ii. IRANIAN STUDIES
Many of the Austrian Iranologists and their scholarly achievements are discussed in the surveys s.v. GERMANY iii. and iv. The present entry is intended as a synthetic history of the organization of Iranian studies (1) up to 1918 in all the Habsburg “hereditary countries,” which included the present Czech Republic and Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Bosnia, also parts of Poland, Romania, and Ukraine, and (2) since 1918 in the Republic of Austria exclusively.
Ancillary beginnings (1524–1754). Valuable information on Persia was often reported by Austrian envoys (Hans Christoph Freiherr von Teufel zu Guntersdorf, 1587; Georg Tectander, 1602-5), travelers (Heinrich von Poser und Großnedlitz, 1620–25), and Jesuit missionaries (P. Alexander de Rhodes, P. Grueber). However, the earliest orientalists in Austria were Johann Jesen (the Bohemian physician of Emperor Rudolf II [r. 1576-1612]) and Sebastian Tengnagel (1574–1636, native of Büren, in Guelders [in the present-day Netherlands]), the second custodian of the Imperial Library; the latter, although more conversant in Turkish than in Persian, bequeathed some New Persian manuscripts to the Hofbibliothek (some may have been acquired earlier). The Vienna Library preserves the oldest extant New Persian manuscript in Arabic script, the pharmacopoeiea Ketāb al-abnia wa’l-ḥaqāʾeq al-adwia of Abu Manṣur Mowaffaq Heravi (q.v.), copied in 1056 CE by the poet Asadi (q.v.; facs. ed. by F. R. Zeligmann, Vienna, 1859).
Iranian studies arose from diplomatic relations, in Austria somewhat later than in Bohemia, Hungary, or Poland. Until 1750, the government’s aim was to meet the practical need to instruct professional interpreters (dragomans, entitled Sprachknaben). Although the first contacts were established in 1524 on the occasion of the Persian embassy of Father Petrus de Monte Libano to Emperor Charles V (r. 1519-56), the legates (Austrian ambassadors) were content with employing Christian natives or sending young men (from 1578) to Istanbul to acquire a practical command of the languages. The first Imperial Court Interpreter (Hofdolmetscher) was appointed in 1661, in the person of François de Mesgnien Meninski (1623–97), who was a distinguished expert in the languages used in the Muslim kingdoms. In 1674, the Sprachknaben-Institut (under the auspices of the Internunciature in Istanbul) was established in Vienna, on the model of training institutions in France and Poland; and courses in Oriental languages were instituted at the University of Vienna by Gianbattista Podestà (1624–1703). The oldest printings in Austria in modern Oriental languages date from the same period (Podestà, Tractatus varii de linguis orientalibus, praecipue Arabica, Persica et Turcica, Vienna, 1669; P. Bedik, Cehil Sutun, seu explicatio utriusque celeberrimi, ac pretiosissimi Theatri quadraginta columnarum in Perside Orientis, Vienna, 1678). These works were soon superseded by Mesgnien’s Thesaurus linguarum Orientalium, Turcicae, Arabicae, Persicae ..., published in Vienna in four volumes between 1680 and 1687, which for 150 years remained a standard, especially in Jenisch’s 1780 reprint. This flowering did not last long. Podestà’s courses met with only slight success (a total of three students completed the three-year course) and were discontinued after 1677. The Paraemia Locmani sapientis (1703) by Mesgnien’s pupil and successor as Hofdolmetscher (official Interpreter), John Adam Lacheviz, is of little value. After it, and Podestà’s scarcely distributed Cursus grammaticalis linguarum orientalium, arabicae scilicet, persicae et turcicae (3 vols., Vienna, 1703), Oriental studies in Austria remained static for 50 years, since the collapse of the Safavid kingdom in 1722 severely restricted regular diplomatic relations and official concern with Persia.
