STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

23

Transcript of STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

Page 1: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA
Page 2: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

ISMEOASSOCIAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE

DI STUDI SUL MEDITERRANEO E L’ORIENTE

SERIE ORIENTALE ROMAFONDATA NEL 1950 DA GIUSEPPE TUCCI

DIRETTA DAL 1979 DA GHERARDO GNOLI

Scientific Board: Timothy H. Barrett, East Asian History, School of Or. and African Studies, London

Alessandro Bausi, Äthiopistik, Asien-Afrika-Institut, Universität HamburgPeter Kornicki, East Asian Studies, Cambridge University

Daniel Potts, Ancient Near Eastern Archaeology and History, Inst. for the Study of the Ancient World, New York University

Editor: Adriano V. Rossi

NUOVA SERIE

Vol. 5

R O M AISMEO

2017

Page 3: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI NAPOLI “L’ORIENTALE”DIPARTIMENTO ASIA, AFRICA E MEDITERRANEO

ISMEO – ASSOCIAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE DI STUDI SUL MEDITERRANEO E L’ORIENTE

STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICAGHERARDO GNOLI MEMORIAL VOLUME

Edited by Enrico Morano, Elio Provasi and Adriano V. Rossi

ROMASCIENZE E LETTERE

2017

Page 4: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

This volume was published with a grant from the:

– PRIN 2009 Project (2009JHSEE7) “Sedi del potere, comunicazione politica esocietà nell’Iran achemenide: ricerche e studi archeologici ed epigrafici”, directedat L’Orientale University by Adriano V. Rossi;– MIUR Project “Studi e ricerche sulle culture dell’Asia e dell’Africa: tradizionee continuità, rivitalizzazione e divulgazione”.

TUTTI I DIRITTI RISERVATI

ISBN 9788866871156

© 2017 Scienze e Lettere S.r.l.Via Piave, 7 – 00187 Roma

Tel. 0039/06/4817656 – Fax 0039/06/48912574e-mail: [email protected]

www.scienzeelettere.com

© ISMEO Associazione Internazionale di Studi sul Mediterraneo e l’Oriente, Romawww.ismeo.eu

© Università degli Studi di Napoli L’Orientale, Napoliwww.unior.it

Layout by Beniamino Melasecchi

Page 5: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

Gherardo Gnoli in a photo from the early 2010s.

Page 6: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA
Page 7: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

Studia Philologica Iranica. Gherardo Gnoli Memorial Volume

EDITORIAL BOARD

†Richard N. FryePhilippe GignouxAlmut HintzeHelmut HumbachJean KellensGilbert LazardMaria MacuchRud̈iger SchmittMartin SchwartzShaul ShakedNicholas Sims-WilliamsProds O. SkjærvøGernot L. WindfuhrEhsan YarshaterYutaka Yoshida

Page 8: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA
Page 9: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

CONTENTS

ix

17

172331

51

6379859399

139147165

179187199207217

223

243

257

273

Preface by E. Morano, E. Provasi and A.V. Rossi ..................................

M. Alram, Ein Schatzfund des Hunnen-Königs Mihirakula ...................G. Asatrian, Middle Iranian Lexical Archaisms in Armenian Dialects ..H.R. Baghbidi, Three Etymological Notes ..............................................C.G. Cereti, A Short Note on MHDA 38 ..................................................J. Cheung, On the Origin of the Terms “Afghan” & “Pashtun” (Again)C.A. Ciancaglini, Phonology, Etymology and Transcription Issues of

Middle Persian Final Sequences ‹-lg› and ‹-lkꞌ› ................................I. Colditz, Another Fragment of the “Parable on the Female Hearer

Xybrʾ”? ..............................................................................................M. Dandamayev, Indian Soldiers in Achaemenid Babylonia ..................A. de Jong, The Women Who Witnessed Zoroaster’s Birth .....................D. Durkin-Meisterernst, Yima’s anādruxti- .............................................E. Filippone, On the Meaning of Avestan nāuuiia- and Pahlavi *nāydāg Ph. Gignoux, Sur les noms de personnes et quelques particularités lin-

guistiques d’une nouvelle collection privée de parchemins pehlevisR. Gyselen, Formules moyen-perses et monogrammes sassanides ........A. Hintze, The Advance of the Daēnā: The Vištāsp Yašt and an Obscure

