Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T07:51:07.878Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A note on Pahlavi lexicography: Middle Persian hassār, hassārīh

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2023

Marco Fattori*
Affiliation:
“Sapienza” University of Rome, Rome, Italy
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article deals with the identification and interpretation of two rare Middle Persian words. Firstly, some attestations of the as yet unrecognized word <hs’lyh> hassārīh are discussed, showing that it means “direction”. Then, a semantic analysis of its underived counterpart hassār is carried out, as a basis for an etymological proposal. Finally, it is argued that hassār descends from Old Persian *haçā-sāra- “(having the head) in the same direction”, and a possible reconstruction of the semantic development of the word is provided.

Type
Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS University of London

1. K43c and the word <hs’lyh> in the Zoroastrian ritual vocabulary

The fragment of Pahlavi manuscript labelled K43c consists of two non-contiguous folios (numbered 186 and 191 in Persian script) containing some liturgical indications concerning the Paragna ritual.Footnote 1 The text is still unpublished but is easily accessible thanks to the facsimile printed in Christensen (Reference Christensen1936, vol. 2).Footnote 2

Even from a superficial look, it is clear that ms. K43c provides a slightly different formulation of some ritual indications already known from the Nērangestān, which have recently been studied by Cantera (Reference Cantera and Farridnejad2020). In particular, f. 186 coincides to a great extent with N.30.10–11, where the procedures for drawing the water for libations are described, and ends with a fragment corresponding to N.49.14 dealing with the collection of consecrated milk (Av. gąm jīuuiiąm, Pahl. <jyw'> ǰīw) which is going to be mixed with the water (cf. Cantera Reference Cantera and Farridnejad2020: 73 f.). F. 191 (starting from l. 3) contains ritual indications on the cutting of the barsom similar to those given in N.79.8 ff. (cf. Cantera Reference Cantera and Farridnejad2020: 79–81).

The fact that these passages from the Nērangestān have the same content as K43c but express it in different words is very helpful in clarifying the meaning of the very first word occurring in K43c, the subject of this paper. As I shall argue below, this word, which is not registered in the main lexicographical repertoires of Pahlavi, should be read as <hs’lyh> hassārīh. Here follows a synoptical presentation of the sentences in K43c containing this term, alongside their equivalent in the Nērangestān. The edition of the passages from the Nērangestān is based on Kotwal and Kreyenbroek (Reference Kotwal and Kreyenbroek1992–2009, abbreviated K&K) with some improvements made possible by comparison with K43c.

As can be seen, Pahl. hassārīh is used as an alternative to Pahl. war with the meaning “side, direction”.Footnote 8 Despite what may appear from Kotwal and Kreyenbroek’s edition, where war is systematically restored regardless of the manuscript readings, in the quoted passages from the Nērangestān there are only two certain occurrences of war, whereas everywhere else corrupted spellings for hassārīh are found. As a matter of fact, this is not the only case in which spellings pointing to Pahl. hassārīh have been misinterpreted or emended by editors. I have been able to identify at least four more passages from the Pahlavi religious literature.

N. 52.7 (after K&K/3: 236 f.):Footnote 9

AMT ’hlwb’n lwb’n plwhl YDBHWN’t' OL dšntwm blswm QDM ’y YBLWNyt' PWN +hs’lyhFootnote 10 Y zwhlk'

ka ahlawān ruwān frawahr yazād, ō dašntom barsom abar ē barēd, pad +hassārīh ī zōhrag

“When he worships the souls and fravashis of the righteous, let him make the offering on the point of the barsom that is farthest to the right, beside the zōhr cup.”

Pahl.Riv. 58.38 (after Williams Reference Williams1990: 208–9):

’š’n' BRA OL hs’lyh Y blsm OZLWNšn' APšn' ’pst’k PWN hs’lyh Y blsm gwbšn'

ā-šān bē ō hassārīh ī barsom šawišn u-šān abestāg pad hassārīh ī barsom gōwišn.

“Then they should go towards the barsom and recite the Avesta directed towards the barsom.”

Boyce and Kotwal (Reference Boyce and Kotwal1971: 68) take the spelling for <hs’lyh> as a corruption of Av. ašaiia and interpret the “ašaiia of the barsom” as a reference to Y.8.2 (so Williams Reference Williams1990), but there is clearly no need for such an emendation.

ŠNŠ.Supp. 13.9 (after Kotwal Reference Kotwal1969: 42 f.):

HNA l՚d PWN ahurāi mazdāi hs’lyh Y dtwš zwhl hm LBBME Y OLE zwt’ l՚st' YHSNWšn'

ēd rāy pad ahurāi mazdāi hassārīh ī daθuš zōhr ham dil ī ōy zōt rāst dārišn

“On account of this, at ahurāi mazdāi the zōhr should be held in the direction of the daϑuš exactly level with the heart of the zōt.”

Kotwal (Reference Kotwal1969: 102 fn. 16) reads <’s’lyh>, but in the text emends it to an otherwise unattested *sarīh, tentatively translated as “above” (not in his glossary at p. 169). A reading hassārīh “direction” is supported by the parallels exposed so far and fits perfectly within Kotwal’s interpretation of the sentence.

