Referring to the Origin of the So-Called Sigmatic Or Simple Future, All The

GATHICA

Alike for those who for TO-DAYprepare, And those that after a TO-MORROW stare, A Muezzin from the Towerof Darknesscries "Fools! your Rewardis neitherHere nor There!"

By GIKYO ITO

IX On the sigmatic future in Old Iranian

Referring to the origin of the so-called sigmatic or simple future, all the grammarians of either Indic or Iranian hold that the tense dates as far back as to the Indo-Iranian period because of its occurrence both in Vedas and Avesta. This generally accepted assertion, however, seems not to be exempt from sceptici- sms. Of the imposed tense forms, the following are all that can be cited, mainly from Chr. Bartholomae's Altiranisches Worterbuch, Strassburg 1904 (AirWb.):

1. saosyant-, 2. vaxsya, 3. har∂syente and har∂syamna-, 4. vaxsyeite, 5. zahymna- vs.

zata-, 6. var∂syamna- vs. varsta-, 7. uzdahyamna- vs. uzdata-, 8. haosyanta-, 9. a-m∂r∂xsyanta-, 10. busyant-, 11. sraesyeiti and sraes∂mna-, 12. aes∂mna-, 13. caes∂mna-, 14. nisasya, 15, +naesyeiti, 16. pataiyaavahayaiya.

**** 1. saosyant- is generally thought to be a future participle active of sav-/su- "benefit", all the more so because it connotes an eschatological function in

Younger Avesta and Pahlavi literatures. In the former, by saosyant- are meant

Uxsyat.∂r∂ta-, Uxsyat.n∂mah- and Astvat.∂r∂ta- whereas in the latter the last named is called Sosyans, i. e. saosyant- par excellence and the prior two Usedar and Usedar- mah respectively. They are expected to play an eschatological role respectively in each of the three milleniums succeeding that of their father, Zaraθustra. But as was rightly pointed out by G. Messina(1), the activity of the saosyants in the Gathas moves in an atmosphere realistic, present and historical, and not eschatological, mythic. Sometimes (Y. 4511, 489, 532) saosyant-(sg.) can and may be identified with Zaraθustra himself and at another times (Y. 3413, 463,

37 4812) saosyants (pl.) with his special co-operators. Gathic saosyant-, like the Buddhist bodhisattva, benefits both himself and others, or seeks to attain himself perfect freedom in order to benefit the other sentient beings. When Y. 3413 saosyants' egos (daena) pass to the heavenly Reward by the path, well-made by Justice, it is an aspect of self redeeming activity or svartha of saosyant- while in all other Gathic passages saosyants' roles are played in benefitting others or parartha. Y. 4511:

yasta daev∂ng aparo masyasca tar∂.masta yoi im tar∂.+mainyanta

any∂ng ahmat y∂ hoi ar∂m +mainyata

saosyanto d∂ng patois sp∂nta daena

urvaθo +brata +pta va Mazda Ahura Who, therefore, shall hereafter despise the daevas and the mortals who, far from submitting themselves to Him, shall despise Him, the benefitting ego of the saosyant- (who is) the house-lord (shall be to him) an ally, a brother, or a father, O Mazda Ahura. Y. 463: kada Mazda yoi uxsano asnam

anh∂us dar∂θrai fro asahya [fr] ar∂nte

v∂r∂zdais s∂nghais saosyantam xratavo

kaeibyo uθai vohu jimat mananha

maibyo θwa sastrai v∂r∂ne Ahura When, O Mazda, shall appear the bulls of days in order to hold the world of Justice; (when) with the bounteous declarations the wills of the saosyants? To whom shall (Thy Highness(2)) come as aid with Vohu Manah? (It is) to me, (for) I have chosen (it) to declare Thee.

Y. 489:

kada vaeda yezi cahya xsayaθa

Mazda asa yehya ma aiθis dvaeθa

∂r∂s moi [∂r∂z] ucam vanh∂us vafus mananho

vidyat saosyas yaθa hoi asis anhat When shall I know whether, O Mazda, through Justice you rule over him from whom scare threatens me? May (Thy Highness(3)) speak to me truly the mysteries (?) of Vohu Manah. May the saosyant- know how the reward shall be for him.

38 ORIENT GATHICA

Y. 4812:

at toi anh∂n saosyanto dak・yunam

yoi xsnum vohu mananha hacante

syaoθ[a]nais asa θwahya Mazda s∂nghahya toi zi data hamaestaro aes∂mahya Then they shall be the saosyants of the provinces who, through good mind, by deeds in accordance with Justice, shall busy themselves satisfying Thy declaration, O Mazda. For they (are) destined to suppressors of Aesma. Y. 532:

at[ca]hoi scantu mananha uxδais syaoθ[a]naisca

xsnum Mazda vahmai a fraor∂t yasnasca

kavaca vistaspo zaraθustris spitamo f∂rasaostrasca

danho ∂r∂zus paθo yam daenam Ahuro saosyanto dadat

May they (in accordance) with his (i. e. Zaraθustra's) mind, words and deeds, busy themselves satisfying Mazda and gladly adoring Him for His

praise, (they, namely) Kavi Vistaspa, and Spitama, (son) of Zaraθustra, and Frasaostra, making straight path for the Religion which Ahura created as (that) of the saosyant-.

