Dies ist eine Internet-Sonderausgabe des Aufsatzes
„Old Armenian and Caucasian Calendar Systems [I]“
von Jost Gippert (1986).
Sie sollte nicht zitiert werden. Zitate sind der Originalausgabe in
„Annual of Armenian Linguistics“ 8, 1987, 63-72
zu entnehmen.

This is a special internet edition of the article
„Old Armenian and Caucasian Calendar Systems [I]“
by Jost Gippert (1986).
It should not be quoted as such. For quotations, please refer to the original edition in
„Annual of Armenian Linguistics“ 8, 1987, 63-72.

Alle Rechte vorbehalten / All rights reserved:
Jost Gippert, Frankfurt 2001

1.          Cf. R. Schmitt, “Zu den alten armenischen Monatsnamen”, Annual of Armenian Linguistics 6, 1985, pp. 91-100. [back / zurück]

2.          An extended version of my Oslo paper “Die altgeorgischen Monatsnamen” (“Monatsnamen”) will be published in the “Proceedings” of the “3rd Caucasian Colloquium” (to appear Oslo, 1987). [back / zurück]

3.          Cf. the two articles of M. Brosset Je, “Calcul chronologique des Géorgiens, § 2: Des mois” and “Extrait du manuscrit arménien no. 114 de la Bibliothèque royale, relatif au calendrier géorgien”, in: (Nouveau) Journal Asiatique, Sér. 2, 10 = 21, 1832, pp. 171-175 and 526-532. For a later treatment cf. K.P. Patkanov, Neskol'ko slov o nazvanijax drevnix armjanskix mesjacev, Sanktpeterburg 1871, pp. 35-43. [back / zurück]

4.          This holds not only for the article of R. Schmitt, but also for V. Bănăţeanu, “Le calendrier arménien et les anciens noms des mois”, in: Studia et Acta Orientalia 10, 1980, pp. 33-46, who made use of parts of the material published by Brosset and Patkanov only. Two extensive treatises have been completely ignored by Armenology apparently because they appeared in Georgian journals and in the Georgian language: P'. Ingoroq'va, “Jvel-kartuli c'armartuli k'alendari” (“The Old Georgian pagan calendar”), in: Sakartvelos muzeumis moambe (“Messenger of the Museum of Georgia”), 6, 1929-30, pp. 373-446 and 7, 1931-32, pp. 260-336, and K'. K'ek'elije, “Jveli kartuli c'elic'adi” (“The Old Georgian year”), in: St'alinis saxelobis Tbilisis Saxelmc'ipo Universit'et'is šromebi (“Working papers of the Tbilisi State University by the name of Stalin”) 18, 1941, reprinted in the author's “Et'iudebi jveli kartuli lit'erat'uris ist'oriidan” (“Studies in the history of Old Georgian literature”) 1, 1956, pp. 99-124. [back / zurück]

5.          The first etymology was proposed by P. de Lagarde as early as 1866 (cf. his “Gesammelte Abhandlungen”, Leipzig, p. 9), the second by J. Marquart in 1907 (cf. his “Untersuchungen zur Geschichte von Eran” 2, Leipzig, p. 205). Cp. Schmitt, op. cit., p. 94 sq. [back / zurück]

6.          Cf. de Lagarde, l.cit. and now Schmitt, l.cit. [back / zurück]

7.          Cf. e.g., K'ek'elije, op.cit., p. 101. [back / zurück]

8.          The equation was proposed for the first time by the Georgian prince Teimuraz who prepared the material used by Brosset in his article in 1832; cf. Journal asiatique ... p. 171. [back / zurück]

9.          For the presumed Iranian etymologies cf. de Lagarde, op.cit., p. 9 and 163, resp. and Schmitt, op.cit., p. 95. [back / zurück]

10.          The proposal of K'ek'elije (op.cit., p. 102), kue- `downward, below' > *kueltoba- `those being below, in the underworld', has much in its favour. This could be a calque on the Iranian fravardigān, rendered νέκυια in Greek by the Byzantine author Menander (cf. de Lagarde, op.cit., p. 161). - For details see “Monatsnamen”. [back / zurück]