There remains one attestation of hassārīh in a difficult passage of the Pahlavi translation of the Gāϑā Ahunauuaitī (Y.28.9b):Footnote 11

yōi və̄ yōiϑəmā dasəmē stūtąm

“nous qui avons pris place à la cérémonie de vos éloges” (Kell.)

“(we) who are standing by at the offering of praises to You” (Humb.)

MNW ’w' HNA Y LKWM hs’lyh YHBWNm st’yt’l’n'

kē ō ēd ī ašmāh hassārīh dahom stāyīdārān

“(we) who (are) in Your direction tenth among worshippers (?)”

Presumably, already in the most ancient layer of the Pahl. translation, this sentence was not correctly understood due to the ambiguity of the Old Avestan (OAv.) forms yōiϑəmā (Pf.Ind.1.Pl. of yat- “to take a position”) and dasəmē (Loc.Sg. of dasǝma- “offering”) and was consequently given a word-for-word translation which does not make full sense in Middle Persian.

As to the rendering of dasəmē, it seems preferable to me to accept the reading of ms. K5 <YHBWNm> (subsequently corrected to <YHBWNyt'>, which is the reading of all the other mss.) to be read as dahom “tenth”, written as a Pres.1.Sg. of dādan “to give” due to homophony. This form can be explained as an erroneous translation of OAv. dasəmē (mistaken for Young Avestan (YAv.) dasǝma- “tenth” instead of YAv. dasma- “offering”), according to an interpretation already found in Y.11.9, a YAv. passage where dasmē yōi və̄ yaēθma is quoted at the end of a numerical series 1–10 (cf. Malandra and Ichaporia Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013: 16).Footnote 12 The later corruption in Y.28.9b of <YHBWNm> to <YHBWNyt'> dahēd (Pres.2.Pl. rather than 3.Sg.) may have been triggered by the presence of <LKWM> ašmāh “you” in the sentence.Footnote 13

The only Pahl. word which could represent the translation of OAv. yōiϑəmā is clearly hassārīh. This erroneous translation is most easily explained by assuming that yōiϑəmā was not interpreted as a verb but rather as an abstract noun in -man- or -ma- from the perfect stem of the verb yat- (yōit-, variant of yaēt-).Footnote 14 Since yat- is usually translated as a verb of motion in Pahlavi,Footnote 15 it does not seem unlikely that the assumed abstract derivative was rendered with a word meaning “direction”.

Admittedly, such an explanation must remain hypothetical to some degree, as long as the sense of the whole Pahl. sentence is unclear. However, I believe that the recognition of an attestation of Pahl. hassārīh “direction” represents a step forward in comparison with previous attempts to read the same word as asarīh “endlessness, abundance” (Dhabhar Reference Dhabhar1949: 20 in the glossary)Footnote 16 or āsārīh “encouragement” (cf. Shaked Reference Shaked1996: 654 fn. 40), which are both otherwise unattested and show no connection with the original Av. text. Likewise, Bartholomae’s emendation <hdyb’lyh> ayārīh “help, assistance” (followed by Malandra and Ichaporia Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013: 27) should be rejected as unnecessary.

2. The meaning of Manichaean Middle Persian <hs’r> and Pahlavi <hs’l>

The reason why the word written as <hs’lyh> has been transcribed as hassārīh in the previous paragraph is that I think it should be linked with Manichaean Middle Persian (MMP) <hs’r> hassār, translated as “likewise” (adv.), “like” (prep.) or “alike” (adj.) in the main dictionaries.Footnote 17 Before I propose a new etymological interpretation for both words, it is worth analysing the few attestations of Middle Persian (MP) hassār in order to identify all of its semantic nuances. Firstly, some additional passages from the Pahlavi translation of the Gāthās will be introduced in which a spelling <hs’l> corresponding to MMP <hs’r> has mostly remained unnoticed.Footnote 18 Then, the meaning of <hs’r> in its Manichaean occurrences will be discussed.

2.1. Pahlavi Yasna

The Pahlavi translation is quoted excluding the explanatory glosses which, as will be exemplified below, are later additions based only on the older Pahlavi word-for-word translation.Footnote 19

Y.30.9d:

hiiat̰ haϑrā manā̊ bauuat̰ yaϑrā cistiš aŋhat̰ maēϑā.

“si nos pensées se concentrent là où la compréhension est …” (Kell.).

“when (our) thoughts will have become concentrated (on the place) where insight may be present” (Humb.).

MNW hs’l mynšn' YHWWNyt […] ’š TME plc’nkyh AYT […] BYN myhn'

kē hassār menišn bawēd […] ā-š ānōh frazānagīh ast […] andar mēhan

“he whose thought is concentrated (?), there dwells (?) his insight.”

