Linguistic Society of America

A New Darius Inscription Author(s): Carl D. Buck Reviewed work(s): Source: Language, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Mar., 1927), pp. 1-5 Published by: Linguistic Society of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/409638 . Accessed: 29/12/2011 05:07
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Linguistic Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language.

http://www.jstor.org

433 ff. Kellogg. It looks as if his text. Just recently. BucK UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO Any addition to our scanty store of Old Persian inscriptions is certain to yield something of interest. It was found between two blocks of an ancient foundation which came to light in rebuilding a small house in Hamadan and which belongs to an extensive series of Achaemenian ruins of ancient Egbatana. His brief grammatical notes have not made my own comments on the Old Persian text superfluous. I have seen Herzfeld's communication in the Deutsche Literaturzeitung. 1926. such as have been unearthed in foundation deposits. and that the gold tablet is now in New York. The editor in JRAS has followed the more usual method of fuller transcription. who was in Persia last summer. The editor gives a copy made from a photograph of the gold tablet. his line division after the first two lines is not that of the gold tablet. and this is true of the new Darius inscription published by Sidney Smith in JRAS. and occurs in duplicate on a gold and a silver tablet. 2105 ff.. were in reality that of the silver tablet. though nominally that of the gold tablet. John P. These presumably belonged to a series of three or more (gold. though he must have used it in constituting the Elamite text. which is much mutilated in the gold tablet. It is in the usual trilingual versions. and I have used this. Herzfeld makes no mention of the silver tablet. 1926. where is given the first account of the provenience of the gold tablet.A NEW DARIUS INSCRIPTION CARLD. silver. Herzfeld deals mainly with the historical and archaeological importance of the find. He gives a letter for letter transcription (except in rendering the ideogram for "king"). In the Old Persian text too. Mr. and baser materials). which is in much better condition. after my comment was written. but with a considerable number of errors-the misreading 1 . A photograph of the gold tablet was received from a dealer by the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. informs me that the silver tablet was also found at Hamadan and presumably in the same building. and restorations of the text (of the Elamite version) from a photograph of the silver tablet. and to whom I am indebted for first calling my attention to the find and the publications.

From the fact that Sardis (i. and pass to some grammatical comments. is as follows. F) instead of the usual Or Meillet's V. 8 "Darius the great king. GeographicalJournal 1896. India occurring in the second and third. not simply vi). and the omission of one whole word. Says Darius the king: This (is) the kingdom that I hold.e. 605 ff. since Lydia might well figure as the (north)western frontier land without excluding islands off the coast or lands further north but not so westerly. the Naxg-i-Rustam list of 486 B. from northeast to southwest and from southeast to northwest. which are not included in the earliest of the lists of subject lands. from the Scythians beyond Sogdiana to Kush. our inscription differs from the Behistun inscription. Smith thinks it probable that the inscription was written before the expedition to Samos in 516 B. such as we have elsewhere. the extent of the kingdom is here defined by the extremities. several misinterpretations of sequences. and for the same reason Herzfeld states that it must antedate the expedition against the European Scythians in about 515 B. (the kingdom) which Auramazda.or Weisbach's r*. Boh. This orientation is of peculiar interest in connection with the conclusions of J. 3 Odtiy Ddrayavaug XS ima x~afam tya ada4 m ddraydmiy haEs Sakaibig tyaiy pa5 ra Sugdam amata yAt~ a Kug haid Hi(n)da6 uv amata yati a Spardd tyamaiy Aurama7 zdA fribara hya maOi~tabaganam. Kush only in the third. king of kings. but with (cf. and in the spelling of the first syllable of Vidtaspa (vii. C.. C. gave me. L. king of the lands. . May Auramazda protect me and my family. Myres. These seem somewhat doubtful inferences." Instead of an enumeration of the subject lands. as to the distorted axis of ancient geography. 1 In the form of the word-divider. C. son of Hystaspes. Lydia) is given as the (north)western frontier. The correct reading. who is the greatest of the gods.. India and Kush (Ethiopia).2 CARL D. 1 Ddrayavaug XS vazarka XS XSyansm XS dah2 yuvndm Viltlspahyd pula Haxlmanigiya. the Achaemenian. from India to Sardis. BUCK of some signs (or misprints). More significant perhaps are the (south) eastern and south(west)ern borders.' But I leave this question to the historians. in the system of transcription commonly em' ployed in Iranian studies. mm Auramazda pdtuv utimaiy viOam.