Word in the Hāδōxt Nask ...................................................................H. Humbach, Zarathushtra and the Balance ..........................................J. Josephson, The Pahlavi Psalter as a Translation ................................J. Kellens, Les Gâthâs dites de Zarathusthra ..........................................G. Lazard, Les racines de la langue persane ...........................................P. Lecoq, Le -a final en vieux perse ........................................................C. Leurini, The Virgins and the Bride: Matt. 25:1 in the Manichaean

Middle Persian Fragment M36 ..........................................................P.B. Lurje, More on Sogdian Versification: Translated and Original

Compositions .....................................................................................M. Macuch, A Legal Controversy from the Sasanian Period in a Late

Pahlavi Rivāyat Text ..........................................................................M. Maggi, Annotations on the Book of Zambasta, IV: Ronald E. Em-

merick’s Notes ...................................................................................

Page 10: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

E. Morano, The Jackals and the Elephant: A Manichaean Sogdian Talein Manichaean Script. With an Appendix with Corrections to Previ-ously Edited Fragments of Tales ........................................................

É. Pirart, Les Soleils de l’Avesta .............................................................A. Piras, X ˅arǝnah- and the Garlands. Notes about the Avestan and

Manichaean Yima ................................................................................E. Provasi, Some Notes on Sogdian Phonology: Prothetic Aleph and

Labialised Velars ...............................................................................Ch. Reck, Form and Emptiness: A Fragment of a Sogdian Version of

the Heart Sutra? ..................................................................................A.V. Rossi, Ten Years of Achaemenid Philology: Old Persian &

Achaemenid Elamite 2006-2016 ........................................................G. Scarcia, Alla ricerca di un Ur-Farhâd: Hercules patiens, magnetico

signor dottore, scalpellino, feldmaresciallo mecenate? ....................R. Schmitt, Der Flußgott Oxos in der iranischen Anthroponymie ..........M. Schwartz, An Achaemenid Position, and Gathic Composition:

OPers. *grasta-(pati-), OAv. grə̄hma-, and PIE √gʰres ......................Sh. Shaked, Zoroastrian Views on Suffering ...........................................N. Sims-Williams, The Name of the Kushan Goddess Ομμα ..................P.O. Skjærvø, Khotanese Land Purchase Deeds .....................................D. Weber, Bemerkungen zu einigen Personennamen in den neuen Do-

kumenten aus Tabaristan ...................................................................G. Windfuhr, The Enigmatic kurušag Ewe that Nursed Infant Zarathush-

tra, and the Precession of the Equinoxes ...........................................E. Yarshater, Tāti Dialects .......................................................................Y. Yoshida, A Manichaean Middle Persian Fragment Preserved in the

Kyōushooku Library, Osaka, Japan ...................................................P. Zieme, Ein altuigurisches Fragment zur manichäischen Ethik ..........

Plates .......................................................................................................

293299

311

325

353

359

395413

427435449455

469

477491

509517

525

Page 11: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

PREFACE

Gherardo Gnoli (Rome 1937 – Cagli 2012) was one of the most distinguishedscholars of pre-Islamic Iran. From 1965 to 1993 he was Professor of IranianPhilology at the Istituto Universitario Orientale of Naples (now L’Orientale Uni-versity), of which he was also Rector from 1970 to 1978. Then, from 1993 to 2008he was appointed Professor of the “Religious History of Iran and Central Asia”at the University of Rome La Sapienza, and Professor Emeritus since 2009. It wasmainly due to Gherardo Gnoli’s work and teaching that Iranian philology in Italywas able to grow into a distinct field of studies parallel to that of Persian studies.He was a member of many scientific academies. From 1979 to 1995, succeedingGiuseppe Tucci and Sabatino Moscati, he was President of the Istituto Italianoper il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (IsMEO) and since 1995 of the Istituto Italianoper l’Africa e l'Oriente (IsIAO). As President of the IsMEO, he contributed signif-icantly to the expansion of Italian research work in Asia (after 1995 also in Africa)by increasing both the size of the related disciplines and the geographical areasinvolved. He was also a founding member of the Societas Iranological Europaea(SIE), and it is not mere coincidence that, as long as the IsIAO was active, the of-ficial seat of the Societas was located at the Institute.