Bartholomae (AiWb: 1763) simply transcribed the word as <a dd a r>, and Dhabhar (Reference Dhabhar1949: 20 in the glossary, see n. 16) interpreted it as asar: “a-sar mēnišn, continuous thinking, concentrated mind”.Footnote 20 Skjærvø (Reference Skjærvø2000), however, rightly recognized in this word the Pahl. counterpart of MMP hassār. Since hassār is employed to translate the OAv. adv. haϑrā, its most plausible translation is “in the same place”, so, figuratively, “concentrated” with reference to thought. Unfortunately, the sense of the whole sentence both in Avestan and Middle Persian is not fully clear, so it cannot be decided whether the equivalence of haϑrā and hassār is the result of a mechanical word-for-word translation or of a conscious interpretation of the Av. text. The explanatory gloss kū menišn pad dastwarīh ī any dārēd “i.e. (he) has his thought directed by someone else’s authority” is totally unrelated to the Av. text and probably depends on a reading a-sār “without head, without guide” (cf. Av. asāra-, Pahl. transl. +asardār, AiWb: 210). Despite being useless for the purpose of clarifying the meaning of hassār, such a gloss demonstrates that the word belongs to the oldest stage of the MP language and had become unintelligible to later commentators.Footnote 21

Y.32.6a–c:

pourū.aēnā̊ ə̄nāxštā yāiš srāuuahiieitī yezī tāiš aϑā

hātā.marānē ahurā vahištā vōistā manaŋhā

ϑβahmī və̄ mazdā xšaϑrōi aṣ̌āicā sə̄ṇghō vīdąm.

“Puisque, ô Maître qui conserves en mémoire, tu connais par la très divine Pensée les … des (torts) par lequels celui qui en commet beaucoup cherche, en temps de trouble, à établir sa renommée, la définition (de ces torts) doit vous être exposée, (à toi), ô Mazdā, et à l’Harmonie, au moment d’exercer l’emprise sur toi.” (Kell.)

“The many crimes against peace with which (the deceitful one) strives for notoriety, whether he so (strives) with these (crimes) / Thou knowest (about that) through best thought, O Ahura, Thou who rememberest (people’s just) deserts. / Let praise be broadcast for You, O Wise One, and for Truth, in (the domain of) Thy power.” (Humb.)

KBD kynyk’n' kyn' BOYHWNyhyt […] MNW slwt YKOYMWNyt […] AYK AMT OLEš’n' hs’l […] / ’šk’lk' ’m’lynyt’l ’whrmzd […] W ZK Y p’hlwm ’k’s Y PWN whwmn […] / PWN +HNA Y LK LKWM ’whrmzd hwt’yh ZK Y ’hl’yyh hmwhtšn' BRA YDOYTWNyhyt

was kēnīgān kēn xwāhīhēd […] kē srūd ēstēd […] kū ka awēšān hassārFootnote 22 […]/

āškārag āmārēnīdār Ohrmazd […] ud ān ī pahlom āgāh ī pad wahman […]/

pad ēd ī tō ašmāh Ohrmazd xwadāyīh ān ī ahlāyīh hamōxtišn bē dānīhēd […]

“It is desired that the hate of many malicious men is announced, because if they (are) that way, (You) Ohrmazd (are) the true reckoner and the highest knower by means of Wahman. In this realm of Yours, Ohrmazd, the teaching of righteousness will become known.”

Leaving aside the serious exegetical problems in this OAv. passage (cf. Kellens and Pirart Reference Kellens and Pirart1988–91, vol. 3, 84 f.), it seems to me that the Pahl. word-for-word translation reveals a coherent interpretation by the translator: the evil ones should be openly denounced because their behaviour will be judged and punished by Ohrmazd. In particular, the words yezī tāiš aϑā at the end of the first line match perfectly with ka awēšān hassār “(lit.) if they so”. In this case, hassār appears to be employed in the more general meaning of “so, that way”, without any local connotation.

Y.46.8a–b:

This last passage deserves discussion only because it contains a word apparently pointing to Pahl. <hs’l> (registered as <’s’l> in Dhabhar Reference Dhabhar1949 and compared to the previous attestations in Malandra and Ichaporia Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013: 204):

yə̄ vā mōi yā̊ gaēϑā̊ dazdē aēnaŋhē

nōit̰ ahiiā mā āϑriš š́iiaoϑanāiš frōsiiāt̰

“[…] ou qui soumet mes troupeaux au tort, que le désastre (rituel) ne résulte pas pour moi de ses actes.”

“And if someone aims at my herds to injure (them), / may destruction not reach me through his actions.”

MNW ZK Y L gyh’n' YHBWNyt ’w' OLE kynyk' […]/ LA PWN ZK Y OLE kwnšn' +’w' +mnFootnote 23 +’slyšFootnote 24 l’nynyt’l +HWEydFootnote 25

kē ān ī man gēhān dahēd ō ōy kēnīg […]

nē pad ān ī ōy kunišn +ō man (?) +āθriš […] frāz rānēnīdār +

“Who gives injury to my world,

may (he) not direct āϑriš against me (?) as a consequence of his actions.”

In order to establish a plausible reconstruction of the original word-for-word translation of this passage, the manuscript text needs to be corrected in several points. In my opinion, the corruptions here are twofold. First, some mechanical errors took place: the sequence here conjecturally restored as ō man “against me” was corrupted into a spelling pointing to <ANE> an “I”Footnote 26 and the mere transcription of the OAv. hapax āϑriš <’slyš> was erroneously split into two words, originating in some mss. the pseudo-attestation of hassār <’s’l> with which we are concerned. At a later stage, maybe at the time when the explanatory glosses were added, the correct Opt.3.Sg. rānēnīdār + was deliberately changed into rānēnīdār ham in order to make sense of the corruptions, disregarding the fact that this would have compromised the correspondence with the original Av. text.Footnote 27 The corruption of <’slyš> into <’s(’)l lyš> (maybe passing through a stage where <’slyš> was written with double <l> for an alleged /l/) was already found in the text read by the later commentators, who explain asā̆r rēš “infinite wound” as kē pad tan ud ruwān rēš kunēd “which causes a wound both in the body and in the soul” (i.e. both in life and in afterlife, forever).Footnote 28 Once again, such a recostruction is rather hypothetical, since it is impossible to know to what extent the Pahlavi translator understood the OAv. text in the first place. Anyway, it should appear from this discussion that the attestation of the spelling <’s’l> in Pahl. Y.46.b is in all likelihood unrelated to the word hassār.

