Sogdian Christian text: manifestation of ‘Sogdian Christianity’

© B. Ashurov, 2015

TEXTS AND MANUSCRIPTS: DESCRIPTION AND RESEARCH

B. Ashurov

SOGDIAN CHRISTIAN TEXTS: THE MANIFESTATION OF “SOGDIAN CHRISTIANITY” [1]

Abstract. This paper aims to discuss the philological “mechanisms” used in translating Christian texts into Sogdian. It focuses specifically on how different Christian theological and ecclesiological vocabularies were translated from Syriac. Particular empha-sis will be given to showing how the Sogdian Church linguistically contextualized its theological and ecclesiological concepts. Section 1 offers introductory review of the composition of the texts focusing on the physical organization and philological structure of the texts, including short survey of research history on individual vocabularies. Section 2 discusses the translation mechanisms observed in structure of the texts. Section 3 provides examples of the “Christian” vocabularies related to a selected major theologi-cal ecclesiological concepts and expressions.

Keywords: Christian texts, Sogdian Christianity, Central Asia, The Church of the East, linguistic contextualization

Introduction

The period between the fall of the great Kušan Kingdom (4th century AD) and the Arab invasion (8th century AD) was a time of great flourishing for Sogdiana both economically and culturally.

This time period witnessed the steady spread of Sog-dian culture outside its immediate geopolitical bounda-ries; from the Zarafš n valley to a , Semirechye and China. Sogdian towns and cities were planted along the main trade routes and in economically strategic areas. Although these so called “colonies” were primary agri-culturalist societies, they played a major role in the de-velopment of local sedentary urban culture since much of the region was mainly inhabited by (semi) nomadic pastoralist communities.

Sogdian communities outside of Sogdiana were also instrumental “service providers” for caravans (mainly led by Sogdians) that travelled through their cities.

The prosperity of Sogdian commerce in early medieval period (5th—8th centuries AD) had significant implica-

tions for their culture. The trade brought them into close contact with different “ethno-linguistic” communities and contributed to the enrichment of their worldview and of their culture in general. In particular, one of major conse-quences was the intensive growth of different religious components in Sogdian culture, such as Christianity.

Aside from references in literary sources, evidence of “Sogdian Christianity” has reached us through various material culture objects and texts. Sogdian Christian texts are one of the largest extant Christian bodies of writing in an Iranian language, and were discovered in the early decades of the twentieth century by members of the German Turfan Expeditions during the four cam-paigns, led by Albert Grünwedel and Alber von le Coq between 1902 and 1914 [2].

All Sogdian Christian texts known today were dis-covered at the ruin of Shüi-pang, near the modern-day town of Bulayïq, located 10 km north of Turfan, China, and a small number were found in the Dunhuang area [3].

History of Research

The diversity of the vocabulary in Sogdian Christian texts was first noted by Émile Benveniste [4], where he focused on various categories of Christian terminology: either Middle Persian or technical words designated as Syriac loanwords. A further study on the topic was un-dertaken by Olaf Hansen [5] who also presented a list of

Syriac Christian technical terms and their Sogdian coun-terparts. In particular, he stressed the Persian background and characteristics of Sogdian Christian texts, as mani-fested in their use of Middle Persian words. Nicholas Sims-Williams [6] has studied the “Syriac elements in Sogdian” and discussed many important individual words.

4 Manuscripta Orientalia. VOL. 21 NO. 1 JUNE 2015

Physical Organization and Philological Structure of the Texts

The extant Sogdian Christian texts vary in sizes and compositional arrangements. There are manuscripts containing a single work or a collection of thematically related texts, as well as manuscripts containing various unrelated texts [7]. One of the well-known examples of the latter manuscript group is the codex C2 [8] that is believed in its original composition to have contained at least 13 texts of various genres, such as martyrology or Apostolic Cannons [9].

In their layout and format, most of the Sogdian Christian manuscripts are written in Western-style codi-ces, with only a single fragment being assumed to repre-sent an Indian po h book [10]. However, according to Sims-Williams “there is nothing to suggest that it ever had a string-hole like a real po h ” [11].

The texts are written in paper with black, brown and red ink, with the red used for the opening lines, rubrics and headings. The Sogdian Christian texts are composed in one column and usually follow Syriac punctuations and the most used ornament or iconographic element is the sign of the cross. The greatest “shortcoming” of the existing Sogdian Christian texts is the lack of colophons, which would have been of immense help in dating and localization of these texts.

As translated literature, Sogdian Christian texts dis-play both a “dependence” on original sources as well as an “independence” from them.

The “dependence” of the Sogdian Christian texts on Syriac is primarily displayed in the following features:

(i) The use of loan words, especially technical terms or specific Christian expressions designating different ecclesiastical offices or practices, such as deacon, Eucharist etc. (These are detailed below).

(ii) Retention of Syriac word-order and over-literal translation causing the creation of artificial syntax [12]. This feature is particularly evident when the verb is placed in the beginning of the sentence, which is not a feature of Sogdian. However, verbal forms are kept in

accord with Sogdian morpho-syntactical structure. This feature is well evident in the example below:

mn [d b ]d[n]( )t btry nkp r bnpš(h) (Syriac). Whoever wants to come after me should give up his

soul. (xwn) d [qt q]( )mt(qt ) t mn p(š)ys pstw t [pr

xyp ](r)yw (Sogdian). Whoever wants to come after me should give up his

soul [13].

The “independence” of the Sogdian Christian texts is displayed in the following:

(i) The use of native Sogdian vocabulary or, on oc-casion, Middle Persian words to translate both general Christian expressions and termini technici e. g b to translate al h , “God”. Further examples are detailed below.

(ii) The use of words or phrases, which may have been part of a Sogdian literary style. As exemplified by the following sentence from lectionary C5:

r yšw [ltl](m)ydwhy (Syriac). Jesus spoke to his disciples. w nw frm y[]xwt w yšw qw xyp [ž]wxšqt s (Sogdian). So spoke the Lord Jesus to his disciples [14].

In the example above the adverb, w nw, “so”, “thus” is used at the beginning of the sentence containing Jesus' speech, which is absent in the Syriac original. In addi-tion, the use of the word xwt w, “Lord” in connection with Jesus' name is also another stylistic feature of Sog-dian Christian texts that is absent in Syriac. In the origi-nal texts “Lord” is not inserted before Jesus' name on all occasions. Another additional word that is regularly used in Sogdian Christian texts, but is absent in Syriac is the adjective nwšy, “eternal” that regularly qualifies Syriac hy , “life”; e. g. nwšc žw n, “eternal life” [15].

Translations Mechanisms

Christian expressions in Sogdian Christian texts were translated using the following vocabulary categories:

L o a n w o r d s

Most loanwords found in Sogdian Christian texts were from Syriac and were given in transliteration. These are usually technical terms or personal names (see the examples below). There are also loanwords of Greek and Hebrew origin that were transmitted into Sogdian via Syriac. In addition, there are a few Syriac words that were phonetically assimilated into Sogdian. It is signifi-cant to mention that the technical words used in Sogdian Christian texts, including the adapted Syriac script, had been never used by non-Christian Sogdians or other lan-guage groups [16]. In relation to the Syriac loanwords in Sogdian Christian texts for which the native equivalent is not attested Hansen remarked that these are “relics” of

the earliest period when Christianity was introduced into Sogdian culture [17]. That is to say that these loanwords were at first used when the corresponding Christian vo-cabulary in native Sogdian was still evolving or Christi-anity was not well absorbed into linguistic setting of Sogdian culture. However, their subsequent retention and use together with Sogdian native words indicates that these words had become well known and were widely used. Therefore, the translator did not consider it urgent to translate them or attempt to find a correspond-ing word in Sogdian.

The second stratum of loanwords used in Sogdian Christian texts is represented by Middle Persian words

B. ASHUROV. Sogdian Christian Texts… 5

such as trs q, “Christian”, pyw q, “response” and x nyš, “reading”. As Sims-Williams puts it:

The use of Middle Persian for the vernacular parts of the liturgy was probably introduced into Central Asia during the initial stages of the Nestorian mission from Iran, but Middle Persian, which would not have been understood by the local population, was soon superseded by Sogdian [18].

This category of vocabulary, as Benveniste has em-phasized [19], bears qualitative significance as the words denote both important theological and general concepts. The Middle Persian vocabularies in Sogdian Christian texts indicate the familiarity of Sogdian Christians with the Christian literature in Middle Persian, or even possibly

that the evangelization of Sogdiana was carried by the Middle Persian speakers. Today the only surviving exam-ple of Middle Persian Christian literature is the Pahlavi Psalter, which was also discovered at Turfan [20]. How-ever other Christian inscriptions in Pahlavi are known, such as inscription in the processional cross discovered from Herat or cross plaques ornamented with Pahlavi in-scriptions in South Asia i. e. India, Sri Lanka [21].