As Rector of the Istituto Universitario Orientale, he was the main promoter ofa far reaching reform which was destined to transform an antiquated institutiondevoted to the study of a few languages and cultures of modern Asia and Africainto a modern, highly specialised university, in which the cultures of Asia andAfrica were studied in their historical premises and modern developments, as wellas in their interactions with European cultures.

Already in 2003 a number of his pupils and friends offered to Gherardo a vol-ume on the occasion of his 65th birthday. The scope of this volume was restrictedto only one of the main fields of interest of the dedicatee, viz. pre-Islamic Iranianreligions approached from a historical and philological point of view; conse-quently the volume appeared as Religious themes and texts of pre-Islamic Iran andCentral Asia in the series “Beiträge zur Iranistik” of Reichelt Verlag directed byNicholas Sims-Williams.

Approaching his seventy-fifth birthday, some friends insisted that the mainItalian institutions in which Gherardo had been active should offer a volume ofstudies in his honour; and Gherardo, though somewhat reluctantly, admitted that

Page 12: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

a volume connected with his name could be conceived only as a joint effort ofL’Orientale University and IsIAO.

Major problems distracted the attention of Gherardo and his friends in thesubsequent months, and during 2012 two sad events happened almost simultane-ously, Gherardo’s passing and the IsIAO dissolution by the Italian Berlusconi Gov-ernment.

It was clear at this point that the projected volume should be realised. Afterthe re-foundation of ISMEO as an International Association in 2012, it was decidedthat the new Association should join L’Orientale University in the project, that aninternational editorial board with fifteen leading Iranianists should be set up, andthat the volume should be edited by Enrico Morano, Elio Provasi and Adriano V.Rossi, and the invitation to contribute should be circulated among senior col-leagues and friends who had on occasions discussed with the dedicatee differentquestions of Iranian philology stricto sensu.

The present volume benefited from the collaboration and support of many peo-ple and institutions, above all L’Orientale University and ISMEO. We are deeplyindebted to the colleagues and friends who readily accepted the invitation to jointhe editorial board of this volume; we profoundly miss the scheduled contributionsby Werner Sundermann and Richard Frye; other colleagues, though unable tocomply with our request for a contribution for different reasons, expressed theirappreciation of the initiative. We are grateful to all colleagues who have con-tributed articles.

Enrico MoranoElio Provasi

Adriano V. Rossi

A bibliography of the works (1961-2007) of Gherardo Gnoli has been published in Biblio-grafia di Gherardo Gnoli pubblicata nella ricorrenza del suo 700 compleanno il 6 dicembre2007, Roma, Aléxandros, 2007; all updates of the bibliography up to 2013 will be includedin a second editition (in the press).

Page 13: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

Yutaka YOShIDa

kyoto

A Manichaean Middle Persian Fragment Preserved in theKyōushooku Library, Osaka, Japan1

0. Introduction: Manichaean Middle Iranian Manuscripts Preserved in Japan

the number of manichaean middle Iranian texts preserved in Japan is nothigh. the bulk of them are those acquired by the Otani expedition and are currentlyhoused in the main library of ryūkoku university, kyoto.2 they were publishedby me in collaboration with the late Professors k. kuDara and W. SuNDermaNN:Irango danpenshūsei [Iranian fragments from the Otani Collection. Iranian frag-ments unearthed in Central Asia by Otani Mission and Kept at the Library ofRyūkoku University], kyoto 1997 [1999].3 Since the publication of the volume justmentioned, some forty Sogdian fragments belonging to the Otani Collection havebeen re-discovered among the Nachlass of the late Professor k. OgaWa. a shortlist of the collection has been published4 and one fragment among them has beenproved to belong to the same manuscript as Ch/So 14742, Otani 7281, and Otani10001.5 apart from them another four small fragments have appeared in the libraryof tokyo university.6 they are among those turfan texts purchased from a Chinesecollector named lIaNg SuWeN梁素文 before the war. a succinct catalogue of thefragments was once published.7

In this paper dedicated to the volume in memory of the late Professor g.gNOlI, I edit yet another unpublished manichaean middle Persian fragment pre-served in Japan.8 Since the relationship between Iranian manichaeism and zoroas-trianism was one of his main fields of study, I hope my edition of this smallfragment will interest his deceased soul.