the first syllable is written here v'i." The correct reading of sakaibaiga is of course Sakailnb. as well as with the Naxg-iRustam inscription. through the loss of final d of the ablative. XSyahya and XShya = xsayaOiyahyd. as in many of the other short inscriptions. Noteworthy is the instrumental form after haca "from.A NEW DARIUS INSCRIPTION 3 Throughout this inscription. The haia Sakaibis is the first example. or XS&ndm as in Xerx. answering to Sanskrit -bhyas is quotable." but hadd kard. so that the only faithful transcription is -yandm. Cf. d 11. In the plural no form in -biya. 5.g. serves also for the ablative. but it is s as always. though the singular occurs once. cb 10. which with Tolman we represent x?dyaOiya by XS. Suez c 5. Sakam Bh. which is the proper transcription for every other occurrence of the form. 2. The plural Sakd is usual in the enumeration of the provinces.the vowel sign after ya having been omitted. ca 6. The spelling uv is taken over from the final position. Pers. 1. Smith reads -yanam and that is doubtless the form intended. The forms are to a considerable extent identical. Skt manobhis with sandhi treatment of -as before the case-ending. like bagaibis. sg. corresponding to the Sanskrit instrumental ending -na. 4. "with the army. as in NR a 25 ff." Without preposition the ablative is unknown and the instrumental restricted. Pers. so that there is no material help from this. just as in the compound paruvzananam beside paruzanAndm. which are the most numerous. In the pronouns the ending -na. not simply vi. e 20. 21. Pers. gen. and in connection with the situation in the singular of a-stems it justifies the but agrees with the Darius Persepolis inscriptions. remarking "elsewhere Saka. hac' Parsa "from Persia. 1. and the uses are indicated by the preposition. e 18. Dar. and the four copies of Art. 1-2 Smith reads dahyunam. For the genitive plural we expect XkySanm as in Dar. e. . ViMtaspahya. Cf. the two cases are merged in -a. Pers. As noted above. In the singular of a-stems. is indicated by the ideogram. In 11. paralleled by paruvnam in NR a 6 ff. But here the text has dahyuvnam (dahayauvanaama). and we have haca aniyand Dar. Smith gives the second sibilant as s'. Smith reads Sakibis." with which the ablative is the natural construction and the usual one in both Avestan and Old Persian. but hitherto there has been no occurrence of a plural with haad. At the same time one must bear in mind that in Old Persian the syncretism of ablative and instrumental is only somewhat less complete than in Latin. But the original text has XSyanama.