It is likely that there was other Christian literature in Pahlavi similar that in Sogdian, but which has not sur-vived. Above all, the so-called Persian elements in Sog-dian Christian texts are indicative of the robust in-ter-relationship of the churches in Sogdiana and Persia where the patriarch of the Church of the East resided.

N a t i v e V o c a b u l a r y

This category includes the Sogdian words used to translate various Syriac technical and general religious ter-minologies, such as mwžtybrqy , “Gospel” to translate Syriac “evangelion” or zprt w t, “Holy Spirit” to translate ruh qd š . The indigenous vocabularies in Sogdian Chris-tian texts are sometimes used together with the Syriac loanwords i. e. same word both in its Syriac as well as in Sogdian. This was probably done for stylistic purpose to avoid repetition of the words. However, the fact that these

words may have had symbolic meanings as well cannot be completely ruled out.

Aside from linguistic reasons, the development or use of indigenous Sogdian terms can be interpreted as a “soli-linguistic” phenomenon signalling the accultura-tion of the Church into the local context through the use of language [22]. One feature of the native words de-vised to convey theological concepts in Sogdian is that they are nearly always compound nouns.

Examples of the “Christian” Vocabularies of the Sogdian Christian Texts

T h e o l o g i c a l E x p r e s s i o n s

God

The term used to designate God in Sogdian is b . This term as demonstrated by Walter Henning in Sog-dian is also used as an honorific term meaning “Lord”, “Sir”, “Excellency” [23]. Sims-Williams has subse-quently demonstrated that this term was sometimes used as a specific designation of Mithra, one of the main Sog-dian-Zoroastrian deities known from both written sources and works of art [24].

Yet at the same time Sogd. - continued as designa-tion of the ancient divinities, and the representatives of monotheistic religions, as Christian missionaries, used it of “God” with a capital letter [25].

Etymologically, b belongs to the verbal root bag “to distribute”, “to allot” and may be equated with bhága, an Old Indian divine epithet probably meaning “dispenser”, “generous one”. In Sogdian Christian texts, this term is used exclusively to render Syriac al h , “God”. Possibly the only example where the Syriac al h in Sogdian Christian is used in transliteration is found in the story of Daniel:

fryw qwnt xyp wnt lh s r cn ty m n ZY cn ty z wr. cn s t šy ZY cn s t m n.

Love the Lord God with (your) whole mind and with

(your) whole strength, with all (your) intelligence and with all (your) mind [26].

Sims-Williams observed that in this example the Sogdian word m n, “mind” is used to translate Syriac words lb , “heart” and r yn , “mind” [27]. Otherwise, the word for heart in Christian Sogdian, particularly on the usage evidence of C2, is žy wr.

One of the most frequent attestations of the word b is in phrase “Lord God”.

xwtw b . Lord God [28]. xwt w xwt w z wrqyn xwšywny b . Lord, Lord, mighty king (and) God [29].

Other theological terms related with b root are b nyq, “divine”, “of God” and b y qy , “divinity”.

b nyq šyr qty Divine Grace [30]. tw b y qy Thy Divinity [31].

The expression of b y ptry, “Father God” is also common, which usually translates Syriac b [32].


Lord

The term translating “Lord”, as seen in above exam-ples of “Lord God” is xwtw. In Christian texts xwtw is used both in connection with God e. g. xwtw b , “Lord God” and Jesus xwt w yšw , “Lord Jesus”.

The term xwtw in currently known texts occur with different spellings e. g. xwt w and xwd w. Similarly to b , this term in Sogdian is widely used both addressing humans and divinities. As was noted earlier in Sogdian Christian texts, xwtw “Lord” is one of the phrases regu-larly used in connection with Jesus' name, which is ab-sent in the Syriac originals. For example, in C5 the fol-lowing is attested:

mr yšw [ltl](m)ydwhy. Jesus spoke to his disciples (Syriac). w nw frm y[]xwt w yšw qw xyp [ž]wxšqt s . So spoke the Lord Jesus to his disciples (Sogdian) [33]. mr yš[w ] ltlmydwh(y).

Jesus spoke to his disciples (Syriac). w nw fr m y[]xwt w y(š)w qw xyp žwxšqt[ ] s (Sogdian). So spoke the Lord Jesus to his disciples [34].

Regarding the use of xwtw in Sogdian Christian texts, Martin Schwartz points out that it always translates the Syriac word mry as “Lord” [35]. This usage of the word is also confirmed in the lectionary C5, where xwtw consistently translates Syriac mry . However, in this texts it “is used [either] alone or with lh ‘God’ but not with yšw ” [36]. The spelling xwd w is attested in E8, a liturgical text for the commemoration of the departed.

Since xwt w is not used in the Syriac texts where Sogdian uses it, one can argue that such phraseology i. e. using xwt w consistently with Jesus is a feature of the cultural influence of Sogdian into the textual tradition.

However, its exact implications on the social and reli-gious perception levels cannot be determined for certain.

Another term translating “Lord” in Sogdian is xyp wnt, which as evident in the example given below, is also used in common with xwtw.

n ny t mdw qy pryw m x xyp wnt yšw mšyh tmp( )[r] [ ]t ywxny r z xcy. šwšp []qy sqyp r cn pyls t ks

xšnyrq xcy nd(yw)yd snqy qy w(s)tty (b) pr xwtw yšw

frwrtqt(y) dbrw. The bread and wine upon it is a mystery Our Lord Je-

sus Christ' body and blood. The veil over the paten and chalice is a sign of that stone which was placed upon the door of the Lord Jesus's tomb [37].

There are two different words used in relation to Je-sus in this example: xyp wnt which is used with the phrase “Jesus Christ” and xwtw which is used when Je-sus' name is not followed by his title i. e. Christ.

In the above and other similar contexts, this desig-nation of the word “Lord” by two distinct terms xwtw and xyp wnt may be understood as a “stylistic device”; that is the use of these words as synonyms to avoid repetition. Furthermore, this signifies the translator's awareness and knowledge of different Sogdian words conveying similar theological concepts accurately.

In addition to Sogdian Christian texts xyp wnt is also used in Manichean texts, and similarly to xwtw it has different spelling variations, such as xyp wnd. This term is not common in Sogdian Buddhist texts. De-pending on the contexts in which this term is used, it can mean “ruler”, “king”, and “the Lord”. The application and usage of the term is comparable to the earlier men-tioned xwtw.

Christ, Jesus Christ and Messiah

As with other personal names (Syriac, Greek, and Hebrew) including Jesus and his title in Sogdian Chris-tian texts are represented by transliteration from the Syriac yšw “Jesus” and yšw mšyh “Jesus Christ” [38].

As Sims-Williams pointed out personal and geo-graphical names in Sogdian Christian texts are “usually adapted with their Syriac spellings unchanged” [39]. However, if there was another form of spelling already established these (geographical or personal names) are given in their Sogdian form, for example the Middle Per-sian name Š hd st. According to Sims Williams the Sogdian translation of this name (Middle Persian Š hd st, “Friend of the king” [40]; Syriac r m mlk and Sogdian xwšywny fry) may have been influenced by the word order of the Middle Persian; that is xwšywny fry. Because in Sogdian fri is otherwise usually the first ele-ment in compounds. Another established geographical name is frwm, “Rome” [41]. But in the name of the Sa-sanian capital city Tesifon, which in the Syriac version is given as q yspwn the Sogdian version does not reproduce this historical form, but replaces it by a form tyspwn,

which indicates the great familiarity of the Sogdian translator with the actual Middle Persian form of the place name [42].

In connection with this it is noteworthy to mention that the Syriac term that is directly related to the word Christ kristianaia (ultimately from Greek borrowed into Syriac) is not attested in Sogdian. Instead, Sogdian Christian texts employ the word trs q, an ex-pression deriving from Pahlavi tars g ( trs, “to fear”) to translate the word “Christian”. This word is also attested in expression n trs qy, “non-Christians”, an adjective trs q ny, “of the Christians” e. g. trs q ny b y, “God of the Christians” [43] and trs qy , “Christianity”.

Possibly the only other instance where the expres-sion is used is Psalm 22:24:

[xwt w y t](r)s kt (Sogdian). O fearers of the Lord God. d l hy d-mry (Syriac). Fearers of God [44].


Like many other Middle Persian words used in the Sogdian Christian texts this particular vocabulary is in-dicative of the interrelationship of Sogdian and Middle Persian Christian literature. In addition, this term has anthropological implication, namely it is used to differ-entiate a religious identity of an individual.

Christians of the Sassanid Empire, as Sebastian Brock has shown, were referred to by the “outsiders”, such as Zoroastrian High priest Kartir, as nasraya and kristiyan [45]. In Kartir's inscription “the differentiation in terminology refers to two groups of different geo-graphical origin, and of different cultural allegi-ance” [46], i. e. nasraya designates the local / native and kristiyan the “expat” Christians likely those Christians who were brought to Persia as a result of the war and were Greek speaking. In contrary to the nasraya, a designation usually applied to the local Christians by the non-Christian outsiders, the local Christians in Persia before the fifth century, may have self-identified by the term mšhaye “Christ-like”.

