The Old Turkish Texts

The religions already mentioned were also present among the Turkish peoples, particularly the Uigurs who after the collapse of their powerful empire of the steppes after 840 CE founded the West Uigur kingdom with its capital Khocho (Gaochang). Predominantly from the villages Bulayïq and Kurutka in the Turfan oasis Christian texts in Syriac, Sogdian and Turkish came to light. Manichaean Turkish texts come from many temple ruins in Khocho itself but also from other places in the oasis such as Bäzäklik and Toyuq. They are written not only in the Manichaean, but also in the Uigur script and in Turkish runes, otherwise known only from inscriptions in Siberia and Mongolia, and comprise a broad spectrum of Manichaean literature, furthermore letters, monastic decrees etc. that give us in insight into how Manichaeism ›had installed itself in the world‹, to use the words of an untimely deceased member of the commission guiding the Turfan project, H.-J. Klimkeit.

Old Turkish

After the first stage of Old Turkish (runic inscriptions from many regions of Asia from Mongolia as far as the Carpathian Basin, ca. 6th - 10th c.) a second stage is represented by the pre-Islamic texts from Turfan and Dunhuang. This Central Asian Turkish is a koiné-type literary language that, on phonological and morphological criteria, is divided into about three dialects: Manichaean Turkish, early Buddhist Old Turkish [Uigur A] and Buddhist Old Turkish [Uigur].

 Whilst the literary remains of the Uigur Manichaeans dates from the 10th and 11th centuries and that of the Christians is restricted to Khocho, Bulayïq and Kurutka, that of the Buddhists presents an entirely different picture. In the whole period from the 9th to the 14th centuries Buddhist works were read, copied, translated and modified. The number of fragments illustrating all the facets of Buddhism amongst the Uigurs rises to thousands and forms the major part of the ca. 8000 Old Turkish fragments. When we consider that this is only a small part of what was once translated, written down and put into verse then we must recognize that Buddhism really flourished in the later phase of the Uigur kingdom.

Click to get a larger image
Page of a block print of the Old Turkish version of Viśvantara-Jātaka. Illustrations in the Uigur-Mongolian style.

Edition of the Old Turkish texts

In 1904, shortly after the return of the first Turfan Expedition with its stupendous results, F.W.K. Müller, the acting director of the Museum for Ethnology edited the first Turkish Manichaean text. In the same year, K. Foy attempted a first description of the language of the Turkish Manichaean texts. But it was A. V. Le Coq who was to publish not only the Manichaean miniatures in a splendid facsimile volume but also to edit the Manichaean Turkish text fragments in three studies (»Türkische Manichaica aus Chotscho«, I-III [1911-1922]). W. Bang re-edited some of them between 1923 and 1926 and in 1930 edited together with his student A. v. Gabain, parts of the difficult »Great Hymn to Mani the Father« which Le Coq had not dared to translate (work on this text was continued by A. v. Gabain with W. Winter 1958 [TT IX] and by L.V. Clark 1982). Work on the Manichaean texts was taken up again only at the end of the 60s when P. Zieme published a series of fragments, particularly in BTT V. A first facsimile volume covering about half of the Manichaean Turkish fragments is at the press.   

F. W. K. Müller (1863 - 1930)

F.W.K. Müller turned to the Christian but even more so to the Buddhist Turkish literature with his series »Uigurica« beginning in 1908 and of which A. v. Gabain published the fourth part in 1932 from Müller’s papers. In 1928 W. Bang and A. v. Gabain started the series »Türkische Turfantexte« that eventually comprised ten numbers and in which G.R. Rachmati later cooperated (TT VI, VII). It was also A. v. Gabain who prepared a facsimile edition of the fragments of the Maitrisimit. A facsimile edition of »Uigurica I-IV« was edited in 1983 by G. Hazai and P. Zieme. Most of the publications mentioned have been made easily available in the multi-volume reprint »Sprachwissenschaftliche Ergebnisse der deutschen Turfan-Forschung« 1972-1985). In 1941 A. v. Gabain presented with her »Alttürkische Grammatik« a systematisation of her editorial work on the fragments. Replete with references and clearly structured, this grammar immediately became an instrument of the following generations of Turcologists. She also formed the plan for a »Uigur Dictionary«; this is being carried out by K. Röhrborn (1977-1998; six fascicles to date). G. Clauson wrote an etymological dictionary of Old Turkish in 1972, the Turcologists in St. Petersburg made a reference dictionary in 1968. A. v. Gabain dealt with problems of language, script, book culture and literature. Ş. Tekin published a study of the old book formats of the Uigurs. M. Erdal produced a ground-breaking study of Old Turkish word-formation and has also studied phonological problems. He is preparing a new »Grammar of Old Turkish«.

