Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1e her, calling her merely the saimprdptam (nt.) in a, and again he avoids the name in b, ¢, of v. 4, using his intelligent prépnotu. His Pahl. MS. must have been deficient, or he doubted the proper name. He has Jamdspah. There could be no difficulty in writing the word P. in Sansk. as a proper name. J.* has ajijdtd(?)janat, J4 ajijdtdjanat, C., the same, but P. has ja@¢é crossed out. I must apologize for my former chaotic mis- print. Unfortunately at the last moment I left in the proof-sheet the remains of an emendation to ajanishthdh (see the Pahl.), but I preferred a 3r4 pers. ; see my trl., and read ajanishta; or with ajanishtha(h) ((2)so) translate, ‘thou wast born(?)’. Iam unable to give a very satisfactory explanation of ajijdta°, whether = aijijat@ = ‘born of the genital organ(?)’; cp, aij = ‘slippery’ is a question. Possibly ‘born of the sender (?)’, ‘the disposing head’ anji = aji(?). Pédd, so, as more Parsi than paidd. Read Pahl. bentman. 4. w was another antiquated character which I had erroneously allowed to stand in order to avoid a breach of uniformity, and from the lack of a type; read now pw = 6, and w_ = A, also the final ys. I erroneously felt myself committed to w= % or hv by having printed early parts of this work before the distinction had been noticed by scholars. Westergaard used yw , Spiegel for hv or h. This verse is a graphic response, of the bride to the pious injunctions of v. 3. Tam is obviously the poetical repetition of tém in the previous verse, and on no account to be violated without authority from MSS. Yd is yéna in the sense of ‘since’, or ‘when is ‘when he shall obtain me from my father’; that is, ‘as I become his wife’. Some would refer véddd(t) to Ved. vidh = ‘to serve’ (used of the Gods), as if for the sake of variety. I still prefer the more obvious meaning. Vé is superfluous, but may mean ‘ your offered bridegroom’. All the datives, — in accordance with poetic diction and Iranian usage, refer to ¢énvad(f) i 611 hanhus (ast@ understood). Béd(#) is the Vedic dé¢ = ‘verily’; or dzed(t) may be a miswriting for davad(t), in which case we need no asté under- stood. I have acceded to the reading ashéuné in S. B. E. XXXI, p. 192, but I now prefer as above: ‘to the righteous one, the master’ to the right- eous ones, the vdstryaé(é)ibyo (poetic repetition). Then in antithesis, and in allusion to the injunctions in v. 3, mé (read mdz) béd(£)(?) us; ‘to me de the understanding which you enjoin upon me (see the preceding verse). Hanhus = strth, For etymology cp. perhaps Ved. sasé = ‘grass’, ‘food’. This with changed suffix would be *sast = hanhu (?). One writer regards the word as a reduplication of the root han = san (cp. Ved. sdti). For us I compare ushi (Pahlavi hishth). The Pahlavi read meébéet us. Otherwise one might think, of a perfect, ‘bédus’, to bandh ‘for me binding (?) the solemn convenant, may Ahura bestow the blessing’.
2hanhu (?). One writer regards the word as a reduplication of the root han = san (cp. Ved. sdti). For us I compare ushi (Pahlavi hishth). The Pahlavi read meébéet us. Otherwise one might think, of a perfect, ‘bédus’, to bandh ‘for me binding (?) the solemn convenant, may Ahura bestow the blessing’. Or we might regard the various readings for mé which suggest mé@jig, connecting it with daddd(f) as mén.daddd(t): ‘May Ahura, confirming this (d¢dws), give attention to the good soul for ever’. At this difficult place all suggestions are welcome. Mé may represent méc, or mém may represent mam, or méan, ménd (gen.). Others put the strophe in the mouth of the bride- eroom changing tém to tam without MSS., and omitting the two °n?’s render: ‘I will love her with ardour (speredd) who will serve my father, and her husband, and the servants, and the connection - -’ (The good lady would have been well occupied). D. has afash valmanich 7, nésmanth (80); M.! seems zannih possibly for zanth = ‘cohabitation’ in 6, D. mozd va, va mazdinidar (?), or wa mazdayasnidar (2), or namazdinidar (?) and hiishih twice in c, and dénd (dind) 7 in d, gl. I have as usual been too adverse to the Pahl. Hiéaspir7k = ‘well-subjected’ is far from certain, Sipurdan = ‘to trust’ might suggest ‘well-trusting’, or an active ‘well-subjecting’ would be nearer the Gatha. We should hardly venture to compare sabda- rah = catamitus, paedicator as figuratively used in such a connection as this; ‘the violently ardent affection’(?). The 1** conj. is not rendered. Paithyaé(é)ché without being mistaken for fedhrd, = abidarih or abidar, was yet reproduced by ab#, the ideas of ‘master’ and ‘father’ not having been considered far apart. Venvad(?) was read as from the reflexive pron., many others being baffled. Hanhus well = sirth; masiniddér or mazdyas- niddr (2) or mazdintdar points to mé@ béd(t) suggesting mébad (a purely-parsi word!); see also Ner.’s gurukdryam (the 1* pers. pron. was not seen’). J.