The Discovery ok the Zend-Avesta.. xi The Interpretation of the Zend-Avesta xw The Formation ok the Zend-Avesta. xw The Origin of the Avesta Religion. hi The VendIdad lxxxiii •TRANSLATION 01- THE VENDlDAD.
Farcard I. An enumeration of sixteen lands created by Ahura Mazda, and of as many plagues CREATED IN OPPOSITION HV ANGRA MaINYU. I Fargaud II. Myths ok Yima 10 Fargard III. The Earth 21 I (i~6). The five places where the Earth fools most joy. 22 II (7"ii). The five places where the Earth feels most sorrow 24 III (12-35). The five things which most rejoice the Earth 25 IV (36-42). Corpses ought not to be buried in the Earth 31 Fargard IV. Contracts and Outrages...33 II a (2). Classification of contracts 34 1 1 b (3—4). Damages for breach of contract *35 lie (5-10). Kinsmen responsible 36 II d (11-16). Penalties for breach of contract...37 (34-36). Wounds causing blood to flow...42 (37-39). Broken bones 43 (47—49). Praise of physical weal 4r> CULL viii CONTENTS.
I1 Mil?
Fargard V 48 I ( r— 7). If a man defile the fire or the earth involuntarily, or unconsciously, it is no sin 49 II (8-9). Water and fire do not kill 50 III f 10—14). Disposal of the dead during winter.. 51 IV (15-20). How the Dakhmas are cleansed by water from the heavens •.53 V (21-26). On the excellence ofjmrity and of the law that shows how to recover it, when lost 55 VI (27-38). On the defiling power of the Nasu being greater or less, according to the greater or less dignity of the being that dies 57 VII (39-44). On the management of sacrificial implements defiled by the dead 60 VIII (45-62). On the treatment of a woman who has been delivered of a still-born child; and what is to be done with her clothes 61 Fargard VI 66 I (1-9). How long the earth remains unclean, when defiled by the dead 66 II (10-25). Penalties for defiling the ground with dead matter 67 III (26-41). Purification of the different sorts of water, when defiled by the dead 69 IV (42-43). Purification of the Haoma...72 V (44-51). The place for corpses; the Dakhmas.. 72 Fargard VII 74 I (1-5). How long after death the Nasu falls upon the dead 74 I I (6-9). How far the defiling power of the Nasu extends 76 III (10-22). Cleansing of clothes defiled by the dead. 77 IV (23-24). Eating of corpses an abomination...79 V (25-27). Bringing corpses to fire or water an abomina- tion So VI (28-35). Cleansing of wood and corn defiled by the dead 81 Vila (36-40). Physicians; their probation 83 VI lb (41-44). Their fees 84 VIII (45-49). Purification of the earth, of the Dakhmas.
The Dakhmas and the Daevas 86 IX (60-72). Treatment of a woman who has brought forth X (73~75)- Cleansing of vessels defiled by the dead. 91 XI (76). Cleansing of the cow...§..92 XII (77). Unclean libations 92 CONTENTS.
IX Fargard VIII 93 I (1-3). Purification of the house where a man has died 93 II (4-13). Funerals 94 III (14-22). Purification of the ways along which the corpse has been carried 97 IV (23-25). No clothes to be wasted on a corpse.. 99 VI (33“34). A corpse when dried up does not contaminate 103 VII (35-72). Purification of the man defiled by the dead 103 VIII (73-80). Purification of the fire defiled by the dead no IX (81-96). The Bahrain fire 112 X (97-107). Purification in the wilderness...116 Fargard IX. The Nine Nights* BarashnOm...119 la (1,-11)* Description of the place for cleansing the un- clean (the Barashnum-gfth) 1 19 II (37-44)* Fees of the cleanser 129 III (47-57)- The false cleanser; his punishment..131 Fargard X. Spells recited during the process of THE CLEANSING Fargard XI. Special spells for the cleansing of the SEVERAL OHJKCTS Fargard XII. The Upaman: how long it lasts for DIFFERENT RELATIVES Fargard XIII. The Dog I (1-7). The dog of Ormazd and the dog of Ahriman I a (1-4). The dog Vanghapara (the hedge-hog) I b (5~7). The dog Zairimyangura (the tortoise) II (8-16). Offences against the dog III (17-19). On the several duties of the dog.
