Introduction
Zoroastrian texts such as Vendidad 1, and certain chapters of Bundahišn, and Šahristānīhā ī Ērānšahr Footnote 2 provide little geographical and ethnographic data. They mostly contain long lists, with scant detail, of mythical, pseudo-historical and historical places that seem to be arranged according to a strong, tailor-made Iranocentric perspective.Footnote 3
However, the Middle Persian literary corpus also preserves the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg (The memorial of Jāmāsp),Footnote 4 which contains a number of chapters that dwell on ethnographic – and in some cases geographical – descriptions of India, China, Arabia and Barbary (ch. 8), Ceylon or the region of Slavs (ch. 10), and Mazandarān and Turkestan (ch. 12).Footnote 5 This material is particularly interesting because of its accuracy, clearly attesting to the author's own knowledge of geography and ethnography. At first glance the descriptions share similarities with the accounts of Muslim geographers and travellers from the ninth to twelfth centuries ce. But in addition, the narrative of the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg includes material from the early Sasanian to the early Islamic period, suggesting that these chapters might have undergone a process of reworking and interpolation at least up until the end of the eleventh century ce (Agostini Reference Agostini2012: 180).Footnote 6 In addition to some scattered fragments in Pahlavi, this Zoroastrian book has come down to us in two other complete versions, in Pāzand and Pārsi, that depend on a probable original in Pahlavi. The first, traditionally considered to be Middle Persian transliterated in Avestan script, and the second, a specimen of Middle Persian transliterated in Arabo-Persian, were both used by Zoroastrian Parsees probably not earlier than the twelfth century ce.Footnote 7 All this must be taken into consideration when attempting to date and understand the process of writing, transmission, and reworking of the different chapters.
This article aims to address some of the chronological, geographical, and ethnographic issues that arise from the identification of these toponyms, and to offer an updated English translation of these chapters (for the edition, see the Appendix).
India
In the Sasanian period, interest in Indian and Greek knowledge was motivated in part by a Zoroastrian ideology that considered all human knowledge to have originated in the canonical scriptures known as the Avesta.Footnote 8 During the period of rewriting and canonization of the Avesta, most probably culminating during the reign of Khusraw I (531–579), Indian science and culture, as well as several “secular” works (among them Kalilah wa-Dimnah) reached the Sasanian court and were translated there.Footnote 9 Nevertheless, while IndiaFootnote 10 aroused great curiosity, the description of India included in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg 8: 2–5 (Appendix A) seems to refer to a post-Sasanian period:
2) Jāmāsp answered: “India is a wide country. <Somewhere> it is cold and <somewhere else> it is hot, <somewhere> it is wet and <somewhere else> it is dry. There are plants and trees, there are harsh steppes and there are deserts. 3) Among them some live on rice, some on cows’ milk and some eat eggs. 4) Their beliefs, laws and customs <are> numerous. There are some on the side of Ohrmazd, and there are some on the side of Ahreman. They practise witchcraft in public. 5) And when they die, some are buried underground, some are thrown into the water and some are burned in the fire. All those <who do not belong to> the Good Mazdean Religion go to Hell.
