn. s. m. of the f pres. part., should appear beside the terminations 6 for as = @s — ants, which, together with its fuller form, preserves the sign of the nom. s, lost in the Sansk. uncovered term.; cp. ugdn of Agni, Indra, etc. Some scholars 545 render khshathrd in the sense of ‘fields’, but shdithréd = kshétrani would be the more natural text for that. Ved. kskatrd, used of Varuna, Indra, and others, hardly descends to the fields, and in the Gathdas Khshathra, as the personified Sovereign Power of the Iranian Deity, is actually besought ‘to come’ to the invoker in formal association with Vohu Manah, Asha, and Ar(a)maiti. Read my former printing, every thing, and, ours. Some able scholars would colour: ‘Him will I propitiate in common with the faithful: may He afford them, as they wish it, plenty and success. May M. A. grant lands and fields for our nourishment, till the faithful in reality form an intelligent community’. Pahl. Whereas we have a 224 sg. imper. rendered by a 34 sg. else- where, we have in line ¢ the 3" sg. conj. rendered by a 274 sg. imper. Vadinyén might better be taken as an imper. 2"¢ sg. with pdnakth, as iteration of idea in yehabindi. Pdnakih is intelligent gloss. Frédahishno hémanam seems to show that the prophet was supposed to pray for grace that he might further the prosperity of his people. Haozathwdd(t) was read hazd°. The trlr. had elsewhere no difficulty in rendering hu°, as in Y. 32, 5 hi-z2tvishnih = hujydtois, etc. As to °eathwad(t), see 2athwd = 2dko in Y. 44, 3, ete. Correct of course Ner.’s asmah, read my former printing yat. But the impossible (?) yam is now explained by the original MS. J.3 as a part of vayam; °cha should be read va; vayam smah, and this in spite of a desired cha. Sansk. v could be easily misread ch, and one MS., Jie is especially doubtful. 10. Anmaint would be naturally compared with anmd Y. 28, 7, and ammainé(é) in Y. 44, 20, but the suggestion of the Pahl. may lead us to a still better explanation; **andmni (sic) might be loc. adverbial = ‘ (famed) beyond our power to name’; ‘who is heard of in unnamed measure’. My rendering in S. B. E. XXXI. where dan is taken for dédm, acc. infin., and also my alternative rendering here must both of them labour under the difficulty that the two dat. hd with a verb, like choist (see also ahmdi stot), would seem to bear especial receptive dative force, the infin. (?) din (dim) being unusually distant. Unwilling to violate the language, I had previously ‘taken chdist as expressing the act of the worshipper, whose offering explained the extension of Ahura’s fame, dan also expressing the ascription of Weal and Immortality to Ahura, which he possessed for His people. I now once more think dan suspicious as an infin., for it may well be a pres. part. (or aor. pres. part.); cp. wsén (wedn), as it is improbable that the loss of s from ucdns, etc.
3of Ahura’s fame, dan also expressing the ascription of Weal and Immortality to Ahura, which he possessed for His people. I now once more think dan suspicious as an infin., for it may well be a pres. part. (or aor. pres. part.); cp. wsén (wedn), as it is improbable that the loss of s from ucdns, etc. should not have begun in the Zend. Line c, hyad(t) hoi Asha Vohuché chéist Mananhd might be parenthetic, dén being in agreement with Ahurd understood from 0; see Y. 43, 3 where line ¢ comes e awkwardly 546 after Ahuré. Some might render, with slight change of text: ‘With these festive words of devotion will I rejoice Him who is called A. M., as He really in grace has promised to grant in the kingdom Welfare and Life (?), and to the people power and help’. J.* has chéistd = ‘sacrifices are directed’. Notice the rendering of the reduplication in mimaghzhd by haméshak. The trlr., having twice rendered forms of anman by astéibd, here from some unknown reading renders a form of naman with the @ priv. and translated with especial intelligence what he understood as a word meaning ‘in his unnamed character’ by ‘in his ‘other’ name ’, also curiously departing from his nearly universal custom, in that he renders Mazdéo Ahiiro, not as a mere proper name. As to the syntax of the (syntactically only) difficult 6, he relieves himself with a gloss aighash gift, and by the above-mentioned description of Mazddo Ahuré, as if it might represent some other person than the supreme Deity. He could not credit chéist - - - hdi (see above) nor hd. In line e he gives positively an alternative rendering; s¢éi was regarded as a dat. infin. of std, and rendered as a pres., expressive of ‘con- dition’. But the trlr. at the same time would not reject a meaning ‘for the land’ which had descended in tradition; accordingly he adds Spendarmads, which he understood, as Ner. so often does, as a Synonym for ‘earth’, Din was probably taken as the pres. part., and rendered ‘he gives’, and his valman might well be regarded as in oblique case by position, omitting va with MSS. I formerly used a too severe impartiality. Read alternatively : ‘That one is to be magnified by us, etc... . (c) who revealed to that one righteousness and the good mind, the royal power, weal and immortality, to him (= his) és the giving one (= he who gives) the energy which is (2) the powerful characteristic(s)’, Alternative gloss ‘to Spendarmad (= ‘earth’, ‘land’) ‘who gives ’, etc. Critically treated the Syntax should follow the Gatha with almost total disregard of the ordinary syntactical force of the mechanically enforced Sequence of the words. In Ner. J 3, J.* have caktimatah. Agni is mentioned because the ‘fire’ in the later Avesta was closely as- sociated with Ashavahishta, Read my former printing tasya ’smdkam, sadai va, ghatitd ’si, So, better. Adhyavyavasdyasya J.4, C., P., is not an impos- sible form; ep. vya°. 11. As to caesura after the 4th, see d, and e(?). If v. 10 originally preceded v.
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.