Aphrahat writing in the mid-fourth century uses the term to gloss the word kristyane used in the book of Acts 11:26. Considering that he employs the word mšhaye to define the kristyane makes it clear that at that time kristyane was not widely used or known in Persia [47]. The mšhaye was than subsequently displaced under the influence of the Antiochene tradition in the Church of the East of the Sassanid Empire from early fifth century and as Brock puts it:

the term kristyane [in this period] came to be used of all Christians, irrespective of their origin [and the term]

nasraya evidently gained, in Christian eyes, distinctly pejo-rative overtones [48].

The above discussion makes it explicit that the adoption of certain self-identifying term by the Chris-tians in Sassanid Era had sociological, perhaps theologi-cal and political, reasons, too. This raises the question whether the use of Middle Persian trs q by Sogdian Christians was also conditioned by a similar situation. It is clear that Greek expression kristyane (in Syriac ad-justment) epitomized the intrinsic relationship of Per-sian, Syriac and Greek-speaking Christians. Perhaps, this symbolic virtue of the term was also found in the word trs q, which signified the true Persian identity of the Sogdian Christians and their links with the “mother church” in Iran.

Recently Samuel Lieu has opined that the term by which Christianity was known in medieval China i. e. Jing-jiao “ ” and is traditionally translated as the “Luminous Religion” may be a homophonic calque for trs q [49].

At the time when official decree for propagation of Christianity was granted to the Church of the East, Sog-dians were one of the sizable Iranian-speaking minorities in the Chinese soil [50]. Further, considering the ethnic background of the important figures of the Xian Stele, i. e. the Bactrian (Balkh) origin of Mar Yazedbouzid, it is pos-sible that Sogdians were some of his primary co-workers in converting China to Christianity [51]. These considera-tions, at least indirectly, point to the fact that trs q was in-troduced to the Chinese Christian circle as was kristyane into Persia, where the main missionary force may have been educated in Greek, but were of Syriac ethnicity.

Holy Spirit

The Holy Spirit in Sogdian Christian texts is desig-nated by a compound phrase zprt “pure”, “holy” and noun w t “wind”, “spirit”. In Sogdian Christian texts the word holy zprt is also attested in its Syriac loan qdyš. For example, in C2 fol. 57R 29 we find the following

šy p(r)tw qdyš. The three times Qaddiš [52]. zprt w t pr() qpwtyc(y)[](m n)[wqy ]. The Holy Spirit in the likeness of a dove [53]. [xwm r]-w bw zprt w t. Advocate the Holy Spirit [54].

In the last example zprt w t “Holy Spirit” follows a partially-attested compound. Judging from the lacuna, it has been suggested that the missing word was xwm r, “consolation”, which in this particular context would translate Advocate or Paraclete, an attribute of the Holy

Spirit. In Syriac the Paraclete is used in its Greek trans-literation [55].

The best example containing the theological formu-lary of the “Sogdian Christianity” is the Nicene Creed [56]. The Nicene Creed was a document of great importance, from a theological perspective. The author-ity of the Synod of Nicea was affirmed by first Synod of the Church of the East held in AD 410 [57]. The signifi-cant theological implication of the document is also demonstrated by the fact that it was codified in both Sogdian language and Sogdian cursive script, which was possibly known in the larger social context than the adapted Syriac. Presence of the text expressing the core belief of the Christian church in the format (language and script) accessible and familiar to majority indicates strong intentions toward the localization (indigenization) of Christianity into Sogdian society, which remained largely multi-religious until its conquest by Islam.

Baptism

The word used to translate “baptism” in Sogdian Christian texts is sn m.

[[]xyd] qy w btq dynd r qt sn m pc ztq t nm n: [ t ny[]w b]tq qt sn m br msq

That (fact) that the priest says: “So and so receives baptism” and does not say: “I baptize” [58].

Similar to the Syriac term ma mud th stemming from the verbal root meaning, “to bathe”, “to wash”; the


Sogdian word also means “washing”, as exemplified by the phrase dynd rty dsty sn m, “the washing of the hands of the priest” [59]. Accordingly, the particular sacra-mental meaning of the term, i. e. Baptism is discerned solely by the context where it is used. The verb to “bap-tize” in Sogdian is formed from sn m, “washing” and br, “give”. The particular phenomenon to note here is

the semantic shift of the word from meaning a regular washing into a ritual washing.

There are other examples demonstrating the seman-tic shifts in Sogdian texts, such as ps y w, “fail”, “stint” and “restriction”. As indicated in the recently published Sogdian Christian hymn ps y w translates Syriac bÿšt , “evil deeds”, which shows a semantic shift from regular failing to moral failing i. e. sin [60].

Mystery / Eucharist

The Eucharist in Sogdian Christian texts is translated by two words: r z and qwrbn. Etymologically r z is an Iranian word, however as indicated by the final it may have entered Sogdian from Syriac. The Sogdian equivalent of the expression is r z, which means a “se-

cret”, “mystery” or “symbol” [61]. The borrowing of this word from its Syriac usage suggests that r z in its Iranian context had not the same special meaning; namely Eucharist, but rather was a generic word designating a mystery or secret.

Heaven / Paradise

The concept of heaven / paradise in Sogdian Chris-tian texts is translated by the following terms: wštm x, bwstn and sm n. Of these three wštm x conveys the meaning of “heavenly realm” and sm n conveys the meaning of “sky”. Both are also attested in Manichean and Buddhist Sogdian texts. On the other hand bwstn means paradise in the sense of “garden”.

For example,

xz()tr tys qw bwstn Arise go enter into Paradise [62].

The Sogdian word wštm x (in Manichean Sogdian once spelled wyštm x, in Middle Persian whyšt w and in New Persian bihišt) etymologically relates to the Avestan expression vahišt m ah m, “(best) existence”, which according to Zoroastrian cosmogony was associ-ated with Ahura Mazda's place. Thus the Bundahišn says vahišt gar - am n auhramazd “vahišt (is) the ‘House of Welcome’ of Ahura Mazd ” [63].

In the Avesta this term occurs in Y. 16.7: vahišt m ah m ašaon m yazamaide, “the Best Existence of the ašavans we worship” [64]. The Avestan vahišta in the form of ( )xušt “best” (with “x” for “h”, as opposed to *w št(-m x), i. e. “Ø” for “h”), is also attested in the only Sogdian Zoroastrian text, the Aš m Voh prayer (Yasna 27.14). Benveniste notes that in Chorasmian Turkish this word as a loanword from Sogdian is attested in the form of uštmaq / u maq [65]. This can suggest that this word was probably first adopted into Old Turkish (Uighur), however, it cannot be determined whether it was inherited from Manichean or Christian usage.

On the basis of the presence of different linguistic influences in the Avesta discussed by Hoffmann & Narten [66] the phonetic deviation of vahišta as ( )xušt as pointed out by Hintze [67] resulted from Avestan text being subjected to the influence of Sogdian. That is pro-nunciation adapted into local spoken Sogdian.

Furthermore, the relationship of Sogdian wštm x with the vahišt m ah m is assumed on the basis that many Old Iranian phrases and compounds merge to-gether. Consequently, the Sogdian wštm x may have re-sulted from the merging of the bipartite phrase vahišt m

ah m into a single word. In addition, wštm x exhibits the usual dropping of “h” between “a” and “i” — a feature observed in Sogdian.

In C2 wštm x is used, on several occasions, together with adverb sm ncyq “heavenly”, for example:

sm n[cyq[]wš]tm x qy nwystyt xnt ws . The heavenly kingdom whither they have been in-

vited [68]. npwlwsy sm ncyq wštm xy dn (m )[x xyp wnt prw]. Paul in the kingdom of Heaven with Our Lord [69].

The compound use of sm ncyq wštm x in the light of the etymological connection of the wštm x with the Zo-roastrian eschatological concept vahišt m ah m as well as the prevalence of knowledge of Zoroastrian theologi-cal concepts in Sogdiana, may be understood to convey the same meaning in Christian texts.

The above observation in semantic similarity of these two words conveying similar meaning confirms that sm ncyq wštm x, “Heavenly Kingdom” of the Chris-tian theology is same as the “House of Welcome” of Zoroastrianism. Recently Barbati has observed the fol-lowing:

il regno dei cieli”. Cf. sogd. <[sm ncy]q wštm x> e sir. <mlkwt dšmy >. Ho notato che in questo lezionario il siriaco <mlkwt > “regno” è tradotto con <wštm x> per indicare il “regno celeste” e con <xšywnqy > per indicare il “regno terreno”. Tale distinzione è presente anche in altri testi sogdiani cristiani ed è sempre mantenuta in C5 [70].