The scientific work on a text results in an edition that, depending on the fragments, has more or less the following structure: a) an inventory of the fragments; b) attribution of the fragments to manuscript groups and description of these; c) transliteration of the individual fragments; d) compiled text (depending on the language also in transcription), if more than one manuscript was found, often an attempted reconstruction of the original work; e) translation of the text; in the case of a translated text a detailed comparison with the original (actual or assumed), as far as possible; f) commentary on the contents and on linguistic and religious problems and/or those relating to cultural history and even, as necessary, on economical problems; g) indices, complete word index and/or a terminological index. In recent years is has become usual to include the edited texts as photo-facsimiles. The Turfan editions are intended to provide the basis for further studies in all the relevant aspects ranging from codicological to religious studies.

A first survey of the Buddhist literature in 1997 details 83 works and since then the numbers of works identified has risen. If we include new discoveries such as those in the Northern Grottoes of Magao (near Dunhuang) or the recovery of new texts from the collections in Berlin and St. Petersburg we can optimistically expect the number to rise further. Some of the great Mahāyānasūtras such as Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra, das Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra (»Lotus-Sūtra«), Suvarṇaprabhāsottamasūtra (»Sūtra of Golden Light«), Sukhāvātīyūhasūtras, Guanwuliangshoujing, Vajracchedikāsūtra and other Mahāprajñāpāramitā-Texte texts are present, also commentaries translated by monks.

Thanks to the untiring work of Taiwanese Buddhists and scholars the complete Chinese canon in the Taishō edition has meanwhile been digitised and placed on the web thus making it much easier to identify fragments. Therefore in the future it will be possible to find out more quickly if a particular text is a translation of a known text. This will allow us to establish which works are preserved only in the Uigur tradition. However, there are still many manuscripts to be studied, edited and published.

Click to get a larger image
Uigur text in Runes (U 5)

In numerous publications, works of Uigur Buddhism have been presented (see the List of Publications). The manuscript of Insadi-Sūtra edited by S. Teczan (BTT III) is one of the texts of the Berlin collection that is most difficult to read. It is becoming ever more clear that it is an independent version of a Buddhist work.

The relatively late works of Tantric Buddhism that show Tibetan influence were edited in a long-term cooperation by G. Kara and P. Zieme. These include Sādhana texts, the Cakraśaṃvara Cycle, a Guruyoga, Mañjuśrīnāmasaṃgīti and a version of the Book of the Dead from Dunhuang (BTT VII, BTT VIII, Zieme-Kara Totenbuch).

Buddhism in Central Asia

The teaching of the Buddha which arose in northwestern India gained from the time of Aśoka, the ruler of the Maurya dynasty in the 3rd c. BCE and especially after the first century BCE an ever growing following also outside of India. In this the Central Asian caravan routes played an important role as an early missionary route to China and East Asia. Of Theravāda Buddhism two schools in particular, the Sarvāstivāda and the Mūlasarvāstivāda were active on the northern Silk Road, but the Vaibhāṣika school was also broadly spread. With the development of Mahāyāna Buddhism new impulses originated in China and found fertile ground in the oases of Central Asia, particularly in Khotan and in the Turfan Oasis. Testimonies of the cults of Maitreya and Avalokiteśvara  as well as of the school of the Pure Land (Amitābha Buddhism) appear in great numbers. The close connection between Turfan and Dunhuang, particularly at the time of the kingdom of the West Uigurs led to, amongst other things, the spread of Dhyāna (> Chan > Zen). In the late phase, in the Yuan Period (13th/14th c.) Tantrism flourished under the influence of Tibetan and Mongolian masters.

