^{page 391 note 1} I take it for granted that this stroke in Book-Pahlavi represents the final -y of the Sasanian inscriptions and the Pahlavi-Psalter, found not only as the ending of the cas. obl. of nouns, but also, being part of Aramaic forms, in ideograms like L'YNY ~ pēš and 'YTY ~ hast, L'YTY ~ nēst, which words in good MSS. always are written . I may mention here that the -Y of L'YNY has been convincingly explained by Andreas as the Aramaic dual-ending. This perpendicular stroke is, in my opinion, the only trace of the cas. obl. found in Pahlavi of the books. It is, of course, only a graphic survival, and I consider the -y of the inscriptions and the Psalter to be so too, because only on this assumption is it possible to account for the irregularity of the -y being used or omitted.

^{page 394 note 1} It always ought to be kept in mind in discussing the origin of letters of the Av. alphabet that Pahlavi and Avestan writing was executed by the same scribes. Thus we shall have to take into account the fact that the form of the Av. script, such as we know it, might be due not only to an “Ur-” Avestan Aramaic script, but also, to a certain extent, to a secondary influence from scribes versed in writing Pahlavi, the scientific language of Zoroastrian theology (cf. e.g. the formal congruity of Pahl. and Av. which cannot be anything but secondary).

^{page 397 note 1} Mitteliranische Manichaica aus Chinesisch-Turkeslan, i-ii (south-west dialect), iii (north-west dialect), von F. C. Andreas (†). Aus dem Naohlass herausgegeben von Walter Henning, SPAW. Phil.-Hist. Kl. 1932, 1933, 1934, quoted as Andreas-Henning, i, ii, iii.

^{page 397 note 2} Bruchstücke einer Pehlevi-Übersetzung der Psalmen von F. C. Andreas (†). Aus dem Nachlass herausgegeben von Kaj Barr, SPAW. Phil.-Hist. Kl. 1933, quoted as Andreas-Barr.

^{page 398 note 1} It may have been otherwise in the old north-western dialects and Professor Nyberg's explanation of the north-western optative 'hyndyyh, etc., as a periphrastic formation from the pres. part, may well prove to be correct; this formation perhaps survives in the periphrastic pres. indie, in -n(n)- in Zāzā, in -nd-, -n(n)- in Sängisärī, Lāsgirdī, Šämerzādī, Tāliši, and other dialects spoken in the vicinity of the Caspian Sea, cf. Lingvistkredsen i Koebenhavn, Aarsberetning for 1934, p. 15, and Christensen-Barr-Henning, Iranische Dialektaufzeichnungen aus dem Nachlass von F. C. Andreas, i, p. 163, footnote 1 (in press). Professor Nyberg told me by letter that he himself had explained the nd- formations of the modern “ Caspian ” dialects in the same way as I did.

^{page 398 note 2} The correspondence of the north-west and south-west forms is quite clear from the Ḥājj.-inscription. In the Ars. redaction (9–10) we have the past partic. + Ḥ W Yndy (as for the reading, cf. Turfan 'hyndyyh,) in the protasis and the apodosis of an irreal period : 'YK 'k šyty BNYt ḤWYndy, . . . 'ksy YḤWT ḤWYndy “ (he said), that if a construction had been erected, . . . it would have been visible.” The corresponding period in the Sas. redaction (9–10) runs : 'YKḤT čyt'ky čyty ḤWH, 'DYN . . . pty'k YḤWWN ḤWH. Herzfeld reads ast for ḤWH as we, indeed, may do in places where the Ars. text has ḤWYt. I should rather suggest that ḤWH here is to be read hē the opt. sg. 3rd, cf. (also or is found in the sg.) common in the irrealis of the past (v. Bartholomae, Zur Kunde d. Mittelir. Mundarten, i, pp. 47–51, esp. p. 50²). Cf. Pahl. Ps. 123, 2, ḤTmn L' MH MRWḤY YK'YMWNt ḤWHd . . . (3) 'DYNšn zywndky 'wp'rty ḤWHm “ If the Lord had not been with us . . . they would have devoured us alive ”. Ps. ḤWHd must be compared with (not with the conj. 3rd sg. Turfan Ḥ'd (hāδ) also used in irreal clauses, as I did in my glossary, Andreas-Barr, p. 130a. It is not likely that the spirant δ < t in this form should have been written phonetically with here as in other cases in the Ps. is for y as in the book-form). The orthography of the inscriptions being rather sparing as to the use of phonetic complements denoting verbal endings, I think a form like ḤWH without any phonetic complement may admit of more than one reading. The north-west texts published by Andreas-Henning ofier some instances of this optative ('hyndyyh, wrdyndyh, qryndyh, bwyndyh). We find the same formation of the irreal period as in the Ḥājj.-inscription in a 49–50 (cf. also b 117, 128). In other cases it is used to express a wish: 'fryd bwyndyh “ benedictus sit ” (m 50, 53) = south-west 'fryd byh, or an obligation: (b 53–57) where wrdyndyh and qryndyh are in parallelism to nšst r “ you shall sit down! ”.

^{page 399 note 1} As for bēh, hē we might perhaps think of a connection with O.P. biyā and Younger Av. forms like hyat with mood-sign -iyā of the unthematic type.

^{page 399 note 2} For explaining ligatures found in the cursive script the most safe and methodic procedure is, in my opinion, to start from the cursive forms of the elements forming the ligatures and not from the fonns of letters such as they appear on the stone monuments or in the Psalter MS. written in archaic script to serve as a liturgic book of the church. It is, e.g., quite clear that andar cannot have originated directly from forms like of the inscriptions or of the Psalter, but only from cursive ligature . Ligatures, of course, arise in cursive writing, and the ligatures found on monuments, e.g. on the Derbend inscriptions published by Professor Nyberg, or in the Psalter, are due to the influence from the cursive script which in Persia as everywhere has developed independently and apart from the monumental script. I therefore consider it a rather bold undertaking to try to make out the phonetic value of an obscure ligature in tracing it back to the monumental script, especially if the forms in question are not found in the inscriptions or in the Psalter. The ligatures of the cursive are generally as ambiguous as are the single letters of the Pahlavi alphabet. Thus we always have to consider the possibility of more than one solution of a Pahlavi-ligature, as we, e.g., in the case of may have to assume a threefold origin : .

^{page 401 note 1} Cf. now Henning, GGA., 1935, p. 7, footnote 3.

^{page 402 note 1} The forms in -' with pron. suff. are not clear to me. A change: -ē in final, -ā in anteconsonantic position is not very probable in a text written in purely south-western dialect, as the Psalter. A reference to the rather confused materials collected by Lentz, ZII., 4, 270 ff., does not help to clear up the problem. Professor Arthur Christensen once, when I discussed the problem with him, suggested that 'm, 'mn might be writings of the pron. suff. comparable with modern Pers. used after