That the Gathic saosyants are Zaraθustra's contemporary figures is clearly shown in Y. 4812 where are depicted the then active saosyants of the provinces, In Y. 704 confess the Mazdayasnians thus "In accordance with the saosyants of the provinces who, benefitting themselves, are raising (their) voice (yaθa va saosyanto dah・yunam suyamna vacim +bar∂nti), we as bearers of Holy Word want to serve earnestly." The saosyants, here, are Gathic and not eschatological, mythical. When the saosyants of the provinces benefit themselves (suyamna-), it is their activities comparable to Buddhist svartha. When they are raising their voice

(vacim +bar∂nti), we can see their role like parartha. Y. 553 reads: "May there be with us the Staota Yesnya which created Ahura Mazda in order to watch over those who are benefitting themselves as well as benefitting (others) (har∂θrai...suyam- nanamca saosyantamca)." Here those who are watched over by Ahura Mazda are both suyamna- and saosyant-. The mere comparison of these two passages will soon reveal the fact that the Mazdayasnians see the saosyants of the provinces as their contemporaries and that such figures, benefitting others (saosyant-), are raising their voice (vacim +bar∂nti). Those who benefit others (saosyant-), i. e. raise their voice as saosyants, are the contemporaries with the confessing Mazdayasnians concerned. In the Fravarane Confession Y. 127, saosyants are

Vol. VIII 1972 39 brought along by Zaraθustra, Kavi Vistaspa, Frasaostra and Jamaspa who did not err in their choice. The saosyants, here, belong to the past. In Aogmad-

aeca 46 we have "Just like the wind from the southern quarter furthers (fraδati)

all the creatures and makes grow (var∂δati) and benefits (saosyanti), ..." where

saosyanti (sic!) should be taken as a present indicative like the other two, fraδati

and var∂δati. That saosyanti here points to no future tense is also evident from

Widewdad 42 Gloss which reads yo dainhave hu.vaxsai fraδ∂mnahe var∂δ∂mnahe ... suyamnahe. Otherwise, suyamnahe (pres. participle) would be superseded. From what has been thus far treated, saosyant- has nothing to do with a future tense but is to be regarded as a present participle. saosya-, then, may be explained as either a denominative of savah- n. "benefit" or a present stem of -s-extension of sav-/su- "benefit" of which the prior seems preferable. For savah->* saos-, cf. Ind. avara- adj. "inferior", Av. aora and O. P. aura "downward" and for *savah-ya-, cf. n∂mak・-ya- "pay homage", denom. of n∂mah- n. "homage" and aenah-ya- "offer violence to", denom. of aenah- n. "violence". 2. vaxsya simplex is attested in Y. 301, 4615,518 and that prefixed with fra- (fravaxsya) in Y. 446, 451-6. The form is generally thought to be a future indicative 1. sg. active of vak- "speak" which tense however is expressed by subjunctive. I can find no reason why a sigmatic future must here be postulated. What made scholars resort to such an interpretation seems to be their notion that vaxsya, when compared with Ind, vaksyami (fut. indic. 1. sg. act. of vac- "speak"), rejects different explanation. But the context in which (fra) vaxsya occurs is the same with

that in which s∂nghamahi (pres. indic. 1. pl. act.) takes place in Y. 311:

ta v∂ urvata mar∂nto agusta vaca s∂nghamahi

aeibyo yoi urvatais drujo asahya gaeθa vim∂r∂ncaite

atcit aeibyo vahista yoi +zrazda anh∂n Mazdai Remembering these prescriptions of you do we proclaim the words unheard for those who according to the prescriptions of wickedness destroy the creatures of Justice, but the best (words) for those who are submissive to Mazda. In comparison with it, we cite Y. 455:

at fravaxsya hyat moi mraot sp∂nto.t∂mo

vac∂ sruidyai hyat mar∂taeibyo vahist∂m

yoi moi ahmai s∂raos∂m dan cayasca

upa.jim∂n haurvata am∂r∂tata

vanh∂us +mainy∂us syaoθ[a]nais Mazda Ahuro

40 ORIENT GATHICA

Then I will speak of what the most beneficent said to me, a word which is the best for mortals to hear: 'Those who for it shall each and every one give obedience to me, shall attain to perfection (and) immortality, on account of (their) deeds of good mind'-(thus spoke the most beneficent) Mazda Ahura. Without forced explanation, there is no point in distinguishing the two verbs