1 I am indebted to Prof. N. SImS-WIllIamS and Prof. D. DurkIN-meIStererNSt for com-ments and discussion. Some of their suggestions are cited below in relevant places.

2 On the Iranian manuscripts of the Otani collection now preserved in the lushun museum,China see YOShIDa 2012, pp. 39-53.

3 For fragments belonging to the minor collections see also my article: “Nihonnihokansareteiru tyūseiirangoshiryō nitsuite [On the middle Iranian texts preserved in Japan]”(YOShIDa 1998).

4 Cf. OgI, kItSuDō, YOShIDa 2008.5 On these fragments see YOShIDa 2010.6 See appendix below.7 Cf. Tōkyō Daigaku shozō bukkyōkankei kichōshoten. Tenjishiryō mokuroku 2001, esp. pp.

7, 20-24.8 I thank Professor e. kOIzumI and Dr k. kItSuDō for drawing my attention to this fragment.

I also thank kyōushooku library for permitting me to study the manuscript and to reproduce itin this article.

Page 14: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

510 Yutaka Yoshida

1. Manuscript

Quite recently, one middle Persian fragment has appeared among the manu-scripts collection of the late Professor tOru haNeDa (1882-1955). the collectionis dubbed as tonkō hikyū 敦煌秘笈 or “Selected treasure of Dunhuang” and iskept in a private library called kyōu Shooku 杏雨書屋, Osaka, Japan. as the des-ignation of the collection suggests, the bulk of the collection are those DunhuangChinese manuscripts once owned by a famous Chinese collector lI CheNgDuO李盛鐸 (1858-1935). the manuscript in question bears a signature 羽 719 (hereafterhaNeDa 719) in the library and its photograph is published in volume 9 (pp. 152-153) of the series of facsimile volumes entitled Tonkō Hikyū敦煌秘笈 being pub-lished by the library. On one side of haNeDa 719 a vermilion seal is impressed,which reads muzhaishending 木齋審定; this is known to be lI CheNgDuO’s own-ership seal impression.9

as one can see from fig. 1, this middle Persian fragment is written in mani-chaean script and comes from the lower part of a folio. the fragment preservesright, left and bottom margins and measures 7.8 cm by 14.1 cm. each side comprisesthree verses written in a couplet (total six lines on each side) and each line is 9 cmlong. this lay out of the manuscripts clearly indicates that it comes from a codexbook consisting of hymn cycle(s) and the height of a page would have been ca. 28cm or two times as long as its width, i.e. 14.1 cm; each page of the book is likelyto have comprised ten two-lined verses.10 In light of different sizes of spaces alongthe right and left margins, recto and verso of the folio can easily be recognized.While the recto side is clean and letters can be read without difficulty, the versoside is badly stained so that considerable parts of the text are effaced. One can alsosee mirror-image impressions of letters from the following page. the present stateof the verso seems to indicate that the fragment was once glued to a blank side ofanother document, possibly a Buddhist Chinese text(?), for enforcement.

the fact that the manuscript was once owned by li Chengduo, famous col-lector of Dunhuang manuscripts, implies that it came from Dunhuang rather thanturfan. It is true that one manichaean text written in manichaean script, a scrollof the Xwāstwānīft in uighur, was discovered in Dunhuang, but it has been theonly one example so far and no other similar texts were found there. this situationinduces one to assume the turfan origin of haNeDa 719. accordingly, the problemsurrounding its original place of discovery must remain open, for the time being.11

9 Nevertheless, it was once proved by a. FuJIeDa that lI CheNgDuO’s ownership seals werefaked, and that many Dunhuang and turfan fragments bearing this and similar ownership sealimpressions did not belong to lI CheNgDuO’s collection, cf. FuJIeDa 1985.

10 On the layout the manuscripts of manichaean hymn cycles from the german turfan col-lection see SuNDermaNN 2012, pp. 13-15.