In the light of the above discussion on the meaning of wštm x and sm ncyq wštm x, other expressions used can be considered to be generic word for “heaven” but not neces-sarily heaven as theological concept i. e. afterlife or eternal place. In C2 the word sm n is used only once in the context of dying and going to Heaven i. e. heaven as afterlife [71].

The phrase [ rwxšn ]| r(d)mn literary meaning “Light Paradise” in recently identified epistle fragment is of interest to note here.

[]qw bgy ptry [s r qy mnd yžnd]


q rt t pt(r)[q n[]dn] šyrqtyt pr w [[]pr rwxšn ]- r(d)mn.

[May you give thanks] to God the Father, [who] has made [us worthy] and [has given us a share in the] in[heritance] with the saints [in] Paradise [72].

The Syriac text of the verse has “who has made us worthy of a share of the inheritance of the saints in the light”.

As Sims-Williams points out this is a well-attested Zo-roastrian term in Manichean Sogdian texts [73]. As appears from the context “it is used as an explanatory translation of Syraic nwhr , ‘light’ [designating the Paradise]”.

Hell

The eschatological concept of hell in Sogdian Chris-tian texts, similarly to the aforementioned concept of heaven, is translated by the word tm. This word is ety-mologically related to Avestan t mah literally meaning darkness and thus can be designated as inherited concept from Zoroastrianism in Sogdian Christian.

tr ms w(n) pr tmw.

Go pay heed to hell [74].

This term is also attested in Manichean and Buddhist texts [75]. Although it is possible that in each of these religions based on their individual eschatological per-spectives these concepts were understood differently, it is however, hard to comment specifically on this.

Tomb / Graveyard

Related to the concepts of heaven and hell is that of tomb and / or graveyard. One of the frequently used Sog-dian word for tomb is frwrtqty a (determinative) com-pound frwrty, “corpse” with qty, “house”, thus qty to be a “tomb”, a house for the dead.

An example for frwrty “corpse” is found in:

t xyd wyd xšp pt(yx)ryn x n wrnqyn ync cn w cn dw dw mrty nwyspny frwrty.

And on that very night that believing woman hired from the market two men each to every corpse [76].

In the examples attested in C2 this word translates both Syriac byt myt , “house of the dead” and qbr “grave (earth grave)”. However, the Syriac phrase byt myt , “house of the dead” by frwrtqt in C2 is rendered only once.

In other examples frwrtqt translates qbr , “grave”. Compare below the Syriac original and its Sogdian translation.

mdbh xcy m(šy)h frwrtqty (Sogdian). The altar is in place of Christ's tomb… mdb dyn ytwhy dwkt qbrh d-mšy (Syriac). Tomb of the Messiah [77]. pr xwtw yšw frwrtqt(y) dbrw (Sogdian). Upon the door of the Lord Jesus' tomb. mn qbrh d-prwqn (Syriac). From the tomb of Our Saviour [78]. [[]sn ](m)nty qy cn wzn . xšnyrq xcy xwtw yšw y

sn mnty [qy ](c)n [frwrtq](t) (Sogdian).

(Text restored) The rising from the font is a sign of the Lord Jesus' rising from the tomb.

qymth d-mrn yšw d-mn qbr (Syriac). The rising of Our Lord Jesus from the tomb [79]. w nc nw ms xwtw yšw []prymnt (šy) n m ž( )yr mnty

z wr xšt cn frwrtqt t sty qw (s)m( )ny s (Sogdian). The Lord Jesus … arose from the tomb and ascended to

heaven. mn byt myt (Syriac). From the house of the dead [80].

The word frwrtqt , “the house of the dead” is also identical to another Sogdian word mwrt sp nc, “corpse hotel” about which Ilya Gershevitch opined to be “an accurate enough definition of a cemetery” [81]. How-ever, there are several different words in Sogdian, which have been understood to mean grave, such as zy-qnty that literally means “earth-dug” [82]; sqsyt the singular of which is attested in Mount Mugh document B-8 as sks k, which also translates Syriac qbr , “grave” [83]. The word sksy is also attested in the phrase (sk)s(y ) [ r]y “the door of a tomb” in the frag-ment containing the Psalm 5, which as pointed out by Sims-Williams:

paraphrases Syr. qbr ptÿ “open graves / tombs”, [and thus] demonstrates clearly that, for the translator of this Psalm, sksy could denote a “tomb” or “sepulchre”, not only a “grave” [84].

Satan

Satan in C2 is translated by the word šmnw, which as Sims-Williams pointed out stems from an unattested Avestan term *ašå mainiiuš “the worse spirit” and in meaning is identical to the Buddhist, Zoroastrian and Manichean word for “devil” or Ahariman [85].

In Sogdian Christian texts a related word to this is šmnq ny, “devilish” [86]. It is also attested in phrase šmnw ž nt, “devil's messenger” [87].


Grace

The theological concept of “grace” in Sogdian Christian texts is translated by šyr qty . Other related words with “grace” attested in C2 are: šyr, “good”, “ex-cellent”, šyrqty, “virtuous”, “righteous”, šyry, “what is good, blessing” [88].

pcprty pryw[]b nyq[]šyr qty t (wyny )[šw] mc (z) wrqyn bwt pr zprt w t.

Grace rests upon him and his conduct becomes strong in the Holy Spirit [89].

pr m x (xy)[p wnt t b y t bwcny] yšw mšyh []šyr[ q]ty

By the grace of our Lord and God and saviour Jesus Christ [90].

Another term attested in Sogdian Christian texts that translates “grace” is y n br qy , a compound phrase com-posed of y n < Old Iranian y na, “mercy”, “grace”, “favour” and the abstract noun from verbal root br, “to give”.

pr mšyh y n br qy . By the Grace of Christ [91]. r xyd prywyd zprt w ty y n br qy .

and by that same Grace of the Holy Spirit [92].

Other semantically related term to the above worth mentioning is frywn, “blessing” with the verb form fryn / fryt [93]. The term frywn is also known in Mani-

chean Sogdian texts.

Salvation

The word translating “salvation” in Sogdian Chris-tian texts is wxš mnty deriving from the Sogdian verb wxš, “to save”. Accordingly, the word for “Saviour” fre-quently used in connection with Jesus' name is wxšny

(pres. part. noun). For example, xwtw yšw( ) m x wxšnw, “The Lord Jesus our saviour” [94].

The other term designating Saviour in C2 is bwcny from verb root bwc, “to save”. Similar meaning of the word is also attested in Manichean texts [95].

Resurrection and Ascension

In C2 there are two different words used to translate the Syriac qiamat, “resurrection”. These are xz mnty (formed from the verbal root xz, “to rise”) and qym .

(i) mwrtyty xz mnty. The resurrection of the dead [96]. (ii) xz mnty žmnw. The time of the resurrection [97]. (iii) w n-c n xšt m x [xyp wnt yšw ] mšy cn

mwrt -d m (p)[r xyp ptr](y) wbdy . Just as Our [Lord Jesus] Christ arose from the realm of

the dead i[n] the glory of [His Father] [98]. (iv) mšy xšt c[n mwrt]( )-d m. Christ arose from the realm of the dead [99]. (v) qwdš qy qym xšpy The consecration on the Eve of the Resurrection [100].

The use of xz mnty and qym in folio 57V10, 11 is interesting. In the first instance i. e. 57V10 qym is used to refer the “eve of Resurrection” but in 57V11 xz mnty is used to designate the “time of the Resurrection” xz mnty (n) my. It is unlikely that these two different

vocabularies were meant to denote two different aspects of the Resurrection as an eschatological event i. e. the eve and the day or time, but could be possible that they were understood as synonyms and were used to avoid repetition of the same word.

It maybe also possible that qym was understood to imply Easter — in the sense of name of festival (Syraic

idagura). However, the examples (iii) and (iv) where the verb xz, “to rise” is used in the context of the resurrec-tion of Christ, affirms that the word xz mnty is a Sog-dian technical term designating Resurrection.

In Sogdian another word for “resurrection” is mwrt zw nt, a compound noun formed from mwrt “dead” and zw nty “coming to life” [101].

The word Ascension is formed from the verb denot-ing rising; sn/st, “to rise”, “to ascend”. The actual noun is sn mnty.

[[]sn ](m)nty qy cn wzn . The rising from the font [102].

This word is also used in connection with the Jesus' ascension as exemplified by the following phrase in the Apostolic Cannons:

xyp sn (m)nt His Ascension [103].

As attested in the calendar fragment E42, the word swlq in phrase swlq m was used to designate the “feast of the Ascension” [104].

Judging from the context of the use of sn (m)nt therefore it may be regarded as a technical term desig-nating “Ascension” as a specific theological event. This semantic shift from an ordinary word into a technical term was also observed in the previously mentioned word for baptism that has emerged from the regular word for “washing”.


