Showing papers in "Iran and the Caucasus in 1999"

The Origin of the -ng Suffix in Kurmandji

Abstract: 1. The main function of the nominal suffix -ng in Kurmandji dialects is the formation of substantives with diminutive and hypocoristic meanings: xyayYng, xaying, xang "little sister", from xuh, xwah "sister" (Orbeli) (cf.: ala xwayinge, darde dila girana, tigte dinyae 6i mirana "O, little sisters, grief of (my) heart is enormous, what is for me the wealth of the world". Djindi, p. 155); waring "maiden, girl servant", from JarI (cf.: huin Jaringe mina dalal, min bihisitya mIri na li mal "You, my nice little maidens, I have heard that the emir is not at home". ibid, pp. 24, 147); birang "little brother", from bira(k) "brother" (cf.: birange min gula govandana "My brother is the flower of the round dances". Rudenko, p.86); cf. also: zavang "son-in-law, bride-groom", from zava;. xasing "mother-in-law", from x(w)asi, etc. The forns with -ng, having emotional charge, show affection and, a highly passionate attitude towards the subject. However, there is a series of forms, where the formant -ng bears only a substantivizing function, without expressive connotation: reving (revi) "wayfarer" (cf.: hiln kina? gote, am revingin "Who are you? (They said): We are wayfarers"); bering "milking-place, enclosure"(beri); mang "moon", Persian mah; p'alang (p'ala) "worker, reaper" (cf.: Way p'alang, p'alang, da'sa daste ta zangla "O, reaper, reaper, the sickle in your hands is clanking". Celil, p. 20); zavlng (zavi) "furrow"; kaning "source, spring", from kani; gogang "corner, brim", from go?a; xaning "house", from xanI; JIng "place, abode", from XI, etc. With personal names the suffix -ng renders pejorative meaning: Hasong "a Haso", A'dong (from A'do), etc. We have also a compound variant of the suffix, with -ik, i.e. -king, again with hypocoristic-derogatory semantics: gadaking "kid, boy", from gada "boy", biraking "little brother", from bira(k) "brother", havalking "friend, pal", from haval "friend", etc. It can have also a collective meaning, cf.: zarking "kiddies", from zar "child". The whole functional spectre of -ng is almost the same as that of -ak in New Persian (a comprehensive list of-ng formations in New Persian is given in: Navabi).

Pahlavi References To Armenia

Abstract: Persian, Parthian2 and Greek inscriptions of the first Sasanian kings: in gahpuhr's inscription at Kacba-i Zardugt,3 Armenia appears on the list of the kahrs of gahpuhr's realm, after Arabestan, following thus the Achaemenid tradition, and before Iberia (wyrg'n), Maxelonia /Siunik' (Sykn),4 Albania /'rd'n, Balasakan, up to the Mountains of Kaf and the Gate of Alanians, Mountains of Padigxvar, Media, Gurgan, etc. In Narseh's inscription at Paikuli (? 92-3)5 in Western Iran, Armenian king (but not Armenia!) Tyldt6 (Tirdat/Trdat) is mentioned after the Caucasian countries of * [Gur]gan/Balasalkan [?], Mskyt'n,7'byr'n (Iberia),8 Syk'n,9 before the Arab vassals of Hirah and Edessa ('mrw Ihmyd'n ML(KA) 'mrw 'pgrn'n [MLKA?]). In the slightly earlier inscription[s] of the Zoroastrian "Pope" Kerdir (? 15), Armenia appears on the list of the lands of "Iran and non-Iran" before "Iberia (wlwE'n), Albania, Balasakan up to the Gate of the Alanians".'? Here these lands are listed as parts of non-Iran, as was observed by Lukonin," but it should be recalled again that this last list belongs to the text of the fanatical Zoroastrian dignitary. However, there seems to have been existing a well-fixed order of the Caucasian countries, opening as a rule with Arnenia and finishing with the Gate of the Alanians. As only a very small amount of Book-Pahlavi Zoroastrian literature has survived, one could hardly be surprised that there are rather few references to Armenia found in this corpus. On the contrary, one would say that there is quite a number of such occurrences (especially when one searches the Zoroastrian literature in an attempt to find mentions of another Caucasian countries) of the name of this land that throughout most of its history was so tightly connected with her southern neighbor. In. the Middle Persian composition Bundahi?n,12 chapter 31.10-11, Armenia (*Armanl3) is listed among the lands of Iran, with Ray, identified here with Adurbadagan (... i hast Adurbadagan) to follow. This list is, however, based on the Middle Persian version of chapter 1.12-15 of Vendidad, or Widewdad, a late Avestan text, where Adurbadagan is a gloss for Ray /Ray, which "translates" the Avestan Raga (Adurbadagan, hast ke Ray gowed), and Armenia is absent from the list altogether. Nevertheless, the close examination of both lists, that one found in the Pahlavi Vendidad I, and that of Bundahi?n 3 1, based on Pahlavi Vendidad I, demonstrates that Armenia in the list of Bundahign was inserted instead of Haraxvaiti, Arachosia (in Pahiavi: Harahmand14). Such substitution of Armenia instead of an ancient EasternIrania country implies that in, at least, one Iranian tradition Armenia wais seen as part and parcel of Iran. One finds intriguing information in BundahiMn 11 la, which treats of the rivers. Bd 1lla.3-5: Frat rod bun xan az wmand I HrOm pad Asurestan widered ud 0