Enlightened orientalism: the translation epoch (1754–1848). The situation changed in 1754, when, under the impetus of the Chancellor Prince of Kaunitz-Rietberg, the Kaiserlich-königliche Akademie der Orientalischen Sprachen (k.k. Orientalische Akademie), was founded with eight Sprachknaben and a ten-year curriculum. This school of advanced training seemed at first to be intended for a utilitarian goal similar to that of the former initiatives, even though New Persian was not included among the languages taught. However, the Orient, viewed as the “source of Light,” now fascinated both enlightened aristocrats and influential freemasons (cf. the figure of Sarastro Zarathustra in the Magic Flute), so that the Academy was building one of the most effective bridges to the exclusive Austrian nobility and a diplomatic career. Among the first group, Franz Maria Freiherr von Thugut succeeded Kaunitz as chancellor in 1794, and Bernhard (later Freiherr) von Jenisch was appointed in 1780 as trustee of the Imperial Library; the third director, Father Franz Höck, S.J., became Rector Magnificus of the University of Vienna in 1802. A patron enabled a library to be assembled, with 87 Persian manuscripts and hundreds of documents. The tide of the publications flowed again: Ignaz Lorenz Freiherr von Stürmer, Anthologia Persica, seu selecta e diuersis Persis auctoribus exempla in latinum translata (Vienna, 1778); Berhard von Jenisch and Franz Höck, Mohammed Mirchond. Historia priorum regum Persarum post firmatum in regno islamismus, persice et latine (Vienna, 1782); Johann Friedel, Fragmente über die Literaturgeschichte der Perser, nach dem Lateinischen des Baron C.E.A. Reviczky von Rewissnie (Vienna, 1783).
Still more active were Jakob von Wallenburg (1763–1806), Josef Freiherr von Hammer-Purgstall (1774–1856) and Vinzenz von Rosenzweig Ritter zu Schwannau (1791–1865). Wallenburg’s translation of Jalāl-al-Din Rumi’s Maṯnavi perished, and his untimely death broke off his translation of Ferdowsi’s Šāh-nāma. Parts of it were printed in Hammer-Purgstall’s Fundgruben des Orients (Vienna, 1809-19), and A. de Bianchi edited his Notice sur le Schah Name de Ferdoussi (Vienna, 1810). Hammer-Purgstall’s famous Mahomed-Schemsed-din Hafi;s’ Divan, (Tübingen, 1813-14) influenced Goethe’s Westöstlicher Diwan and revealed the universal significance of Persian poetry. This was only a small part of his oeuvre, which included history (e.g., a ten-volume Geschichte der Osmanen, Pest, 1827-33; and Geschichte der Ilchane, d.i. der Mongolen in Persia, Darmstadt, 1842) and Persian, Arabic, and Turkish literature (e.g., Geschichte der schönen Redekunst Persiens vom 4. Jahrhundert der Hedschira ... Mit einer Blüthenlese aus 200 persischen Dichtern, Vienna, 1818; see DAWLATŠĀH SAMARQANDI). Hammer-Purgstall, who was decorated with nineteen Orders and who personified orientalism in Europe through his relations with the aristocracy and the literati, crowned his career by fostering the foundation of the Imperial Academy of Sciences in 1847, of which he became the first president. To his pupil Rosenzweig, professor at the Academy from 1817 to 1847, we owe Joseph und Suleika, historisch-romantisches Gedicht ... des Mewlana Abdurrahman Dschami (Vienna, 1824; see JĀMI, MAWLĀNĀ); Auswahl aus den Diwanen des größten mystischen Dichters Persiens, Mewlana Dschelaleddin Rumi (1838); and a translation of Ḥāfeẓ, Der Diwan des großen lyrischen Dichters Hafi;s (1858), which is superior to that by Hammer-Purgstall.
Vienna was becoming the most active center for living Oriental languages. The Mechitarist monks, coming from Venice, founded an abbey in Vienna; here they developed a library of Armenian manuscripts, which is now second only to Erevan, and the largest collection of Armenian coins (catalogued by P. Z. Bedoukian). They established presses for Oriental languages, from which came, e.g., J. Markwart, Skizzen zur historischen Geographie und Geschichte von Kaukasien (Vienna, 1928). Also, the kaiserlich-königliche Hof-und Staats-Druckerei became, under the direction of Alois Auer Ritter von Welsbach (1813-69), the most versatile press in the German-speaking area, with 104 different typefaces in 1851. The second Avestan typeface (after the very ugly Berlin one of 1825) was cast there in 1847, and Pahlavi and Pazand type with all the ligatures were first made there in 1850. Other printing houses subsequently acquired an Avestan typeface, but not a Pahlavi one, so even works published in other countries had to be printed in Vienna if they required Pahlavi type. Among them were most of Friedrich Spiegel’s philological works (Huzvâresch-Grammatik, Leipzig, 1851; Avesta, die heiligen Bücher der Parsen, zum ersten Male herausgegeben, Vienna, Hof- und Staatsdrückerei, 1853–55; Avesta, die heiligen Bücher der Parsen, zum ersten Male übersetzt, Leipzig, 1863; Commentar über das Avesta, Leipzig, 1864–69), Heinrich F. J. Junker’s The Frahang i Pahlavīk (Heidelberg, 1912), and J. M. Unvala’s Neryosangh’s Sanskrit version of the Hōm Yašt (Vienna, 1924). The state presses also served as centers for language teaching (with lectures on Persian, Arabic, Turkish, or Sanskrit), as Auer required typographers to know the languages they set.