A series of articles by K. Kudara and P. Zieme deals with bilingual excerpts (Chinese - Old Turkish) from Theravāda Buddhist works (the Āgama). Similar bilingual Buddhist texts are the Biography of Xuan Zang and the Bathhouse Sūtra. Furthermore, the authors edited a versified version of the meditational sutra Guanwuliangshoujing, a sutra of the school of the Pure Land hitherto known only in its Chinese version which is in prose.

Buddhist confessional texts that have attracted the interest of Turcologists since Türkischen Turfantexten IV were edited by K. Röhrborn and I. Warnke.

On the basis of 60 Berlin fragments it was possible to re-establish the text of the first book of the Sutra of Golden Light (Altun Yaruk Sudur) so badly preserved in the St. Petersburg fragments and to present an edition in 1996 (see BTT XVIII). This fills a gap in the Uigur tradition of this important  Mahāyāna sutra that was translated into many languages of the Buddhist countries (Chinese, Tibetan, Mongolian, Tangut etc.). A further gap in the detailed study of this text is J. Wilkens’ edition of the Trikāya part of that text (BTT XXI).

The Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra is a Mahayana sutra whose Indian original is lost except for a few quotes in other texts. However, translations into Chinese, Khotan Sakan, Sogdian, Tibetan and Mongolian are known. To these could be added a translation into Old Uigur of a third of the text recovered from the Turfan fragments (see BTT XX).

A research prize granted by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation to G. Kara has allowed and continues to allow him to cooperate with P. Zieme. They work together on a collection of Uigur tantric sutras in which Avalokiteśvara the Bodhisattva of Great Compassion plays a central role. These works translated from Chinese will be compared to the originals.

An edition of Yetikän sudur (»Sūtra about the Great Bear«) and similar Buddhist works dealing with the stars is being prepared. Furthermore, besides editions of a commentary on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśasūtra and of Amitābha texts, editions of Chan-Buddhist texts, of a collection of Uigur translations of the Lotus Sutra and of alliterative poetry with Buddhist content (as a continuation of BTT XIII) are planned.

Click to get a larger image
Fragment of a Uigur text (U 3832)

This page belongs to the unpublished Old Turkish texts that still comprise a large part of the Berlin collection. U 3832, which is probably from Murtuq, is from a magnificently made book with golden yellow letters on a dark blue background. The text is a Tantric Buddhist one and is from an Old Turkish translation of the Tantric work Fo shuo pishamen tianwang jing (= *Vaiśravaṇa-devaraja-sūtra) »The Sūtra about the King of heaven Vaiśravaṇa, preached by the Buddha«. On the page shown here Vaiśravaṇa, one of the four guardians of the world (lokapāla) speaks verses praising the Buddha.

Though the numerous religious texts dominate in the editorial work there is occasionally an opportunity to work on the above-mentioned profane texts which contain just a few literary genres but which provide information about the real circumstances and objects of interest of the societies in the Central Asian oasis-states and therefore are an important source for the previously badly documented history of the Turkish peoples.
Already early on W. Radloff worked on these secular texts, but they only appeared in 1928 in his posthumous book »Uigurische Sprachdenkmäler«. His student, S.E. Malov continued his work in St. Petersburg; in Berlin it was G.R. Arat who prepared a large-scale study of Uigur documents (unpublished; in his papers, held in trust by O.F. Sertkaya, there are numerous photography of texts the originals of which must be presumed lost). His »Eski Türk Hukuk Vesikalar« which appeared in 1964 formed the basis for the further studies of L.V. Clark (»Introduction to the Uyghur Civil Documents of East Turkestan 13th - 14th cc.«, 1975) and of Japanese scholars, in particular N. Yamada, whose postumus work finally appeared in the »Sammlung uigurischer Kontrakte« (edited by T. Moriyasu, J. Oda, H. Umemura, P. Zieme) in 1993. S. Raschmann published a collection of important references in her book »Baumwolle im türkischen Zentralasien«, 1995. D. Matsui published Uigur documents and contributed so to the study of the society and economy of the Yuan period. He intends to publish »Uigur Administrative Orders during the Mongol Period« in BTT.