(s∂nghamahi and fravaxsya) in their tense. In all of the passages cited above, Zaraθustra says "As prophet (*vaxsa-bara-> M. P. waxs-war>N. P. vaxsur), i. e. one who raises his voice (vacim baraiti), I will, or want to, tell you such and such things. You must listen to me." When Zaraθustra "raises his voice", he speaks as bearer of 3vaxsa- n. "logos dei" (cf. Widewdad 1915). The rest passages meet our legitimate expectation. Y. 301: at ta vaxsya is∂nto ......

staotaca +Ahurahya(4) yesnyaca vanh∂us mananho

humazdra +asahyaca(4) ya raoc∂bis dar∂sata urvaza Then these things I will tell, O those desiring (to listen) ...... (things, i. e.) the hymns to Ahura, and the prayers to Vohu Manah and the bliss of Asa which shall be seen, together with the lights, by him who marks well (what I say). Y. 451 ab: at fravaxsya nu +guso.dum nu sraota

yaeca asnat yaeca durat isaθa Then I will speak. Now hear, now heed, both (you) who from nearby, and (you) from afar (have come and) desire (to listen). Y. 518: at zi toi vaxsya Mazda ......

hyat akoya dr∂gvaite usta y∂ as∂m dadre

hvo zi maθra syato y∂ viduse mravaiti Then, indeed, these two things I will declare, O Mazda, ...... that (things) shall become worse to the wicked one (but that things shall be) according to the desire (of) him who has held Justice. Indeed, blessed (is my humble self(5),) the prophet, who will speak to the one knowing (of many other things).

In the last passage Zaraθustra says: "I will declare these two things...... I am blessed who will speak as prophet (of many other things)." There is no reason to distinguish mravaiti (pres. subj.) from vaxsya: a decisive step towards

Vol. VIII 1972 41 my assertion that vaxsya is pres. subj. 1. sg. act. of a denominative of 3vaxsa- n. "logos dei" (AirWb. 1339 "Wort, Geheiss"). For the elipsis of the final -a of vaxsa- in vaxsya-, cf. baesaza- n., m. "medicine" > baesazya- "cure" (AirWb. 915) and vastra- n. "meadow" > vastrya- "pasture" (AirWb. 1415).

**** Now we are in a position to account for forms simulant of sigmatic future (3-10). Although they were uncritically entered under future tense, the interpretation as such seems open to further consideration from four reasons: (A) har∂syente and har∂syamna-, as will be treated under (3), cannot fittingly be under- stood as sigmatic future in the truest or Indic acceptance of the term; (B) with transitive, the imposed futures occur only in the middle voice (3-9), whereas with intransitive only in active (10); (C) hunvana (i. e. *hunvana, nom. pl.) pres. part. passive stands in contrast with haosyanta (i. e. *haosyanta)which in its turn points to the future but is afforded with -anta-, a variant of -ata-; (D) for the rest (11-16), we have nothing to do with sigm. future as will be shown below. From these reasons we are led to say that the strained sigm. future (3-10) is somewhat different from Indic future in which with transitive are attested active as well as middle forms and that the Iranian forms (3-10) consequently are rather to be taken as gerundive like denominative. The gerundive implies naturally a future meaning so that the participle suits well the counter of what notion is expressed by either a past participle in -ta (5-7) or a present participle in -ana (8).

3. har∂syente and har∂syamna-. Y. 276 reads: haoma pairi.har∂syente...... vanhus Sraoso yo +asi hacaite mazaraya h∂ca iδa yoiθwa +astu. "The Haoma (-twigs) ...... should be filtrated. Good Sraosa who is accompanied by the treasure- bestower Asi-He must be here present." In Wisprat 121 is read: haomanamca har∂syamnanam yoi har∂syente raθwe b∂r∂zaite ...... frafsu +fravirataca. hoi vanhus Sraoso asyo yo +asi hacaite mazaraya h∂ca iδa yoiθwa +astu. "From the Haoma (-twigs) to be filtrated which should be filtrated for the high ratu...... (comes) the possession of good cattles and of good men. The good Sraosa, friend of Asi, who is accompanied by the treasure-bestower Asi-He must be here present." What is implied here is that one can come to the possession of good men and cattles when he filtrates the Haoma, therefore such Haoma "should be filtrated

(har∂syente)" and the Haoma as such may justly be called "one to be filtrated

(har∂syamna-)". har∂syente means not "they shall be filtrated" but rather "they are to be filtrated", and har∂syamna- consequently "to be filtrated, der zu filternde".

42 ORIENT GATHICA

For a basic *har∂sya-

1026: kam∂r∂δo.jan∂m daevanam/akatar∂m sraosyanam(6)/acaetar∂m miθro.drujam masya-

nam/ ...... "(We worship Miθra,) the head-smasher of daevas/worse of those

to be punished(6)/punisher of men false to the contract/...... " where akatar∂m "worse" and sraosyanam "of those to be punished" stand in connection with

repectively acaetar∂m "punisher" and miθro.drujam masyanam "of men false to the contract". The preponderate multitude of participles (3, 5-10 vs. 3, 4) does not prove their theoretical pre-existence which must be assigned to finite verb, since one participle built on a finite verb will lead to analogous construction of another participles.

