some cases even to the signification of "repentance" ("Pœnitentia" Freytag). The NT of the parallel version might be quoted in support of the duplication of the final in only that this would not be altogether a safe argument in the presence of the exceptional (emphatic) 7 of the Chaldæan vernacular in Daniel v. 5, 24, though probably any such heritage had been subdued by contact with the mixed dialects of more Southern latitudes.

The word Naba would at first sight naturally suggest the obvious interpretation of "Prophet," but taken in connexion with the 17 of the counterpart transcript it will be necessary to elevate its meaning into "Lord," or a later adaptation of the ancient "Nebo," as derived from the root ,"Editus, elatus fuit," 1, "to be prominent,” and not as having any direct connexion with N, "to pour forth."

رَبُّ

The article the prefixed to the 17, which gives force to the parallel term, would altogether remove the joint titles far above the grade of a mere vātes or "prophesier." The effect of the double letters of the current speech and 7 seems to have been sought in graphic expression by the lengthening the vowel sound of into,, as in the analogous case of, which was the substitute for the dominant Arabic (the modern Persian ).

The texts next reiterate the passages from lines 6, 7.

נגליי פתן זניי ויס היף החאימות لگلي پون زني دوني ايو هنهتون

C. Pehlvi.- well sustaining joy among the people of this world.

Sassanian..

well upholds joy among the people of the earth.

It will be noticed that there is an addition in this line to the previous formula, in the introduction of two new words, which are expressed in mere letters as and respectively, to which I myself have but cautiously, and, at last, of very necessity, admitted a perhaps over simple meaning.

1 Arabic lexicographers bring the whole series of parallel terms for Prophet under the common root .

But having reached thus much of the conventionality of the then local speech, so marked in situ, and so singularly preserved in the dependent ramifications of the more advanced vernacular in its ultimate spread, I feel that but few will be found to contest the data the rock records of the middle of the third century A.D. so strangely reproduce as specimens of the crude prayers and invocations of a new faith, neither the matter nor manner of which was fully understood by the compiler of the inscription.

But of all the quaint problems that have presented themselves during the course of this rather tedious development of a complicated and obscure bilingual manifesto, no single item has afforded so much of a surprise as this Hip of the Chaldæan texts, which even the most daring ingenuity would scarcely have ventured to coerce into the modern Persian conversational and sonorously aspirated Khúb,1 unless the fellow version had contributed both the first hint and the simultaneous proof of the correctness of the assignment; even now, many critics may refuse to see the Greek ev in the of the Sassanian writing, especially as the meaning, in either case, so oddly accords with the general tendency of the translation which I may be supposed to be too hastily advocating.

והדדיא כלחו שיתי היף שדי

و هتيا ول زک چيتاني ايو شديتن ولزک

C. Pehlvi.-And THE God he (is), Lord, great in goodness.

Sassanian.—And THE God that (is), Godlike, abounding in goodness.

ו מנו הדדיא כלהו שיתי יאמזוד להוף ידא רוב הדדין اهر منو چتیا ول زک چیتان رميتن ولي ليدي نب

C. Pehlvi.-And THE heavenly Lord he (is) Lord; Oh increase of good aid, Lord of Lords.

Sassanian.-And THE heavenly Lord, that (is) Lord on high, Master (giver) of aid, Lord!

9

The orthography, in this instance, may have been affected by the Arabic pro, «Formidabilis, aut verendus, reverendus, fuit." The Persian word is more correctly defined in line fourteen of the original inscription as 17=

. هوب

But little remains to be said in the way of strictly philological commentary upon the concluding passages of the parallel inscriptions, though their curt and imperfectly connected sentences necessarily admit of many and obvious gradational renderings. However, as any possible divarication from the leading intention of these epigraphs must, after all, revert to the general tenets of the Christian faith, we have only to accept this singular Eastern paraphrase of portions of our own authorised version, and, under such a concession, frankly to test and compare its very limited departure either in words or ideas from the Greek of the New Testament, on which we base our own interpretation.

The first of the remaining difficulties consists of a question of grammar, which was at this time, necessarily, but little subject to fixed laws; and even had the parts of speech been in any way reduced to a recognised and defined system, the eccentric intermixture of words, phrases, and constructive identities of this Camp language,1 would release a modern interpreter from any reserve in dealing with doubtful or exceptional terms of minor significance.