The first European scholarly description of Muslim India (together with Afghanistan) and of Nāder Shah’s reign is owed to the Bozen [Bolzano] Jesuit, Josef Tieffentaller. Johann Philipp Wesdin, better known under his name as a Carmelite, Paulinus a Sancto Bartholomaeo, syndic of the Oriental Missions in Rome and a native of Hof in Lower Austria (1748–1806), wrote the first attempt to interpret the Brahmanic religion, using J. F. Kleuker’s translation of the Avesta. He also, following Sir William Jones’ recognition of the Indo-European language family (1786), published the earliest list of lexical correspondences between Sanskrit, Avestan, Latin, and Germanic (1798). In an appendix he also established that Avestan was not a corrupted form, as Jones had asserted, but a linguistic cognate of Sanskrit. Following in his footsteps, the Jesuit Josef Dobrovský (1753-1829) compared Sanskrit and Avestan with Old Church Slavonic as early as 1806.
Delayed modernization (1848-1918). Despite these achievements, by the middle of the 19th century Austrian Oriental studies had fallen behind in three respects. Firstly, it remained belles-lettres in the true baroque and Enlightenment tradition, the foremost aim of which was translating and popularizing the ever-living treasuries of Oriental poetry and wisdom. Elegant rendering took precedence over philological minuteness or erudite apparatus. This practice earned Hammer-Purgstall fame outside the narrow scholarly circle but also provoked criticism for inaccuracies. In fact, except for the amateur linguist Paulus a Sancto Bartholomaeo, they took absolutely no part in the great archeological debates of the early 19th century, the controversy about the authenticity of the Avesta brought back by Anquetil-Duperron, or the decipherment of the Achaemenid cuneiform inscriptions by Grotefend (q.v.).
Secondly, until the university reform of Leo Graf Thun-Hohenstein in the 1850s, only the medieval Faculties of theology, medecine, and law were represented in the Austrian universities, where teaching, but no research, was allowed. The Ph.D. degree was not introduced in Vienna until 1872. The curriculum of the Orientalische Academie became more technical and detached from research after 1848 (even more so after 1898, when it was reorganized in the k.u.k. Konsularakademie); it no longer served to satisfy the encyclopedic curiosity of aristocrats and diplomats about the Orient, but rather to meet the practical need for political agents. Elsewhere, chairs for Indology or comparative linguistics were created—at the Collège de France and in Bonn (1818, the latter for August Wilhelm von Schlegel), in Berlin (1821, for Franz Bopp), and in Oxford (1833). (Von Schlegel’s brother Friedrich, likewise an Indologist and one of the founders of Comparative Grammar—a term he introduced—was a Chancellery secretary in Vienna. He continued to lecture into the 1820s but soon ceased to keep up with the progress of Indology.) Learned societies were founded—the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal (1780), the Société Asiatique (1822), and the Deutsche Morgenländische Gesellschaft in Leipzig (1845). Such developments prompted no response in Austria. The Professor for Protestant Theology Johann Georg Wenrich (1787–1847) tried to echo Rasmus Rask and Bopp, but his Commentatio of 1827 is but a (well-informed) compilation of all hitherto published works and remained isolated and unnoticed. Wenrich set up a course in Sanskrit as early as 1825, but it attracted no student.