4. vaxsyeite

t∂m∂m yais yava fraca vaoce fraca mruye fraca +vaxsyeite. "And this (i. e. Yaθa Ahu Vairyo prayer) is the best utterance of those utterances which have ever been spoken and are spoken and are to be spoken." and in Wisprat 153: yo fravaoce yo fravaxsyeite maza amava v∂r∂θraja "(Yasna Haptanhaiti) which has been called, (and) which is to be called great, powerful (and) victorious." 5. zahyamna- vs. zata-

...... varstaca var∂syamnaca "And all the good deeds both ever done and (hereafter) to be done". 7. uzdahyamna- vs. uzdata-

9. a-m∂r∂xsyanta-, with the afore-mentioned -anta- and the privative a-, is

attested in Yt. 1994:...... dar∂sca daθat +am∂r∂xsyantim vispam yam astvaitim gaeθam

"...... And he (Astvat.∂r∂ta), observing, will make all the corporeal world not

to be destroyed." The base is mar∂k-. 10. busyant- (

Vol. VIII 1972 43 ahvah-, perf. part. act. of ah- "be, exist"), hant- (pres. part. act. of ah-) and busyant- respectively. But as is evident from Y. 3310, bav-/bu- has a meaning referring to the future: "come into being". Y. 3310ab: +vispas-toihujitayo ya[sca]

zi anhar∂ yasca h∂nti/yasca Mazda bavainti (K5, 37-pres. indic.) θwahmi his zaose +abaxso.hva. "All good things of life, indeed, which have been and which are and which, O Mazda, come into existence (i. e. will exist) - in Thy pleasure do Thou accept them (as things) of Thine." Although bav-/bu- occurs in pres. indicative, it implies originally a fixture meaning, which fact can hardly be denied by Y. 457 b which reads: yoi zi jva anhar∂ca +bvaintica (root aor. subj. act. 3. pl.) "(those) who, indeed, (are) living, and have been, and will come into being (i. e. will exist)". Later on, the tint of this meaning of bav-/bu- was looked over, so as to build a new form busyant- on *har∂syeite and har∂syamna-. The afore- said sequence hant-, bavant- and busyant- looks so much like what it ought to be, viz. a contamination of a primary sequence hant- and bavant- with a secondary hant- and busyant-. busyant- itself is incomparable to Ind. bhavisyant- fut. part. act. because of its basic vowel. As intransitive, the verb bav-/bu- was most pro- bably obliged to take an active suffix -ant. That the intransitive, and only that, is afforded with an active-syant- is tangible proof of my view-point that the imposed -sya- futures (3)-(9) are to be regarded as a gerundive like denominative, not as sigmatic future in the truest or Indic sense of the term. busyant- as such, though active, has still a gerundive meaning, viz. "what is to be, das zu werdende" and not "what will be (come), was werden wird", so that Old Slav byseste-je (bysoste-je)<*bhu-syo-nt-yo-, the only continuation of busyant- is "devant etre, futur(7)" in the sense of "what is to be, das zu werdende", and not in the sense of "what will be(come), was werden wird". Av. busyant-, Old Slav byseste-je /bysoste-je andInd. bhavisyant- may legitimately require a re-consideration of the origin of the sigmatic or -sya- future in general.

11. sraesyeiti and sraes∂mna-. In Widewdad 834 is read: noit hisku hiskvai sraesyeiti "(In response to the question of Zaraθustra, Ahura Mazda said:) '...... No thing dry adheres to thing dry.'" In all other passages of the same chapter, the responses of Ahura Mazda are always expressed by the indicative present as referring to a given fact. There is no cause to require an only exception. sraesyeiti here is pres. indic. 3. sg. act. of sraes- "adhere", with the present stem in -ya- (sraes-ya-) while another present stem in -a- (sraes-a-) is found in Wid.

1317: In answcr to the question of Zaraθustra: kva asti spa pasus.haurvo daityo.gatus? "Where is the sheep-watching dog rightly situated?", Ahura Mazda said:

44 ORIENT GATHICA yo +yujyastim haca gaeθabyo paraiti sraes∂mno tayus v∂hrk∂mca. "(Rightly situated is the dog when he is with his lord) who, pursuing thieves or wolf, goes a yujyasti

away from (his) dwelling." Bartholomae translates sraes∂mno by "in der Absicht zu verfolgen", taking it as *sraesyamno fut. part. mid. But in Avestan, sraes- is not the only one with its present stem both in -ya- and in -a-, cf. xraos- "cry"

>xraosya- (xraosyeiti(8)) and xraosa- (xraos∂ntam(9) upa); baod- "sentire" >baoδa-

(baoδ∂nto(10)) and buiδya-(buiδyoimaiδe(11)). sraes∂mno stands for *sraesamno "pursuing, i. e. in pursuit of", not "in der Absicht zu verfolgen".

12. aes∂mna- is attested in Yt. 1366: aat frasus∂nti...... fravasayo......

ap∂m aes∂mna havai kacit nafai havayai vise "Then proceed the Fravasis, seeking (or, in search of) water, each and every one for their own family, for their own village." Bartholomae translates aes∂mna- by "um zu suchen" in the meaning "in der Absicht zu suchen", taking it, forcibly to my mind, as fut. part. mid. *aesyamna- <1aes-.

13. caes∂mna- is found in Yt. 1993: vaeδ∂m...... yim barat Kava Vistaspo

asahe haenaya caes∂mno which is translated by Wolff-Bartholomae(12) "das Ges- choss, das Kavay Vistaspa fuhrte, (um) das [beleidigte] Asa an dem Feindesheer

zu rachen". According to Bartholomae(13), caes∂mna- stands for *caesyamna-,

fut. part. mid. of kay- "avenge". But B. Geiger(14) pointed out that caes∂mna- is a pres. part. of -s- extension of kay- i. e. it stands for *caesamna-. I. Gershe- vitch(15) translates accordingly "the weapon which brought Kavi Vistaspa, avenger of the marauding enemies of Truth". If not resorting to -s- extension,

caes∂mna-, i. e. *caesamna- may be connected with kaes- "teach" and the passage may be translated "the weapon which brought Kavi Vistaspa when correcting the enemies of Asa". 14. nisasya (Y. 502) is, to go by my interpretation(16), nis-as-ya pres. subj. 1. sg. act. of nis-as- "attain," not *ni-hant-sya fut. ind. 1. sg. act. of ni-hant- as is intended by Bartholomae(17). 15. +naesyeiti. Thus emended Bartholomae(18) the form naesyaeiti in

Vaeθa Nask 6 which reads: haδa paδi span∂m naesyaeiti. H. Humbach(19) rightly

corrected naesyaeiti to +nisaδayeiti, caus. pres. indic. of ni-had- "sit down" in the light of the Pahlavi translation abag ristag pay sagan kadar-iz-e nisast kuned "One

makes dogs whatsoever sit at the feet of the dead." The Vaeθa Nask 6, therefore, should be translated thus "One makes dog sit at the feet (of the dead)", which refers to the sag-did ceremony. Bartholomae's reading +naesyeiti, fut. indic. 3. sg. act. of nay-/ni-, must be superseded.

Vol. VIII 1972 45 16. pata(t)iyaavahayaiya, attested in Bisotun Inscription I, 55 and translated by Akk. us-sal-la "I prayed". Three interpretations have been proposed: (A) patiyavahyaiy=pati-a-avah-ya-i(20), imperf. denominative of avah- n. "help", hence avah-ya- "ask for help", cf. Ind. avas-yant- "asking for help"; (B) patiyavahyaiy =pati-a-a-vah-ya-i(21), impf. of a-4vah- "pray"; (C) patiyavanhyaiy=pati-a-a- van-hya-i(22),futurum historicum of a-3van- mid. "implore". Of the prior two interpretations the first seems to me preferable in spite of Akk. us-sal-la, whereas the 3rd and last least probable, because Avestan itself can afford no sigmatic future in the truest or Indic sense of the term, much less Old Persian. patiyavanhyaiy would mean "I was (?) to be implored". From the Iranian linguistic circumstances above elucidated(23) the conclu- sion is hardly avoidable that the hitherto maintained Indo-Iranian origin of the sigmatic future is not based on unfailing grounds, which fact can better explain the Indic situation that the sigmatic future is "rather rare in Rgveda where it is substituted for the most part by subjunctive (only 17 futures from 9 bases, more participles of the 6 latter bases), less infrequent Atharvaveda (50 cases from 25 bases) and afterwards most common(24)". (Paper read at the 23rd Congress of Japanese Association of Indian and Buddhist Studies held at Dobo University, Nagoya, on August 27, 1972)

X Old Persian a pada a na-(25)

Old Persian a pa da a nais generally thought to mean "Hall of Pillars", "Palace" or "Audience-Hall". None of the hitherto proposed readings, however, apadana-, apadana-(26), appadan-(27) and appa danna(28) can afford the meaning "Hall of Pillars" derived only from the construction, much less the meaning "Audience-Hall" owing its origin to a supposed function of the structure. Practi- cally all of the iranists concerned resort to the meaning "Palace", analysing the word as apa-da-na- and comparing it with Ind. apadha- f. "concealment"(29) or with αποθηκη "storehouse"(30). apa-da-na- would then mean the act of keeping inside apart from outside or what separates inside from outside which, however, though likely leading to the meaning "prison" or at best "storehouse", does not admit even the remotest chance of "palace". O.P. apadaana- is first attested in Darius II's Inscription a at Susa (Dar2Sa) which was mutatis mutandis followed by Artaxerxes II's Inscription b at Hamadan