* om. tvam, (a) has susvddu (so), (c) om. sarveshdm, (d). Cobhanam = haspirik. Ner. seems to have seen hd + siparth = ‘perfection’, hence his peripdrnam, and he read dahishné for déshishnd. Aba rdi is not rendered, being pro- , bably discarded as an error. Prdpnotu may correspond mechanically in its 612 place to the word Périchisté, if line c begins after pdlayati, but it is itself So proper and sensible that it cannot be intended as a translation of Péruchisté. It shows however the curious reluctance on the part of Ner. to reproduce the name. De/ is corrected from dehad; istdd, or éstdd. 5. Séaéenit stands in close connection with saddré, the suffix only being different; how to explain the formation is difficult, sah + van as a pl. nt. (?) The reading vademné if to vad, ‘I speaking’, stultifies mraom? if to vadhit, ‘I about to marry advise you marrying ones’ it would seem sententious for the place, whereas vaé(é)demné is very Gathic, and goes with vaé(é)dédam.
3rent; how to explain the formation is difficult, sah + van as a pl. nt. (?) The reading vademné if to vad, ‘I speaking’, stultifies mraom? if to vadhit, ‘I about to marry advise you marrying ones’ it would seem sententious for the place, whereas vaé(é)demné is very Gathic, and goes with vaé(é)dédam. Aibyastd (so I would now prefer) is either = aibi-yatta (so naturally) to yat = ‘strive after’, athematic. conjug. (exceptionally), or nom. voc. pl. of the past part. (of yat), or 254 pl. of ah = as, cp. as + abhi, ‘gain’, ‘get in your power’ ah = as + abhi. This I would explain as in the sense of - + vigvdny abhy astu satibhagad »+ RY. VII, 1, 32. But as ever, the old reading must not be too contemptuously disregarded; abyaschd may equal ‘from these things’ irreg. abl. for instr. being placed after the noun for emphasis. With ahim - + vanhéus mananhd, cp. Y. 43, 1. The 7 of aintm (sic) is the so-called Pahlavi letter » with inherent @ = ya. The word does not represent ainyam, it is ainyam, and should be so written. Vévenhata to Ved. vévdsate. Hushénem corresponds mechanically with sushdnd = ‘easy to be gained’, and ‘good reward’, but it is far more in the spirit of the context to compare kshd = ‘dwelling place’, and to regard nem as the usual suffix, *suksh@na = home-happiness’; hét = ‘to him’ or ‘to her’. D. has 7 sakhtindn (? or °dn avé dz° (?)); Hitésh in a, zak ich?-~- zak tan (M.+ 2%), valman minishn®, mindavam 7 in b. D. va amat, kirfak 7, rds 7 atdno, valman hiiminishnih (so M.!) valman Hiéités, gés 7 in d. The Pahl. trlr. did not omit am with gébishnd = mraom? from ignorance; as need hardly be said, accidental causes existed of course. Perhaps pavan = ‘on account of’, ‘for the benefit of the maidens’ (force of dat). Demano if not gl. is primary altern. trl. for mén° to a mdn = ‘dwell’. Ménishné also (?) =, men° and ma@z°, alone of itself makes this Pahl. trl. of this strophe to competent scholars of more importance than much otherwise closer trl., for it proves that the Pahl. trlr. was the first author of the rendering menchd (maz)dazdim = animadvert®’. Elsewhere the trlr. erroneously (?) renders men, méng = li, but these ménishno’s (as translated by Ner.) gave the indication on which Haug rendered mei° = mentem. Even as to their form, — it is necessary to say that they may, as alternatively, be infin. for 2™4 pl. — imper ; see the preceding °¢dén, and read; ‘let there be a turning (appli- cation, dahishnih) of the thoughts dy you (= ‘turn ye your thoughts’) to both & 613 the worlds (= 4) {when ye understand (khaviténéd may be 2™4 pl.) - - -]’. Vivenhath, was. referred to van, in the sense of ‘acquisition’, he notices the reduplication as elsewhere.. All but J.3 and P. om. thalokam. J.* has mérgasya without the usual irrational gr for g; J.thas sydt yatah punyam, J.* punya (so) margah (d). Ner. wellavoids the trl. of demano which adds to the probability that it is gl. Mahat punyam (a) seems a free trl. of Hitdsh; Ner.
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.