Thirdly, between 1850 and 1885 a new paradigm emerged in all the historical sciences (excluding the classics), of which the neogrammarian revolution in linguistics is only one, albeit the most conspicuous, manifestation. This paradigm can be summarized as a plea for a scientific methodology in the human sciences, contrary to the earlier antiquarian spirit, and it called for literary and scholarly studies to be kept separate (pace Friedrich Rückert). To describe its process, the term “analytic idealism” is perhaps the most appropriate. That is, each piece of evidence was to be clearly dated and located, made to testify to only its own time and place. This procedure leads to the definition of distinct, and supposedly homogenous, stages; these can be rationally described and related to the adjacent, earlier and later stages by application of abstract, logical principles. Accordingly, uchronic and diatopic typologies (in Alexander von Humboldt’s manner) were discarded, and each field began to be split according to linguistic or chronological criteria. As a result, Old and Middle Iranian (and sometimes New Eastern Iranian too) became (and remain today) mostly the domain of Indo-Europeanists, since the Old Iranian languages constitute one of the branches of Indo-European; whereas Persian was subsumed under Oriental studies along with Semitic languages and Turkic. The dawn of this movement for Iranian studies may be found in Theodor Benfey’s review of Hermann Brockhaus’s Vendidad and Friedrich Spiegel’s Avesta (Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1850, pp. 1193–1236; 1852, pp. 1953–76; and 1853, pp. 57–93), in which Benfey inaugurated what might be called the “Vedizing School” along with Rudolf von Roth and Martin Haug. The movement manifested itself in the growing suspicion of local traditions, in the endeavor to distinguish (and in certain cases to over-distinguish) different layers in a building or a text, and in the predilection for the oldest monuments rather than for younger ones, even when the latter were better preserved or more attractive. All this led to a race to discover and secure the oldest testimonia.
The new paradigm, having originated in Germany, was slow in reaching the Dual Monarchy, especially the University of Vienna. Four illustrations are worth citing. (1) Although supported by Hammer-Purgstall and Alexander von Humboldt, Theodor Benfey’s nomination to the professorship of comparative linguistics was refused by the Ministry of Culture in 1849, while Anton Boller (1811-69), whose most durable contribution remains the connection of Japanese with Mongolian and Turkic, was eventually appointed as Extraordinarius (associate professor) in June 1850 and as Ordinarius in 1855. (2) Austria-Hungary, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, and Spain were the few Western countries that did not send any expeditions to Central Asia and the Turfan Basin, except for a geological one under Dr. A. Regel; the Budapest-born Marc Aurel Stein traveled on behalf of the British Government of India. (3) No archeological institute was established, nor were excavations undertaken in Syria, Mesopotamia, or Persia. (4) At the end of the Monarchy the Museum of Fine Arts in Vienna (Kunsthistorisches Museum) owned only 4,000 coins. In comparison, despite shortage of resources, the Republic of Austria has, since 1918, purchased twice as many, notably the collection of E. von Zambaur in 1928.
Up to 1900, most of the Viennese professors who taught or published on Iranian topics remained polymaths rather than historians or comparative linguists in the new sense; Bedřich Hrozńy complained of not having found a competent teacher in Vienna, and Th. Nöldeke deemed his Viennese sojourn (1854–57) unfruitful. Nöldeke was nevertheless elected corresponding fellow of the Academy in 1887, and he published in its Sitzungsberichte—e.g., Persische Studien on Greek loanwords in New Persian, an edition of the Alexander Romance, and a Syriac history of the last Sasanian kings (590-642 CE) written ca. 680 (now known as the Khuzistan Chronicle; Baumstark, p. 207 and n. 11). Boller’s successor was the universal linguist Friedrich Müller (1834-97), who wholly rejected the neogrammarian method (see, e.g., his review of Paul Horn’s Grundriß der neupersischen Etymologie in WZKM 7, 1894, p. 189). Thus his earlier contributions are more useable than his later works, in which antiquated theories often persisted. Good examples are his “Über die Stellung des Armenischen im Kreise der indogermanischen Sprachen” (Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Classe [SKAW] 84, 1877, pp. 211-32), which criticizes H. Hübschmann’s separation of Armenian from Iranian languages, and “Die semitischen Elemente der Pahlawi-Sprache” (SKAW 136/10, 1897, p. 3) against Spiegel’s and Nöldeke’s interpretation of the Semitic words in Pahlavi texts as ideograms and against the neogrammarians. Another universal scholar (now fallen into oblivion) was the professor of history Maximilian Büdinger (1828–1902), who published studies on the Medes and Cyrus as well as on La Fayette and Columbus.