E c c l e s i o l o g i c a l C o n c e p t s

Church

The term used to translate “church” (Syraic dth ) in Sogdian Christian texts is ncmn.

ncmny nwmt t (p)ts qt Laws and ordinance of the Church [105]. Xyp [] ncmnty Your Churches [106]. pt mbrymync trsq ny ncmn Apostolic Christian Church [107].

Sogdian ncmn, as Gershevitch pointed out, is ety-mologically related to the Avestan han amana [108]. In Buddhist Sogdian the word commonly used to designate an “assembly” or “gathering” is nw z [109].

In Christian Sogdian texts, the word designating “general crowd” gathering or multitude is w zy. In Christian texts this word is attested in compound form

w zqty (assembly + house) and translates Syriac knwšt , “synagogue” [110].

Sogdian Christian texts thus have specific word to distinguish between the Jewish and Christian gathering places; in which case it may be assumed that ncmn was a “technical” word adopted to designate Christian gath-ering (place or the church).

The only other term attested in Christian Sogdian to designate the “church” is dynd ry — a compound word constructed from dynd r, “priest”, “religious” and Sog-dian abstract suffix -y . A similar construction is ob-served in the word [ p]sqwpy , “bishopric”. In this con-struction “the Sogdian abstract suffix -y takes the place of Syr. – ” [111]. In this light it may be possible to suggest that the word dynd ry in contrast to the ncmn would mean church house i. e. vicarage. However, no concrete example is known yet.

Priest and Bishop

The term translating “priest” in Sogdian is dynd r, a compound word formed from dyn, “religion” and d r, “to have”.

[[]xyd] qy w btq dynd r qt sn m pc ztq t nm n: [ t ny w b]tq qt sn m br msq. That (fact) that the priest says: “So and so receives

baptism” and does not say: “I baptize” [112]. pr (f)rywn wn dynd rt t šy pd rnyt. Bless (its) priests and its bishops [113].

The word for “bishop” attested in the last example is pd rny, which is formed from the present participle of the verb pd t/pd rt, “to sustain” [114]. This term perhaps was constructed on practical grounds: that of function of the bishop as someone sustaining the church. However, if this word translates the Syriac mdbrn then its basic meaning would be a “leader”.

Another term for “bishop” attested in Sogdian Christian text is psqwp , which is transliteration of Syriac epasqpa (Greek ). In C2, this word is used in two different indeclinable forms as psqpy and pswqpy [115]. Thus in C2 fragment 68V12 [116] we read brb šmyn psqpy “Barba šmin the bishop”. The same spelling of the “bishop” is attested in lines 13 and 22 of the fragment 77R16 in C2.

It has been noted that these forms of the word for bishop “differ in their ending as well as in the rest of their vocalism from the Syriac forms found elsewhere in Sogdian” [117] in the following spellings psqwp and pysqwp . Accordingly Sims-Williams concludes that:

The apocope of the initial vowel and especially the metathesis and loss of inAternal short vowel indicate that pswqpy belongs to an earlier stratum of [Syriac loan words into Sogdian] [118].

Although the phonetic modification of this word, does not allow determining its immediate origin, whether Greek, Syriac or other intermediary, but it has been sug-gested that the assimilated words such as above were borrowed into Sogdian through Middle Persian and pos-sibly in their Middle Persian forms [119].

Another term used to translate “priest” or rather “Presbyter” in Sogdian Christian texts is msydr.

The word dynd r in C2 consistently translates Syriac kahna, “priest”. And the word msydr is used to translate qaššiša, “elder”, “priest” “in accordance with its etymo-logical meaning” [120]. Both of these words are also at-tested in the rubrics of a bilingual baptismal rite (Syriac text with Sogdian rubrics) HT 88 and HT 66 (dynd r in fragment 66V7; msydr in fragments 66R13, 66V4 and 88R3) [121]. However, in this particular text that employs these two different words, it is difficult to discern which Syriac term is meant, qaššiša or kahna [122]. On the other hand the use of a Sogdian word as well as a Syriac loan-word for “oil” in the above text clearly demonstrates the “ritualistic” distinction made by the translator between two kinds of oils. As Brock & Sims-Williams have observed:

The Syriac term has been kept for the “holy oil” in the horn (already consecrated), whereas Sogdian is used for the oil (in the laqna) which is being consecrated for the pre-baptismal anointing [123].

This particular point indicates that the choice of different vocabulary conveying the same or similar meanings was not just to avoid repetition, but had other semantics: namely, distinguishing between the “ritual” categories in the example of oil here. Accordingly, two different words for the “priest” may have been used for the same reason, such as distin-guishing two different ranks of clergymen. The word dynd r is also attested in Sogdian Buddhist and Manichean texts as well, which again indicates its Persian usage context.


Deacon

This ecclesiological office in Sogdian is designated by transliterated Syriac loan word šm š . In its plural form the word šm š t, “deacons” displays similar pho-netic feature to the word pysqwp yt “bishops”. Accord-ing to Sims-Williams “is not clear whether these forms are merely graphic variants [of the regular plurals

in -yt] or they are new plurals” [124]. On the other hand, the “Sogdianised” phonetic features of these words suggest them to have been known in Sogdian for long period of time, which again is obvious in their phonetic assimilation and the absence of their Sogdian equivalent.

Apostle

In C2 the word “Apostle”, in the sense of the twelve Apostles of Christ, is consistently translated by pt mbry which commonly means “a messenger”, “prophet”. The common word used for “Apostle” in Syriac is šli a, which like the Greek literary means “one who is sent away”. However, in Sogdian the word that is formed from the verb “to send” is fryšty / frešt , which is used to translate “angel” (Syriac mala a) not an “Apos-

tle” [125]. It is of interest to mention that the Manichean fryštg (known in Parthian and Sogdian Manichean texts), formed from the verb fryš “to send”, designates the Manichean Apostles.

It is interesting that although the word “Apostle” in the attested fragments has a specific technical meaning, i. e. the original twelve Apostles of Christ, in Sogdian the translator neither uses a loan word nor “constructs” a new word.

Neophytes

The concept of a neophyte, as observed in the com-mentary on the baptismal and Eucharist liturgy, is trans-lated by the word n yty, a noun formed from adjective nw-y, “new”.

wrr w š my qy pr n yty srw štytqn. pr [ ](z)twny [qy p]c( )šd rnt cn mš(yh) . (§17) The orarium, the veil on the head of the neo-

phytes, indicates the liberty which they have received from Christ [126].

In this example, the word n yty, as shown by the Syriac text, translates Syriac “baptised ones” not those to be baptised [127]. Schwartz in this regard asserted that this particular semantics of n yty may be influenced by the concept of “baptism being rebirth” that is becoming a “new person” [128].

Scripture

The word used for “Scripture” in Sogdian Christian texts is pwsty, which is a generic Sogdian word meaning “book” or “written document”. This word is ultimately related to Old Persian pavast , also attested in Parthian pwstg and Sanskrit pu aka.

Another word for book attested in Sogdian Christian texts is m rdny. However, this word has a different func-tional meaning, namely “book” as a title or part of the scripture. For example, in C2, fragment 94V18-19 we find “Book of Kings”, xwšywnyty m rdn [129].

Furthermore, as indicated by the phrase wcync nwm “Old (Law) Testament” and bywnyty pwstyt “Books of Prophets” [130] certain books of the Bible in Sogdian were also designated individually. However, pwsty depending on the context generally conveyed the comprehensive meaning of Scripture (Biblos). In C2 this term is used in connection with Gospel and Psalms, for example in fragment 31V17, 27 we find the following phrase mzmwrty… pwsty ptfsy, “the Psalms and reading of Scriptures” [131].

A related word with “scripture” is qryn , usually meaning “scripture reading” [132]. In liturgical context, however the act of reading (either scripture, or different parts of the service) was designated by the Persian word x nyš, “read(ing)” [133]. The latter is attested in E13, a funerary liturgical text with Sogdian rubrics. In this text (E13), another technical term attested is pyw q, “re-sponse”. These “functional” terms were used in a section of liturgy requiring a response from the congregation (exclamation or prayer). The word x nyš is used for a section in liturgy that is sung (read) while sitting. Both these liturgical technical terms are Persian loanwords; however it is difficult to determine whether they carried such meanings prior to their use in Sogdian Christian literature.

The general word for reading in Sogdian Christian texts (outside the liturgical context) is ptfs mnty deriving from verb ptfs, “to read”, thus ptfsyny means “reader” [134].

Gospel

Christian Sogdian texts use two distinct expressions to translate the word “Gospel”. These are wnglywn, which translates, or rather transcribes the Syriac evan-gelion, an ultimately Greek loanword in Syriac; and

mwžtybrqy a native Sogdian term. The latter is com-pound noun formed from mwžty, “message”, “good news” and araky , “bringing”. The noun mwžty is re-lated to Parthian mwjdg of the same meaning.


w stnt pt mbryt qt cn s t pwstyty pšys wnglywn ptfs ty by. w nc nw t py wstyny. t c nw p dy sqwynt rmy šw pt wšynt p t wxš mnty mwžty brqy xcy ns t mrtxmyt(y).