This description highlights the vastness and diversity of the country as well as its various customs and traditions, including the public practice of witchcraft. A similar description, though longer and richer in detail, is found in the work of Marvazī, an eleventh/twelfth-century Muslim geographer and ethnographer born in Merv. In his historical treatise, which also encompassed China and Turkestan, he tells of the vastness of India, its wide range of ethnic groups and beliefs, and the practice of magic in the streets.Footnote 11
The reference in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg to the Good Mazdean Religion (hu-dēn) deserves more attention and may provide an important element that allows us to date the passage or perhaps its original version. It can be argued that the dichotomy between the disciples of Ohrmazd and Ahreman, as well as the use of the term hu-dēn, may refer to the first Zoroastrian communities of India,Footnote 12 who reached Gujarat from Khorasan in 936 ce (Hodivala Reference Hodivala1925: 70), or, according to a traditional – albeit disputed – view, already in 780 ce (Eduljee Reference Eduljee1991: 1–39).Footnote 13 Additional food for thought is given by the comparison of this passage with what the Bundahišn 27: 43Footnote 14 says about the faith of Indians: “Buddha (but) is the demon whom the Indians worship and his spirit dwells in those idols because they worshipped Būdāsf (i.e. bodhisattva)”.Footnote 15 This suggests that in Sasanian times Buddhism was closely associated with India, as it was widely practised there. However, it is known already from the account of the tenth/eleventh-century Iranian polymath al-Bīrūni that in his time Buddhism in India had already been eclipsed by Hinduism to such an extent that only scant notes were reported (Sachau Reference Sachau1910: I. xlv–xlvii and 249). As the Zoroastrian tradition of the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg makes no reference to Buddha, we might assume that the final version was written when Buddhism was no longer prominent in India, thus setting the terminus post quem for its writing or reworking.Footnote 16
China
In the same chapter as India, the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg 8: 6 (Appendix B) briefly relates the following about China:
6) ChinaFootnote 17 <is> a wide country with much gold, much musk (mušk) and many pearls. Men who are there are skilled, wise and perspicacious. They worship Buddha (but), and when they die, they are damned.
Again, this short description has some similarities with Marvazī’s account. A series of stereotypes, such as the reference to the geographical size of the region, the country's incalculable wealth, and the wisdom and perspicacity of its people, are recorded by this Muslim geographer.Footnote 18
It should be noted that in this passage the word but may be translated either as Buddha or as a generic idol,Footnote 19 and the dating of this passage hinges on the translation of this term. The correct translation of this word is in fact Buddha, as when the same chapter describes the Arabs and Berbers (see below) the word uzdēs is used to indicate idol. For any attempt to date this passage, it is necessary to define those periods of Chinese history when Buddhism benefitted from the protection and favour of the emperors.
Dan Shapira (Reference Shapira2001: 333 and n. 94) translates the word but referring to Buddha, and further argues that this is a precise description of China before the Tang dynasty (618–907).Footnote 20 In fact, the founder of this dynasty, Li Shi-min, better known as Emperor Taizong, strongly opposed Buddhism and promoted the teaching of Confucius. However, during the interregnum of the “self-proclaimed” Zhou dynasty (690–705), Empress Wu Zetian strongly favoured Buddhism. Moreover, it is important to underline that Emperor Gaozong (649–683), the successor of Taizong, promoted the building of some Buddhist and Taoist temples so that monks would pray for the prosperity and welfare of the Empire (Ch'en Reference Ch'en1964: 219).Footnote 21 In addition to the possibility of dating the passage to the pre-Tang or to the early Tang period, the presence of the word mušk should also be considered. In fact, if we assume that the word čin can traditionally also refer to Tibet and Khotan, we should interpret differently the presence of this specific aromatic, commonly associated with Tibet in the Arabic tradition from the mid-ninth century ce.Footnote 22 This option provides not only a different geographical identification but also suggests a date for the passage later than the eighth century ce.
Arabia and Barbary
As for Arabia and Barbary, the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg 8: 7 (Appendix C) says:
7) The country of the Arabs (tāzīgān) and the Berbers (barbarīgān) <is> a hot and dry desert, there is not any fruit, and water <is> scarce. Their nourishment <consists of> milk, noxious creatures, rats, snakes, cats, foxes, hyenas and other similar <animals>. They worship idols (uzdēs) and live by camels and quadrupeds <as there is not> anything <else>.
Sasanian history serves as a useful support when attempting to date this passage and to define these two regions geographically. The Sasanians knew the Arabian Peninsula well. During most of the sixth century ce they defended the kingdom of Himyar, which dominated the South of this peninsula, against the attacks of Ethiopians who had converted to Monophysitism and were supported by the Byzantines (Christensen Reference Christensen1936: 368–69; Frye Reference Frye1983: 328; Bosworth Reference Bosworth and Yarshater1983: 604–9). The description of the Arabs (tāzīgān) suits the Pre-Islamic period for various reasons.Footnote 23 In fact, the word uzdēs most likely describes an Arab pagan cult;Footnote 24 there is no hint of a reference to the new Islamic religion. Moreover, the text does not reveal any hostility towards Arabs. In this, the passage is exceptional since in most Zoroastrian texts Arabs are depicted as the destroyers and persecutors of the Mazdean religion.