2.2. Manichaean texts and Armenian hasarak

In the Manichaean corpus, the passages where the meaning of <hs’r> hassār is recognizable with enough certainty are only five. They are presented below grouped according to their meaning (the references are based on Durkin-Meisterernst Reference Durkin-Meisterernst2004):

  1. a) hassār as an adverb meaning “in the same place/direction as” (as in Pahl. Y. 30.9 = OAv. haϑrā).

M7981 I V i 28 (Hutter Reference Hutter1992, l. 332), transl. Boyce (Reference Boyce1975: 66 fn. 17):

ud parrōn az zamīg ud āsmān hāmkišwar, ud bēdandar az hān panz dušox ō ērag pādgōs-rōn, az anōh ōrrōntar abar tam dušox, az xwarāsān dā ō xwarniwār pādgōs, hassār wahištāw ēg dēsmān īg nōg dēs.

“beyond the cosmos of earths and heavens, and outside those five hells in the south quarter, nearer (?) than there, upon the darkness of hell, from the east to the west region, corresponding to Paradise, build a new building.”

Although the traditional translation “corresponding to” (Andreas and Henning Reference Andreas and Henning1932 “entsprechend”) is ambiguous, it seems difficult not to give hassār a local meaning (“in the same place as Paradise” or “in the same direction as Paradise”). In fact, the whole passage is aimed at describing – in a fairly cryptic wayFootnote 29 – the place where the “New Building” (dēsmān īg nōg, see Andreas and Henning Reference Andreas and Henning1932: 184 fn. 1) is going to be built.

  1. b) hassār as an adverb meaning “so, likewise, in the same way” (as in Pahl. Y.32.6 = OAv. aϑā).

M7981 II V ii 3, 13 (Hutter Reference Hutter1992, ll. 757–67):

ud hassār-iz hōšag axtar pad ēw māh yak rōz abzawēd […]

“and likewise, the constellation of Virgo exceeds one month by one day”

ud hassār-iz māhīg axtar pad ēw māh yak rōz abzawēd […]

“and likewise, the constellation of Pisces exceeds one month by one day”.

These parallel sentences follow a passage dealing with the relation between epagomenal days and constellations in the Iranian and non-Iranian (here probably Babylonian) calendar.Footnote 30 According to the traditional interpretation, followed in the given translation, hassār is employed as a simple anaphoric adverb marking the continuity of discourse. However, since the purpose of these sentences is to indicate the two periods of the year in which, according to Mani’s interpretation, the surplus days accumulate in the non-Iranian calendar, I regard as equally possible a translation such as “and also corresponding to the constellation of X there is one day in excess over the time of a month”. From this perspective, the meaning of hassār would be more similar to (a), albeit with a temporal nuance. In any case, for practical reasons, in the following paragraph the letter (b) will be used to refer to a meaning “likewise, in the same way”, since it is supported by the attestation in Y.32.6 and is somehow implied in the value (c).

  1. c) hassār as an adjective meaning “equal”.

M7981 II R ii 27 (Hutter Reference Hutter1992, l. 713):

ud rōz dwāzdah zamān bawēd ud šab dwāzdah zamān, ud harw dō āgenēn hassār ēstēnd

“and the day will last twelve hours, and the night twelve hours, and both will be equal together”.

M5750 R ii 20 (Sundermann Reference Sundermann, Wießner and Klimkeit1992: 316 ff.)

imīn senān rōzān pad paymān harw se hassār hēnd

“those three days are all three equal in length”.

Finally, the Arm. loanword hasarak remains to be mentioned, rightly connected by Benveniste (Reference Benveniste1957–58: 56 f.) to MMP hassār.Footnote 31 Benveniste identifies for Arm. hasarak both an adverbial usage “pareillement, en commun”, corresponding to our meaning (b), and an adjectival usage “pareil, égal, commun”, corresponding to our meaning (c).

3. Etymology

The only explicit attempt to offer an etymology of MMP hassār goes back to Henning (Reference Henning1935: 17), who derived it from Ir. *ham-sarda- “of the same kind”, from the same stem as YAv. sarǝδa- “Art, Gattung” (AiWb: 1566 f.). This etymology is clearly based on the adjectival meaning “equal” (c), and is probably influenced by the comparison with Parth. hāwsār “similar, alike” (Arm. loanword hawasar), derived from Ir. *sarda- by Bartholomae (Reference Bartholomae1906: 35 fn. 1, 233).Footnote 32 In my opinion, this explanation is questionable in several respects.

