INSCRIPTION No. VI. The celebrated bilingual Inscription of Sapor, in the Hájíábád cavern, seems to have been first made known to the modern world by Ker Porter, whose description of the position and surroundings of the fellow tablets is as follows: "The valley, or rather dell of Hájí-ábád, cannot be more than two miles in extent from end to end; the most western extremity being formed by the rocks of Nakshi-Rustam, which stretch three miles from the village of Hájí-ábád, in a direction north, 68° west. I was shewn a piece of antiquity in one of these caves, which I believe has not hitherto been noticed. It lies about a mile, nearly north, from the village. The entrance is exceedingly lofty; and within, the cavern is still more so. We see that nature originally formed it of an immense height and depth; but not satisfied with her amplitude, manual labour has added fifty yards of excavation in the vaulted roof. Along the right side, we found several square places hewn in the rock; two, nearest the entrance, at about six or seven feet from the floor of the cave, were filled with inscriptions, both were in the Pehlvi character, not much injured, but widely differing from each other; one consists of sixteen lines, the other of fourteen. I copied them with all the accuracy in my power, being much impeded by the height and darkness of their position. One portion of the three upper lines I could not make out in the least. Each inscription occupies a whole excavated tablet of about four feet in width." Sir Ephraim Stannus's direct plaster casts of these inscriptions, taken from the face of the living rock, were brought to Europe and published in the form of jumbled and imperfect engravings, among the Transactions of the Royal Society of Dublin in 1835. The former obviously authentic reproductions of the original very early attracted the attention of Mr. Norris, who promptly devoted himself to their decipherment, for which De Sacy's essays on kindred texts had already in a measure paved the way. The interpretation of these new 2 documents, however, proved a more serious task than had been anticipated, and Mr. Norris, in the self-denying hope1 that some of the then more advanced Zend students might be in a condition to supply us with tentative translations, prepared with his own hand accurate pentagraph copies of the biliteral texts, which were eventually prefixed by Westergaard to his edition of the Bundehesh, but no analysis or preliminary commentary was attempted on this occasion; nor has that author, in his subsequent introduction to the Zend Avesta,3 made any seeming advance in satisfying himself of the meaning or contents of these writings, beyond the detection of the single word, which Anquetil had already determined from other sources. A similar reserve has been maintained by Dr. F. Spiegel, who has given us so excellent a work on the Pársi language,5 as well as a series of Essays, of far higher pretensions, on the Huzváresch-Sprache. Dr. Martin Haug, indeed, was the only one of the prominent Zend scholars of that day who attempted to face the real difficulties of the interpretation, or who dared to venture beyond the safe limits, which the parallel Greek translations secured for the explanation of the opening passage, detailing the conventionally verbose titles and descent of the king. Dr. Haug's first effort appeared in 1854.7 A more extended analysis is to be found in his work published in Bom 1 I myself had very much to thank Mr. Norris for in these early days of our joint interest in Pehlvi decipherment. See J.R.A.S. (1849), vol. xii. p. 263; Num. Chron. (1849), xii. p. 72. I do not seek the slightest reserve in alluding to my own limited objects and contracted application of the documents in question in 1849. My studies, at the moment, merely extended to a definition of the normal forms of the lapidary letters with a view to aid the determination of the contrasted outlines of the cognate characters on the coins I happened to be engaged upon. See J.R.A.S. (1849), vol. xii. pp. 263-5-6, etc.; Num. Chron. (1849), p. 73, et seq. 2 The Bundehesh. N. L. Westergaard. Copenhagen, 1851. Professor Westergaard had previously directly copied the original inscriptions themselves during the course of a tour in Persia, and some of his foot notes and corrections are of considerable value. 3 Zend Avesta, “The Zend Texts.” Vol. i. Copenhagen, 1852-54. 4 Pp. 18, 21. 5 Grammatik der Pársisprache. Leipzig, 1851. 