1e her, calling her merely the saimprdptam (nt.) in a, and again he avoids the name in b, ¢, of v. 4, using his intelligent prépnotu. His Pahl. MS. must have been deficient, or he doubted the proper name. He has Jamdspah. There could be no difficulty in writing the word P. in Sansk. as a proper name. J.* has ajijdtd(?)janat, J4 ajijdtdjanat, C., the same, but P. has ja@¢é crossed out. I must apologize for my former chaotic mis- print. Unfortunately at the last moment I left in the proof-sheet the remains of an emendation to ajanishthdh (see the Pahl.), but I preferred a 3r4 pers. ; see my trl., and read ajanishta; or with ajanishtha(h) ((2)so) translate, ‘thou wast born(?)’. Iam unable to give a very satisfactory explanation of ajijdta°, whether = aijijat@ = ‘born of the genital organ(?)’; cp, aij = ‘slippery’ is a question. Possibly ‘born of the sender (?)’, ‘the disposing head’ anji = aji(?). Pédd, so, as more Parsi than paidd. Read Pahl. bentman. 4. w was another antiquated character which I had erroneously allowed to stand in order to avoid a breach of uniformity, and from the lack of a type; read now pw = 6, and w_ = A, also the final ys. I erroneously felt myself committed to w= % or hv by having printed early parts of this work before the distinction had been noticed by scholars. Westergaard used yw , Spiegel for hv or h. This verse is a graphic response, of the bride to the pious injunctions of v. 3. Tam is obviously the poetical repetition of tém in the previous verse, and on no account to be violated without authority from MSS. Yd is yéna in the sense of ‘since’, or ‘when is ‘when he shall obtain me from my father’; that is, ‘as I become his wife’. Some would refer véddd(t) to Ved. vidh = ‘to serve’ (used of the Gods), as if for the sake of variety. I still prefer the more obvious meaning. Vé is superfluous, but may mean ‘ your offered bridegroom’. All the datives, — in accordance with poetic diction and Iranian usage, refer to ¢énvad(f) i 611 hanhus (ast@ understood). Béd(#) is the Vedic dé¢ = ‘verily’; or dzed(t) may be a miswriting for davad(t), in which case we need no asté under- stood. I have acceded to the reading ashéuné in S. B. E. XXXI, p. 192, but I now prefer as above: ‘to the righteous one, the master’ to the right- eous ones, the vdstryaé(é)ibyo (poetic repetition). Then in antithesis, and in allusion to the injunctions in v. 3, mé (read mdz) béd(£)(?) us; ‘to me de the understanding which you enjoin upon me (see the preceding verse). Hanhus = strth, For etymology cp. perhaps Ved. sasé = ‘grass’, ‘food’. This with changed suffix would be *sast = hanhu (?). One writer regards the word as a reduplication of the root han = san (cp. Ved. sdti). For us I compare ushi (Pahlavi hishth). The Pahlavi read meébéet us. Otherwise one might think, of a perfect, ‘bédus’, to bandh ‘for me binding (?) the solemn convenant, may Ahura bestow the blessing’.
2hanhu (?). One writer regards the word as a reduplication of the root han = san (cp. Ved. sdti). For us I compare ushi (Pahlavi hishth). The Pahlavi read meébéet us. Otherwise one might think, of a perfect, ‘bédus’, to bandh ‘for me binding (?) the solemn convenant, may Ahura bestow the blessing’. Or we might regard the various readings for mé which suggest mé@jig, connecting it with daddd(f) as mén.daddd(t): ‘May Ahura, confirming this (d¢dws), give attention to the good soul for ever’. At this difficult place all suggestions are welcome. Mé may represent méc, or mém may represent mam, or méan, ménd (gen.). Others put the strophe in the mouth of the bride- eroom changing tém to tam without MSS., and omitting the two °n?’s render: ‘I will love her with ardour (speredd) who will serve my father, and her husband, and the servants, and the connection - -’ (The good lady would have been well occupied). D. has afash valmanich 7, nésmanth (80); M.! seems zannih possibly for zanth = ‘cohabitation’ in 6, D. mozd va, va mazdinidar (?), or wa mazdayasnidar (2), or namazdinidar (?) and hiishih twice in c, and dénd (dind) 7 in d, gl. I have as usual been too adverse to the Pahl. Hiéaspir7k = ‘well-subjected’ is far from certain, Sipurdan = ‘to trust’ might suggest ‘well-trusting’, or an active ‘well-subjecting’ would be nearer the Gatha. We should hardly venture to compare sabda- rah = catamitus, paedicator as figuratively used in such a connection as this; ‘the violently ardent affection’(?). The 1** conj. is not rendered. Paithyaé(é)ché without being mistaken for fedhrd, = abidarih or abidar, was yet reproduced by ab#, the ideas of ‘master’ and ‘father’ not having been considered far apart. Venvad(?) was read as from the reflexive pron., many others being baffled. Hanhus well = sirth; masiniddér or mazdyas- niddr (2) or mazdintdar points to mé@ béd(t) suggesting mébad (a purely-parsi word!); see also Ner.’s gurukdryam (the 1* pers. pron. was not seen’). J.