First, it should be emphasized that the prefix ham- undergoes assimilation before -s- only in a couple of verbal forms in which its semantic value is fairly weakened (hassāz- “to make ready” < *ham-sač-, hassūd ppt. “whetted” < *ham-sauH-, cf. Henning Reference Henning1947: 45).Footnote 33 On the contrary, in the great number of bahuvrīhi adjectives formed with ham + noun, assimilation is never found, probably because the derivational process did not cease to be transparent and productive throughout the Middle and New Iranian period and inhibited phonological changes across morpheme boundaries. As a matter of fact, along with forms such as Pahl. hamsāmān “contiguous” and hamsāyag “neighbour” (NP hamsāye) – all without assimilation – an adjective hamsardag “of the same kind” < *ham-sarda-ka- is attested in Pahlavi (cf. CPD: 41), demonstrating that the proto-form postulated by Henning indeed existed, but did not yield hassār as its MP outcome.

In fact, there is no apparent trace of a word sāl (the non-Manichaean counterpart of sār) with the meaning “sort, kind” (< Ir. *sarda-) either in MP or NP. Most likely, the non-South-Western outcome attested in Pahl. sardag prevailed because it was distinguished from the potential homophone sāl “year” (< OP ϑard-, Av. sard-).Footnote 34 As was already recognized by Meillet (Reference Meillet1906–08), it is more plausible that both Parth. hāwsār and MP hassār are compounded with a second member *-sāra- “head”, well attested in the Iranian languages as an ablaut-variant of *sarah- “head” in composition. In particular, there are two possible meanings of Ir. *-sāra- which are relevant to our discussion:

  • in compound adjectives with a nominal first element, meaning “having the head of X, resembling X”: e.g. MMP hūgsār “pig-headed”, xarsār “donkey-headed”; Pahl. mēšsār “sheep-headed”, xašēnsār “blue-headed” (name of a bird in HKR 25, “mallard duck” according to Azarnouche Reference Azarnouche2013: 112); NP gāvsār “bull-headed”, dēvsār “demon-like”, etc. (cf. Horn Reference Horn, Geiger and Kuhn1895–1901: 191 f. for further examples); Parth. hāwsār (< *hāvat-sāra-) “similar, alike”.

  • in compound adjectives and adverbs meaning “(having the head) directed towards X”: e.g. Av. starō.sāra- “reaching the stars with its top” (name of a mountain); MP nigūnsār “downwards”; Pahl. abāzsār “rebellious”; Sogd. postposition -sār, - “towards” (cf. Gershevitch Reference Gershevitch1954: 69 f., 223); Chor. postposition -sār “towards” (cf. Benzing Reference Benzing1983: 568).

In light of the semantic analysis carried out here, it seems plausible to me that the original meaning of hassār was (a) “in the same direction”, i.e. the most concrete and specific, also attested in the abstract hassārīh, and that meanings (b) “in the same way, likewise” and (c) “alike, equal” resulted from a subsequent semantic evolution. A possible etymology which would account for this meaning is OP *haçā-sāra- “(having the head) in the same direction”, with a first element corresponding to Av. haϑrā̆ (Ved. satrā́) “an einem Ort, zu gleicher Zeit, zusammen, zugleich” which is rendered by means of Pahl. hassār in Y.30.9 (see above).Footnote 35 In origin, the OIr. compound was probably an adjective, but due to its almost exclusive predicative usage, it became perceived as an adverb in the Middle Iranian stage, just like MP nigūnsār “downwards”. Since the only meaning attested for hassār as an adjective in MP is “equal, alike”, I am inclined to think that it is the result of a secondary development starting from a somehow faded value of hassār “similarly, likewise” (b). The semantic evolution of this word could then be summarized as follows:

  1. (a) “having the head in the same direction” (adj.) > “in the same direction/place” (adv.);

  2. (b) “in the same way/manner” (adv.) > “so, likewise” (adv.);

  3. (c) “equal, alike” (adj.).

Unlike the simple hassār, the abstract derivative hassārīh seems to have preserved the old local sense “(the same) direction”. Perhaps it is thanks to the retention of a more concrete connotation that the word hassārīh could survive in the Zoroastrian ritual lexicon long enough for us to be able to grasp its meaning and reconstruct retrospectively the history of such an interesting lexical item.

Acknowledgements

I wish to express my gratitude to M. Mancini, A. Cantera, C.G. Cereti, and P.O. Skjærvø for reading a draft of this article and providing me with helpful advice and criticism.

Funding information

This article is a product of the PRIN project “Cultural interactions and language contacts: Iranian and non-Iranian languages in contact from the past to the present” (PRIN 2020, prot. 2020PLEBK4-003, sponsored by the Italian Ministry of Education and Research), Unit at the University of Rome “La Sapienza” whose co-ordinator is F. Pompeo, principal investigator E. Filippone.

Abbreviations

AiWb

= Bartholomae Reference Bartholomae1904.

CPD

= MacKenzie Reference MacKenzie1971.

Humb.

= Humbach, Elfenbein, and Skjærvø. Reference Humbach, Elfenbein and Skjærvø1991.

Kell.

= Kellens and Pirart. Reference Kellens and Pirart1988–91.

K&K

= Kotwal and Kreyenbroek. Reference Kotwal and Kreyenbroek1992–2009.

Footnotes

1 Cf. Christensen (Reference Christensen1936, vol. 2, 7 f.), Asmussen (Reference Asmussen1992, with further literature) and Martínez-Porro Reference Martínez-Porro2017: 107.