Regarding the country of the Berbers (barbarīgān), one is beset by doubt and speculation. There have been at least three previous attempts to fix its geography. Giuseppe Messina (Reference Messina1939: 102, n. 1), followed by Otakar Klíma (Reference Klíma and Rypka1968: 38), located the region in eastern Africa, specifically in Somalia where the existing city of Berbera could have kept its ancient name, and in general, in Abyssinia. Davoud Monchi-Zadeh (Reference Monchi-Zadeh1975: 88–91) located this toponym in eastern Iran, but though this word seems to be a “travelling” toponym, his suggestion is ungrounded. It is tempting to identify this region with the land of Berbers in North Africa. However, beyond the accounts of travellers and merchants, only the sudden and short conquest of Egypt in 619 ce by Khusraw II, and the consequent occupation of the western regions of Siwa and Faiyum (Christensen Reference Christensen1936: 442; Frye Reference Frye1983: 336), justify eventual contact between the Sasanians and one of the several Berber tribes located there.
It is likely, then, that this toponym refers to eastern Africa. In support of it, the ninth/tenth-century Persian historian Tabarī describes how during the war against the Ethiopians for supremacy in the southern Arabian Peninsula, Khusraw “of immortal soul” organized a naval expedition – probably along the Somali coast – to reach Sarandīb (i.e. Ceylon).Footnote 25 As for the dating of the chapter, this is quite difficult and uncertain. The absence of hostility towards Arabs would place its composition during the Sasanian period, but it would then encounter the extremely complicated historiographical question connected with the historicizing of Pahlavi texts as Sasanian or post-Sasanian.Footnote 26
Ceylon or the region of Slavs?
The Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg’s chapter 10 has come down to us both in its Parsi version and a Pahlavi fragmentary version. The latter is missing the first few lines where the controversial word sīlānī (ﺳﻳﻼﻧﻰ) appears. The interpretation of this word is significant in defining the location of this toponym. However, before tackling the study of this crucial word, we can turn to what the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg 10: 1–3 (Appendices D and E) relates about this place:
1) King Wištāsp asked: “What <is> the way of living and dying of the men of Sīlān (sīlānī) and also of those who live by the lakes and by the sea? Who <is> their lord and chief? On which side are they? And when they die, where they are thrown? And where do their souls go?” 2) Jāmāsp, the bidaxš (i.e. constable, majordomo) answered: “Those men who live on lakes and on the sea are watery people, and they are on the side of the gods (yazad). Their place <is> fruitful. 3) <There are> many quadrupeds, birds, fishes and noxious animals and they eat them all. When they die, they are buried in a dry place; some go to paradise, others to hell.”
If one relies on the most modern and complete Parsi tradition alone, this toponym may be readily identified with Ceylon (today's Sri Lanka).Footnote 27 The isle of Ceylon was relatively famous in classical sources, and the seventh-century ce Armenian geographer Ananias of Širak placed Taprobane Isle (Ceylon) among the 44 countries of Asia. He wrote that it was the widest isle of the world, and described it as a rich and prosperous place inhabited by various species of quadrupeds and wild beasts. On the other hand, there is no reference in his account to the religion or the funeral customs of its inhabitants.Footnote 28 Moreover, it is certain that Sasanians maintained political and commercial relations with Ceylon. Although Tabarī’s account of the subjugation of Ceylon by the above-mentioned naval expedition of Khusraw has to be considered a mere legend (Bosworth Reference Bosworth1999: 264, n. 635), the economic and commercial relations between Sasanian Iran and Ceylon are borne out by the archaeological finds of Sasanian coins on the island (Bopearachchi Reference Bopearachchi and Gyselen1993: 79). This identification might also be supported by the seventh-century Sogdian paintings at Afrasyab (Samarkand), where India is depicted as amphibious, following the Classical topos of the dwarves dwelling on lakes, swamps and beaches.Footnote 29 As in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg, where a separate chapter is devoted to India, it is quite expected that the motif of amphibious elements would be transferred to the nearby isle of Ceylon.