The Vuandalic Alphabet According To Teseo Ambrogio

Abstract: A Sixteenth Century alphabetical compendium, Teseo Ambrogio's Introductio in Chaldaicum linguam, Syriacam atque Armenicam et decem alias linguas, characterum diferentium Alphabeta circiter quadraginta, et eonumdem invicem conformatio; mnystica et chabalistica quamplurima scitu digna. Et descriptio ac simulachrum Phagoti Afrani. Teseo Ambrosio ex Comitibus Albonesii J. U. Doct. Papien. Canonico Regulari Lateranensi, ac Sancti Petri in Coelo Aureo Papiae Praeposito, Authore. MDXXXIX, contains examples and comparisons of over 10 alphabets of Western and Oriental languages while including some 30 examples of ciphers as well. Generally, these are kept quite distinct, with the ciphers contained in an appendix; however, the Gothic and a Runic alphabet appear among the ciphers and some rather curious candidates for alphabetical legitimacy are included in the book's main sections: one of these is the socalled Vuandalic Alphabet Ambrogio's Vuandalic alphabet is quite a mystery. Almost all other referenced alphabets are given as simple tables or are discussed in one chapter at length; this one, however, is literally strewn throughout the book. Nonetheless, the alphabet is of such importance, in Ambrogio's opinion, that he gives it a separate item number in his table of contents so that readers could examine it as a whole. The numerical order of the letters is given for only some of the hand-written exempla and all of the examples seem to be compared to Coptic, Dalmatian, Macedonian (Bulgarian) or Armenian. As we will see below, only one letter is given in a massive comparison of all of the alphabets he had discussed up to that point I will give all of the Latin commentary on this alphabet and a list of the letters included in the text. Where the order is questionable, I will mark the letter with a question mark. Note that this Vuandalic hardly seems to have a phonology expected of a language related to Gothic. Could this be a Slavic language (Wendish for instance) whose name has undergone a slight phonetic deformation? The major alphabets of the work had special fonts created for them, but the. Arabic, Ethiopic, Coptic, Dalmatian, Cyrillic, Vuandalic and a number of other occasionally referenced alphabets were written in by hand. Only a few of the some hundred printed exempla were actually put through this completing process as it must have been done by Ambrogio himself and he was very frail at the time and soon to die. The examples of the book in the Mechitarian Ubrary of Venice, in the Newberry and in Paris are complete; others in the Matenadaran in Yerevan and in various sale catalogues have proven not to be. It is therefore important to have a completed copy of the work to be able to examine the Vuandalic and many of the authors wnrting about Ambrogio and his book did not have thiis opportulnity. I have created a Vuandalic bitmap 'font' using Fontographer. I have followed Ambrogio's hand as closely as possible by using a scanned stencil. It is asssumed that differences may appear between the realizations of the letters found in different examples of the book; I have been able to compare only three completed copies anld some four uncompleted. The table below is the first complete representation of the alphabet thiat I am aware of.

