It has been intimated in the account of the Median Empire which was
given in a former-volume that the language of the Persians, which was
identical, or almost identical, with that of the Medes, belonged to the
form of speech known to moderns as Indo-European. The characteristics of
that form of speech are a certain number of common, or at least
widely spread, roots, a peculiar mode of inflecting, together with
a resemblance in the inflections, and a similarity of syntax or
construction. Of the old Persian language the known roots are, almost
without exception, kindred forms to roots already familiar to the
philologist through the Sanscrit, or the Zend, or both; while many are
of that more general type of which we have spoken--forms common to all,
or most of the varieties of the Indo-European stock. To instance in a
few very frequently recurring words--“father” is in old Persian (as
in Sanscrit) _pitar_, which differs only in the vocalization from the
Zendic _patar_, the Greek [ ], and the Latin _pater_, and of which
cognate forms are the Gothic _fadar_, the German voter, the English
_father_, and the Erse _athair_.
[See the html version for the following pages of this
chapter which is a section with hundreds of Greek
words.]
[Illustration: PAGE 365]
[Illustration: PAGE 366]
[Illustration: PAGE 367]
[Illustration: PAGE 368]
[Illustration: PAGE 369]
[Illustration: PAGE 370]
[Illustration: PAGE 371]
[Illustration: PAGE 372]
[Illustration: PAGE 373]
[Illustration: PAGE 374]
[Illustration: PAGE 375]
[Illustration: PAGE 376]
[Illustration: PAGE 377]
[Illustration: PAGE 378]
The ordinary Persian writing was identical with that which has been
described in the second volume of this work as Median. A cuneiform
alphabet, consisting of some thirty-six or thirty-seven forms,
expressive of twenty-three distinct sounds, sufficed for the wants of
the people, whose language was simple and devoid of phonetic luxuriance.
Writing was from left to right, as with the Arian nations generally.
Words were separated from one another by an oblique wedge; and were
divided at any point at which the writer happened to reach the end of
a line. Enclitics were joined without any break to the words which they
accompanied.
The Persian writing which has come down to us is almost entirely upon
stone. It comprises various rock tablets, a number of inscriptions upon
buildings, and a few short legends upon vases and cylinders. It is in
every case incised or cut into the material. The letters are of various
sizes, some (as those at Elwend) reaching a length of about two inches,
others (those, for instance, on the vases) not exceeding the sixth of
an inch. The inscriptions cover a space of at least a hundred and eighty
years, commencing with Cyrus, and terminating with Artaxerxes Ochus,
the successor of Mnemon. The style of the writing is, on the whole,
remarkably uniform, the latter inscriptions containing only two
characters unknown to the earlier times. Orthography, however, and
grammar are in these later inscriptions greatly changed, the character
of the changes being indicative of corruption and decline, unless,
indeed, we are to ascribe them to mere ignorance on the part of the
engravers.
There can be little doubt that, besides the cuneiform character, which
was only suited for inscriptions, the Persians employed a cursive
writing for common literary purposes. Ctesias informs us that the royal
archives were written on parchment; and there is abundant evidence that
writing was an art perfectly familiar to the educated Persian. It might
have been supposed that the Pehlevi, as the lineal descendant of the
Old Persian language, would have furnished valuable assistance towards
solving the question of what character the Persians employed commonly;
but the alphabetic type of the Pehlevi inscriptions is evidently
Semitic; and it would thus seem that the old national modes of writing
had been completely lost before the establishment by Ardeshir, son of
Babek, of the new Persian Empire.