However, there are many reasons to doubt this geographical identification. First of all, the word sīlānī might be a corruption of the Pahlavi word 
Footnote 30 [sgl'p̄yk] /saglābīg/Footnote 31 “Slavs”, which is found in Iranian Bundahišn 14: 37,Footnote 32 a passage likewise devoted to ethnography (see further below). Second, the first occurrence of the form Sīlān (< Pali Sīhalan) is attested in Rašīd al-Dīn (around 1300 ce), while a few years earlier Qazvīnī used the form Sīyalān. Before them, one regularly finds the form Sarandīb (Faller Reference Faller2000: 24–5).Footnote 33 Moreover, the passage in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg does not comment on the mountains or gemstones usually mentioned in descriptions of Ceylon. On the other hand, if we assume a very late reworking of the passage in the Parsi version, even after the beginning of the fourteenth century ce, the word sīlānī (ﺳﻳﻼﻧﻰ) might have been used by an author who was no longer able to read the correct Pahlavi form.
It is interesting to compare this passage from the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg with Iranian Bundahišn 14: 37:
37) Here too, there was mixture on account of the Adversary. Such as Black Africans from the mixture of terrestrial and aquatic men, Slavs (or men of clay and water)Footnote 34 who live on both land and water, and others of this kind.Footnote 35
It is true that, unlike the Slavic peoples described in the Iranian Bundahišn, those of the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg lived on lakes and on the sea, but even in Arabic geographical literature the Slavs are not portrayed as particularly amphibious. For example, the large rivers and Lake Maeotis (i.e. the Sea of Azov), mentioned in the tenth-century Ḥudūd al-ʿAlam 3: 8, may also refer to Russian lakes or to the Baltic Sea.Footnote 36 Nevertheless, while Africans were well known in the Sasanian period, the same was not true of Slavs,Footnote 37 who were rarely known under this name in the seventh century ce (Shapira Reference Shapira2001: 330, n. 83).Footnote 38 This would be sufficient reason to abandon the identification with the Slavs in the Sasanian period if other possibilities did not present themselves.
However, if we date this chapter of the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg and that of Bundahišn, to the Post-Sasanian and Early Islamic era, the presence of Slavs makes absolute sense, since the Arab caliphates extensively exploited Africans and Slavs as slaves.Footnote 39 It seems likely that this chapter underwent continuous reworking in the Islamic period, with the Zoroastrian author using the descriptions of Slavic and Rus’ tribes by Arab geographers, such as the tenth/eleventh century Persian Muslim geographer Gardīzī,Footnote 40 as a literary and ethnographic model.
Mazandarān and Turkestan
The Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg’s chapter 12 contains a detailed description of the people of MazandarānFootnote 41 and Turkestan. It has come down to us both in its Parsi and Pahlavi versions, although the latter is missing some passages at the end. In chapter 4 of the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg,Footnote 42 the people of Mazandarān are presented as enemies of the Iranian hero Frēdōn. This chapter relates the myth of the battle between this Iranian hero and the people of Mazandarān, who were known for their violence and wickedness, and how Xwanirah (i.e. the central continent and first abode of Iranians) was liberated from them.Footnote 43
In contrast, the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg 12: 1–6 (Appendices F and G) relates the following about this region:
1) King Wištāsp asked: “What are the customs of the people of Mazandarān and of the Turks? Are they men or demons? What are their laws? When they die, where are they brought? Where does their soul go?” 2) Jāmāsp, <the bidaxš> answered: “The people of Mazandarān are all men by soul, strength and likeness. Moreover, they recognize the law. Their place is prosperous and there are plants, trees, wilderness, mountains and plains, hot <lands> and many cold lands, and snow falls there in abundance. 3) <Concerning> their law and <their> religion, some are righteous, others sinful, some are on the side of Ohrmazd, others are on the side of Ahreman. And when they die, most of them go to Paradise, the others to Hell. 4) They have no fear of death and they are covetous in copulating with young men.Footnote 44 Many men, when they have sexual intercourse with a woman, they kill her! 5) And those who live longer, fifty years, have many children. °And when <someone> dies, they willingly sit with friends, brothers and relatives and <then> they eat.°Footnote 45 6) Among them there are some who, after the religion of Zoroaster reached them, belong to this holy religion.”