IV (20-28). On the food due to the dog.
V (29-38). On the mad dog; how lie is to be kept, and cured VI (39 -40). On the excellence of the dog...VII (41-43). On the wolf-dog VI II (44-48). On the virtues and vices of the dog.
IX (49-50). Praise of the dog ' X (50-54). The water dog Fargard XIV. The atonement for the murder of a water dog 165 Fargard XV 172 I (i-8).g Qn five sins the commission of which makes the sinner a Peshotanu t. 172 X CONTENTS.
II (9-19). On unlawful unions and attempts to procure abortion 174 III (20-45). On the treatment of a bitch big with young 175 IV (46-51). On the breeding of dogs...180 Fargard XVI 181 I (1-11). On the uncleanness of women during their sick- ness 181 II (11-12). How it can be removed 183 III (13-18). Sundry laws relating to the same matter. 184 Fargard XVII. Hair and Nails 185 Fargard XVIII 189 I (1-13). On the unworthy priest and enticers to heresy. 189 II (14-29). The holiness of the cock 192 III (30-60). The four paramours of the Dru^..".196 IV (61-71). On unlawful lusts 200 Fargard XIX 203 I (1-10). Angra Mainyu attempts first to kill, then to seduce Zarathurtra 204 II (11-42). Ahura Mazda reveals the law to Zarathujtra. 207 III (43-47). Angra Mainyu flees down to hell...217 Fargard XX. Tiirita and the origin of medicine. 219 Fargard XXI. Waters and Light 223 I (1). Praise of the holy bull 224 II (2-3). Invocation addressed to hail as a healing power 224 III a (4-7). Joint invocation addressed to the waters and to the light of the sun 225 III b (8-1 1). Joint invocation addressed to the waters and to the light of the moon 226 III c (12-17). Joint invocation addressed to the waters and to the light of the stars 227 IV (18-21). Spells against disease 228 Fargard XXII. Angra Mainyu creates 99,999 diseases: Ahura Mazda applies for healing to the Holy Word and to Airyaman 229 Transliteration of Oriental Alphabets adopted for the Transla- tions of the Sacred Books of the East...237 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER I.
The Discovery of the Zend-Avesta.
The Zend-Avesta is the sacrfcd book of the Parsis, that is to say, of the few remaining followers of that religion which reigned over Persia at the time when the second successor of Mohammed overthrew the Sassanian dynasty \ and which has been called Dualism, or Mazdcism, or Ma- gism, or Zoroastrianism, or Fire-worship, according as its main tenet, or its supreme God1 2, or its priests, or its sup- posed founder, or its apparent object of worship has been most kept in view. In less than a century after their defeat, nearly all the conquered people were brought over to the faith of their new rulers, cither by force, or policy, or the attractive power of a simpler form of creed. Rut many of those who clung to the faith of their fathers, went and sought abroad for a new home, where they might freely worship their old gods, say their old prayers, and perform their old rites. That home they found at last among the tolerant Hindus, on the western coast of India and in the peninsula of Guzcrat 3. There they throve and there they live still, while the ranks of their co-religionists in Persia are daily thinning and dwindling away 4.
As the Parsis are the ruins of a people, so are their 1 At the battle of Nih&vand (642 a.c.) a Ahura Mazda.
8 They settled first at San^iin, not far from Daman; thence they spread over Surat, Nowsari, Broach, and Kambay; and within the last two centuries they have settled at Bombay, which now contains the bulk of the Farsi people, nearly 150,000 souls.
4 A century ago, it is said, they still numbered nearly 100,000 souls; but there now remain#no more than 8000 or 9000 souls, scattered in Yezd and the surrounding villages (Dosabhoy Framjee, The Parsees).
xii vendIdAd.
sacred books the ruins of a religion. There has been no other great belief in the world that ever left such poor and meagre monuments of its past splendour. Yet great is the value which that small book, the Avesta, and the belief of that scanty people, the Parsis, have in the eyes of the his- torian and theologist, as they present to us the last reflex of the ideas which prevailed in Iran during the five cen- turies which preceded and the seven which followed the birth of Christ, a period which gave to the world the Gos- pels, the Talmud, and the Qur’an. Persia, it is known, had much influence on each of the movements which produced, or proceeded from, those 'three books; she lent much to the first hcresiarchs, much to the Rabbis, much to Moham- med. By help of the Parsi religion and the Avesta, wc arc enabled to go back to the very heart of that most mo- mentous period in the history of religious thought, which saw the blending of the Aryan mind with the Semitic, and thus opened the second stage of Aryan thought.