and in -vo. I think. d. 229). 5.3 is." Such a participle would have the form masta. For para = Skt. a with the ablative. Grd. as haIa gdtvQ. One may recall the fact that the formally identical Vedic saca "with"2 is used with the locative. beyond. Skt. But the syncretism of ablative and instrumental has no bearing on the hamiHi(n)dauv of 11. Grk. Phil. Syntax I 752) of the shift of meaning in Iranian is insufficient. s InJRAS.v) and sauguda) it is the latter that is abnormal with its anaptyctic vowel between stops. I. 11. 3? In that case should amata ydtd a be translated 'extending up to'?" Herzfeld: "d-mata kann wohl nur von der Wurzel mad-'zumessen." The a was known only as a postpositive with the locative. the instrumental ending serving for both. BUCK provisional assumption that here too the two cases were merged. 1753) and the fact that Delbrilck's explanation (Vergl. But the contrast between haca Babiraus and hacI Hi(n)dauv remains surprising. tyaiy para Sugdam. tiras "across. with tara = Av. for which we should now substitute pa." But the ta is a restoration. Wtb. "Is it another derivative from the same root as amata (if the reading is correct) variously rendered in the Bisitin inscription Col. His further remark "Im Elamischen ist das Altpers. Bartholomae.4 CARL D. paras "beyond" (cf. iran. The new word amata. nor is it more startling than the opposite poles reached by the group represented by Latin sub and super.' im jungawestischen belegt. and Herzfeld that para is new. abgeleitet werden. gives the same sense. I 222. Bartholomae. and also other locative forms sometimes serve as ablatives. The shift is no more violent than that which once took place in Eng. 6. but here is used like Skt. despite the skepticism of some (cf. It has been customary in the corresponding phrase NR a 28-9 to read Saka tyai[y ta]radraya. For mittuma is a postpositive with Sukta. In all previously known passages ydta is a conjunction meaning "while" or "until. answering to the OP para before Sug- . 4-5. with. Smith remarks that we should expect tara. for which neither editor offers any satisfactory explanation. which stands in contrast to the previously known hami Babiraus with the regular genitive-ablative form. only that here we know better the particular context in which it started. 11. amata ydtd d Kula (Sparda) = hinc usque ad. 1repa.dmata nur an erster Stelle durch das ebenfalls neue mittumaausgedrtickt" is due to a misunderstanding of the Elamite structure. as if the text had du instead of the actual dau) is a locative form like Babirauv. tar5. 2 I believe in this formal identity. For Hi(n)dauv (wrongly transcribed in JRAS. or again that in Avestan the locative forms in -5 = OPers. 5-6. -auv. Altiran. here and the previously known Suguda (sauguuda As between Sugdamprp-.hacl basman (cf.

"' On this my colleague Professor Luckenbill furnishes the following note: sa rab'i alla ilanipz of 1. amo 'ham asmi. Smith omits baganam in his transcription and even remarks that the Persian version has "the greatest" simply. Smith says that "the obscure word alla here seems to mean 'the other part.29 (? XVI). The use of eli in Assyrian for "over.and Xerx...and Xerx. Van. Xerx. the first incorrectly according to his system. but is equivalent to them in meaning. in contrast to the other versions." alla is undoubtedly the cuneiform rendering of the Aramaic 'al. The text has in both cases maiy. 2. The corresponding Elamite phrase is the same as in Xerx. -tas from a pronominal stem ama-. and further attested by the adverbs amd "at home" ("chez lui") in RV. utamiy. In this inscription the Babylonian version agrees with the latter. with Whitney's translation). corresponding to the rare Skt. "who (is) great above (i. greater than. confirmed by the photograph. the Elamite with the former. In Xerxes Elvend and Xerxes Van the same idea of the superlative is expressed by the more commov raba sa ilani'l. .-"Darius the king thus speaks: al-la a anaku adfiku ana Gumdtu Magusu. 11. g we have a phrase. Elyv. or greatest of) the gods. the "great one of the gods. g 1. ama. from here" RV 5.6. 71. The phrase hya maOeitabaganam is identical with that in Dar. and also from that in Dar. Elyv. while others have mam Auramazda patuv hada bagaibil. Van. Van. etc. sa tvam"he am I. since there is no a-sign after the ya. See also Peiser. more than" is well established.. for the use of alla in the Neo-Babylonian and Persian period contracts. the regular equivalent of OP yata. d."this" occurring in a formula of the Atharva Veda and the Brihmanas. 1. 1." while in Darius Pers. and amat "from this place." Here alla sa is the Aramaic 'al se. she thou" (AV 14. But his own copy. It is the kuis. Babylonische Vertrage 230 and Tallqvist. after I had slain Gaumita the Magian. 8. 1. Die Sprache der Contracts Nabd-nd'ids 42. as in many parallel passages. al-la occurs in the Babylonian version of the Behistun Inscription. just like mittumanna in NR a 23. 8 mam auramazda patuv. That of the Babylonian version differs from that in Xerx. Ely.. and the Elamite and Babylonian versions conform to it. Pers. not m'iy. remainder. which here in both cases answers to the whole Persian phrase amata ydida.A NEW DARIUS INSCRIPTION 5 clearly an adverb formed with the ablatival -ta = Skt. shows bagqncm. Xerx. Smith transcribes tyamiy but utamaiy. Herzfeld transcribes tyamiy. 7 is the equivalent of sa rabt eli ildnil. 7. 53. 8. Pers. which has the same force as eli. dam.e. 1. AV.