6 Grammatik der Huzváresch-Sprache. Literatur der Parsen. Vienna, 1860. Vienna, 1856. Die Traditionelle 7 Uber die Pehlewi-Sprache und den Bundehesh. Göttingen, 1854, p. 5. bay in 1862,1 and a far more imposing array of critical identifications is inserted in his introduction to Hoshengji-Jamaspji's Farhang-i-oim-yak, 1867.2 In conclusion, the writer announces that he hopes soon to publish a full "translation and explanation of both texts" of the inscription. I must frankly admit that my system of reading and interpretation varies materially from that of Dr. Haug, so that I labour under the disadvantage, as an amateur learner, of differing at the outset from a practised professional teacher; but as there is no antagonism in the matter, but merely an independent search after knowledge in either case, I trust we shall speedily arrive at a translation that will satisfy ourselves and, I regret to say, the very limited circle of those who take an interest in these studies. As regards the materials for the reconstruction of correct texts of the two inscriptions at present available, I may mention that Sir E. Stannus's casts of the Sassanian version stop short with the sixth out of the total of sixteen lines. The Chaldæo-Pehlvi text is complete in its full fourteen lines, but the plaster impressions have been taken in four separate squares, which have, as a rule, suffered greatly on the edges, and supply a very imperfectly connected line either at the horizontal or cross perpendicular points of junction (see the Photograph). The British Museum copies are in better condition than those of the Royal Asiatic Society, while we may reasonably infer that the Dublin impressions are the best of all. Ker Porter's artistic facsimiles are of great use occasionally, and M. Flandin's more labored reproductions, at times supply the correct forms of dubious letters. I have also at my disposal a worn and nearly obliterated pencil copy of the entire Sassanian text made by Sir H. Rawlinson, who, however, omitted to secure a new facsimile of the counterpart Chaldæan. 1 Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings, and Religion of the Parsees. Bombay, 1862. 2 An old Zand-Pahlavi Glossary, by Destur Hoshengji-Jamaspji, High Priest of the Parsis in Malwa, with notes and introduction by Dr. M. Haug. London, 1867. 3 Pp. xx. XXI. HÁJÍÁBÁD INSCRIPTION, NO. VI. The opening word in either version of this inscription is defined in the plural form, in seemingly intentional contrast to the singular number, made use of on ordinary occasions, where the writing avowedly refers to an isolated individual in a given group of sculpture, or to a general composition, wherein the leading figure alone is indicated. In the present instance, the text must be supposed to advert to the general series of illustrations of Sapor's deeds delineated in the bas-reliefs in immediately proximate localities; or, probably, to some special mural representation of the mundane and higher powers more directly referred to in the text, which may have been either only preliminarily designed, partially executed, or afterwards intentionally destroyed. The duplicate legends in parallel cases commence severally with and In this epigraph the Chaldæan plural is found in one version, and in the other, which seemingly represents a vague definition of the corresponding modern Persian neuter plural », with the connecting izáfat attached. The specific term itself has, for long past, been identified with the modern, S. ufa, Armenian and Aramæan, Patkar, "imago." appears to connect itself with the Persian cuneiform zana, the modern Zan, "a woman," but which in early times retained its leading signification as directly derived from a 1 It is not easy to determine, with the limited information available, in what condition the three other tablets, ranging in line with these inscriptions within the cave, were found. There is nothing to show whether the rough surface was merely levelled and prepared, the tablets actually sculptured in relief or engraved in letters; or, on the other hand, whether the finished work was finally damaged or destroyed. M. Flandin's account of the walls of the interior is as follows:-" Ils se trouvent au Nord-ouest des monticules qui indiquent le périmètre de l'ancienne ville d' Istakhr et près du village d' Hadji-abad. Dans une gorge de la montagne on aperçoit des cavernes naturelles. Dans l'une d'elles sont disposées, sur sa paroi même, cinq tablettes dont deux sont revêtues d' inscriptions pehlvis bien conservées."-Flandin, p. 155, folio, texte; octavo, texte, vol. ii., p. 138. 2 Rawlinson, J. R. A. S. x. 320; xii. 432. Oppert, J. A. 1851, pp. 564, 572, dahyunám paruzanánám, “des pays tres peuplés." Anquetil, ii. 505, has Zana= |