ART. V.-LITERARY NOTICES. By the Editor. I. The Zend Language and Zend-Avesta. From Prof. In our second Number, Vol. I. p. 407, is a notice respecting the Zend-Avesta, its antiquity and authority, and the general merits of the translation by Anquetil du Perron; as also respecting the proposed publication of the original by Prof. J. Olshausen of Kiel, in which we regret to learn that no progress has been made beyond the Fasciculus there announced. In the mean time, however, the same labour has been undertaken in France, by the distinguished oriental scholar Eugene Burnouf, who is proceeding with more rapidity in giving to the public a litho-autographic copy of the Parisian manuscript, under the title: Vendidad Sade, l'un des livres de Zoroastre. Publié d'après le manuscrit Zend de la bibliothèque du Roi. Texte Zend. Livraison 1-8. Paris 1830-33. fol. pp. 448. The following remarks upon the publications of Burnouf and Olshausen, are from the pen of Prof. Kosegarten, one of the most learned and judicious of oriental scholars; and their value is enhanced not only by the critical estimate given of Anquetil's version, but also by the information afforded as to the nature and character of the Zend language, and the sources from which an acquaintance with it is to be derived. The remarks are extracted from an article in the Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung for June 1833, Nos. 96, 97. "In the zeal with which the study of oriental philology is at present pursued, it was to be expected, that new attention and a thorough investigation would soon be applied to the ancient religious books of the Persians; which were first introduced to us by Anquetil du Perron, and which we call Zend-Avesta. That Anquetil's translation of these books was in many places paraphrastic, uncertain, and unsatisfactory, was indeed very obvious from the notes which he inserted by way of philological illustration in the margin of his work. In these the uncertainty of his exposition is constantly conspicuous, so soon as he makes any attempt at etymological explanation, as also when he often says, Ces paroles peuvent se rendre encore de cette manière, or Ou pourroit encore traduire ainsi. Anquetil never gives any explanation in respect to the grammatical character of the Zend in its details; nor has he left behind any lexicographical attempts in regard to that language. The meagre vocabularies printed in his work were not composed by him, but merely copied in India; and they are so imperfect, that neither the grammatical endings nor other forms are properly distinguished. We find in them everywhere such specifications as the following would be in a Latin vocabulary, viz. hominum, man; tibi, thou; nostrum, I; purusque, pure; venisti, to come. These vocabularies were probably taken from some kind of interlinear version of the Zend text; they are properly glosses. Anquetil undoubtedly made his translation chiefly in accordance with an oral interpretation, which the Parsees at Surat repeated to him. He appears never to have attained to any real acquaintance with the grammatical forms of the Zend language; since he has so frequently in bis version utterly neglected them. This careless mode of pursuing the study of philology deserves in him indeed a milder censure; because in his time the exact and critical mode of studying languages demanded nowadays, was wholly unknown, and all the inore important helps and preparatory labours were still entirely wanting. "The first requisite in order to render the study of the Zend text possible, naturally was to make this text accessible to the public by the aid of printing or lithography; since it can be in the power of very few scholars to make use of the manuscripts existing at Paris, Copenhagen, and Oxford. This task of multiplying copies of the text, the editors of the two works abovementioned have undertaken; both of them with the help of lithography, although the preparation of Zend types for printing cannot be attended with any great difficulty or expense, and has in fact already been accomplished in Berlin.* Indeed, the Zend alphabet contains by no means so great a number of letters and signs, as for instance the Arabic or the Devanagari for the Sanscrit. "M. Burnouf has advanced the farthest in his lithographic labours. He gives a fac simile of the Paris manuscript, which contains the Vendidad Sade in the order preferred by the present Parsees, These types are found in Bopp's Vergleichende Grammatik der Sanskrit, Zend, Griechischen, Lateinischen, etc. Berlin 1833. viz. so that the three books Izeshne, Vispered, and Vendidad are section-wise mingled together. The Izeshne we know is divided into sections called Hâs, the Vispered into Kardes, and the Vendidad into Fargards. These Hâs, Kardes and Fargards stand in the Paris manuscript all mixed up together. The editor announces, that he intends also to give hereafter a new translation of the Vendidad Sade, with a commentary. In this he will be able to avail himself with great advantage of a Sanscrit version of the Izeshne at Paris, which appears to be very literal, and has been described by him in the Journal Asiatique.' This Sanscrit version was made by a Parsee named Nerioseng, about three centuries ago; and M. Burnouf has already announced his intention of publishing it. In his edition of the Zend text, M. Burnouf gives only the text of a single manuscript, without meddling at all with various readings. "Prof. Olshausen gives in his edition, which also is lithographic, only the book Vendidad, exclusive of the Izeshne and the Vispered. We have here consequently the text of the Vendidad continuously, and divided only into its Fargards, as we find it in Anquetil's French version. In the margin the editor has subjoined various readings derived