46 ORIENT GATHICA

(Art2Hb). Dar2Sa reads: imam *apadanam stundya aθangainam Darayavaus xsaya- θiya vazarka akunaus; Darayavaum xsayaθiyam Aura Mazda patuv hada bagaibis. "This palace, of stone in its column(s), Darius the Great King built; Darius the King may Ahuramazda together with the gods protect." (tr. by Kent(31))

Art2Hb: (32) *apadanam stunaya aθangainam Artaxsassa xsayaθiya vazarka

akunaus haya Darayavaus xsayaθiya pussa Haxamanisiya. Mitra mam patuv. "This palace, of stone in its column(s), Artaxerxes the Great King built, the son of Darius the King, an Achaemenian. May Mithras protect me..." (tr. by Kent(33)) Besides, the word alone is attested in Art2Ha and Sa. Art2Ha:...... imam *apadana vasna Auramazda Anahata uta Mttra adam akunam. (ll. 5-6) "...... by the favor of Ahuramazda, Anaitis, and Mithras, this palace I built." (tr. by Kent(34)) Art2Sa:...... imam *apadana Darayavaus apanayakama akunas abaya- para upa Artaxsassam nayakama θuxta(35) vasna Auramazda Anahata uta Mtθra imam *apadana adam akunam. (ll. 3-4) "...... This palace Darius my great-great-grand- father built; later under Artaxerxes my grand-father it was burned(35); by the favor of Ahuramazda, Anaitis, and Mithras, this palace I built." (tr. by Kent(36)) Kent's translation "of stone in its column(s)" is hardly convincing. Such

an idea and wording must have been expressed by a bahuvriki *aθangaina-stuna- "having stone pillars". stunaya, taken as loc. sg. (*stunaya) by Kent, may be instr. sg. (*stunaya). *apadana- *stunaya would then mean "what separates (inside from outside) by pillar(s)" which does not suit the real construction. The difficulty met with by the analysis apa-da-na- seems to be excluded by inter- preting the word as apa-d-ana-, root aorist participle passive of apa-da- "set apart, separate". In Avestan, root aorist participle in -ana- is not attested. This linguistic situation seems to be a proof against my argument, which however can be propped by the fact that from syntactical and contextual considerations, Old Persian ada "he created", root aor. 3. sg. act. and adada "he bestowed", imperfect 3. sg. act. can scarcely be distinguished. In Darius I's Inscription fat Susa (DarSf) we read: baga vazarka Auramazda haya imam bumim ada, haya avam asmanam ada...... "A great god is Auramazda who created this earth, who created yonder sky...... ", whereas DarSe reads: baga vazarka Auramazda haya imam bumim adada, haya avam asmanam adada...... "A great god is Auramazda who bestowed this earth, who bestowed yonder sky...... " The more instru- ctive is Darius' Inscription b at Naqse Rostam (DarNRb) in contrast with Xerxes' Inscription 1 at Persepolis(37) (XerPl), because in the former is read baga vazarka

Vol. VIII 1972 47 Auramazda haya adada ima frasam taya vainataiy, haya adada siyatim martiyahya, haya xraθum uta aruvastam upariy Darayavaum xsayaθiyam niyasaya. (ll. 1-5) "A great god is Auramazda who bestowed this excellent work which is seen, who bestowed happiness upon man, who granted wisdom and activity upon Darius the king.", whereas in the latter stand ada "created" and Xsayarsam "Xerxes" instead of adada "bestowed" and Darayavaum "Darius" respectively. In the light of dadatuv "may he bestow, give", adada with reduplicated present stem I have taken as imperfect of da- "give", in contrast with ada, root aor, of da- "create". But as far as their meaning and tense are concerned, we may take it for granted that there is no distinction between them both. It does not seem far-fetched even to say that ada is haplology for adada. *apa-d-ana-, therefore, might well be equalized to *apa-dad-ana-, present participle passive (as regards *dad-ana-, cf.

Av. daθ-ana- and Ind. dadh-ana-), from which *apa-d-ana- could haplologically derive. *apa-d-ana- means "kept off, set apart, separated". What is, then, kept off and set apart by columns? It is the roof. The roof is kept off from floor. What matters most to this idea is that the structure should be high and tall. Otherwise is non-sense. The pillars in situ at Persepolis are nearest to what is expected. I cannot help but assuming that at the beginning the word *apadana- must have found its place in such a bahuvrihi *stunapadana-varti- "what has roof set apart by pillars" or a wording *-saiy *vartis *stunaya *apadana *astiy "whose roof (varti- f.(38)) is set apart by pillar(s)". Afterwards, when the word *apadana- was singled out so as to denote the very building, it must have lengthened its preverb *apa- to apa-, viz. apadana-, cf. *pati.vak- adj. "answering">Av. paitiva- ka- n. "answer" and *Patisuvara->O. Pers, Patisuvari-. The Akkadian version ap-pa-da-an (Art2Sa and Ha) and the Elamite transcription ha-ba-da-na- (Art2Sa) cannot exclude my reading apadana-, because the initial ap-pa- and ha-ba- point to both apa- and apa-, cf. O. P. Assina- with its Akkadian and Elamite transcrip- tions 'a-si-na and 'ha-is-si-na respectively, apadana- would mean "high-roofed building". Syntactically, if the reading *apadanam should be preferable, it would have been preceded by the governing stunaya. The sequence as is given in Dar2- Sa (and Art2Hb) seems rather to show apadanam preferable: imam apadanam stunaya aθangainam may be translated by "this stone-made High-Palace (or apadana-) with columns". Old Persian or rather Old Iranian apadana- "high building" postulates Parthian 'pdn(39) "palace" to be read apadan, represented as Parthian loan-word apadna "palace" in Syriac. In Manichaean Parthian, the initial single aleph shows not infrequently long a-, like 'byn=aben "of water",