The Middle Iranian Texts

A few book rolls and books amongst the Middle Iranian material are relatively well preserved. The latter include the group of Christian Sogdian texts. From numerous pages found in Bulayïq codices can be reconstructed. One of the pearls of the collection is an incomplete booklet, whose pages are in the wrong order, published under the name Bet- and Beichtbuch. But the vast majority of the Turfan texts consist of single pages (though sometimes pages in sequence are preserved), for the most part, fragments of pages. Torn from books, the pages were found by the explorers strewn on the ground or they bought them from the farmers in the area. The date of the destruction is unclear and it may be assumed that the conditions under which the fragments were found contributed to further fragmentation. Some pages were never bound into a book: they were the by-products of a scriptorium.

Despite the rather desolate state of many fragments the texts are, for various reasons, retrievable. Many texts are relatively short hymns, two or three of which could fit on a page. Or, since copies of the texts were made and, moreover, many manuscripts contained collections of miscellaneous texts, it is possible that one and the same text is present in a number of copies. Therefore one of the achievements of Turfan Studies is to compare meticulously and to confront these fragments with each other in a synopsis. The particular character of the collection means that a scholar working on a text has to be familiar with the whole collection, since that text may be present in it more than once and even in a form difficult to recognize. It has been shown that decisive information can be gained even from an apparently insignificant fragment. Part of the work (and at the same time one of its results) consists of reconstruction the original codices. On the basis of page size and writing type a relatively large number of codices have been recognized. These often contain collections of texts in various languages (Middle Persian, Parthian, Sogdian and Uigur).

Click to get a larger image
Manichaean scribes. Page from a book from Qočo.

Translation of the Old Turkish lines in the cartouche:
»When one believes [heretics(?)],
when one believes them who follow wrong teachings,
when there are unbelieving begrudgers, [greedy] wanters,
then one must recognize that everything [is perishable(?)].«
(from an unidentified Manichaean text).

Amongst the languages preserved in the fragments from Turfan the Middle Iranian languages Middle Persian, Parthian, Sogdian, Sakan and Bactrian (one fragment in Manichaean script and the ›Hephthalitenfragmente‹) are represented. At the time of the discovery of the Turfan texts, of all these languages only Middle Persian in the form of Book Pahlavī, the language of the Zoroastrian books, was known, other sources for these languages had either not been recognized or interpreted or even found (Middle Persian and Parthian inscriptions, Sogdian letters and documents, Bactrian documents). Information on these languages, e.g. in al-Bīrūnī’s writings, came into its own only when work started on the texts which (together with the discoveries from other places in Central Asia) allowed a whole series of Middle Iranian languages to step forward and so extended enormously our knowledge about the history of the Iranian languages and about the cultures along the Silk Road.

In the case of the Middle Persian texts the language of which was already known in the form of Zoroastrian Middle Persian, the fact that the texts from Turfan are written in the clear Manichaean alphabet and have for the most part not been subject to massive influence by New Persian in their transmission has had consequences for the interpretation of the orthographically very opaque Zoroastrian Middle Persian transmitted in late manuscripts. The possibility afforded by the Turfan texts of distinguishing the closely related languages Middle Persian and Parthian according to clear criteria led to a general clarification of the linguistic situation in the west of Iran in the Middle Iranian period and has also had effects on the recognition of Western Middle Iranian loanwords in Armenian and in Aramaic dialects.

Even today the Parthian texts from Turfan still are the most important source for the study of this language. The Sogdian texts from Turfan have, on the basis of their quantity and varied contents, a prominent position amongst the various and widely scattered sources for this language. The Middle Persian texts from Turfan are an important reference point for Zoroastrian Middle Persian. The Sakan texts from Turfan join the extensive finds from the Sakan language areas proper in the west of Central Asia. The few Bactrian texts from Turfan, that have eluded convincing interpretations, can hopefully now be interpreted with the help of the various discoveries of Bactrian texts from Afghanistan (particularly in the last ten years).