In this passage, Mazandarān and its inhabitants are described in considerable detail. The author describes the people of Mazandarān in a way diametrically opposed to that of another Pahlavi book, the Dēnkard IX.20: 17–24, that depicts them as a group of filthy, violent giants.Footnote 46
The Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg describes the people of Mazandarān as followers of the Mazdean religion. This seems to be something of an overstatement since the region was still non-Iranian, and Zoroastrianism was not particularly widespread there during the late Sasanian period (Brunner Reference Brunner and Yarshater1983: 766).Footnote 47 On the other hand, in the middle of the ninth century ce, during the reign of the Abbasid caliphate, certain Zoroastrian princes lived in Mazandarān and Gilān, such as Mardāvīj (Frye Reference Frye1975: 140; Crone Reference Crone2012: 268–9; Agostini and Stark Reference Agostini and Stark2016: 29 and n. 65). This might suggest that the passage was reworked in the post-Sasanian period.
The account of the people of Mazandarān in the Dēnkard IX.20: 24 relates that among the survivors of the battle against Frēdōn, one-third did not return to Xwanirah, whilst the other two-thirds came back to learn the religion of Zoroaster with Frašōtar, the brother of Jāmāsp.Footnote 48 It is possible that the author of this chapter was perhaps influenced by this passage of the Dēnkard in describing the religious faith of this people, although he introduced some textual changes.
Now we will briefly address the statement in paragraph 4 that deals with their sexual habits. The Pahlavi version tells of the men's covetousness and lust for women, whilst in the Parsi tradition young men take the place of women. This may be an intentional allusion to the practice of sodomy and pederasty, both with disparaging connotations. It is quite plausible that this textual variation was intended to emphasize the poor reputation of the people who were the foes of Frēdōn, dwelled in the demonic, Northern side, and refused to adopt the Zoroastrian religion.
In any case, it seems that the late version in the Parsi tradition, which introduces the theme of sodomy, is not directly related to the passages on this topic in the Pahlavi Vendidad 1: 11Footnote 49 and in the Bundahišn 31: 21–2.Footnote 50 In fact, in both texts, the region Xnəṇta,Footnote 51 inhabited by the people of Vəhrkānas, should be associated with Gorgān (i.e. Greek Hyrcania) which is in the Caspian area near Mazandarān, where the counter-creation of Ahreman was pederasty (kūn-marz). The mingling of early and late religious, mythical and historical elements can be seen as clear evidence to argue that the passage was composed in the Sasanian period and then interpolated during the first centuries of the Islamic era.
The passage about Turkestan and its inhabitants is by far the richest in detail and information. The Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg 12: 7–12 (Appendices H and I) describes this region as follows:
7) Turkestan is a wide, always cold <and> wooded place; <there are> few fruit trees, edible fruits or <other eatable> things. 8) Among them, some worship the Moon, some are sorcerers and some belong to the Good Mazdean Religion (hu-dēn). Those who worship the Moon do not have the custom to kill men; all the others are bowmen and experts of the steppes. Their horses cover the distance of thirty parasangs in one day and one night. 9) They do not eat bread, but they <eat> the living beings they catch, except for men. They dwell in the steppes and wear woollen clothes. They lead a hard and frugal life, <and> their jealousy towards women is strong. 10) Their women wear trousers and copulate very much. Their likeness, face and eyes are beautiful. 11) Many are cold, many <others> are fierier and they are always in conflict, war and other <similar> activities against each other. And a despicable death <is> dishonourable for them. Moreover, there is in this region the one who, following ignominious law, murdered the person to whom he gave hospitality.Footnote 52 12) They practise agriculture. When they die, they are thrown into the forest; there are some who go to paradise, some to hell, and others to hammistagān (i.e. the intermediate place between paradise and hell). When the dead will be resurrected, they too will be resurrected. <This is their> way of thinking and acting with men.
