SHT 3405

Known as:	SHT 3405
Cite this page as:	"SHT 3405". In A Comprehensive Edition of Tocharian Manuscripts (CEToM). Created and maintained by Melanie Malzahn, Martin Braun, Hannes A. Fellner, and Bernhard Koller. https://cetom.univie.ac.at/?m-sht3405 (accessed 18 May 2026).
Provenience
Main find spot:	Unknown
Collection:	Berlin Turfan Collection
Size (h × w):	7.5 × 5 cm
Number of lines:	3+

Transliteration

b2x	e [t]t[e] y·ā

Transcription

b2x	ette y·ā

Commentary

Linguistic commentary

*	Schmidt (Wille 2008: 63) reads “estiyā[r]; verschrieben für etsiyār* (für eṃtsiyār), das als opt. 1. sg. Ā. der Wurzel ents- (“ergreifen”) – die erste bisher entdeckte, von einem Konjunktivstamm gebildete Dualform des Tocharischen überhaupt – zu bestimmen ist.” [“estiyā[r]; misspelled for etsiyār* (for eṃtsiyār), which must be identified as opt. 1. sg. Ā. of the root ents- (“seize”) – the first Tocharian dual formed from a subjunctive stem that has been discovered so far”]. It is not quite clear what is meant here. It cannot be a 1sg.opt.mid. because that would certainly be eṃtsimār. Should it be a 1du.opt.mid., then the remarkable thing is not that it is an optative (formed from the subjunctive stem), but the mere fact that it is a first person dual: in TA, only a 3du.pt. and a du.ipv. are attested (both active; in TB, more dual endings are attested: 3du.prs.mid., 3du.pt. – or perhaps 3du.sbj. –, du.ipv.mid. However, no 1du. endings are attested either).There are other problems as well: the reading is far from obvious and it is not clear how the gloss relates to the Sanskrit text in Schmidt's interpretation: a 1du.opt.act. would be parigṛhṇīyāva, for instance. If the gloss is not in TA, but in TB, the first two akṣaras may be ette 'down' or ente 'then' (perhaps rather the former, because in the late language inte seems to be replacing older ente - Peyrot 2008: 172). Also, e[ś]ne 'eyes' might be a possible reading. The third akṣara may read y[w]ā, which could be an abbreviation of ywārc 'half'. Unfortunately, these suggestions offer no connection to the Sanskrit text.
*	.

Schmidt (Wille 2008: 63) reads “estiyā[r]*; verschrieben für etsiyār (für eṃtsiyār), das als opt. 1. sg. Ā. der Wurzel ents- (“ergreifen”) – die erste bisher entdeckte, von einem Konjunktivstamm gebildete Dualform des Tocharischen überhaupt – zu bestimmen ist.” [“estiyā[r]*; misspelled for etsiyār (for eṃtsiyār), which must be identified as opt. 1. sg. Ā. of the root ents- (“seize”) – the first Tocharian dual formed from a subjunctive stem that has been discovered so far”]. It is not quite clear what is meant here. It cannot be a 1sg.opt.mid. because that would certainly be eṃtsimār. Should it be a 1du.opt.mid., then the remarkable thing is not that it is an optative (formed from the subjunctive stem), but the mere fact that it is a first person dual: in TA, only a 3du.pt. and a du.ipv. are attested (both active; in TB, more dual endings are attested: 3du.prs.mid., 3du.pt. – or perhaps 3du.sbj. –, du.ipv.mid. However, no 1du. endings are attested either).There are other problems as well: the reading is far from obvious and it is not clear how the gloss relates to the Sanskrit text in Schmidt's interpretation: a 1du.opt.act. would be parigṛhṇīyāva, for instance. If the gloss is not in TA, but in TB, the first two akṣaras may be ette 'down' or ente 'then' (perhaps rather the former, because in the late language inte seems to be replacing older ente - Peyrot 2008: 172). Also, e[ś]ne 'eyes' might be a possible reading. The third akṣara may read y[w]ā, which could be an abbreviation of ywārc 'half'. Unfortunately, these suggestions offer no connection to the Sanskrit text.

Philological commentary

*	Glosses Skt. /// + [h]. toparigraheva; perhaps to be read parigrahe ca 'and in possession'? (Wille 2008: 63).

Remarks

*	Recto in Chinese, verso in Sanskrit with Tocharian gloss.

SHT 3405

Provenience

Transliteration

Transcription

Commentary

Linguistic commentary

Philological commentary

Remarks

References

Online access

Miscellaneous