48 ORIENT GATHICA 'dwr=adur "fire", 'frydg=afridag "blessed", 'gs=agas "known"; and as to the scriptio defectiva -dn for -dan, we may refer to wcn=wacan "voices", bwdystn(40) (M5)=bodestan "garden". In the phonetic notation of the Masoretes O. P. apadana- or Parthian apadan must have become *'appadan (cf. Daniel 1145: ΓΓνχ 'appadno "his palace") which, together with Manichaean Middle Persian "ywn(41) =ayiwan "palace", does not point to a later lengthening of the initial vowel. Arab-New Persian ayvan, eyvan,or ivan dates back to M. Pers. ayiwan which in its turn, when i absorbed in y, became *a-y-wan and then>ayvan (with diphthong), eyvan or ivan. My understanding of apadana- as such arouses another problem whether or not the Old Persian nomenclature admits this sort of interpretation. To my mind, O. P. tacara-, ardastana-, handis- and duvarti- as were elucidated by me, seem to be tangible proof of my interpretation. These words indicate structures not in a vague and meaningless way but with definite implication. As was pointed out by me, buildings were called, without resorting to indifferent, mediocre appel- lation such as palace, residence or gate, sometimes tacara-(42) considering one building's relation to another, sometimes ardastana-(43) from its usage and function, sometimes handis-(44) (not hadis-) laying stress upon the process of its construction and sometimes duvarti-(45)in view of its mode of structure, thus vague expression having been consciously avoided. Aside from Art2Hb which is a mere imitation of Dar2Sa, imam apadana (acc. sg.) in Art2Ha and Sa points to the likelihood that the form current in spoken language at the time of Artaxerxes II was apadan, and moreover a mere apadan not accompanied by the governing stunaya. If one and the same scribe had been charged himself with the three inscriptions Art2Hb, a and Sa, he mis- sed the correct form apadanam in his composition of Art2Ha and Sa, because his repetition of apadanam in his Art2Hb was only done without any grammatical consideration. In Dar2Sa, the syntactical significance of stunaya had been still felt just like that of Avestan VanhuyaDaityaya in Airyana- Vaejah- VanhuyaDaityaya "Aryan Basin of the Vanuhi Daitya". In Widewdad 12 we read: fraθw∂r∂s∂m az∂m yo Ahuro Mazda Airyan∂m Vaejo Vanhuya Daityaya(46) "I who (am) Ahura Mazda created the Aryan Basin of the Vanuhi Daitya". Without Vanhuya Daityaya "of the Vanuhi Daitya" the mere Airyana- Vaejah- is non-sense. Though non-sense, the only Airyana- Vaejah- or Middle Persian Eranwez/Eranwej has been and still is prevalent. The same is the case with our apadana-, apadan, ayiwan, ayvan, eyvan or ivan.

Vol. VIII 1972 49 (Paper read at the 14th Congress of The Society for Near Eastern Studies in Japan held at The National Education Hall, Tokyo, on November 19, 1972)

Notes (1) G. Messina: I magi a Betlemme e una predizione di Zoroastro, Roma 1933, pp. 31-37; ditto: De vetere religione Persarum eiusque relatione cum religione V. et N. T., Roma 1936, p. 37. (2) G. Ito: "Gathica I", Orient, Vol. 3, Tokyo 1966, p. 4. (3) G. Ito: "Gathica I", Orient, Vol. 3, Tokyo 1966, p. 4. (4) F. B. J. Kuiper: "The Bliss of Asa", Indo-Iranian Journal, Vol. 8-1964-No. 2. The Hague, p. 96 ff. (5) G. Ito: "Gathica I", Orient, Vol. 3, Tokyo 1966, p. 6. (6) Differently I. Gershevitch: The AvestanHymn to Mithra, Cambridge 1959, p. 181 (Commenta- ry on 261).