The apostles laid down that after all the Scriptures the Gospel should be read, as setting the seal, and the people should hear it while standing on the feet, because it is the gospel of salvation for all men [135].

Related to the term Gospel (or generally New Testa-ment) is that of Old Testament. This term as exemplified in phrase wcync nwm t byw yty pwstyt t wngl(yw)n, “Old Testament and the books of Prophets and Gos-pel” [136]. The Christian or rather religious connotation of the term “law” in the naming of the parts of the Bible is also evident by its attestation in the phrase ncmny nwmt t (p)ts qt, “church laws and ordinances” found in C2 fragment 55R30 [137].

Font and Orarium

Both these liturgical furnishings of the church in Sogdian Christian texts are translated by Syriac loan words wzn , “font” and wrr , “orarium”.

[myd r zt. sn ](m)nty qy cn wzn . xšnyrq xcy xwtw yšw y sn mnty

[qy ](c)n [frwrtq](t) wrr w š my qy pr n yty srw štytqn. pr [ ](z)twny [qy p]c( )šd rnt cn mš(yh) .

The rising from the font is a sign of the Lord Jesus' rising from the tomb. The oraraium, the veil on the head of the neophytes, indicates the liberty which they have received from Christ [138].

The unusual spelling of the wrr (in C2, also attested as w ) may indicate its full assimilation into Sogdian, a case comparable to the earlier mentioned words for “bishop” and “deacon” [139].

Altar

The word “altar” in Sogdian Christian texts is trans-lated by mdbh and rwnws, one being of Syriac and the other of Greek origin. Both these words are attested in the bilingual (Syriac text with Sogdian rubrics) liturgical text HT 66 line 14 [140]. In this fragment the word mdbh is attested several times, but the word rwnws designating “altar” is met only once.

mdbh xcy m(šy)h frwrtqty The altar is in place of Christ's tomb [141]. mdbh sp s The service of the altar [142].

Conclusion. Sogdian Christian Texts and “Sogdian Christianity”

In Sogdian Christian texts in the absence of suitable equivalents, such as personal and geographical names, certain concepts were translated using loanwords from Syriac. These are recognizable by their use of the char-acters he, heth, kaph, and lamed that are seldom used in words of Iranian origin.

A few Syriac loan-expressions demonstrate complete assimilation into the Sogdian phonetic system. These are words that had undergone either partial or complete pho-netic modification in Sogdian. As Sims-Williams has shown, most Syriac loanwords in Sogdian Christian texts retain their original spelling (usually transliter-ated) [143]. However, for some of the assimilated vo-cabularies, although their Syriac origin is recognizable, their phonetic reconstruction is not possible.

The use of Syriac outside the Mesopotamian boundaries where it was both the “church language” and common language spoken by the populace, is principally connected with the spread of Christianity. That is, it was introduced by missionaries both in its spoken and written forms. Accordingly, despite their relatively small num-bers, the assimilated Syriac words and other loanwords which were not calqued into Sogdian are significant lexical evidence for the long historical interaction be-tween Sogdians and Christianity.

The historicity and cultural impact of Christianity in Sogdian culture is shown in particular by the use of in-

digenous religious expressions in translating Syriac Christian literature. As observed in Sogdian Christian texts, these are represented in three vocabulary catego-ries:

(i) “ordinary” words, namely expressions common throughout all types of religious texts in Sogdian, such as b , “God” and xwtw, “Lord”;

(ii) “constructed” vocabularies formed to convey specific Christian concepts, such as mwžtybrqy , and used only in the Christian texts;

(iii) “changed” vocabularies that in the context of their use, i. e. Christian texts, have suffered semantic change, such as sn m, “washing” (used to translate “Baptism”), or sn mnty, “rising” (used to designate “As-cension”). Additionally, Sogdian Christian texts demon-strate knowledge of Middle Persian terminology. Con-sidering the dominance of Zoroastrianism in Sogdiana and the relationship of some of the borrowed vocabulary with it, it is possible that these vocabularies prior to their use in Sogdian Christian texts (or undergoing semantic change) were used and known in Sogdiana in either Zo-roastrian i. e. religious or generic contexts [144].

Although some of the terms used to translate Christian theological expressions are identical with those employed in Manichean, Buddhist or other Sogdian literature, this does not imply “lexical syncretism”. These terms are used in specific contexts and thus it is possible that each of these


religions developed its own terminology and vocabulary in Sogdian, meaningful for their audience and contexts. In addition, as Benveniste and Hansen have shown, the use of common vocabulary in Christian, Buddhist and Manichean texts in the Sogdian language is due to the co-existence of these religions and their use of one common language i. e. Sogdian, with its Iranian roots [145]. This is particularly significant in relation to the Sogdian Christian texts, as it clearly demonstrates that the Christian message was dis-seminated by the Persian-speaking (Pahlavi) missionaries, which also finds support in textual and epigraphic evidence discovered in (Western) Iran.

One point to be highlighted in this relation is that in contrast to the Manicheans, who fully absorbed and widely integrated their teachings with Buddhist and Christian apocryphal writings, the Sogdian church re-mained aloof from this pluralistic religious atmosphere. This is especially evident in its selective borrowing of vocabulary from Syriac. Furthermore, the terms that were possibly loaned from Manichaeism or Buddhism are bound to polemical contexts. For example, the expression qrm, “evil deeds”, “fate” (which is etymologically Indian, i. e. karma) is found only in the Christian polemic against the Manicheans. Accordingly, dictated by its context of use as well the fact that it is not attested anywhere else in Sogdian Christian texts, this term is probably directly bor-rowed from Manichean usage [146].

The Sogdian Christian texts, judging by their usage of vocabulary, support the linguistic principle of indexi-cality, according to which the meaning of words, expres-sions and concepts is always determined by the specific social and cultural context in which linguistic transaction takes place. In other words, these texts are not simply products of translation as the transposition of meaning from one linguistic code to another (descriptive render-ing or codification of Syriac into Sogdian), but are grounded in a specific cultural and ethno-linguistic con-text. Each word indicates a specific meaning that was realised in Sogdian in both generic or specific use, such as b that outside the Christian texts was used to desig-nate “god” or “Mithra”, but in the Christian context designated “Al h ”.

This example further shows that the meaning of indi-vidual words and concepts in translation were not always attached to the specific concept in original language. Again, to look at the example of al h and b , it is clear that in both languages these two words were attached to different specific concepts related to the “higher deity” (monotheistic, polytheistic). However, in the context of Christian texts, these two words acquired a specific “uni-fied” meaning and the Christian readers would have un-derstood that b used in lectionary readings or Psalter or prayer is not an epithet of Mithra widely known in popular culture of Sogdiana, but represents Al h .

N o t e s

1. This article is adapted from my doctoral thesis Tars -ky : an Analysis of Sogdian Christianity Based on Archaeo-logical, Numismatic, Epigraphic and Textual Sources. For ease of reference, I have not distinguished light and heavy stems in Sogdian, as is the norm. For symbols and conventions I have followed Sims-Williams, 1985; [xyz] = missing letters; (xyz) = uncertain reading; (xyz) = traces compatible with suggested reading; (xyz) = lacuna.

2. Zhang & Xinjiang, 1998. The texts were discovered during the four campaigns by the German Turfan Expedition, led by Albert Grünwedel and Alber von le Coq between 1902 and 1914. Consequently, the majority of manuscripts are at present held in Germany in the Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, with smaller collections being housed in the Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesitz and in the Museum für Indische Kunst.

3. Sims-Williams, 1990; Von le Coq, 1928; Hage, 1987; Sims-Williams, 1992; Sims-Williams & Hamilton, 1990; Klein & Tubach, 1994. It is also thought that some of the Sogdian Christian texts of the Turfan collection were found in Qo o and Toyoq.

4. Benveniste, 1964. 5. Hansen, 1966. 6. Sims-Williams, 1988. 7. Sims-Williams, 2009: 272. 8. Sims-Williams, 1985. 9. Sims-Williams, 2012: 272. 10. Hansen, 1968: 94. 11. Sims-Williams, 2009: 272; 2012: 62. 12. Barbati, 2010.

13. Barbari, 2010: 4. 14. Barbati, 2010: 3. A reading from the Gospel of

Mathew 10:15. 15. Pittard & Sims-Williams, 2013: 48—49. A reading

from the Gospel of Mathew 19.17V5. Similarly, Sogdian texts make consistent use of the word “God” whenever the word “Father” in is used in relation with God.