from another Paris manuscript; it is matter of surprise, that he has not also made use of the Copenhagen manuscripts. The selection of a text among these various readings, must of course, in our present imperfect acquaintance with the Zend language, be very much a matter of hazard; still, the addition of these readings is at all events to be commended. The letters and strokes in Olshausen's edition are smaller and more distinct than in that of Burnouf. The first part or fasciculus of the former, which appeared in 1829, extends only to the fourth Fargard of the Vendidad, which contains in all twenty-two Fargards. Since that time nothing further of this edition has appeared, so far as I know; nor do I know whether it will be continued. The editor promised also an Apparatus criticus et lexicalis. "The sources from which we may derive aid in investigating the Zend language are at present the following: Anquetil's translation of the Zend-Avesta ; the Zend and Pehlvi vocabularies communicated by him, and many others of the same kind which lie in manuscript at London and Copenhagen; the Sanscrit translation of the Izeshne by Nerioseng; the Pehlvi copies of the Zend books; and finally the comparison of the Zend with the Sanscrit, which has been recently applied, particularly by Bopp, with great success. The Zend indeed, in its roots and in its grammatical forms, is a near sister of the Sanscrit; and hence also its affinity with the Greek, Latin, and Gothic, is a natural consequence. "Works which have recently appeared and which afford aid for the illustration of the Zend text, are the following. Rask in his treatise: Ueber das Alter und die Aechtheit der Zendsprache, Berlin 1826, has given the pronunciation and power of the Zend letters more exactly and correctly, than had been done by Anquetil. Bohlen in his essay: De origine linguae Zendicae, Königsb. 1831, has instituted many comparisons of Zend words and grammatical forms with those of the Sanscrit and modern Persian; but has built too much upon Zend words which are often incorrectly explained in Anquetil's vocabularies. Burnouf, in the Journal Asiatique,' 1829, has explained several passages of the Zend text with the help of the Sanscrit version of Nerioseng, and has added some general remarks on several grammatical peculiarities of the Zend; he has also done the like in a review of Bohlen's essay in the Journal des Savans' for Aug. 1832. Bopp, however, has in this respect accomplished more than all others, in several articles in the 'Berliner Jahrbücher,' and in the later portions of his Grammatica critica linguae Sanscritae. He has pointed out the relation of many Zend forms to the corresponding Sanscrit forms, and has accurately explained many single passages of the Zend text, thus correcting the translation of Anquetil. He also has first pointed out the mythological affinity between the Zend doctrines and those of India; e. g. with reference to the Indian beings Fama, Aswinas, Writrahan, which re-appear in the Zend-Avesta; to which mythological affinities Burnouf has also quite recently added some others, e. g. with reference to Gershasp i. q. Krishaswa, Elborsh i. q. Wrihat, and others. The Vergleichende Grammatik of Bopp, however, [mentioned in the preceding note,] affords still more complete exhibitions of the Zend forms; and properly so, since the Zend now constitutes an important member in the Indo-European family of languages. "By the use of the helps already extant for the study of the Zend text, we are able in many parts to understand the text perfectly, and to give an exact and sufficiently certain account of the grammatical form of each single word. But we often find ourselves brought to a stand, especially by roots and words peculiar to the Zend, which are not contained in the kindred VOL. IV. No. 15. 78 languages, and the signification of which cannot with certainty be assumed from the connexion nor from Anquetil's translation. The Zend, in its grammatical forms, is occasionally more complete and antique than the Sanscrit, and agrees sometimes with the more ancient Veda-Sanscrit; sometimes however the Zend terminations are already much abraded, and many case-endings have thus come to have the same sound. The same relation in respect to forms still entire, is found in many ancient kindred languages; one language or dialect has retained the antique shape in one form; another dialect has it no longer in this same form, but in another; while neither has, more than the other, the stamp of antiquity throughout. The Zend words seem to be tolerably rich in vowels; inasmuch as the Zend loves to insert, first, a short a before another vowel; and, secondly, a short i in a syllable, when the following syllable ends with i or e. E. g. The remainder of Prof. Kosegarten's article is occupied with critical discussions upon quite a number of passages of the ZendAvesta, and the consequent correction of Anquetil's version. These discussions may very properly be subjoined to the list of helps above given by himself. II. German Philosophy. From the German of Prof. F. E. The following remarks will perhaps be interesting to some of our readers, as presenting the German philosophy in contrast with the prevailing systems in England and America, and thus exhibiting in a more tangible form some of the peculiar characteristics of the former. We translate them from a review of Prof. Upham's work: Elements of Mental Philosophy, contained in the Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung of Halle for July 1833, Erg. Bl. Nos. 66, 67. The article is by Prof. Beneke, himself a very respectable writer on philosophy; and while he does justice to the merits of the work in point of ability, he takes occasion, in remarking upon it, to state occasionally the doctrines of Ger |