The Videvdad Project

Vīdēvdād has been transmitted in two main groups of manuscripts, namely the Pahlavi and the Sādeh ones.

In the Pahlavi Vīdēvdād manuscripts the Pahlavi translation is intercalated within the Avestan text in a very characteristic way. See for example the beginning of Vīdēvdād in the manuscript M3 of the Staatsbibliothek in Munich (the image has been modificated and the Avestan script is in red and the Pahlavi one in black):

The Avestan text is translated sentence by sentence, so it is possible to establish further divisions in each chapter. Sometimes the Pahlavi translation adds more or less long commentaries, or also synonyms of a translated word in Pahlavi which is hardly understable to the translator. These commentaries are intercalated in the Pahlavi translation as glosses, which sometimes are really long digressions about a specific religious or non-religious theme. The divergence in the interpretations is marked sometimes by the addition of the different opinions of particularly relevant commentators. These interpretations are usually introduced in an anonymous way by the Pahlavi syntagm ast kē ēdōn gōwēd kū ... “there is (a commentator) who says” or inserting the commentator’s name, like for example abarag guft kū ... “Abarag said that ...”. Their common feature is also that all of them have lost the 12th chapter or fragard of Vīdēvdād during their Sassanian transmission, as Dēnkard 8, which does not mention this chapter, demonstrates.

The Pahlavi Vīdēvdād includes also in some manuscripts a Pazand translation of some words, a New Persian translation of some words, a New Persian translation of sentences or the whole text, and even a Gujarati translation of the whole text, as the manuscript Jb shows. There is also a rare case, namely the manuscript T46 from the Meherjirana library, where the Avestan text is only translated in Gujarati, but not in Pahlavi.

This class includes the oldest Vīdēvdād manuscripts in the transmission and refers to the archetype of the Hērbed Hōmast Wahišt Bahlšādān ī Ohrmazd, that is, at least to the end of the XII century A.D., who copied his text in Sīstān. From this copy Ardašīr ī Wahman ī Rōzweh Šāhburzēn Šāhmard copied his text in Sīstān too. From Ardašīr’s copy, namely the hyparchetype, stems the copy of Rōstām Mihrābān ī Marzabān, probably made in India. All these three copies are lost, but its heirs are preserved, according to Geldner's edition of the Avesta, by the manuscripts L4 (1323 A.D.), K1 (1324 A.D.), Pt2, Ml3 (1594 A.D.), P2 (1758 A.D.), K3b, K3a, B1 (before 1865 A.D.), M3, Ml4 (1858 A.D.), M35, Jb and P10. However Geldner’s hypothesis that all the preserved copies of the Pahlavi Vīdēvdād transmission stem from L4 and K1, which were copied by the same scribe, namely Mihrābān ī Kayhusraw, in 1323 and 1324 A.D. respectively, can be dubious. Actually the manuscript known as IM in Sanjana’s edition of the Pahlavi text of Vīdēvdād attests a colophon which seems to stem from a different tradition and refers to the copy of Ardašīr ī Wahman ī Rōzweh Šāhburzēn Šāhmard, but without the next copy of Rōstām Mihrābān ī Marzabān. On the contrary, the other manuscripts collated by Sanjana in his edition, namely MU3 (ca. 1607 A.D.), DR (1755 A.D.), DJJ (1767 A.D.), DJR (1823 A.D.), DJE (1825 A.D.), MU1 (ca. 1832 A.D.), MU2 (1833 A.D.) and DN (1836 A.D.) are supposed to stem from the same tradition of L4 and K1.

To the manuscripts used by Geldner we add the manuscripts E4, F10 and T44 from the Meherjirana Library in Nawsari (India). The manuscript E4 (see description) is probably the best of the known Pahlavi Vīdēvdād manuscripts. It is only 30 years younger than L4 and K1, but complete and very well preserved. The manuscript F10 is also very interesting and seems to be in close relationship to E4. Unfortunately it contains only V 1-8.

Tentatively we postulate now the following stemma which needs obviously further considerations:

On the other hand, the Vīdēvdād Sādeh manuscripts are divided in two groups, namely the Indian and the Iranian ones. Their common features are that they only include the Avestan text without its Pahlavi translation and they never abbreviate the frequent repetitions of the Avestan Vīdēvdād text. They also insert after each chapter of Vīdēvdād the Yasna and Visparad texts for liturgical use, so the Avestan text of these manuscripts follows this order:

Y1.1-8
	Vr 1
Y 1.10-2.8
	Vr 2
Y 2.10-11.8
	Vr 3.2-5
Y 11.9-15
	Vr 3.56-Vr 4
Y 11.16-Y 14
	Vr 5
Y 15
	Vr 6
Y 16-17
	Vr 7-8
Y 18-21
	Vr 9
Y 22
	Vr 10-11
Y 23-27
	Vr 12
		V 1-4
Y 28-30
	Vr 13
		V 5-6
Y 31-34
	Vr 14
		V 7-8
	Vr 15
Y 35-42
	Vr 16-17
		V 9-10
Y 43-46
	Vr 18
		V 11-12
Y 47-50
	Vr 19
		V 13-14
Y 51
	Vr 20
		V 15-16
	Vr 21-22
		V 17-18
Y 52-53
	Vr 23
		V 19-20
Y 54
	Vr 24
		V 21-22
Y 55-72

In Geldner’s edition the Iranian Sādeh are represented only by Mf2 (1618 A.D.), Jp1 (1638 A.D.) and K9 (1746 A.D.). The Iranian Sādeh manuscripts share graphical preferences and agree in much more readings with the Pahlavi manuscripts. The fact that they were copied in Yazd and the Pahlavi manuscripts were copied in Sīstān may have been decisive to these common readings, which stem from an also common tradition. Although the Iranian Sādeh transmission can be referred only to the beginning of the XVII century A.D., it is probable that it stems together with the Pahlavi Vīdēvdād from a common Iranian source.

Thanks to Touraj Daryaee we have had notice of the existence of another Iranian Sādeh manuscript. According to Daryaee's information, which goes back to Dr. K. Mazapour's notes, its copist is Frēdōn Marzabān and its date 967 A.Y. If this information is right, the copist would be the same of Jp1 and this manuscript the oldest known Iranian Sādeh.

The stemma of the Iranian Vīdēvdād Sādeh is the following, according to Geldner:

On the other side, the Indian Sādeh tradition has been preserved in a greater amount of manuscripts, so it is a difficult task to trace it by a genealogical tree, as Geldner, who could not collate but a small part of them, already stated. The Indian Sādeh manuscritps of Vīdēvdād are represented in Geldner’s edition by L1 (1435 A.D.), M2 (1657 A.D.), O2 (1681 A.D.), P1 (1714 A.D.), K10 (after 1743 A.D.), Br1 (1748 A.D.), L2 (1759 A.D.), Dh1 (1764 A.D.), L5 (1792 A.D.), B2, K2 and S2 However, both the Indian and the Iranian Sādeh manuscripts seem to stem from the same tradition of the Pahlavi manuscripts, because they have been influenced by some Pahlavi glosses to the Avestan text. Therefore both Indian and Iranian Sādeh manuscripts stem from a common Iranian, and maybe Pahlavi Vīdēvdād, source.

Geldner also mentions other Vīdēvdād Sādeh manuscripts, namely Bb1, J1, Jm2, Jm3, L3 and Ml1, but without further details, so we cannot suppose if they are Indian or Iranian Vīdēvdād Sādeh. He also mentions the rare M7 (1809 A.D.), which only attest fragments from Y 45, V 1 and Yt 17.