16. Sims-Williams, 2001: 36. 17. Hansen, 1966: 95—96. 18. Sims-Williams, 2001: 36. 19. Benveniste, 1964: 87. 20. Durkin-Meistererns, 2006. 21. Gignoux, 1995; 2001. 22. “Soli-linguistic” here is used in line with the meaning

of ius soli (law of the soil) a term describing that nationality derives from the soil in which person is born. This term is of-ten used in mapping and documenting linguistic diversity in multicultural societies, such as European Union, Central Asia, where the “soli-linguistic” is understood to designate the “lan-guage of the soil”. When Sogdian translators devised certain mechanisms to translate the Syriac texts they operated ac-cording to how their own language functioned. Thus the new vocabularies “coined” in the process of the translation are not accidental, but deliberate and manifest the cognitive effect of Christianity in both the language and its carriers.

23. Henning, 1965. 24. Sims-Williams, 1991. 25. Henning, 1965: 249. 26. Sims-Williams, 2013: 76, fragment E29/R8-9 and

commentary to the fragment on p. 91.


27. Sims-Williams, 2013: 91. 28. Sims-Williams, 1985: 37, fragment 12R1. 29. Sims-Williams, 1985: 39, fragment 12V14. 30. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R3. 31. Sims-Williams, 1985: 39, fragment 12V17. 32. Barbati, 2009: 252. 33. Barbati, 2010: 3. 34. Barbati, 2010: 4. 35. Schwartz, 1967. 36. Barabati, 2010: 10. 37. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R18-20. 38. Sims-Williams, 1985: 236; Gharib, 1995, entries 5497,

2235, 11014, 11015, and 1120. 39. Sims-Williams, 1988: 146. 40. Sims Williams, 1985: 147. 41. Sims-Williams, 1988: 16. 42. Sims-Williams, 1985: 149 citing an observation by

Gershevitch. 43. Sims-Williams, 1985: 44, folio 23R280. 44. Sims-Williams, 2013: 20 with commentary on p. 41. 45. Brock, 1975: 91—95. 46. Brock, 1975: 92. 47. Brock, 1975: 94. 48. Brock, 1975: 94—95. 49. Lieu, 2009: 227—245; 2013: 123—140. 50. Ashurov, 2013. 51. Hunter, 2009. 52. Sims-Williams, 1985: 114; 1988: 151. 53. Sims-Williams, 1985: 94, folio 53R5. 54. Sims-Williams, 1985: 102, folio 54V15; 2012: 111. 55. The term Paraclete (loanword from Greek) in Sogdian

is known in Manichean usage. In Syriac it is used to denote both the Paraclete-Holy Spirit as well as for intercessor, or advocate, thus retaining the Greek semantics.

56. Müller, 1913: 84—88. 57. Chabot, 1902: 253—275. 58. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R1-2. 59. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R13. 60. Sims-Williams, 2013. 61. Sims-Williams, 1985: 224. 62. Sims-Williams, 1985: 91, fragment 51V11. 63. Bailey, 1988: 62. 64. Gershevitch, 1967: 154. In Avesta Y 44.2 this term is

attested as vahišt a huš. 65. Benveniste, 1964: 87. 66. Hoffmann & Narten, 1989. 67. Hintze, 1998: 155—156. 68. Sims-Williams, 1985: 89 fragment 48V14-15. 69. Sims-Williams, 1985: 82 fragment 48R9. 70. Barbati, 2009. 71. Sims-Williams, 1985: 126, folio 60R6-7. 72. Sims-Williams, 2014: 68. 73. Sims-Williams, 2014: 68, 72. 74. Sims-Williams, 1985: 92, fragment 51V26. 75. Gharib, 1995, entry 9588. 76. Sims-Williams, 1985: 144 fragment 68V6-7. 77. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R17, the corre-

sponding Syriac p. 119, §27. 78. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113—114, fragment 57R20, the

corresponding Syriac p. 119, §29.

79. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R5, the corre-sponding Syriac, p. 118, §16.

80. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R10, the corre-sponding Syriac, p. 118, §21.

81. Gershevitch, 1975: 209—210. 82. Sims-Williams, 1985: 185. 83. Mackenzie, 1970: 118—119. defining it as “raised

tomb”, “tumulus” wants to see in this word a base sk, “high”, comparing Choresmian sks, “be raised”, “high”, and thus nym kw sks k would specify a “deep tomb” or “grave” in contrast to sks k, “raised tomb” as in Greek . Whereas Gershevitch, 1975: 195—196 postulates the phonetic realiza-tion as skase.

84. Sims-Williams, 2014: 35. 85. Sims-Williams, 2000: 11—12. 86. Sims-Williams, 1985: 37, fragment 12R4. 87. Sims-Williams, 1985: 82, fragment 48R17. 88. Sims-Williams, 1985: 227. 89. Sims-Williams, 1985: 129, fragment 61R22-23. 90. Sims-Williams, 1985: 162, fragment 91V4-8. 91. Sims-Williams, 1985: 71, fragment 31V25. 92. Sims-Williams, 1985: 102, fragment 54 V21-22. 93. Sims-Williams, 1985: 203. 94. Sims-Williams, 1985: 142, fragment 64V4. 95. Gharib, 1995, entries 2874—2876. 96. Sims-Williams, 1985: 156, fragment 77V16. 97. Sims-Williams, 1985: 80, fragment 40R23. 98. Sims-Williams, 2014: 64. 99. Sims-Williams, 2014: 66. 100. Sims-Williams 1985: 115, fragment 5TV10. 101. Gharib, 1995, entry 5543. 102. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R4. 103. Sims-Williams, 1985: 103, fragment 55R27. 104. Sims-Williams, 2012: 188; Dickens &

Sims-Williams, 2012: 279. 105. Sims-Williams, 1985: 103, fragment 55R30. 106. Sims-Williams, 1985: 94, fragment 55R22-23. 107. Müller, 1913: 87. 108. Gershevitch, 1954: 8, 42; Hansen, 1966: 97. 109. Gharib, 1995, entry 1165; Hansen 1966: 97. 110. Sunderman, 1975: 54, 67. 111. Sims-Williams, 1988: 155. 112. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R1-2. 113. Sims-Williams, 1985: 94, fragment 54R24. 114. Sims-Williams, 1985: 219. Thus in codex C2 as

“sustainer” in fragment 14R21 and as “sustained” in frag-ment 57R13.

115. Sims-Williams, 1985: 32. 116. Sims-Williams, 1985: 144. 117. Sims-Williams, 1988: 156. 118. Sims-Williams, 1988: 156. 119. Sims-Williams, 1988: 156. 120. Brock & Sims-Williams, 2011: 91. 121. Brock & Sims-Williams, 2011. 122. In codex C2 both dynd r and msydr are attested in

their plural forms as well. 123. Brock & Sims-Williams, 2011: 90. 124. Sims-Williams, 1988: 154. 125. Sims-Williams, 1985: 211. 126. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R5-6. 127. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, footnote 21.


128. Schwartz, 1967. 129. Sims-Williams, 1985: 169. 130. Sims-Williams, 1985: 103, fragment 55R28. 131. Sims-Williams, 1985: 71. 132. Sims-Williams, 1985: 71, fragment 31V17. 133. Dickens 2009: 27. 134. Other examples for this include “reading” — in

fragment 54V30, “read” — in fragment 55R23 and “reader” — in fragment 48R24.

135. Sims-Williams, 1985: 103, fragment 55R22-25. 136. Sims-Williams, 1985: 103, fragment 55R28.

137. Sims-Williams, 1985: 103. 138. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R3-6. 139. Sims-Williams, 1988: 154. 140. Brock & Sims-Williams, 2011. 141. Sims-Williams, 1985: 113, fragment 57R17, the cor-

responding Syriac text found on p. 119, §27. 142. Sims-Williams, 1985: 104, fragment 55V29. 143. Sims-Williams, 1988: 153. 144. Sims-Williams, 2000: 8—11. 145. Benveniste, 1964; Hansen, 1966. 146. Sims-Williams, 2003: 404; 1983: 140.

R e f e r e n c e s

Ashurov, B. (2013), Tars ky : an Analysis of Sogdian Christianity Based on Archaeological, Numismatic, Epigraphic and Textual Sources, Doctoral thesis, London: SOAS, University of London.

Barbati, C. (2009), Il lezionario sogdiano cristiano C5. Una nuova edizione, Doctoral thesis, Roma: Università di Roma “La Sapienza”.

Barbati, C. (2010), “Christian Sogdian manuscript C5 as an example of ‘translation literature’: work in progress”, in: Macuch, M., Weber, D. & Durkin-Meisterernst, D. (eds.), Ancient and Middle Iranian Studies: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference of Iranian Studies, Held in Vienna, 18—22 September 2007 (Iranica 19), Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, pp. 1—10.

Bailey, H. (1988), “Gar - am na”, in: Sundermann, W., Guillemin, J.-D. & Vahman, F. (eds.), A Green Leaf. Papers in Hon-our of Professor Jes P. Asmussen, Brill: Leiden, pp. 61—66.