This description of the customs and traits of the Turks clearly shares many similarities with the accounts of Muslim geographers. Marvazī describes the Turks as a great and diverse people inhabiting steppes and deserts, as well as villages.Footnote 53 Before him, Gardīzī wrote at length about the different Turkish ethnic groups in chapter 17 of his Zain al-Axbār. It is surprising how close his geographical, social and religious descriptions are to the passage in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg. Writing about the Turks, for example, Gardīzī relates that their region is characterized by steppes, snow and forests, and makes note of the jealousy of Turkish men.Footnote 54 It is also curious that Gardīzī provides similar details about the Mongols, such as the eating of venison, bravery and bellicosity, and a fondness for sexual intercourse.Footnote 55
However, beyond these accounts, which could be true of many Central Asiatic peoples and their perception in the collective imagination at that time, the depiction of religious practices in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg assists us in trying to identify the particular Turkish tribe in question. The followers of the Good Religion (hu-dēn) might be identified as Zoroastrians,Footnote 56 the sorcerers as shamans, and the worshippers of the Moon as Manichaeans.
The Manichaeans – in particular, the auditores – would pray four times a day, turning towards the sun at daytime, towards the moon at night, and towards the north when these two celestial bodies, which helped released souls reach the Kingdom of Lights, were invisible.Footnote 57 Moreover, Masʿūdī states that the members of the Turkish tribe of Toquz Oghuz were Manichaeans who proclaimed the existence of two principles: light and darkness.Footnote 58 Gardīzī, too, relates that the Toquz Oghuz belonged to the Manichaean sect, although their villages were also inhabited by Christians, Buddhists, and dualists,Footnote 59 who may be identified, in my opinion, as Zoroastrians. Gardīzī continues by claiming that this tribe, in all likelihood Manichaean, did not have the death penalty for crimes such as theft, adultery, and murder.Footnote 60 This seems to fit in with the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg’s assertion that the worshippers of the Moon did not kill men. Assuming that this detailed account in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg refers to Manichaeism, it would be plausible to identify this people with the Uighurs. The Uighur Khanate in Mongolia and Xinjiang (744–840), which succeeded the Türk Empire in Inner Asia, accepted Manichaeism as the state religion in 762/763 or slightly earlier.Footnote 61 Furthermore, in Arabo-Persian sources the Uighurs are quite commonly referred to simply as Toquz Oghuz,Footnote 62 of whom the Uighurs were one of the sub-tribes.Footnote 63 Though the presence of stereotyped descriptions of Turkish tribes is common in the Arabic sources, this detailed and precise reference to the Manichaean Uighurs would place the first composition of this passage not earlier than the second half of the eighth century.Footnote 64
Concluding remarks
Analysis of these chapters in the Ayādgār ī Jāmāspīg suggests that there was no geographical and ethnographic science in Sasanian Iran comparable with the methodology and accuracy of that of neighbouring traditions;Footnote 65 an interpretation mitigated by the loss of many “secular” texts after the Arab conquest of Iran. Nevertheless, it appears that some passages were composed in the Sasanian period using mythical and religious sources as well as information on the “others” that circulated because of the spread of Zoroastrianism as well as due to the political and military activity of the Late Sasanian kings. It is evident that these accounts were severely reworked and interpolated in the Islamic period. In this period – stretching from the first centuries of the Arabic conquest until at least the thirteenth century ce, if not later – Zoroastrian compilers, whose the presence was still strong and influential in some areas (Cereti Reference Cereti2001: 136), remodelled their geographical and ethnographic traditions and knowledge. They used the accounts, especially those on China, the Slavs and the Turks, by Muslim geographers, historians and polymaths, who had built the framework for this science, and attempted to define and describe that new world and to map their presence in it.