1 The direct effect of Sapor's campaigns to the westward upon the Court language of Persia has been for long past fully recognised and understood (Mohl, Preface to Shah Námah), but we could scarcely have anticipated its resulting in so incoherent a polyglot as these Bilingual texts present us with. It is true that Persepolis was peculiarly situated in regard to conterminous languages, both old and new, and Sapor's freshly imported Aramäisms may have added to the normal difficulties; but much of the imperfection of these writings is undoubtedly due to the novelty of the subject, and to the impossibility of rendering whatever may have been the peculiar form of the recognised sacred text, into degraded Persian vernaculars, with even a remote chance of its essential meaning ultimately reaching the understanding of the less educated masses. And this, indeed, is the fatal obstacle to all Christian teaching in India at the present day,—not that we English are unfaithful, or unwilling, but that Eastern and Western thoughts and deductions start from different bases of symbolical ideals. Though the whole question only amounts to this, after all, that our Western instruction in Christianity commenced later in the world's history, and under the influence of comparatively advanced knowledge and more or less purified teaching. Europe at large received the Gospel in its best form, but every step it went Eastward, it had from the first to encounter hostilities and to submit to concessions of a character calculated to degrade its sublimity,—it was, in effect, the going back to old and self-willed races, instead of carrying welcome tidings to simple but intelligent, though undeveloped peoples.

Under the most simple and ordinary processes of critical analysis of an epigraph freely abounding in both Hebrew and Arabic terms, it might almost be taken for granted that the word, in lines twelve and thirteen, merely reproduced the established, "all," of the authorized speech of those confessedly leading Semitic authorities; and though, with some straining, it might be possible to connect the word, in a vague way, with a suggestion of "universality," it is far preferable to let it down into the quietude of its more direct associations, and to suppose that is nothing more than a local reflex of the Arabic article J, "the." It is quite true that in this very version the corresponding Hebrew (for) has been recognised in its proper and correct form; but in so strangely composite a manifesto as the present, simplicity, or a reduction to primitive elements, is the only true safeguard towards ultimate elucidation; and as we know, on the other hand, that the Persian tongue was then (as it is now) altogether deficient in any representative of our ever-recurring definite article "the,” which, in these combinations of languages, it had to borrow with more or less sonal aptitude from neighbouring nations; can it then be felt strange that the severe “lám, of definition," with its prosthetic 1, at this time only colloquially developed, should have been so readily merged into the Sassanian J, or the but faintly removed Chaldæan

under discussion.

19

now

The leading derivation and ample duties of have already been referred to (p. 42), and the 17, "he," of the associate text, scarcely admits of doubt.

The single word that still remains to be noticed is the

5

, which seems to resolve itself into the Arabic interjection ↳ (Persian) "oh," prefixed to the word (here written), "increase, addition," etc. (from lj, "increvit"). This combination may appear strange and the exclamation somewhat out of place; but in regard to , it must be remembered how constantly the exact synonym J, "increase," was in use, to such an extent, indeed, that the Pehlvi

افزوت = مرم

came to hold the place of honour on the obverse field of the later Sassanian coins, and was retained intact by the Arabs in their imitative coinage, and only disappeared with the latest Pehlvi mintages of Taberistán in A.H. 138.1

PARALLEL TRANSLATIONS OF THE HÁJÍÁBÁD INSCRIPTION. (For text see page 74 and the Photograph.)

CHALDEO-PEHLVI VERSION: Representations of the person of the SASSANIAN VERSION: Representations of the person of the ZoroZoroastrian divinity,' Sapor, King of Kings of Arians and Anarians, astrian divinity, Sapor, King of Kings of Irán and Anirán, of of divine origin from God, son of the Zoroastrian divinity, Ardeshír, divine origin from God, son of the Zoroastrian divinity, Artahshatr, King of Kings of Arians, of divine origin from God, grandson of divine King of Kings of Irán, of divine origin from God, grandson of divine Papak, King. And of multitudes of men, Lord, mighty, the Papak, King. Also Lord of many races, sole mighty (one) of the high obeyed of Satraps, Military chiefs, Nobles. And YE mighty Satraps, and Military commanders, and Nobles. And YE mighty (one) and bringer of joy among the people of the world, and God of (one) also bringing joy (salvation?) to the people of earth, also God of Justice he (is), Lord of the Creator, the high Creator, the Seed (of) Might he (is), Lord of the Creator, the heavenly Creator, the Vicar of the FIRST of Gods, the Spirit he (is). over the Jews sole And Lord who of the Archon of the

the high God of Gods, the Seed. Lord created YE (are). of the order of the chosen Jews Jews sole Lord of Lords he (is). Supreme Lord of the Jews "without

J.R.A.S. xii. 347. In the higher sense see St. Luke xvii. 5, Пpóσles hμiv TíσTIV, "Increase our faith." Acts vi. 7, Kal & λóyos toû ✪eoû nişave, “and the word of God increased." 1 Corinthians iii. 6, àλλ' ¿ Oeds nõgavev, “but God gave the increase.” 7. àîî' ¿ avè̟ávwv @eós, “but God gave the increase." 2 Cor. x. 15; Ephesians iv. 16; Col. i. 10; ii. 19, cỀe Thi cử nơu Tôi Đeo, "increaseth with the increase of God." 1 Thess. iii. 12; iv. 10, etc.

2 It will be seen that I have varied many of the details which were more severely treated in the preceding commentary, among the rest I have altered the rendering of the word. If the term “Mazdyasna religion" has been correctly assigned to the creed itself, it will be quite optional to convert the 'Ormazd-worshipper" of the present text into the "Zoroastrian."

66