2 Alberto Cantera is currently working on an edition of this ms. together with other witnesses of the Paragna ritual.

3 Cf. K&K/3: 132, fn. 610 who read <XDYLY’> and emend it to war.

4 Mss. <hslyh>; cf. K&K/3: 224 fn. 1443 who read <’SLY’> and emend it to war.

5 Mss. <hylyh>; cf. K&K/3: 224 fn. 1444 who read <’YLY’> and emend it to war.

6 Mss. <wlš>; cf. K&K/4: 56 fn. 255.

7 Mss. <hsyh>; cf. K&K/4: 56 fn 256.

8 This meaning for Pahl. war is not reported in CPD but is rightly recognized by K&K/3: 316 (s.v. war 2) and Cantera (Reference Cantera and Farridnejad2020: 73 f.) in his translation. Cf. also the meaning “side, part” in NP listed by Steingass (Reference Steingass1892) s.v. bar.

9 According to Alberto Cantera (personal communication), to whom I owe the reference to this passage, a comparison with N. 52.6, where ō hōytom ī barsom “the point of the barsom that is farthest to the left” is glossed with pad war ī zōhrag, could reveal a slight semantic difference between war and hassārīh, at least as far as their usage in ritual context is concerned. This is indeed conceivable and deserves further investigation, although it probably does not affect much the semantic interpretation of hassārīh outside the technical vocabulary of Zoroastrian ritual, which will be the object of the analysis carried through in the next paragraphs.

10 Mss. <hslyh>; cf. K&K/3: 236 fn. 1559 who read <’SLY’> and emend it to war.

11 This and the following passages from the Pahlavi translation of the Avesta are presented in a new critical edition prepared with the aid of the material published online on the Avestan Digital Archive (https://ada.geschkult.fu-berlin.de/). Since in some cases the interpretation of the OAv. passages is doubtful, the translations by Kellens and Pirart (Reference Kellens and Pirart1988–91, abbreviated as Kell.) and Humbach, Elfenbein, and Skjærvø (Reference Humbach, Elfenbein and Skjærvø1991, abbreviated as Humb.) will always be presented in parallel.

12 Cf. also FīŌ dasmahe: dahom. The reading of the mss. is usually emended to +dasǝmahe (cf. AiWb: 702, Klingenschmitt Reference Klingenschmitt1968: xix) but the Av. spelling dasmahe could represent a further example of the erroneous association of dasma- with a meaning “tenth” in the Pahlavi translation practice.

13 A reading dahēd, lacking a clear counterpart in the Av. text, is accepted by all other editors (Dhabhar Reference Dhabhar1949, Shaked Reference Shaked1996, Skjærvø Reference Skjærvø2000, Malandra and Ichaporia Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013).

14 Cf. AiWb: 1236–8 and Kellens (Reference Kellens1984: 401). For a discussion on the Pahl. translators’ understanding of Av. morphological derivation cf. Cantera (Reference Cantera2004: 249 f., 329–36).

15 Cf. the examples reported in AiWb: 1236–8, especially the quotation of this passage in Y.11.9 where yōi və̄ yaēϑma is translated as kē-mān az ašmāh mad estēd.

16 The additional <’> in -sār is explained by Dhabhar by postulating a “pazandized” form of the common word asar “endless”.

17 Cf. Durkin-Meisterernst (Reference Durkin-Meisterernst2004: 185 f.), Boyce (Reference Boyce1977: 47), ultimately depending on Andreas and Henning (Reference Andreas and Henning1932: 212).

18 Cf. Malandra and Ichaporia (Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013: 204), who list the spellings pointing to hassār among the “words of uncertain interpretation”.

19 Cf. Cantera (Reference Cantera1999: 176 f. fn. 8 and 9) and Cantera (Reference Cantera2004: 244–53).

20 Cf. also the cautious considerations in Malandra and Ichaporia (Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013: 33 fn. 8) who, however, emend the word to hāsr (= Av. hāϑra-, a measure of time!).

21 On the importance of the Pahlavi translation of the Yasna and Vīdēvdād as documents of early MP cf. again Cantera (Reference Cantera1999) and Cantera (Reference Cantera2004: 164–239).

22 So Skjærvø (Reference Skjærvø2000). Malandra and Ichaporia (Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013: 41 fn. 6) correct the text into <’s’>, taking it as a transcription of Av. aϑā.

23 Pt4, Mf4 <ANE' OLE Y>, F2 <ANE' OLE ’>, T6 <ANE OLE>, E7 <HWE'm OLE Y>, R413 <ANE>, J2 <ANE \OL Y/>, K5, M1 <Y ANE ’w'> (for an up-to-date discussion of the grouping of the mss. in families cf. Zeini Reference Zeini2020: 10–13, 26 f.). Skjærvø (Reference Skjærvø2000), Malandra and Ichaporia (Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013): <ANE OLE>.

24 Pt4, E7, T6: <’sl lyš>, F2, J2, K5 <’s’l lyš>. Skjærvø (Reference Skjærvø2000): asār rēš (but see below fn. 28), Malandra and Ichaporia (Reference Malandra and Ichaporia2013: 72 fn. 1): +asā rēš.

25 Mss. <HWE(')m>.

26 For some examples of confusion between phonetic and heterographical reading of <ANE> cf. Bartholomae (Reference Bartholomae1906: 122–4). The most plausible way to account for the following <OLE> in all mss. but R413 is to postulate a dittography of ō man written as <’w' mn> and <OL mn> respectively.