(7) A. Meillet: Le slave commun, 2. ed. revue et augmentee, Paris 1965, §251 (p. 240). Cf. also W. K. Matthews: Russian Historical Grammar. Reprinted with corrections, London 1967, §62 (p. 29). (8) Widewdad 155. (9) Yasna 508. (10) Yast 1969. (11) Yasna 911. (12) Avesta. Die heiligen Bucher der Parsen, ubersetzt auf der Grundlage von Chr. Bartholomae's Altiranischem Worterbuch von Fritz Wolff, Strassburg 1910, p. 296. (13) AirWb. 486, c. n. 4. (14) B. Geiger: Die Am∂sa Sp∂ntas. Ihr Wesen und ihre ursprungliche Bedeutung, Wien 1916, p. 217, n. 1. (15) I. Gershevitch: op. cit., p. 186 (Commentary on 351) c. Addenda. (16) G. Ito: "Gathica VII", Orient, Vol. 6, Tokyo 1970, p. 27, c. n. 52. (17) AirWb. 1771 (1hant-). (18) AirWb. 1042 (nay-). (19) H. Humbach: Vaeθa Nask. An Apocryphal Text on Zoroastrian Problems translated and annotated by H. Humbach and K. M. Jamaspasa, Wiesbaden 1969, p. 19. (20) H. C. Tolman: Ancient Persian Lexiconand the Texts of the AchaemenidanInscriptions transliterat- ed and translated with special Referenceto their recent Re-examination, Nashville 1908, p. 70. (21) Chr. Bartholomae: Zum altiranischen Worterbuch, Strassburg 1906, p. 217f. For his earlier view, see AirWb. 1353, 3van- "wunschen": he forcibly saw in patiyavahyaiy s-aorist of 3van-. (22) M. Mayrhofer: "Neuere Forschungen zum Altpersischen", Donum Indogermanicum.Festgabe fur Anton Scherer zum 70. Geburtstag, Heidelberg 1971, p. 64. (23) AirWb. 557, under 1xsnav- is shown xsnaosya- which, however, is removed AirWb. 1890, 1. 15. (24) V. Pisani: Grammatica dell'Antico Indiano, Roma 1930, p. 158f. (25) In the following, Old Persian texts restored I have left unmarked. (26) R. N. Frye: The Heritage of Persia, London 1962, p. 100. (27) W. B. Henning: "Brahman", Transactions of the Philological Society 1944, p. 110, n. 1. (28) A. T. Olmstead: History of the Persian Empire (Phoenix Books), Chicago 1948, p. 162. (29) Chr, Bartholomae: AirWb. 74; H. C. Tolman: op. cit., p. 64; A. Meillet et E. Benveniste: Grammaire du Vieux-Perse, Paris 1931, §267; R. G. Kent: Old Persian, New Haven 19532,

p. 168 and p. 51, §147, I; M. Mayrhofer: op. cit., p. 104 (as regards the etymology and derivation, reasonably with doubt). (30) Kent: op. cit., p. 168.

50 ORIENT GATHICA

(31) Kent: op. cit., p. 154. (32) Kent: op. cit., p. 155, NOTE to A(rt)2Hb. (33) Kent: op. cit., p. 155. (34) Kent: loc. cit. (35) θuxta (θauxata) "(it was) burned" is restored by me for 4 signs. θuxta (nom. sg. m.) is a past participle passive of O. P. *θauk-, Av. saok-, Ind. suc- "burn". For the Akkad. version i-sa-tum ta-(or us-)ta-ak-ka-al-su, see F. H. Weissbach: Die Keilschriften der Achameniden, Leipzig 1911, p. 123, Anm. d. (36) Kent: op. cit., p. 154. (37) W. Hinz: Altiranische Funde und Forschungen, Berlin 1969, p. 45ff. As regards the earlier publications, see p. 45, n. 4. (38) varti- f. attested in duvarti-< *duva-varti-, cf. G. Ito: "Gathica VIII", Orient, Vol. 7, Tokyo 1971, p. 1 ff. (39) F. C. Andreas und W. Henning: Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan, III, Berlin 1934, s. v. For the interpretation of M5, RI-II, see L. J. R. Ort: Mani. A religio- historical description of his personality, Leiden 1967, p. 238 ff. (40) Over against bwdyst'n (M 748), cf. Ort: op. cit., p. 240. (41) Andreas u. Henning: op. cit., I, Berlin 1932, s. v. (42) G. Ito: "Notes on Old Persian tacara- and handis- (not hadis-)" (in Jap.), Bulletin of the Society for Western and Southern Asiatic Studies, Kyoto University, No. 22, Kyoto 1969 (published in 1971), p. 79 ff. (43) G. Ito: "Gathica VI", Orient, Vol. 6, Tokyo 1970, p. 15 ff.; "On the function of Darius' Palace (tacara-) at Persepolis" (in Jap), Memoirs of the Faculty of Letters, Kyoto University, No. 13, Kyoto 1971, p. 1 ff. (44) G. Ito: op. cit., in n. (42). (45) G. Ito: "Gathica VIII", cited in n. (38). (46) Zend reads fraz brehenid man ke Ohrmazd ham Eranwez ku Weh Daite u-s Weh Daite ed ku rod Daite an gyag be ayed......

Vol. VIII 1972 51