Inquiries into the religion of ancient Persia began long ago, and it was the old foe of Persia, the Greek, who first studied it. Aristotle1, Ilermippus2, and many others3 wrote of it in books of which, unfortunately, nothing more than a few fragments or merely the titles have come down to us. We find much valuable information about it, scat- tered in the accounts of historians and travellers, extending over ten centuries, from Herodotus down to Agathias and Procopius. It was never more eagerly studied than in the first centuries of the Christian era; but that study had no longer anything of the disinterested and almost scientific character it had in earlier times. Religious and philosophic sects, in search of new dogmas, eagerly received whatever came to them bearing the name of Zoroaster. As Xanthus the Lydian, who is said to have lived before Herodotus, had mentioned Zoroastrian Ao'yia4, there came to light, in' those later times, scores of oracles, styled Aoyia tov Zwpoacr- 1 Diogenes Laertius, Prooemium 8.
2 Pliny, Ilist. Nat. XXX, i, 2. Cf. infra, III, ri. t 3 Dinoii. Theopompus, Ilermodorus, Heraclides Cumanus.
4 See Nicolaus Damazccnus, Didot, Fragm. Hist. Ill, 409.
INTRODUCTION, I.
Xlll rpov, or ‘ Oracula Chaldalca sivc Magica,’ the work of Neo- Platonists who were but very remote disciples of the Median sage. As his name had become the very emblem of wisdom, they would cover with it the latest inventions of their ever- deepening theosophy. Zoroaster and Plato were treated as if they had been philosophers of the same school, and Hicroclcs expounded their doctrines in the same book. Proclus collected seventy Tetrads of Zoroaster and wrote commentaries on them 1; but we need hardly say that Zoroaster commented on by Proclus was nothing more or less than Proclus commented on by Proclus. Prodicus the Gnostic had secret books of Zdroaster 2; and upon the whole it,may be said that in the first centuries of Chris- tianity, the religion of Persia was more studied and less understood than it had ever been before. The real object aimed at, in studying the old religion, was to form a new one.
Throughout the Middle Ages nothing was known of Mazdcism but the name of its founder, who from a Magus was converted into a magician and master of the hidden sciences. It was not until the Renaissance that real in- quiry was resumed. The first step was to collect all the information that could be gathered from Greek and Roman writers. That task was undertaken and successfully com- pleted by Barnab£ Brisson 3. A nearer approach to the original source was made in the following century by Italian, English, and French travellers in Asia. Pietro della Valle, Henry Lord, Mandelslo, Ovington, Chardin, Gabriel du Chinon, and Tavernier found Zoroaster’s last followers in Persia and India, and made known their exist- ence, their manners, and the main features of their belief to Europe. Gabriel du Chinon saw their books and recog- nised that they were not all written in the same language, their original holy writ being no longer understood except 1 Fabricius, Graeca Bibliotheca, fourth cd. p. 309 seq.
2 Clemens Alexandrinus, Stromata I. Cf. infra, III, ii, and Porphyrius, de vita Plotini, § 16.
8 ‘ De regio PtVsarum principatu libri tres,’ Paris, 1 590. The second book is devoted to the religion and manners of the ancient Persians.
XIV VENDfDAD.
by means of translations and commentaries in another tongue.
In the year 1700, a professor at Oxford, Thomas Hyde, the greatest Orientalist of his time in Europe, made the first systematic attempt to restore the history of the old Persian religion by combining the accounts of the Moham- medan writers with ‘ the true and genuine monuments of ancient Persia1.’ Unfortunately the so-called genuine monuments of ancient Persia were nothing more than recent compilations referring to the last stage of Parsiism. But notwithstanding this defect, which could hardly be avoided then, and notwithstanding its still worse fault, a strange want of critical acumen the book of Thomas Hyde was the first complete and true picture of modern Parsiism, and it made inquiry into its history the order of the day. A warm appeal made by him to the zeal of travellers, to seek for and procure at any price the sacred books of the Parsis, did not remain ineffectual, and from that time scholars bethought themselves of studying Par- siism in its own home.
Eighteen years later, a countryman of Hyde, George Boucher, received from the Parsis in Surat a copy of the Vendidfid Sadah, which was brought to England in 1723 by Richard Cobbe. But the old manuscript was a sealed book, and the most that could then be made of it was to hang it by an iron chain to the wall of the Bodleian Library, as a curiosity to be shown to foreigners. A few years later, a Scotchman, named Fraser, went to Surat, with the view of obtaining from the Parsis, not only their books, but also a knowledge of their contents. He was not very successful in the first undertaking, and utterly failed in the second.
In 1754 a young man, twenty years old, Anquetil Duperron, a scholar of the Ecole des Langues Orientalcs in Paris, happened to sec a facsimile of four leaves of the 1 1 Veterum Persarum et Parthorum ct Medorum religionis historia,1 Oxford, 1 700.
a Thus he recognised in Abraham the first lawgiver of ancient Persia, in Magism a Sabean corruption of the primeval faith, and* in Zoroaster a reformer, who had learnt the forgotten truth from the exiled Jews in Babylon.
INTRODUCTION, I.
XV XV Oxford Vendiddd, which had been sent from England, a few years before, to Etienne Fourmont, the Orientalist. He determined at once to give to France both the books of Zoroaster and the first European translation of them. Impatient to set off, without waiting for a mission from the government which had been promised to him, he enlisted as a private soldier in the service of the French East India Company; he embarked at Lorient on the 24th of February 3 755> anc* a^cr three years of endless adventures and dan- gers through the whole breadth of Hindustan, at the very time when war was raging between France and England, he arrived at last in Surat, wh'cre he stayed among the Parsis for. three years more. Here began another struggle, not less hard, but more decisive, against that mistrust and ill-will of the Parsis which had disheartened Fraser; but he came out of it victorious, and succeeded at last in winning from the Parsis both their books and their knowledge. He came back to Paris on the 14th of March 1764, and de- posited on the following day at the Bibliothcque Royale the whole of the Zend-Avesta and copies of most of the traditional books. He spent ten years in studying the material he had collected, and published in 1771 the first European translation of the Zend-Avesta1.
A violent dispute broke out at once, as half the learned world denied the authenticity of the Avcsta, which it pro- nounced a forgery. It was the future founder of the Royal Asiatic Society, William Jones, a young Oxonian then, who opened the war. He had been wounded to the quick by the scornful tone adopted by Anquetil towards Hyde and a few other English scholars: the Zend-Avesta suf- fered for the fault of its introducer, Zoroaster for Anquetil. In a pamphlet written in French2, with a verve and in a style which showed him to be a good disciple of Voltaire, W. Jones pointed out, and dwelt upon, the oddities and 1 ‘Zend-Avesta, ouvrage de Zoroastre, contcnant les Idees Theologiques, Physiques et Morales de ce Legislates...Traduit en Fran<jois sur l’Original Zend.* Par M. Anquetil Du Perron, 3V0IS. in 40, Paris, 1771.
* ‘Lettre k M.’A*** du P***, dans laquelle est compris Pexamen de sa traduction des livres attributes k Zoroastre.’
XVI VENDIDAD.
absurdities with which the so-called sacred books of Zo- roaster teemed. It is true that Anquetil had given full scope to satire by the style he had adopted: he cared very little for literary elegance, and did not mind writing Zend and Persian in French; so the new and strange ideas he had to express looked stranger still in the outlandish garb he gave them. Yet it was less the style than the ideas that shocked the contemporary of Voltaire1. His main argu- ment was that books, full of such silly tales, of laws and rules so absurd, of descriptions of gods and demons so grotesque, could not be the work of a sage like Zoroaster, nor the code of a religion so much celebrated for its simpli- city, wisdom, and purity. His conclusion was. that the Avesta was a rhapsody of some modern Guebre. In fact the only thing in which Jones succeeded was to prove in a decisive manner that the ancient Persians were not equal to the lu mi c res of the eighteenth century, and that the authors of the Avesta had not read the Encyclopedic.