27 For the meaning of the verb rānēnīdan “to drive, to push” cf. König (Reference König2010: 193 f. fn. 124 f.) and Skjærvø (Reference Skjærvø and Cantera2012: 39–41).

28 P.O. Skjærvø (p.c.) has kindly suggested to me an alternative solution: the reading <’sl> could be a spelling for Pahl. āhr “dread, fury”, translating OAv. āϑriš, and <lyš> rēš “wound” could be a gloss to āhr.

29 Cf. Boyce Reference Boyce1975: 66 fn. 17.

30 Cf. Henning (Reference Henning1934: 32–5), Boyce (Reference Boyce1975: 70 fn. 30).

31 The suffix -ak in the Arm. loanword, although ultimately of Iranian origin, is probably the result of an inner-Armenian derivation (cf. Benveniste Reference Benveniste1957–58: 57, Olsen Reference Olsen1999: 240 f.).

32 Cf. also Tedesco (Reference Tedesco1921: 208) who postulated a change m > v in *hāmasarda- > hāwsār and wrongly criticized Meillet’s etymology *hāvat-sāra- which is perfectly plausible (see below). The equivalence of MP hassār and Parth. hāwsār is implied by Andreas and Henning (Reference Andreas and Henning1934: 55) and Benveniste (Reference Benveniste1957–58: 57). However, the two words cannot derive from the same proto-form, because Ir. *-āva- yields either MP -āy- (e.g. MP ardāy “righteous” < Ir. *r̥tāvan-) or -ā- (e.g. MP ǰār “time”, Parth. yāwar) depending on the position in the word, whereas MMP <hs’r> has a short vowel in the first syllable.

33 Cf. Nyberg (Reference Nyberg1934: 79), who expressed doubts about the assimilation implied by Henning’s transcription hassār, and Durkin-Meisterernst (Reference Durkin-Meisterernst2014: 124 f.) on double consonants in MP.

34 The MMP word <s’rg>, erroneously quoted in parentheses in CPD: 74 together with Pahl. sardag, occurs only in compounds such as ēw-sārag “of one year” (cf. Durkin-Meisterernst Reference Durkin-Meisterernst2004: 306) and should rather have been registered as the Manichaean counterpart of Pahl. sālag.

35 Av. haϑrā̆ is often found in compounds with various meanings: haϑrā̊ṇc- “auf einen Punkt gerichtet, vereint”; haϑra-jati- “Aufeinmalerschlagen”; haϑra-taršti- “auf einmal entstehende Furcht, plötzlicher Schreck”, etc. A quite close parallel for the compound *haϑra-sāra- is provided by the Sogdian directional adverbs martsār “hither” (< *imaϑra-sāra-), ōrtsār “thither” (< *avaϑra-sāra-), kurtsār “whither” (< *kuϑra-sāra-), all built from a pronominal stem suffixed with Ir. *-ϑra + the element -sāra- (cf. Benveniste Reference Benveniste1929: 152 f. and Yoshida Reference Yoshida and Windfuhr2009: 292 f.).