A Note On the Garni Inscription

Abstract: This short Aramaic inscription, with its title of the son of Wologesus is of certain historical importance, as the title MLK RB ZY 'RM[NYNJ found in its Aramaic form helps to solve an old problem. The Iranian title RB' MLK' 'rmn'n of the pre-Christian kings of Armenia, known long time ago,' caused a controversy regarding its translation. This title in its Iranian fonn is a very ambiguous one, because *wazurg Armenan gah,2 or *wazurg gah Armenan3 could have been interpreted as "the King of Great Armenia", or "the great King of Annenia", while the Aramaic form of the title exludes this possibility.4 The problem, however, is complicated by the fact that the Armenian form, known only from much later period, being a calque from Iranian, t'agawor Hayoc' Mecac', has only one possible meaning, namely "the King of Great Armenia[ns]". In the previous literature, there were polemics about this question, without referring to our Aramaic inscription, known only since 1964. The title wazurg Armenan gah' was compared to wazurg K-Uan gahan ?ah, generally rendered as "Great King of Kings of the Kagans",6 or "King of Kings of the Great KnSans". It is perhaps of interest in this context that Armenian authors and only they, as Frye 1983, 142, had observed mentioned the relationship between the Arsacids of Armenia and the Ktians. Henning 1952, 517, wrote: "Narseh was in Armenia, where he held the office of Vazurg Armenan gah king of Great Armenia"; ibid., n. 4: "not "Great king of Armenia" (as has often been translated); the title equals Arm. t'agawor Hayoc' Mecac', similarly, king of Great Kushan is preferarble to Great king of Kushan".' These words were written by Henning in 1952; some years later, Maricq 1958, 318-9, translated "du Grand roi d'Armenie Hormizd-Ardachir"8 for the Greek of 9KZ 48 xcc-L f2ppu8apcpaExpou geycaXXo am)X,co Apgvitac Ka-L... and the Middle Persian W 'w(w)xrmzd 'rtx?tr ZY LB' MLK' 'Imn'n W....9 Nevertheless, Lang 1983, 517 n. 2, stated: "not "King of Great Armenia"... during the 1st and 2nd centuries A.D., the Armenian throne was regularly reserved for the Parthian Great King's nearest kin, who was known as "Great king of Armenia" rather as their heir apparent to the British throne is called the Prince of Wales. This custom, political conditions allowing, continued into early Sassanian times: thus, prior to 293, the futue Great King. Narseh was viceroy of Armenia with the title of Vazurg Armenan Bah ("great King of Armenia")".10 Historically, Armenia was a part of Parthia rather that of Persia; it was after the rise of the Persianl Sassana dynasty in the first half of the 3rd century CE that thie Armenians, with their Parthian Arsacid royal family, broke up with the Iranian monarchy of Sasanians who were seen by the Armenian Arsacids as usurpers, and only after

The miniature paintings of the barzu-nama

Abstract: Interpolations to Firdausi's ShhJznn rather, they were included much later and firmly into the copies of the Shahnana, acquiring definite positions between certain d&stns. One such interpolation is the Barzo-nana, which is encountered quite often in manuscript copies of the Shahnana, beginning in the Safavid period. A small extract from the Barzoi-nana was first published in 1829 by T. Makan in Calcutta2. Naturally, it can be posited that the plots of these interpolations were no less popular than than those of the basic text, i. e. Shahnama, and that they were often illustrated. For example, judging from the data of the illustration list to St.-Peterburg's Shahnana collection (first published by L. T. Giuzali'an and M. M. D'iakonov in 1935), we see that some manuscripts do contain illustrations to the Barza-n&na

Kurdish Etymologies I

Abstract: Is derived from OIr. *baud-na(*baud-), with *-d-(*-t-) > -h-(-0-) in intervocalic position, a phonetic rule which is commonly shared by Kurdish and Baxtiari dialects, cf.: Kd. buhust "span", Av. vitasti-, MP. bidast; buhur "ford" *buihn, with the narrowing of -u-> -1-, again a common feature in Kurdish, Baxtiari and some other West Iranian dialects, cf.: Kd., Baxt. xan/xTn, hin, ma//mi; Kd. 9-ar/gIr "sabre", rn/rln "butter", xuBk/xigk "sister" (see. Asatrian, Livshits, ? II, p.83; Vahman, Asatrian, p.85). The development of *-d> -his attested also in Middle Persian (Tafazzoli, p.195). However, Prof. A. Perikhanian suggests that it could be a Middle Median phonetic phenomenon, and the forms with this peculiarity in the MP and Parthian are mere borrowings from Median (Perikhanian, pp. 115-11 7). Kurdish bi(h)n is by no means from Av. vaena"nose" (Tsabolov, p. 44).