AppendixFootnote 66
(A)
M52 141v: 10–142r: 2Footnote 67
2) guft-aš jāmāsp +ki hindūgān šahr buzurg hast u sard hast u garm hast u tarr hast u xušk hast dār u diraxt hast ki dašt saxt hast ki +niīāzFootnote 68 hast 3) ki ēšān zīvišniš az birinj hast u ki az šīr gāv hast ki az tuxmahā xvarand 4) +az-šān kēš u dād u ravišn vas u hast pa nīma urmuzd u hast pa nīma ahrīman jādūyiš āškārā kunand 5) u ka mīrand hast ki andar zamīn +nihānFootnote 69 kunand u hast +ō āv afganand u hast pa ātaš bisōzand u har ki na hu-dīn +ō duzax šavand
(B)
M52 142r: 3–142r: 5Footnote 70
6) u čīnistān šahrhā ī buzurg +vas zarr vas mušk vas gauhar vas +ān-iz +ī-š andar band °kard ōy nīzamān°Footnote 71 bārīk +vīniš ēstād band u but parastand ka mīrand druvand hand
(C)
M52 142r: 6–142r: 9Footnote 72
7) tāzīgān u barbarīgān šahr garm u xušk vyāvānFootnote 73 nēst bar u āv +dūdFootnote 74 +az-šān xvarišn šīr u +xarāstarānFootnote 75 u muš u mār u gurba u rōbāh u kaftār u +āvānīFootnote 76 °īnaš anazdīš°Footnote 77 +parastīnand +az-išān zīvišn uštur u čahārpāyiš (…čiš…)Footnote 78
(D)
M52 143r: 1–143r: 8Footnote 79
1) pursīd guštāsp šāh +ki [ōy] ōšān mardumān sīlānī u +an-iz andar zrēh <u> dariyā mānand +az-išān zīvišn <u> +vidārišn či +az-šān xudāy <u> sālār ki pa nīma ki ēstād u ka mīrand +ō ki afganand u +az ēšān ruvān ō ki šavand 2) guft-aš jāmāsp <bidaxš> +ki ōšān mardumān andar zrēh <u> dariyā mānand mardum hand +āvī <u> pa nīma +jahānFootnote 80 +ēstād +az-šān jāy barōmand 3) +az-šān čahārpāy u murγ u māhī u xarāstarFootnote 81 vas ki +hamā bixvarand ka mīrand +ō xušk +mīrandFootnote 82 u hast +ō bihišt u hast +ō duzax šavand
(E)
DP (chap. 10's fragment)Footnote 83
1) (…) ud ka mīrēnd ō kū abganēnd u-šān ruwān ō kū šawēd 2) guft-iš jāmāsp ī bidaxš kū +awēšān mardōmān ī andar +zrēh ud drayāb mānēnd mardōm hēnd ī ābīg ud pad nēmag ī yazdān [ī] ēstēnd u-šān gyāg barōmand <ast> 3) u-šān čahārpāy ud murw ud māhīg ud wāstar was ud hamē be xwarēnd ka mīrēnd ō hušk abganēnd ud ast ī ō wahišt ud ast ī ō dušox šawēnd (…)
(F)
M52 143v: 14–144r: 13Footnote 84
1) pursīd guštāsp šāh +ki māzandarān u turkān či āyīn hand mardum hand ayā dēv +az-šān dād jud jud či u ka mīrand +u ki barand +az-išān ruvān ō ki šavad 2) guft-aš jāmāsp +ki: māzandarān +hamā mardum hand +baFootnote 85 ēšān kirfa <u> dīdanFootnote 86 [zīt] ōšān-+iz dād šināsand +az-šān jāy +āvādān u dār u diraxt u šikārFootnote 87 bēd u kōh u dašt u garmā u vas sard būm +nafzFootnote 88 vas nišīnēd 3) +az-šān dād u dīn hast frārōn hast u +avārūn hast +ō nīma urmuzd hast u nīma +āhrīman hand ka mīrand +paristFootnote 89 +ō bihišt u dudīgar +ō duzax šavand 4) +az-šān marg rā na +pāk dārand <u> pa marzišn javānFootnote 90 ruzdFootnote 91 band vas mard ka +avā zan +kiFootnote 92 āsān kunand +ōzārandFootnote 93 5) u ān-ki bēštar +zēdFootnote 94 panjāh sāl +az-šān farzand-+zāyišnī +sikārFootnote 95 bēd ka mīrand xvad xūb +avā dōstān u birādarān u +°hamēz dōdān°Footnote 96 nišīnand u bixvarand 6) u az ēšān hast ki ōšān pas az zartušt dīn +xvašFootnote 97 mad <u> īn dīn avēža +ēstād