References

Andreas, Friedrich C. and Henning, Walter B.. 1932. “Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan I”, Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1932, 173222.Google Scholar
Andreas, Friedrich C. and Henning, Walter B.. 1934. “Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkestan III”, Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1934, 848912.Google Scholar
Asmussen, Jes P. 1992. “Codices Hafnienses”, Encyclopædia Iranica, vol. 5/8, 886–93 (online edition: https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/codices-hafnienses, accessed 04/03/22).Google Scholar
Azarnouche, Samra. 2013. “Husraw ī Kawādān ud rēdag-ē”, Khosrow fils de Kawād et un page. Paris: Association pour l’Avancement des Études Iraniennes.Google Scholar
Bartholomae, Christian. 1904. Altiranisches Wörterbuch. Strasbourg: Trübner.Google Scholar
Bartholomae, Christian. 1906. Zum altiranischen Wörterbuch. Nacharbeiten und Vorarbeiten. Strasbourg: Trübner.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1929. Essai de grammaire sogdienne. Deuxieme partie. Morphologie, syntaxe et glossaire. Paris: Geuthner.Google Scholar
Benveniste, Émile. 1957–58. “Mots d’emprunt iraniens en arménien”, Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 53, 1957–58, 5571.Google Scholar
Benzing, Johannes. 1983. Chwaresmischer Index, mit einer Einleitung von Helmut Humbach (herausgegeben von Zahra Taraf). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Boyce, Mary. 1975. A Reader in Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian: Texts with Notes. Tehran and Liège: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyce, Mary. 1977. A Word-List of Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian. Tehran and Liège: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyce, Mary. and Kotwal, Firoze. M. 1971. “Zoroastrian ‘bāj’ and ‘drōn’ I”, BSOAS 34/1, 1971, 5673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantera, Alberto. 1999. “Die Stellung der Sprache der Pahlavi-Übersetzung des Avesta innerhalb des Mittelpersischen”, Studia Iranica, 28/2, 1999, 173204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantera, Alberto. 2004. Studien zur Pahlavi-Übersetzung des Avesta. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Cantera, Alberto. 2020. “Avestan texts in context: Fragments Westergaard 6 and 7 and the Paragṇā”, in Farridnejad, Shervin (ed.), Zaraθuštrōtəmō. Zoroastrian and Iranian Studies in Honour of Philip G. Kreyenbroek. Irvine: Jordan Center for Persian Studies, 69105.Google Scholar
Christensen, Arthur. 1936. The Pahlavi Codex K 43. Copenhagen: Levin and Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Dhabhar, Bamanji. N. 1949. Pahlavi Yasna and Visperad. Bombay: Trustees of the Parsee Punchayet Funds and Properties.Google Scholar
Durkin-Meisterernst, Desmond. 2004. Dictionary of Manichaean Middle Persian and Persian and Parthian. Turnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
Durkin-Meisterernst, Desmond. 2014 Grammatik des Westmitteliranischen. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gershevitch, Ilya. 1954. A Grammar of Manichean Sogdian. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Henning, Walter B. 1934. “Ein manichäisches Henochbuch”, Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1934, 2735.Google Scholar
Henning, Walter B. 1935. Review of Henrik. S. Nyberg, Hilfsbuch des Pehlevi, 1928–31. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksell. Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1935, 197, 119.Google Scholar
Henning, Walter B. 1947. “Two Manichaean magical texts, with an excursus on the Parthian ending -ēndēh”, BSOAS 12/1, 1947, 3966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Paul. 1895–1901. “Neupersische Schriftsprache”, in Geiger, Wilhelm and Kuhn, Ernst (eds), Grundriss der iranischen Philologie. Strasbourg: Trübner, 1200.Google Scholar
Humbach, Helmut, Elfenbein, Josef and Skjærvø, Prods O.. 1991. The Gāthās of Zarathushtra and the Other Old Avestan Texts. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Hutter, Manfred. 1992. Manis Kosmogonische Sabuhragan-Texte. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Kellens, Jean. 1984. Le Verbe avestique. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Kellens, Jean and Pirart, Éric. 1988–91. Les Textes vieil-avestiques. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Google Scholar
Klingenschmitt, Gert. 1968. “Farhang-i oim: Edition und Kommentar”, PhD thesis, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg.Google Scholar
König, Götz. 2010. Geschlechtsmoral und Gleichgeschlechtlichkeit im Zoroastrismus. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Kotwal, Firoze M. 1969. The Supplementary Texts to the Sayest ne-sayest. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Kotwal, Firoze M. and Kreyenbroek, Philip G.. 1992–2009. The Hērbedestān and Nērangestān (4 vols). Paris: Association pour l’Avancement des Études Iraniennes.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, David N. 1971. A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Malandra, William W. and Ichaporia, Pallan. 2013. The Pahlavi Yasna of the Gāθās and Yasna Haptaŋhāiti. Wiesbaden: Reichert.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Porro, Jaime. 2017. “The Avestan manuscript 4162 of the Pouladi Collection. Is it the eldest Iranian Vidēvdād Sāde manuscript?”, Estudios Iranios y Turanios 3, 2017, 99118.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1906–08. “Arm. hawasar”, Mémoires de la Société de Linguistique de Paris, 14, 1906–08, 479.Google Scholar
Nyberg, Henrik S. 1934. Texte zum Mazdayasnischen Kalendar. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksells [repr. in VVAA. 1975. Monumentum H.S. Nyberg. vol. 4. Tehran and Liège: Brill, 397–480].Google Scholar
Olsen, Birgit A. 1999. The Noun in Biblical Armenian: Origin and Word-Formation – with Special Emphasis on the Indo-European Heritage. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaked, Shaul. 1996. “The traditional commentary on the Avesta (Zand): translation, interpretation, distortion?”, in VVAA. 1996. La Persia e l’Asia Centrale da Alessandro al X secolo. Rome: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 641–56.Google Scholar
Skjærvø, Prods O. 2000. The Middle Persian Translation of the Avesta. Yasna, Vispered. Online edition https://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etcs/iran/miran/mpers/avpt/yvrpt/yvrpt.htm (TITUS Text Database).Google Scholar
Skjærvø, Prods O. 2012. “The Zoroastrian oral tradition as reflected in the texts”, in Cantera, Alberto (ed.), The Transmission of the Avesta. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 348.Google Scholar
Steingass, Francis G. 1892. A Comprehensive Persian–English Dictionary, Including the Arabic Words and Phrases to be Met with in Persian Literature. London: Routledge & K. Paul.Google Scholar
Sundermann, Werner. 1992. “Iranische Kephalaiatexte?”, in Wießner, Gernot and Klimkeit, Hans-Joachim (eds), Studia Manichaica. II. Internationaler Kongreß zum Manichäismus, 9.–10. August 1989, St. Augustin/Bonn. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 305–18.Google Scholar
Tedesco, Paul. 1921. “Dialektologie der mitteliranischen Turfantexte”, Le Monde Oriental 15, 1921, 184258.Google Scholar
Williams, Alan V. 1990. The Pahlavi Rivāyat Accompanying the Dādestān ī Dēnīg. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Yoshida, Yutaka. 2009. “Sogdian”, in Windfuhr, Gernot (ed.), The Iranian Languages. London and New York: Routledge, 279335.Google Scholar
Zeini, Arash. 2020. Zoroastrian Scholasticism in Late Antiquity: the Pahlavi Version of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar