The aim of this paper is to examine linguistic characteristics of the inscriptions written in South Arabian alphabet and found in Ethiopia. They are first attestations of the language situation of pre-Aksumite Ethiopia.
A. J. Drewes has advanced his hypothesis concerning the language of those inscriptions. He divides them into two groups according to the linguistic differences they manifest. Group I, as he calls it, is written in more or less pure Sabaen, whereas the language of the group II has many characteristics of their own, and he thinks that they were written by native Ethiopians.
Our main purpose is try to describe linguistic features of the inscriptions in detail and find mutual relations of the features. Then we will proceed to investigate Drewes' hypothesis and demonstrate that the existence of group II can be ascertained and that the language was not used only for writing, but also for everyday use. They wrote their mother tongue which shared some characteristics with Geez.
This is to say that the native people was not under strong pressure of Sabaens, which fact is also supported by recent archaeological findings from the time when those inscriptions were drafted. Although it is certain that there was symbiosis of the Ethiopians and Sabaean immigrants, the latter was a minor group then.

抄録全体を表示

Maat (mꜣꜥt) is an ancient Egyptian comprehensive concept connoting justice, truth, and fairness while focusing on the meaning of the order of the universe. This concept was deified as a goddess of justice or truth (mꜣꜥt) and appeared in various texts throughout ancient Egyptian history. This article analyzes the portrayal of goddess Maat in the Coffin Texts, which are known as funerary texts during the Middle Kingdom. In addition to the Pyramid Texts from the Old Kingdom and the Book of the Dead from the New Kingdom, the Coffin Texts are some of the most important resources for understanding ancient Egyptian religion. The Coffin Texts contain over 1,000 spells and include more than 190 descriptions of Maat requiring further examination.

　Furthermore, this article examines the eight expressions known as the Dual Maat (Mꜣꜥty), written as the dual form of the goddess Maat. The reduplication of a deity who was usually represented in a single form is unique among ancient Egyptian deities. The results of the analysis reveal that the Dual Maat reflected three noticeable qualities of Maat: (1) the dual goddesses had a specific relationship with Sokar, the god of the netherworld (spells 479 and 660); (2) they were independent goddesses that empowered and stood by the deceased (spells 660, 149, and 416); and (3) they developed a unique relationship with Re, the sun god (spells 682 and 693).

抄録全体を表示

One of the difficult problems in dealing with the Great Rhetra has been that of the authenticity of the text But recently, in spite of Edward Meyer's view, the authenticity of the text has found acceptance with most scholars I share their view and will propose here an interpretation of this Rhetra The text of the Rhetra runs as follows (1)Διοζ Συλλανιου και 'Αθηναζ Συλλανιαζ ιερον ιδρυσαμενο (ν), (2) φυλαζ φυλαξαντα κα ωβαζ ωβαξαντα, (3)τριακοντα γερουσιαν συν αρχαγεταιζ καταστησαντα, ωραζ εξ, ωραζ απελλαζειν μεταξυ Βαβυκαζ τε και Κνακιωνοζ, ουτωζ εισφερειν τε και αφιστασθαι (4) γαμωδανγοριανημην και κρατοζ The first part (1) is read "founding a sanctuary of Zeus Syllanius and Athena Syllania" Of the cult title "Syllanius" many interpretations have been offered, but it seems to me that no decisive conclusion on this term has been reached yet I read the second part (2) "dividing the people into phylai and obai" The phyle in the Rhetra is not a racial tribe but a local one, and the oba is a subdivision of the phyle So this part implies that a new organisation by tribes and obai is being introduced for political purposes The following part (3) mentions the foundation of the gerousia constituted by thirty members including archagetai But it seems to me that the gerousia existed in some form or other previously, and that καταστησαντα here must only mean that the membership of the gerousia was fixed in number and personnel at this time We find in the whole Rhetra three infinitives-απελλαζειν εισφερειν and αφιστασθαι and four aorist participles-ιδρυσαμενον, φυλαξαντα, ωβαξαντα and καταστησαντα The subject of these participles is no doubt considered to be a certain "law-giver" Now, the technical meaning of εισφερειν is "to introduce a proposal" Those who introduce a proposal are, as Plutarch says, the gerousia αφιστασθαι, I think, is not passive but middle Therefore, though its meaning is vague, the subject of this infinitive must also be the gerousia And perhaps, as Hammond indicated, this word implies "to adjourn and dissolve the (assembly of the) people" If so, then, what is the ubject of the infinitive απελλαζειν (=summon <the people> to an assembly) ? It is not impossible to regard it as a certain "law-giver" But those who introduce proposals and adjourn the assembly of the people must summon the people to the assembly So I conclude that the subject of απελλαζειν is also the gerousia In a work, απελλαζειν, εισφερειν and αφιστασθαι represent various powers of the gerousia The last part (4) is corrupt and its meaning is obscure Presumably this part is a statement concerning powers of the people or the assembly Thus we may translate the Great Rhetra (except the rider) as follows "The law-giver shall found a sanctuary of Zeus Syllamus and Athena Syllania, shall divide the people into tribes and obai, shall set up the gerousia consisting of thirty members, the chief leaders included The <new> gerousia shall from season to season summon the people to the assembly between Babuka and Knakion, and thus shall introduce proposals and shall adjourn the assembly The people shall be <the assembly and> the decisive authority" After all these considerations I believe I can affirm that reforms were effected presumably in about 760 B C in comf ormity with the Rhetra, and that thenceforth the gerousia and the assembly (apella) came to be the legislative and the executive organs

抄録全体を表示

The terms which we can identify as musical instruments in the Ugaritic texts are knr “lyre”, tlb “pipe”, msltm cymbals” and tp “hand-drum”. There are some other terms alleged as musical instruments in Ugaritic texts such as the terms rimt “cow-instrument”, mrqdm “castanet”, 'd “lute” and nbl “strings-instrument”. But these identifications remain problematic.
We find that the the term knr “lyre” is deified in Ugaritic texts. So it is possible to say that lyres had a special divine power in Ugaritic rituals. We can see that a drum and cymbals were used in the exorcistic ritual for curing a sick man in ancient Babylonia. It is possible that string instruments were used in some kinds for magic or in some rituals for manipulating the gods' feelings in the ancient Near East. It may be said that the lyre's magical practice for manipulating the gods' feelings was a motive for its deification in ancient Ugarit.
In the Ugaritic personnel list we can find mslm “cymbalists” together with šrm “singers”. So it is possible that cymbals was an important musical instrument in the Ugaritic kingdom related to religious rites. In the passage of KTU 1.3:I:18-22 it seems that cymbals was an indispensable instrument in this Baal ritual for the celebration of Baal's sovereignty.
The terms tlb “pipe” and tp “hand-drum” occur in the King List of Ugarit. Perhaps they were used in an invocation of the deified kings.
We can find in the the other Semitic languages the cognate terms as the Ugaritic knr, msltm and tp. As for the Ugaritic knr, we can identify the same root not only in the Semitic language but also in the Hittite, Egyptian and Greek languages. This fact might be evidence for cultural contact in the ancient world. Since these instruments mostly occur together with the verbs *šyr or bd which denote “to sing” in Ugaritic, instruments were used mainly to accompany vocal music.

抄録全体を表示

The Avesta Yašts, which constitute the earlist part of the Younger Avesta, comprises numerous uninteligible passages. Yašt 5, 11:13 are typical hymns having such passages.
Parallel passages are observed between Yt. 5, 11:13 and Yt. 10, 125 (a hymn to Mithra), that is to say, ahmya vaše vaz_??_mna (Yt. 5, 11) with ahmya vaše vazante (Yt. 10, 125), and caθwaro vaštara spaeta vispa hama. gaona_??_ho (Yt. 5, 13) with caθwaro aurvanto spaeitita hama. gaona_??_ho (Yt. 10, 125), although they have been rejected or ignored by many Iranists. The dual form, hama. nafaeni berezanta taurvayanta, (Yt. 5, 13), which shows the very contradictory grammatical feature in context, seems to be a formula in the non-Zoroastrian original Yašts. Therefore, the agents of the verb, taurvayanta, are not caθwaro vaštara “four drawing-animals, ” but two gods suggested by the dual form. The above two evidences, I think, reveal the close relation between Anahita and Mithra. On the other hand, Anahita was also worshiped as the bestower and the guardian of kingship as well as Mithra in ancient Iran, and such function of Anahita is known by several passages in Yast 5, the inscriptions of Artaxerxes II and other evidences in West Iran. Moreover, considering the dual form of Yt. 5, 13 and Herodotus' famous misunderstanding about Iranian Aphrodite, Anahita (I, 131), we could not deny the possibility that both of them were united into a pair.
I suppose St. 11 sings a pair of gods, Mithra and Anahita, driving the chariot, and St. 13 comprises the fragments of two different hymns, one depicts Anahita's four drawing-animals, the other the combat against daevas by them. Yt. 5, 11: 13 would be the remnant of the lost hymns dedicated to Mithra-Anahita. If we accept Christensen's theory that, imitating the Avestan language, Median magi converted to Zoroastrianism composed Yašt 5, we may say that the original text of Yt. 5, 11:13 was the part of θεογουιη, so-called Median version of Yašts.
My translation of Yt. 5, 11:13 is as follows;
St. 11: Who (the male god, i. e., Mithra), the first, drives the chariot, gripes the bridles for (driving) the chariot; (Anahita) driving his chariot, …
St. 13: Whose four drawing-animals (are), white ones, all of one colour. (Two gods, Mithra and Anahita) of the same family, high ones, overwhlmed…

抄録全体を表示

Although Daniel C. Dennett, after his investigation of Aphrodito Greek Papyrus, opposed the “Tribute” thesis of Becker, the way of collecting tax organized in the middle Umayyad dynasty is found to be different from one of traditional materials which is recorded by al-Maqrizi's al-khitat. This should be identified to be one of the Arab Conquest Age. The system of tax collect was gradually established in the age of Umayyad dynasty when the Arabic rule over Egypt was strengthened, in parallel with the centralization of Islamic Empire.

抄録全体を表示

ドミナント社会が採集狩猟社会に対して描いてきたイメージは表裏一体をなすダブルイメージである。残忍, 蒙昧, 幼稚, 未開などの否定的なイメージ。無垢, 純粋, 自然とともに, などの肯定的なイメージ。いずれも「文明」の対局に位置づけられ, 政治, 経済, 文化, 法のあらゆる面で採集狩猟民を抑制し統治するための策略であった。しかし, 近年, 政治社会的な地位を向上させる運動, そして新たに確立した社会的, 法的地位に関連して, 採集狩猟民が自らイメージ作りを積極的に行なうようになった。こうしたイメージは政治運動に使われると同時に, 新たなアイデンティティーのエスニック・マーカーに動員されることがある。本稿では, カナダの「エスキモー」が「イヌイト」に替わっていくプロセスにおいて, 狩猟活動が意識されざる日常的な行動から, イヌイトのアイデンティティーを表象するイメージになっている事例を中心に, イメージをめぐる政治的な側面をとり上げる。

抄録全体を表示

本文中で触れたように、象は、パン屋さんで世界一巨大なカアク、お皿工場で普通のお皿の百枚分もある大皿、靴屋さんで百足分もある靴を作り、そのことは既に先行するテキストで述べられている。つまりこれらは全て限定形で表されていても、読者は文脈的情報によりその指示対象を理解できるはずもので、その原則に従えば限定形で表されるべきなのである。それがカアクだけが限定形で、お皿と靴が非限定形という不揃いが生じている。この場合まずカアクが限定形になっていることから、読者はその指示対象を知るためには、それ以前のテキストをスキャンし、象がパン屋さんで世界一大きなカアクを焼いたという情報を得る必要がある。ところが前節でも述べたように「象」の物語には、パターンの定まったサブ物語が3つあり、象はそのパターンに従ってそれぞれの巨大商品を作ったわけである。もし続くお皿と靴も限定形であったなら、カアクの場合と同じ情報検索の手間をさらに二回繰り返さなければならないことになる。加えてカアク・お皿・靴それぞれに修飾節が後続し、読者はそれらによっても情報を与えられている。この場合、最初のカアクだけを限定形にし、後の二つを非限定形すなわち読者の持っている情報ではその指示対象を特定できない場合の形式を用いて表すことで、逆に読者が情報検索、それも最初の情報検索と全く同じパターンの情報を得るための検索作業に用いる労力を省く効果があるのではないか。つまり最初だけ完全な形で提示し、二・三番目はいわば「以下同文」的な扱いをしたのである。さらに、こうして名詞句全体を"軽く"しておくことで、後に修飾節をつけて読者に別の情報を与えることが、よりやりやすくなった。或いは逆に、非限定形にして、その指示対象を特定するための情報を減らしてしまった分を、新たな修飾節で補ったと考えることもできるかもしれない。

抄録全体を表示

本稿では湯湾方言（琉球諸語の1つである奄美語に属する）の複数形が持つ諸機能に注目し，それを世界の諸言語の複数形が持つ「特殊な機能」（Corbett 2000: 234）と比較・考察した。湯湾方言の複数標識は，簡単に言えば，日本語標準語の「たち」だけではなく，「など」に相当する機能も持っている。このような現象を通言語的な視点から整理するために，本稿では「意味地図」（semantic map）という方法論を用いた。その際，単数，双数，複数などのような「数の区分の意味」（number values）と，累加，連合，などの「数の区分以外の意味」（non-number values）を分けて捉えることによって，諸言語の複数形が持つ「特殊な機能」が意味地図上で比較考察できるようにした。その結果，従来の研究では区別されていなかった「集合的例示」と「選言的例示」の区別，および複数形が実質的に1人の対象を指す用法のうち，いわゆる「尊敬複数」（polite plural）とは異なる「否定的・単独的例示」の通言語的な価値を明らかにした。

抄録全体を表示