F. W. K. Müller discovered in the first texts sent to Berlin not only Middle Iranian languages but also original Manichaean texts. Texts thereby came to light that were from Manichaeans themselves and not, as was the case with most of the texts known up to then, from the bitter enemies of this religion or from slightly more objective Arabic historians, and therefore opened a new door on Manichaeism. Work on them has given new impulses to the study of Manichaeism and Gnosis. Later discoveries of Manichaean and Gnostic texts - especially in Greek and Coptic - have led to a more profound understanding of the texts of Eastern Manichaeism and allow their relative position to be established. As far as the Parthian and Middle Persian Manichaean texts (as opposed to the manuscripts containing them) is concerned, it is important to note that many of them were composed in Iran and not - quite unlike the Sogdian and even more the Uigur texts - in Central Asia. For the most part, though, we have copies from the 8th - 11th c. (i.e. 400-500 years after the texts came into existence) made first by Western Iranians and later by Sogdians or Turks. This can be seen in the names that are sometimes placed at the end of paragraphs in the texts.

The Christian and Buddhist texts do not have a pre-eminent position comparable to that of the Manichaean texts. They are often translations that are less well preserved than the originals in other languages. Nevertheless, they are eloquent testimony to the spread of Buddhism and Christianity in Central Asia. Christian-Sogdian texts were found together with Syriac texts and belong to a bilingual Christian community that is part of the Syriac speaking Nestorian community that was also widespread in the Sasanian Empire. Besides translations from the Gospels various ecclesiastical texts are present the Syriac originals of which are often also extant. These are a great help in understanding the Sogdian versions that, in turn, contribute to the history of the transmission of the text.

Click to get a larger image

The illustration shows the bottom half of a page (n 473 Recto) in slightly modified Syriac script (Estrangelo) and Christian Sogdian language. The text, a translation from an identified Syriac original, contains a dialogue between a younger monk who poses questions and an older monk who gives answers; it belongs to the Apophthegmata Patrum. The speakers are indicated in the text by the words written in red ptry (›father‹ for the older monk) and br’t (›brother‹ for the younger monk). The page belongs to the large Sogdian codex C2 and was edited by N. Sims-Williams (BTT XII: Folio 61 R on p. 129).

A unique Christian text is the fragment of the Psalter that found its way to Turfan: It is written in Middle Persian in a variant of the Pahlavī script (that of Sasanian Middle Persian) and is a rare piece of evidence for a Nestorian Christian community’s switch to Middle Persian.

The religious affiliation of a text is important not only for its terminology and comprehension, as a rule it also says something about its origin. Certainly many Middle Persian and Parthian Manichaean texts are translations from no longer extant original texts in an Aramaic language. The Manichaean literature in other languages, in particular the rich Coptic Manichaean literature also contains in part translations and adaptations of the same originals. On the other hand, Chinese translations and adaptations of Parthian Manichaean texts and some Sogdian versions of Parthian texts (Sermon about the Light-Nous; Sermon of the Soul) exit. Most of the preserved Sogdian texts are translations and adaptations of identified Syriac (in the case of Christian Sogdian) and Chinese (in the case of Buddhist Chinese) originals.

This interdependancy that testifies to what is a special feature of the Silk Road, namely that it was a link not only between trading posts but also between cultures, languages and religions, provides us with many avenues for interpreting the texts and demands of those working on the texts much competence and the willingness to consult with colleagues from neighbouring disciplines.

Edition of the Iranian Turfan texts

When F. W. K. Müller had deciphered what was later to be called the Manichaean alphabet he was able in 1904 to present Middle Persian and Parthian texts in transcription and translation; these were reedited by C. Salemann in 1908 who added a dictionary, grammatical notes and an index a tergo.