Benveniste, É. (1964), “Le vocabulaire chrétien dans les langues d'Asie central”, Atti del Convegno Internazionale sul tema: l'Oriente cristiano nella storia delle civiltà (Roma 31 marzo — 3 aprile 1963, Firenze 4 aprile 1963), Roma: Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, pp. 85—91.

Brock, S. (1975), “Some aspects of Greek words in Syriac”, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Philologisch-Historische Klasse III, vol. 96, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 80—108.

Brock, S. & Sims-Williams, N. (2011), “An early fragment from the East Syriac baptismal service from Turfan”, Orientalia Christiana Periodica, vol. 77, pp. 81—92.

Chabot, J.-B. (1902) (ed.), Synodicon Orientale, Paris: Imprimerie Nationale. Dickens, M. (2009), “Multilingual Christian manuscripts from Turfan”, Journal of the Canadian Society for Syriac Studies,

vol. 9, pp. 22—42. Dickens, M. & Sims-Williams, N. (2012), “Christian calendrical fragments from Turfan”, in: Ben-Dov, J., Horowitz, W. &

Steele, J. M. (eds.), Living the Lunar Calendar, Oxford & Oakville: Oxbow Books, pp. 269—296. Durkin-Meisterernst, D. (2006), “The Pahlavi Psalter fragment in relation to its source”, Studies in the Inner Asian Languages,

vol. XXI, pp. 1—19. Gershevitch, I. (1954), A Grammar of Manichean Sogdian, Oxford: Blackwell. Gershevitch, I. (1967), The Avestan Hymn to Mithra, Cambridge: The University Press. Gershevitch, I. (1975), “Sogdians on a frogplain”, Mélanges linguistiques offerts à Émile Benveniste, pp. 195—211. Gignoux, Ph. (1995), “The Pahlavi inscriptions on Mount Saint Thomas Cross, South India”, in: Gitin, S., Sokoloff, M. &

Zevit, Z. (eds.), Solving Riddles and Untying Knots: Biblical Epigraphic and Semitic Studies in Honour of J. C. Greenfield, Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, pp. 411—422.

Gignoux, Ph. (2001), “Une croix de procession de Hérat inscrite en Pehlevi”, Le Muséon, vol. 114, fasc. 3—4, pp. 291—304. Gharib, B. (1995), Sogdian Dictionary: Sogdian — Persian — English, Tehran: Farhangan Publications. Hage, W. (1987), “Das Christentum in der Turfan-Oase”, in: Heissing, W. & Klimkeit, H-J. (eds.), Synkretismus in den Religi-

onen Zentralasiens, Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, pp. 46—57. Hansen, O. (1966), “Über die verschiedenen Quellen der christlichen Literatur der Sogdier”, in: Asmussen, J. P. & Læssøe, J.

(eds.), Iranian Studies Presented to Kaj Barr on His Seventieth Birthday June 26, 1966, København: Munksgaard, pp. 95—102. Hansen, O. (1968), “Die christliche Literatur der Sogdier”, in: Spuler, B. (ed.), Handbuch der Orientalistik, Leiden & Köln:

Brill, pp. 91—99. Henning, W. B. (1965), “A Sogdian God”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 242—254. Hintze, A. (1998), “The Avesta in the Parthian period”, in: Wiesehöfer, J. (ed.), Das Partherreich und seine Zeugnisse: Bei-

träge des internationalen Colloquiums Eutin, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, pp. 147—162. Hoffmann, K. & Narten, J. (1989), Der Sasanidische Archetypus. Untersuchungen zu Schreibung und Lautgestalt des Avesti-

schen, Wiesbaden: L. Reichert. Hunter, E. (2009), “The Persian contribution to Christianity in China: reflections in the Xian Fu Syriac inscription”, in

Winkler, D. & Tang, L. (eds.), Hidden Treasures and Intercultural Encounters. Studies on East Syriac Christianity in China and Central Asia, Münster: LIT Verlag, pp. 71—85.


Klein, W. & Tubach, J. (1994), “Ein Syrisch-Christliches Fragment aus Dunhuang / China”, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Mor-genländischen Gesellschaft, vol. 144, pp. 1—13.

Lieu, S. (2009), “Epigraphica Nestoriana Serica”, in: Sundermann, W., Hintze, A. & De Blois, F. (eds.), Exegisti monumenta: Festschrift in Honour of Nicholas Sims-Williams, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 227—245.

Lieu, S. (2013), “The Romanitas of Nestorian Christianity in China”, in: Tang, L. & Winkler, D. W. (eds.), From the Oxus River to the Chinese Shores: Studies on East Syriac Christianity in China and Central Asia, Vienna: LIT Verlag, pp. 123—140.

MacKenzie, D. N. (1970), “Christian Sogdian notes”, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, vol. 33, pp. 116—124.

Müller, F. W. K. (1913), Soghdische Texte I, Berlin: Verlag der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Pittard, W. J. & Sims-Williams, N. (2013), “Fragments of Sogdian gospel lectionaries: Some new identifications”, in: Tang, L.

& Winkler, D. W. (eds.), From the Oxus River to the Chinese Shores: Studies on East Syriac Christianity in China and Central Asia, Vienna: LIT Verlag, pp. 43—50.

Sims-Williams, N. (1983), “Indian elements in Parthian and Sogdian”, in: Röhrborn, K. & Veenker, W. (eds.), Sprachen des Buddhismus in Zentralasien. Vorträge des Hamburger Symposions vom 2. Juli bis 5. Juli 1981, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 132—141.

Sims-Williams, N. (1985), The Christian Sogdian Manuscript C2, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Sims-Williams, N. (1988), “Syro-Sogdica III: Syriac Elements in Sogdian”, in: Sundermann, W., Duchesne-Guillemin, J. &

Vahman, F. (eds.), A Green Leaf. Papers in Honour of Professor Jes P. Asmussen, Brill: Leiden, pp. 145—156. Sims-Williams, N. (1990), “Bulayïq”, in: Yarshater, E. (ed.), Encyclopaedia Iranica, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul,

p. 545. Sims-Williams, N. (1991), “Mithra the Baga”, in: Bernard, P. & Grenet, F. (eds.), Histoire et cultes de l'Asie Centrale

préislamique. Sources écrites et documents archéologiques, Paris: Éd. du CNRS, pp. 177—186. Sims-Williams, N. (1992), “Sogdian and Turkish Christians in the Turfan and Tun-huang manuscripts”, in: Cadonna, A. (ed.),

Turfan and Tun-huang: The Texts. Encounter of Civilisations on the Silk Route, Florance: Olschki, pp. 43—61. Sims-Williams, N. (2000), “Some reflections on Zoroastrianism in Sogdiana and Bactria”, in: Christian, D. & Benjamin, C.

(eds.), Realms of the Silk Roads: Ancient and Modern, Belgium: Brepols, pp. 1—12. Sims-Williams, N. (2001), “Sogdian ancient letter II”, in: Juliano, A. L. & Lerner, J. A. (eds.), Monks and Merchants. Silk

Road Treasures from Northwest China: Gansu and Ningxia, 4th—7th Century, New York: Harry N. Abrams with the Asia Society, pp. 47—49.

Sims-Williams, N. (2003), “A Christian Sogdian polemic against the Manichaeans”, in: Cereti, C. G., Maggi, M. & Provasi, E. (eds.), Religious Themes and Texts of Pre-Islamic Iran and Central Asia. Studies in Honour of Professor Gherardo Gnoli, Wies-baden: Reichert, pp. 399—408.

Sims-Williams, N. (2009), “Christian literature in Middle Iranian languages”, in: Macuch, M & Emmerick, R. E. (eds.), The Literature of Pre-Islamic Iran. Companion Volume I to A History of Persian Literature, London & New York: I. B. Tauris, pp. 266—287.

Sims-Williams, N. (2012), Mitteliranische Handschriften Teil 4. Iranian Manuscripts in Syriac Script in the Berlin Turfan Collection, Stuttgart: Steiner.

Sims-Williams, N. (2014), Biblical and Other Christian Sogdian Texts from the Turfan Collection, Turnhout: Brepols. Sims-Williams, N. & Hamilton, J. (1990), Documents Turco-Sogdiens du Ixe—Xe siècle de Touen-houang (Corpus Inscrip-

tionum Iranicarum, part II, vol. III). London: SOAS. Sundermann, W. (1975), “Nachlese zu F. W. K. Müllers Soghdischen Texten I”, Altorientalische Forschungen, vol. 3,

pp. 55—90. Schwartz, M. (1967), Studies in the Texts of the Sogdian Christians, Doctoral thesis, Berkeley: University of California. Von le Coq, A. (1928), Buried Treasures of Chinese Turkestan: An Account of the Activities and Adventures of the Second

and Third German Turfan Expeditions, Barwell, A. (transl.), London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd. Zhang, G. & Xinjiang, R. (1998), “A concise history of the Turfan oasis and its exploration”, Asia Major, vol. 11, no. 2,

pp. 13—37.