Jones’s censure was echoed in England by Sir John Chardin and Richardson, in Germany by Meiners. Richard- son tried to give a scientific character to the attacks of Jones by founding them on philological grounds2. That the Avesta was a fabrication of modern times was shown, lie argued, by the number of Arabic words lie fancied he found both in the Zend and Pahlavi dialects, as no Arabic element was introduced into the Persian idioms earlier than the seventh century; also by the harsh texture of the Zend, contrasted with the rare euphony of the Persian; and, lastly, by the radical difference between the Zend and Persian, both in words and grammar. To these objec- tions, drawn from the form, he added another derived from the uncommon stupidity of the matter.
In Germany, Meiners, to the charges brought against the new found books, added another of a new and unexpected kind, namely, that they spoke of ideas unheard of before, and made known new things. ‘Pray, who would dare 1 Cf. the article on Zoroaster in the Dictionnaire philosophique.
a ‘ A Dissertation on the Languages, Literature, and Manners of Eastern Nations,’ Oxford, 1777.
INTRODUCTION, I.
XVII ascribe to Zoroaster books in which arc found numberless names of trees, animals, men, and demons unknown to the ancient Persians; in which are invoked an incredible num- ber of pure animals and other things, which, as appears from the silence of ancient writers, were never known, or at least never worshipped, in Persia? What Greek ever spoke of Horn, of Jemshid, and of such other personages as the fabricators of that rhapsody exalt with every kind of praise, as divine heroes1?’ Yet, in the midst of his Ciceronian nonsense, Meiners inadvertently made a remark which, if correctly interpreted, might have led to important dis- coveries. He noticed that many points of resemblance arc to be found between the ideas of the Parsis and those of the Brahmans and Musulmans. lie saw in this a proof that Parsiism is a medley of Brahmanical and Musulman tales. Modern scholarship, starting from the same point, came to that twofold conclusion, that, on the one hand, Parsiism was one of the elements out of which Mohammed formed his religion, and, on the other hand, that the old religions of India and Persia flowed from a common source. 4 Not only does the author of that rubbish tell the same tales of numberless demons of either sex as the Indian priests do, but he also prescribes the same remedies in order to drive them away, and to balk their attempts.5 In these words there was something like the germ of compara- tive mythology; seldom has a man approached the truth so closely and then departed from it so widely.
Anquetil and the Avesta found an eager champion in the person of Kleukcr, professor in the University of Riga. As soon as the French version of the Avesta appeared, he published a German translation of it, and also of Anquetil’s historical dissertations 2. Then, in a series of dissertations of his own3, he vindicated the authenticity of the Zend books. Anquetil had already tried to show, in a memoir 1 ‘De Zoroastris vita, institutis, doctrina et libris,’ in the Novi Com- mentarii Societatis Regiae, Goettingen, 1778-1779.
a ‘ Zend-Avesty...nach dem Franzoesischen des Ilerrn Anquetil Du Perron,* XVlii VENDfDAD.
on Plutarch, that the data of the Avesta fully agree with the account of the Magian religion given in the treatise on ‘Isis and Osiris.5 Kleuker enlarged the circle of comparison to the whole of ancient literature. He tried also to appeal to internal evidence, an attempt in which he was less suc- cessful. The strength of his defence was seldom greater than the strength of the attack. Mciners had pointed out the mythical identity of the Mount Alborg* of the Parsis with the Mount Meru of the Hindus, as a proof that the Parsis had borrowed their mythology from the Hindus: the conclusion was incorrect, but the remark itself was riot so. Kleuker fancied that he could remove the difficulty by stating that Mount Alborg is a real mountain, nay, a doubly real mountain, since there are two mountains of that name, the one in Persia, the other in Armenia, whereas Mount Meru is only to be found in Fairyland. Seldom were worse arguments used in the service of a good cause. Meiners had said that the name of the Parsi demons was of Indian origin, as both languages knew them by the Latin name ‘ Dcus.5 This was an incorrect statement, and yet an impor- tant observation. The word which means ‘ a demon 5 in Persia means quite the contrary in India, and that radical difference is just a proof of the two systems being indepen- dent of one another. Kleuker pointed out the incorrectness of the statement; but, being unable to account for the iden- tity of the words, he flatly denied it.
Kleuker was more successful in the field of philology: he showed, as Anquetil had done, that Zend has no Arabic ele- ments in it, and that Pahlavi itself, which is more modern than Zend, does not contain any Arabic, but only Semitic words of the Aramean dialect, which are easily accounted for by the close relations of Persia with Aramean lands in the time of the Sassanian kings. He showed, lastly, that Arabic words appear only in the very books which Parsi tradition itself considers modern.