* om. tvam, (a) has susvddu (so), (c) om. sarveshdm, (d). Cobhanam = haspirik. Ner. seems to have seen hd + siparth = ‘perfection’, hence his peripdrnam, and he read dahishné for déshishnd. Aba rdi is not rendered, being pro- , bably discarded as an error. Prdpnotu may correspond mechanically in its 612 place to the word Périchisté, if line c begins after pdlayati, but it is itself So proper and sensible that it cannot be intended as a translation of Péruchisté. It shows however the curious reluctance on the part of Ner. to reproduce the name. De/ is corrected from dehad; istdd, or éstdd. 5. Séaéenit stands in close connection with saddré, the suffix only being different; how to explain the formation is difficult, sah + van as a pl. nt. (?) The reading vademné if to vad, ‘I speaking’, stultifies mraom? if to vadhit, ‘I about to marry advise you marrying ones’ it would seem sententious for the place, whereas vaé(é)demné is very Gathic, and goes with vaé(é)dédam.
3rent; how to explain the formation is difficult, sah + van as a pl. nt. (?) The reading vademné if to vad, ‘I speaking’, stultifies mraom? if to vadhit, ‘I about to marry advise you marrying ones’ it would seem sententious for the place, whereas vaé(é)demné is very Gathic, and goes with vaé(é)dédam. Aibyastd (so I would now prefer) is either = aibi-yatta (so naturally) to yat = ‘strive after’, athematic. conjug. (exceptionally), or nom. voc. pl. of the past part. (of yat), or 254 pl. of ah = as, cp. as + abhi, ‘gain’, ‘get in your power’ ah = as + abhi. This I would explain as in the sense of - + vigvdny abhy astu satibhagad »+ RY. VII, 1, 32. But as ever, the old reading must not be too contemptuously disregarded; abyaschd may equal ‘from these things’ irreg. abl. for instr. being placed after the noun for emphasis. With ahim - + vanhéus mananhd, cp. Y. 43, 1. The 7 of aintm (sic) is the so-called Pahlavi letter » with inherent @ = ya. The word does not represent ainyam, it is ainyam, and should be so written. Vévenhata to Ved. vévdsate. Hushénem corresponds mechanically with sushdnd = ‘easy to be gained’, and ‘good reward’, but it is far more in the spirit of the context to compare kshd = ‘dwelling place’, and to regard nem as the usual suffix, *suksh@na = home-happiness’; hét = ‘to him’ or ‘to her’. D. has 7 sakhtindn (? or °dn avé dz° (?)); Hitésh in a, zak ich?-~- zak tan (M.+ 2%), valman minishn®, mindavam 7 in b. D. va amat, kirfak 7, rds 7 atdno, valman hiiminishnih (so M.!) valman Hiéités, gés 7 in d. The Pahl. trlr. did not omit am with gébishnd = mraom? from ignorance; as need hardly be said, accidental causes existed of course. Perhaps pavan = ‘on account of’, ‘for the benefit of the maidens’ (force of dat). Demano if not gl. is primary altern. trl. for mén° to a mdn = ‘dwell’. Ménishné also (?) =, men° and ma@z°, alone of itself makes this Pahl. trl. of this strophe to competent scholars of more importance than much otherwise closer trl., for it proves that the Pahl. trlr. was the first author of the rendering menchd (maz)dazdim = animadvert®’. Elsewhere the trlr. erroneously (?) renders men, méng = li, but these ménishno’s (as translated by Ner.) gave the indication on which Haug rendered mei° = mentem. Even as to their form, — it is necessary to say that they may, as alternatively, be infin. for 2™4 pl. — imper ; see the preceding °¢dén, and read; ‘let there be a turning (appli- cation, dahishnih) of the thoughts dy you (= ‘turn ye your thoughts’) to both & 613 the worlds (= 4) {when ye understand (khaviténéd may be 2™4 pl.) - - -]’. Vivenhath, was. referred to van, in the sense of ‘acquisition’, he notices the reduplication as elsewhere.. All but J.3 and P. om. thalokam. J.* has mérgasya without the usual irrational gr for g; J.thas sydt yatah punyam, J.* punya (so) margah (d). Ner. wellavoids the trl. of demano which adds to the probability that it is gl. Mahat punyam (a) seems a free trl. of Hitdsh; Ner.
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.