Click to get a larger image
The Manichaean text M 4a / I / V /,/ II / R/

On the right-hand side of the illustration is a short hymn in Parthian in Manichaean script which F. W. K. Müller published already in 1904 and for which M. Lidzbarski 1918 conjectured an Aramaic original on the basis of the phraseology and which he even reconstructed. Since Mānī on another occasion says:› I am a doctor from Babylonia‹ (bzyšk hym ’c b’b[y](l) z(m)[yg ] M48+/I/R/18-19/), the text seems to refer to him.

transliteration                                                 transcription

3/     nys’r’d mwqr’nyg b’š’                            nisārād muqrānīg(?) bāšā
4/     ’bjyrw’ng ‘šnwhrg hym                          abžīrwānag išnōhrag hēm
5/     cy ’c b’byl zmyg                                       čē až bābēl zamīg
6/     wyspryxt hym ˚˚                                       wyspryxt     wisprixt hēm ˚ wisprixt
7/     hym ’c zmyg b’byl ’wd                            hēm až zamīg bābēl ud
8/     pd r’štyft br ’wyšt’’d                                 pad rāštīft bar awēštād
9/     hym ˚˚ ˚˚ sr’wg hym ’bjyrw’ng               hēm ˚ ˚ sarāwag(?) hēm abžīrwānag
10/   cy ’c b’byl zmyg frnft                                čē až bābēl zamīg franaft
11/   hym ˚˚ frnft hym ’c zmyg                         hēm ˚ franaft hēm až zamīg
12/   b’byl kw xrws’n xrws pd                         bābēl ku xrōsān xrōs pad
13/   zmbwdyg ˚˚ ˚˚ ’w ‘šm’ yzd’n                   zambūdīg ˚ ˚ ō išmā yazdān
14/   pdwh’m hrwyn bg’n hyrzydw                 padwahām harwīn baγān hirzēd-u(?)
15/   ’w mn ’st’r pd ’mwjdyft ˚˚                       ō man āstār pad āmuždīft ˚˚
16/   hnjft mwqr’nyg b’š’h                              hanjaft muqrānīg(?) bāšāh

transliteration

Begun is the Muqrān(?) hymn
I am a grateful student, who am sprouted from the land of Babel (= Babylonia).
I sprouted from Babylonia, and have stood at the gate of truth.
I am a young student, who has gone forth from Babylonia.
Forth I went from Babylonia, so that I might call a call in the world.
I beseech you gods: All the gods, forgive my sin(s) with mercy!
Finished is the Muqrān(?) hymn

As yet the two closely related languages, Parthian and Middle Persian, could not be distinguished. This was done systematically and comprehensively by P. Tedesco 1921 in a dialectological study. New editions of texts were presented by E. Waldschmidt and W. Lentz 1926 and 1933 in studies on the religious contents of the texts and by W.B. Henning 1932, 1933 and 1934 (from F.C. Andreas’ papers) and in numerous articles, in particular by W.B. Henning. This work was continued by M. Boyce 1954 and W. Sundermann, the editor in charge of the Iranian texts since 1970 (»Arbeitsstellenleiter« from 1992 until 2000). In 1975 M. Boyce collected many of the texts published up to then. Scholars from all over the world have edited groups of texts or individual texts. The Christian Middle Persian psalter fragment was published in 1933 by K. Barr from F.C. Andreas’ papers. Grammatical studies on Western Middle Iranian first concentrated on the verb in Middle Persian 1933 (W.B. Henning) and in Parthian 1939 (A. Ghilain). Chr. Brunner published a Syntax of Western Middle Iranian in 1977.

Editions of more extensive text material usually contain a glossary. M. Boyce compiled a Word-list in 1977 of the texts she published in 1975. Within the Manichaean Dictionary Project, currently located at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, a dictionary of the published Parthian and Middle Persian texts has been compiled. But a comprehensive dictionary of all Western Middle Iranian texts is still a long way off.