11.          Cf. Schmitt, op.cit., p. 94 sq. In answer to Schmitt's question on nawasardi, “wie es bei den Armeniern zu dieser Namengebung gekommen sein mag”, we must consider that it is not the Iranian month names but the festival calendar which is the main basis of the Armenian month name list. [back / zurück]

12.          für Helmut Humbach, München 1986, p. 172. [back / zurück]

13.          That fravardin is the first month while Armenian hrotic` is the twelfth is explained by the fact that the festival was located between the old and new year; cf. also Schmitt, op.cit., p. 95 sq. [back / zurück]

14.          Cf. Schmitt. l.c., who notes the anomaly but does not offer any solution. [back / zurück]

15.          Cf. § 790 of Thomson's edition (Albany 1976, p. 328): Gayr hasanēr i Mrhakan meheann anowaneal ordwoyn Aramazday ... `He came to the temple of Mihr, called the son of Aramazd'. [back / zurück]

16.          Cf. the critical edition by P. Inglisian of “Kiwrłi Erusałemac`woc` t`ułt` ar̄ Kostandios Kaysr. Usumnasirut`iun ew bnagir (sarunakut`iun)”, Handes Amsorya 79, 1965, pp. 1-16, § 4; Zi yawowrsn sowrb yaynosik sowrb Pentēkostēni, i glowx Ahakani ... `For in those holy days of the holy Pentecost, in the beginning of (the month) Ahakani ...' (i glowx Ahakani translates Νόνναις Μαίαις, cf. Patrologia Graeca, t. 33, Parisiis 1892, 1169). [back / zurück]

17.          A Vienna manuscript of the X.-XI. century (noted as A), cf. Inglisian, op.cit., p. 2. [back / zurück]

18.          This type of word formation is a well known feature of Old Georgian. [back / zurück]

19.          In the martyrology of St. Philectimon. [back / zurück]

20.          E.g., 2 Mos. 40, 2 in the freshly edited “Mcxeta” bible. - The loss of word internal -h- is well known in Old Georgian. [back / zurück]

21.          Loan translations are not at issue here. [back / zurück]

22.          Again the martyrology of St. Philectimon. [back / zurück]

23.          Cf. Schmitt, op.cit., p. 94. [back / zurück]

24.          Schmitt refers to ti-kin himself (l.cit.). As for the relative chronology of apocopy and syncopy, cf., e.g., the same author's “Grammatik des Klassisch-Armenischen mit sprachvergleichenden Erläuterungen”, Innsbruck 1981, p. 37sq. (§ II.2.7./8.). [back / zurück]

25.          Cf.Patkanov, op.cit., p. 39. [back / zurück]

26.          t'irisk'nisa- occurs in two martyrologies, one of which has the variant reading t'iris k'ninisa- (the martyrology of St. Thalele contained in the Georgian ms. of the Bodleian library, f. 118v, cf. P. Peeters, Analecta Bollandiana 31, 1912, p. 308). For *t'irisdinisay we have only one attestation in Old Georgian reading t'irisdidi and one attestation in an XVIII. century manuscript colophon reading t'irisdeni. The lexicon of Sulxan-Saba Orbeliani presents the forms t'irisk'nisa and t'irisdeni. For the Armenian tradition cf. below. [back / zurück]

27.          Cf. the edition Tiflis 1901, p. 273. [back / zurück]

28.          For this festival cf., e.g., M. Boyce, “On the calendar of Zoroastrian feasts”, BSOAS 33, 1970, p. 534 sqq. [back / zurück]

29.          Cf. A.G. Abrahamyan, Hovhannes Imastaseri matenagrut`yunə, Erevan 1956, p. 74. [back / zurück]

30.          Cf. A.G. Abrahamyan, Anania Širakac`u matenagrut`yunə, Erevan 1944, p. 119. [back / zurück]

31.          This is f. 56 of the Matenadaran ms. no. 1999, which shows some further pecularities, too. E.g., it is the only ms. to give the correct first letter of both the names surc'q'nisay and tibisay. [back / zurück]