(G)
DP (chap. 12)Footnote 98
1) pursīd wištāsp šāh kū māzandarān ud turkān čē ēwēn hēnd mardōm hēnd ayāb dēw u-šān dād jud jud čē ud ka mīrēnd ō kū barēnd u-šān ruwān ō kū šawēd 2) guft-iš jāmāsp ī bidaxš kū māzandarān hamāg mardōm hēnd be-šān kirb ud dīd awēšān-iz dād šnāsēnd u-šān gyāg ābādān ud dār ud draxt ud +šēkār bawēd ud kōf ud dašt ud garmāg ud was sard būm ud wafr was nišīnēd 3) u-šān dād ud dēn ast ī frārōn ud ast ī abārōn ud ast ī ō nēmag ī ohrmazd ud ast ī ō nēmag ī ō ahreman hēnd ud ka mīrēnd frāyist ō wahišt ud dudīgar ō dušox šawēnd 4) u-šān marg rāy nē bāk dārēnd ud pad marzišn ī +zanān +ruzd bawēnd was mard ka abāg zan-+ē āsān kunēnd ōzānēnd 5) ud ān kē wēštar zīwēd panjāh sāl u-šān frazand-zāyišnīh wasyār bawēd ud ka mīrēd xwad xūb abāg dōstān brādarān ud ham-paywandān nisīnēnd <ud> xwarēnd 6) ud az awēšān ast ī kē-šān pas az zarduxšt dēn awiš mad <ud> pad ēn dēn <ī> abēzag +ēstēnd
(H)
M52 144r: 13–144v: 15Footnote 99
7) u turkistān buzurg jāy u +hamā sard bēšag bēd +az-išān diraxt +birādarFootnote 100 +xvarišnī +čiFootnote 101 +sangFootnote 102 8) hast az-šān ki māh +parastanand u hast jādū hand u hast bih-dīn hand ān-ki māh +parastanand +ōzārišn mardumān kam kunand u ān +āvānī +hamā kamānvar dašt-yārFootnote 103 būdFootnote 104 asp ōšān pa šabān u rōz pa sī farsang biravad 9) nān na bijānvar ayābēndFootnote 105 bi +hilandFootnote 106 jud az mardum u pa dašt nišīnand u jāma pašmīn +dāštandFootnote 107 [mar] bad zīvišn <u> +dūdFootnote 108 zīvišn bēd +az-išān arašk zanān saxt 10) +az-išān zanān pa šalvār +astavārFootnote 109 hand u marzišn vas kunand +az-išān dīdan +°če dār°Footnote 110 u čašm +dūdFootnote 111 11) vas sard u vas garmtar band +az-išān hamvār yak +avā +dūdFootnote 112 +vaxšišFootnote 113 kārzār u ān varzišn bēd +az-išān margiš xvār +afsīndFootnote 114 andar-či ān kišvar hast u ki az +āpasēndFootnote 115 dād īn ki +padiraft +ēstad kušt 12) varz +āvādānišFootnote 116 kunand ka mīrand +ō bēšag afganand +ōFootnote 117 hast +ō bihišt +ō hast +ō duzax <u> ō hammistagān šavand +ō ka rist wigrāsēndFootnote 118 ōšān-+iz +avāz wigrāsēndFootnote 119 +az-šān maniš u varzišn +avā mardumān bēd
(I)
DP (chap. 12)Footnote 120
7) turkān wuzurg gyāg ud hamāg sard wēšag bawēd u-šān draxt ī +bārwar ud mēwag-xwarišnīg čiš nihang ast 8) [ud] az awēšān <ast> kē māh paristēnd ud ast ī ǰādūg hēnd ud ast ī wēš dēn hēnd ud ān kē māh paristēnd ōzazišn ī mardōmān kam kunēnd ud ān <ī> abārīg hamāg kamānwār ud +dašt-ayār bawēnd ud asp ī awēšān pad šab rōz sīh frasang be rawēd 9) nān nē bē gyānwar ī +ayābēnd be xwarēnd jud az mardōm ud pad dašt nisīnēnd ud jāmag ī pašmēn dārēnd (…) +tang zīwišn bawēnd u-šān +arešk ī (…)