F. W. K. Müller soon turned to the study of Sogdian (1913 and from his papers Müller-Lentz 1934), a language, prior to the discoveries in Turfan, known only from legends on coins and from the reports of historians writing in Arabic. Whilst he called this language a »Pehlevî-Dialekt« his colleague F.C. Andreas identified it as Sogdian. In 1936 W.B. Henning presented an extensive study of a Manichaean Sogdian text. Work on Christian Sogdian texts was continued by O. Hansen (editor in charge of the texts from 1938-43 and 1947-49) in 1941 and 1955, M. Schwartz in 1968 and 1982 (both unpublished) and N. Sims-Williams in 1985, the latter being a complete edition of the surviving parts of the Christian Sogdian manuscript C2. W. Sundermann devoted himself in 1985 to an extensive Manichaean Sogdian text and has over the years published many individual texts. The Buddhist Sogdian fragments from Turfan have not received the same attention that the Buddhist Sogdian texts found outside Turfan have. Editions of individual texts were presented by Müller-Lentz 1934, Utz 1976 (not published) and K. Kudara-W. Sundermann 1987, 1988, 1991, 1992 and 1998.

In 1954 I. Gershevitch published a Grammar of Manichaean Sogdian, in 1995 B. Gharib published a dictionary that comprises the lexis of the published texts.

J.P. Asmussen (1975) and H.-J. Klimkeit (1989 and 1993) compiled anthologies of Manichaean texts in translation.

Since the reconstitution of the Turfan Studies Group the work of editing has concentrated in particular on the Manichaean texts. The fact that for the great part of these texts no originals in other languages exist and that they are written in the by now well studied languages Middle Persian, Parthian and above all Sogdian makes editing them with reference to literary and religious content of primary importance. W. Sundermann has presented his results in the following publications:

1. Reconstruction of original Manichaean literary works

Mitteliranische manichäische Texte kirchengeschichtlichen Inhalts (BTT XI): Presents texts of homilies about church history in Middle Persian, Parthian and Sogdian. The subject of the texts is the life of Mani and the history of the mission in the 3rd c. CE.

Ein manichäisch-soghdisches Parabelbuch (BTT XV): a Sogdian collection of parables. The parable about religion and the world-sea adapts a Buddhist allegory.

The Manichaean Hymn cycles Huyadagmān and Angad Rošnān in Parthian and Sogdian (CII Suppl.Series II): Addenda and additions to the first edition of the Parthian version by M. Boyce; first edition of the Sogdian version.

Der Sermon vom Licht-Nous. Eine Lehrschrift des östlichen Manichäismus (BTT XVII): Reconstruction of the Parthian and Sogdian versions of a didactic text about the liberation of the human Light-Soul, the transformation of the human being to the New Man through the Light-Soul and the characteristics of the New Man. The text is preserved in a more complete form in Chinese.

Der Sermon von der Seele. Eine Lehrschrift des östlichen Manichäismus (BTT XIX): Reconstruction of the Parthian and Sogdian versions of a didactic text about the nature and the beneficial efficaciousness of the cosmic five elements of Light.

2. Edition of thematically identified groups of works of Manichaean literature

Mittelpersische und parthische kosmogonische und Parabeltexte der Manichäer (BTT IV): Texts with cosmogonical content, among them numerous fragments of a text that is probably to be attributed to Mani and therefore has canonical status; parabels that suggest the existence of East Manichaean collections of parables.

3. Facsimile editions

A further task of the Iranian Turfan editions has been since 1996 the publication of facsimiles of the texts published before the 70s which were as a rule not accompanied by photographs of the fragments. The project can be regarded as complete since all new editions contain facsimiles. Two volumes appeared with this object in mind:

W. Sundermann, Iranian Manichaean Turfan texts in early publications (1904-1934) (CII Suppl. Series Vol. III), continued in:

D.Weber, Iranian Manichaean Turfan texts in publications since 1934 (CII Suppl. Series Vol. IV).
At present W. Sundermann is working on the Middle Persian hymn-cycle Discourse of the Living Soul (gōwišn ī grīw zīndag) and its Sogdian version and the present Iranian collaborator, D. Durkin-Meisterernst, is working on the Middle Persian and Parthian Hymns to the Living Soul. The latter has also prepared an as yet unpublished Grammar of Western Middle Iranian. Chr. Reck is preparing an edition of the Middle Iranian Monday and Bema hymns. W. Sundermann is planning as a project in cooperation with the Iranian Institute of the FU Berlin a »Dictionary of Parthian« which will cover the whole Parthian material from the Sasanian inscriptions, the Parthian texts from Turfan and »Book-Parthian«.