11 Professor t. takata was kind enough to check t. haNeDa’s old list of his collection. ac-cording to it, he bought the fragment in april, 1942 and he also suspected its turfan origin atthat time.

Page 15: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

511A Manichaean Middle Persian Fragment

2. Text, Translation and Commentary

here follows the text and translation. In the text, letters in [square brackets]are restored by the present author and (round brackets) indicate partly damagedletters, while slash marks (//////) represent effaced surface. In the translation, wordsin (round brackets) are not in the text but are added to enhance the understandingof the contents.

Textrecto1 dydydwmyd n͗ trs u dwš r͗m y͑ byrwn2 g͗ryt n͗ pc dyl wyy d͗3 y͑ xwd hynd d h͗w ͗n y͑m c͗ pydr4 w͗d h ͗mj r͗ y͑m c͗ ny g͗ n͗5 kym pd hrw gy g͗ w͗d pnd n͗6 mn zywnynd w͗m w͗rw h͗mynyyndverso1 (b)//////////////// y͑ w͗št( f͗)tg n͗a

2 ///////////////////////( w͗z)dyḫb w͗d y͗da

3 ////////////(w)yd ( w͗t)’na n͗ya pws bw n͗4 ////////////////////// wrd(ym)c c͗d ͗ ͗gnyn5 /////////////////////////d y͑ ws n͗e

6 m(yrd)f //////g b͗yr ḫ͗ pd trygry(m)

a: It is difficult to read from the photograph but letters are clearly visible on the original.b: Only weak traces of the first two letters are seen and ’w- is more or less my restoration.c: Only a weak trace of -y- visible.d: a relatively large blank space between c͗ and ͗g͗nyn.e: a space between y͑ and ws n͗ is twice as large as that between -d and ͑y.f: Only weak traces of the last two letters and -rd is virtually my restoration.g: a very short word comprising three letters.

Translationrecto“1-2: You (pl.) saw my outward respect and love. If (only) you had made (them)open in (your) hearts too!3-4: Which themselves are gifts from my father and comrades since (the time of)my ancestors.5-6: Which in every place and (on every) road will make me live and will makeme rejoice.”verso“1-2: . . . of those who are oppressed . . . you (pl.) help the exiled . . . 3-4: . . . and I will be your (pl.) son . . . I turn together.5-6: . . . of many people(?) . . . (is/am) lost in the process of transmigration(?).”

Page 16: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

512 Yutaka Yoshida

Commentary

In this hymn “I” addresses to “you (pl.),” cf. verso 3: “I will be your son.” Inthe context of manichaean hymn cycles, the first person singular is most likely torepresent the living Soul, which is suffering from maltreatment in this world. thefragmentary state of the text makes it difficult to infer whom the second personplural pronoun refers to. however, it is tempting to identify the text with theGōwišn ī grīw zīndag “the Sermon of the living Self,” since it is a speech of theWorld Soul addressed to the human beings. Nevertheless, I have not found a par-allel passage in the text of the Gōwišn ī grīw zīndag recently edited by SuNDer-maNN.12 a cursory survey of the manuscripts of the hymn studied by SuNDermaNN,of which the photographs are available in the website of the turfanforschung, didnot enable me to find a similar manuscript among them, either.13

recto 1, dydydwmyd n͗: as it stands the form is incomprehensible. Obviouslydyd-wm-yd ͗n “seen-me/my-you (pl.)” was intended. as Professor SImS-WIllIamSsuggested, the scribe began to write *dyd-yd n͗ “you saw,” but when he was writingdyd-yd- he remembered -wm. the ordinary form of the second person plural form ofthe enclitic pronoun is -(V)t n͗ (cf. recto line 2: g͗ryt n͗ and verso line 3: w͗t ͗n), butoccasionally it appears as -(V)d n͗. however, the distribution of -t ͗n and -d ͗n is hardto account for.14 relative frequency of -yd n͗ form in the Gōwišn ī grīw zīndag15 maylend support to my tentative identification of the present text with the hymn cycle.