32.          Cf. § 778 of Agathangelos's history in Thomson's edition. According to Thomson (p. 483), the form Tiur found in other editions “has no manuscript authority”; for the god's actual name in Armenian cf. below. [back / zurück]

33.          The reinterpretation of *dini as a singular form is clear because the plural genitive would have been *di-ta, not *dinisa. [back / zurück]

34.          The variant readings quoted above show how both names influenced each other: t'irisdidi contains didi `great'; and t'irisk'ninisa-, k'nini `small'. Note that in 1932 P'. Ingoroq'va still maintained the proposal of Brosset a hundred years before, that t'irisdeni (sic) means “the running of water' and is to be connected with t'irili `weeping' (op cit., 2, p. 331 sq.). [back / zurück]

35.          The reconstruction of -ria- seems to be supported by the Jewish Talmud, too, where a ”Median“ feast is mentioned under the name of Turyaskai or Triaski; cf. S.H. Taqizadeh, ”The Iranian Festivals Adopted by the Christians and Condemned by the Jews“, BSOAS 10, 1939-42, p. 637. The -s-, however, might rather be due to a mutilation; cp. the form of the mihrakan feast given as Muharneki or Moharneki (ib.). [back / zurück]

36.          This assumption would well fit with the Middle Iranian attestations of the god's name as a first member of compounds with the regular spelling <try->; cf. the examples offered by W.B. Henning in A.D.H, Bivar, ”A Rosette phiale Inscribed in Aramaic“, BSOAS 24, 1961, p. 191. The original name of the god was supposed as ”Tîrî oder etwa Tîria“ by Th. Nöldeke, ”Persische Studien 1“, Wien (SBAW, 116) 1888. p. 420. [back / zurück]

37.          For the borrowing of Iranian -iya- stems into Armenian words in -i cf. E. Benveniste, ”Les nominatifs armeniens en -i“, REA 10. 1930, p. 82 sq. with examples such as ari-k' from *ariya-. [back / zurück]

38.          This would be the normal construction of Old Armenian; cf. H. Jensen, Altarmenische Grammatik, Heidelberg 1959, § 427. Note the difference in Georgian ”t'iris dinisa; perhaps the form tri was reinterpreted as a genitive (-i!) at the time of the borrowing into Georgian. The same reinterpretation might have led to the restitution of a form Tiur as a nominative in the older editions of Agathangelos's history; cf. note 32 above. [back / zurück]

39.          The analogical influence might have struck mehekani more thoroughly than ahekani as the later forms meheki and ahki show, the latter of which seems to represent the Middle Armenian development of *ahaka-ni, not ahekani. [back / zurück]

40.          I do not see why Hubschmann (AG. p. 194) regards mrhakan as a “spätere Neubildung” as well as mihrakan. The metathesis of *-hr- to -rh- points to a borrowing in Arsacid times, cp. Hübschmann's own doublet asxarh/sahr (op.cit., p. 13). [back / zurück]

41.          Cf. Hübschmann, op.cit., p. 194. [back / zurück]

42.          Cf. the collection in Hübschmann. op.cit., p.52 sq. [back / zurück]

43.          Annales, 12, 10. [back / zurück]

44.          Cp. the variant reading mehrak'nisa- appearing in Georgian as, e.g., 1 Esra 6, 15 in the so called Ošk'i-Bible (dated AD 978). These readings are not decisive, however, because there may be an influence of an Armenian model containing mehekani itself. [back / zurück]

45.          My thanks are due to G. Klingenschmitt for a thorough discussion of the problems dealt with above. [back / zurück]

Achtung: Dieser Text ist mit Unicode / UTF8 kodiert. Um die in ihm erscheinenden Sonderzeichen auf Bildschirm und Drucker sichtbar zu machen, muß ein Font installiert sein, der Unicode abdeckt wie z.B. der TITUS-Font Titus Cyberbit Unicode. Attention: This text is encoded using Unicode / UTF8. The special characters as contained in it can only be displayed and printed by installing a font that covers Unicode such as the TITUS font Titus Cyberbit Unicode.

Copyright Jost Gippert, Frankfurt a/M 12. 8.2001. No parts of this document may be republished in any form without prior permission by the copyright holder.