Another stanch upholder of the Avesta was the numis- matologist Tychscn, who, having begun to read the book with a prejudice against its authenticity, quitted it with a conviction to the contrary. ‘There is nothing in it,5 he INTRODUCTION, I.
XIX writes, 1 but what befits remote ages, and a man philo- sophising in the infancy of the world. Such traces of a recent period as they fancy to have found in it, are either due to misunderstandings, or belong to its later portions. On the whole there is a marvellous accordance between the Zend-Avesta and the accounts of the ancients with regard to the doctrine and institutions of Zoroaster. Plutarch agrees so well with the Zend books that I think no one will deny the close resemblance of doctrines and identity of origin. Add to all this the incontrovertible argument to be drawn from the language, the antiquity of which is estab- lished by the fact that it was necessary to translate a part of the Zend books into Pahlavi, a language which was growing obsolete as early as the time of the Sassanides. Lastly, it cannot be denied that Zoroaster left books, which were, through centuries, the groundwork of the Magic reli- gion, and which were preserved by the Magi, as shown by a series of documents from the time of Hermippus. There- fore I am unable to see why we should not trust the Magi of our days when they ascribe to Zoroaster those traditional books of their ancestors, in which nothing is found to indi- cate fraud or a modern hand V Two years afterwards, in 1793, was published in Paris a book which, without directly dealing with the Avesta, was the first step taken to make its authenticity incontrovertible. It was the masterly memoir by Sylvestre de Sacy, in which the Pahlavi inscriptions of the first Sassanides were deci- phered for the first time and in a decisive manner. De Sacy, in his researches, had chiefly relied on the Pahlavi lexicon published by Anquetil, whose work vindicated itself thus— better than by heaping up arguments — by promoting discoveries. The Pahlavi inscriptions gave the key, as is well known, to the Persian cuneiform inscriptions, which were in return to put beyond all doubt the genuineness of the Zend language.
Tychscn, in an appendix to his Commentaries, pointed 1 ‘ Commentatio prior observationcs histo rico-cri ticas de Zoroastre ejnsque scriptis et placitis exhibens.* Goettingen, in the Novi Comment. Soc. Reg. 1791.
XX VENDiDAD.
to the importance of the new discovery: * This,5 he writes, ‘ is a proof that the Pahlavi was used during the reign of the Sassanides, for it was from them that these inscrip- tions emanated, as it was by them — nay, by the first of them, Ardcshir Babagfm — that the doctrine of Zoroaster was revived. One can now understand why the Zend books were translated into Pahlavi. Here, too, everything agrees, and speaks loudly for their antiquity and genuineness/ About the same time Sir William Jones, then president of the Royal Asiatic Society, which he had just founded, resumed in a discourse delivered before that Society the same question he had solved in such an off-hand manner twenty years before. He was no longer the man to say, ‘ Si£d-il a un homme ne dans ce siccle de s’infatuer de fables indiennes?’ and although he had still a spite against Anquetil, he spoke of him with more reserve than in 1771. However, his judgment on the Avesta itself was not -altered on the whole, although, as he himself declared, he had not thought it necessary to study the text. But a glance at the Zend glossary published by Anquetil suggested to him a remark which makes Sir William Jones, in spite of himself, the creator of the comparative grammar of Sanskrit and Zend.
‘ When I perused the Zend glossary,’ he writes, ‘ I was inexpressibly surprised to find that six or seven words in ten are pure Sanscrit, and even some of their inflexions formed by the rules of the Vyacaran1, as yushmacam, the geni- tive plural of yushmad. Now M. Anquetil most certainly, and the Persian compiler most probably, had no knowledge of Sanscrit, and could not, therefore, have invented a list of Sanscrit words; it is, therefore, an authentic list of Zend words, which has been preserved in books or by tradition; it follows that the language of the Zend was at least a dia- lect of the Sanscrit, approaching perhaps as nearly to it as the Pracrit, or other popular idioms, which we know to have been spoken in India two thousand years ago V This con- clusion, that Zend is a Sanskrit dialect, was incorrect, the connection assumed being too close; but it was a great 1 The Sanskrit Grammar.
9 Asiatic Researches, II, § 3.
INTRODUCTION, I.
XXI thing that the near relationship of the two languages should have been brought to light.