In principle, dyd-wm-yd ͗n can mean both “you saw me/my” and “I sawyou/your,” since the order of the enclitic pronouns is not dependent on functionsbut on the person: a first person suffix precedes a second person, and a second per-son precedes a third.16

recto 2, wyy d͗: my translation “made open” of this verb is based on a Parthian com-pound wy d͗rwmb “open-mouthed,” on which see DurkIN-meIStererNSt 2004, p. 350b.

recto 6, w͗rw h͗mynyynd: this word is attested for the first time in this text,but its derivation from ͗wrw h͗myḫ “joy” and its meaning “to make someone re-joice” are obvious enough.

verso 3, n͗y: For this late form for n͗ “I” see heNNINg 1958, esp. p. 90, n. 2.n͗y also appears several times in the text of Gōwišn ī grīw zīndag edited by SuN-DermaNN.17 the following verse somewhat resembles the present.

w͗d ͗gr qdyxwd ͗(y͑)y frwx wy[nd ͗ n]ky n͗y bw ͗n ny n͗ w͗d g[nz]und ob ich einen wohlhabenden hausherrn finden [werde],dem ich Schatz und tre[sor] sein werde (cf. SuNDermaNN 2012, pp. 110-111).

12 Cf. SuNDermaNN 2012. See fn. 9 above.13 For the description of the manuscripts see also ibid., pp. 30-48.14 Cf. SImS-WIllIamS 1981, pp. 165-176, esp. p. 171, n. 25.15 Cf. SuNDermaNN 2012, p. 199.16 Cf. BruNNer 1977, p. 99.17 On this point see also SuNDermaNN 2012, pp. 16-17.

Page 17: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

513A Manichaean Middle Persian Fragment

however, the World Soul being the First man’s son, “I will be your (pl.) son”sounds a bit odd.

verso 6, b͗yr ḫ͗: It also appears for the first time in this text, but again its ety-mology, i.e. ͗by “without” + r ͗ḫ “road,” is obvious. Prof. D. DurkIN-meIStererNStwas kind enough to inform me about heNNINg’s old note, where he translatesParthian ͗byr ͗ḫ as “lost.” I cite one of the two verses of m98 containing ͗byr͗ḫtranscribed by Prof. DurkIN-meIStererNSt together with his english translation.

ngwhynd u ͑zwrtynd oo snynd ͗wsnynd ’wd (͗ j͗)y(n)[d]pdmwcynd wsn cyhrg oo ͗c zhg ͗w zhg ͗byr͗ḫ šwyndthey sink and turn, they rise, descend and are reborn.they put on many forms, from child to child they go, lost.

It is more than likely that ͗byr ͗h in our verse also refers to the fate of the WorldSoul losing its way and suffering maltreatment in this world.

verso 6, trygrym: It has not been encountered in the middle Persian orParthian texts so far published. In view of the preceding word ͗byr ͗ḫ and the con-text, one may expect here a word denoting the place or process in which the WorldSoul is undergoing reincarnation. my translation “transmigration” is a mere guessbased on Professor SImS-WIllIamS’s suggestion that try could be an adverbial el-ement meaning “over.” If this assumption is correct, grym may perhaps be a verbalnoun containing a suffix -m (< Old Iranian *-man) like nšym “seat” originatingfrom *ni-šadman-.18

3. Appendix

In concluding this paper I should like to cite my old note of the four fragmentskept in the library of tokyo university. unfortunately, they are all mounted onpaper for enforcement and one can only see one side, although it is more or lesscertain that they bear texts on the other side as well.

(1) a00/4034/a-3/B-03 [21]19 (3.0 cm × 11.1 cm): middle Persian1 mw(r)w ḫ͗ drwdwt r [͗2 ( w͗ṭ)a pyšyy zyw p͗(d r) m͗y(šn)[a

a: a small tip dismembered from the main fragment is joined in a wrong way, but the read-ing seems to be certain.

18 I myself first analysed the word into tryg and rym “filth” and etymologized tryg as from*trṇka- meaning “torture, pain.” For its form and meaning compare Sogdian tr n͗k ͗ “id.” and itsParthian cognate tryxt “distress” < *trṇxti-.

19 this is a signature borne by the manuscript in the library. the three middle Persian frag-ments seem to come from one and the same manuscript and possibly from the same folio, whichis likely to comprise a panegyric or installation hymn to a church dignitary (hmwc’g “teacher”).

Page 18: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

514 Yutaka Yoshida

(2) a00/4034/a-3/B-04 [22] (2.9 cm × 6.9 cm): middle Persian1 hrw p y͗gws kw zyw[yḫ?2 frystg n͗wt p y͗( )͗[nd

(3) a00/4034/a-3/B-04 [23] (2.8 cm × 7.3 cm): middle Persian1 oo s͗(.)[ ](. . .)[ 2 hwjdg s r͗d r͗sic hm(w)[c g͗?

(4) a00/4034/a-3/B-04 [24]20 (5.8 cm × 4.0 cm): Sogdian1 [ ](š)[2 [ ](n )͗[š]w t͗ t͗y n [͗3 [ ](x)[y]δ βyyrtβwtskwn [4 [ ](’)styyḫ o r͗ty m y͗[5 [ ](w)krw w x͗št ms[6 [ xw]t w͗yy z y͗y skw (͗.)[7 [ ] kδ ͗kw xwštr[

20 this fragment is reproduced in the book mentioned in fn. 7 above. Cf. its plate no. 19.the photograph is also available at the following address:http://www.lib.u-tokyo.ac.jp/tenjikai/tenjikai2001/gazo19.html.

Page 19: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

515A Manichaean Middle Persian Fragment

reFereNCeS

Ch. BruNNer: A Syntax of Western Middle Iranian. New York 1977.D. DurkIN-meIStererNSt: Dictionary of Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian. turn-

hout 2004.a. FuJIeDa: “‘tokukarishihanshōkakuchinzō’ in nitsuite [On the ownership seal inscribed

with ‘Dehua lishi Fanjiangge zhenzang 徳化李氏凡将閣珍蔵’].” In: Gakusō, 7(1985), pp. 153-173.

W.B. heNNINg: “mitteliranisch.” In: Handbuch der Orientalistik, 1. Abt., 4. Band, Iranistik,1. Abschn. Linguistik. köln 1958, pp. 20-130.

k. kuDara, W. SuNDermaNN, Y. YOShIDa: Irango danpenshūsei [Iranian fragments fromthe Otani Collection. Iranian fragments unearthed in Central asia by Otani mission andkept at the library of ryūkoku university]. kyoto 1997 [1999].

a. OgI, k. kItSuDō, Y. YOShIDa: “Otanitankentai shūshū ‘Saigonji tachibanashiryō’ nis-tuite [On the so-called ‘Saigonji-tachibana fragments’ from the manuscripts discoveredby the Otani expedition].” In: Tōyōshien 70-71 (2008), pp. 59-79.

N. SImS-WIllIamS: “Notes on manichaean middle Persian morphology.” In: Studia Iranica10/2 (1981), pp. 165-176.

W. SuNDermaNN: Die Rede der lebendigen Seele. turnhout 2012 (Berliner turfantexteXXX).

Tōkyō Daigaku shozō bukkyōkankei kichōshoten. Tenjishiryō mokuroku [exhibition cata-logue of the rare Buddhist manuscrits preserved in the library of tokyo university].tokyo 2001.

Y. YOShIDa: “Nihonni hokansareteiru tyūseiirangoshiryō nitsuite [On the middle Iraniantexts preserved in Japan].” In: Ajia gengo ronsō 2, kobe City university: annals ofForeign Studies, XXXIX (1998), pp. 101-120.

— “Shinshutsuno sogudogo shiryō nitsuite [On some recently discovered Sogdian mate-rial].” In: Kyōto Daigaku Bungakubukiyō 49 (2010), pp. 1-24.

— “ryojun hakubutsukan shozōno sogudogo shiryō [On the Sogdian texts preserved inthe lushun museum].” In: ryojun hakubutsukan & ryūkokudaigaku kyōhen, Chūōajiashutudono bukkyōshahon. kyoto 2012.

Page 20: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA
Page 21: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

PLATES

Page 22: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

Pl. 1 Yoshida (pp. 1-7)

Haneda 719 recto.

Page 23: STUDIA PHILOLOGICA IRANICA

Pl. 2Yoshida (pp. 1-7)

Haneda 719 verso.