This state of affairs did not have exclusively negative results. The Austrian “backwardness” manifested itself in research directions which the new paradigm neglected and which became fashionable only later—unwritten and modern languages, Trümmersprachen (extinct languages known only through fragmentary or secondary evidence), toponymy, decorative arts, applied sciences, and contemporary studies. Five main research directions can be noted.
(1) Political sciences. Ottokar Freiherr Schlechta von Wssehrd (1825-94), dragoman and diplomat, in addition to producing translations in Hammer-Purgstall’s tradition, studied the juridical and political issues of Oriental countries and published terminological dictionaries.
(2) Geography. Wilhelm Tomaschek (1841-1901), professor of geography in Graz and later in Vienna, broke new ground in the toponymics and historical ethnography of Central Asia and southern Siberia, which he never visited. His Centralasiatische Studien comprises a toponymical survey of Sogdiana, which still retains its value despite the rough method, and a similarly useful analogical glossary of the Pamir languages. Most of his intuitions concerning Alexander’s path in eastern Iran have proved more exact than have linguistically more elaborate proposals; and, however flawed his studies about the Scythians may be, they nevertheless gave impetus to further research for some fifty years.
(3) Art and technology. Out of commercial desire for Persian wares (especially carpets) came the creation of the Orientalisches Museum in 1875 (after 1896 called Kaiserlich-königliches Handelsmuseum), the Hochschule für Welthandel–Lehranstalt für orientalische Sprachen (where, for instance, Jerzy Kuryłowicz studied in 1912-14 and 1919-20), and the Österreichische Orient-und Überseegesellschaft (1875-1918). In the organ of the Überseegesellschaft, entitled Österreichische Monatsschrift für den Orient, Josef Ritter von Karabaček, M. Haberlandt, and Moritz Dreger published articles on Persian art, and Alois Riegl (1858–1905) his earliest book. Riegl’s interest in even minor arts, and in functional architecture to the extent that they reveal the spirit of a civilization, was shared by Josef Strzygowski (1862-1941), who tried to assert a Sasanian (via Armenia) and Central Asiatic impulse in the birth of Romanesque art. The studies of J. von Wiesner (1838-1916) on Persian textiles and Central Asian paper remained unequalled up to the 1960s. Emanuel Graf Ludolf (1823-98) gathered an Oriental art collection, which is now kept in the Francisco-Carolinum Museum in Linz.
(4) Natural history. Apart from the universities, the various educational, diplomatic, and military missions to Persia gave rise to fieldwork. Theodor Kotschy (1813-66) brought back from his travel (1835–43, partly with J. Russegger) 300,000 botanical specimens, including many types now in the Natural History Museum. The role of Austrian subjects in the creation of the Dār-al-fonun (q.v.) in 1852 or in the development of Tehran in 1869–74 fall beyond the scope of the present survey, but their reports deserve mentioning: August Kříž (often written Kržiž; 1814-86) drew the first maps of Tehran and of the Alborz (q.v.) range and subsequently studied the indigenous astrolabe. Jacob Eduard Polak (1818-91), who introduced modern medicine in Iran, discovered fossil deposits in Azerbaijan and led an expedition across the Alborz in 1882. He also wrote a travel account, which contains excellent descriptions of Persian life and customs. Later botanical surveys were carried out by J. A. Knapp, Otto Stapf, and F. Nabelek (1909-10), geological ones by E. Tietze, H. Pöhlig, A. Rodler, and Carl Ludolf Griesbach. A zoological survey was carried out by the ichthyologist V. Pietsmann. At a time when urbanism was not acknowledged as a scholarly discipline, Ernst Diez, shortly before World War I, completed a survey of Khorasan province, which thus far had been poorly documented; he published his work subsequently as Iranische Kunst (Vienna, 1944).
(5) Cultural studies. Pastoral care or proselytism in modern Iran, with its social, but also cultural, issues, remains on the agenda of the Missionshaus St. Gabriel in Mödling; founded in 1889, it houses a rich library. It formerly published the anthropological journal Anthropos, which moved to Posieux, Switzerland, in 1938.
Nevertheless, the ministers of education and the Council of the University Professors felt committed to closing the gap between Austria-Hungary and Germany, and they endowed autonomous institutes for each discipline. At the University of Vienna, the Oriental Institute was founded in 1886; and one year later it began publication of the journal Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes (WZKM). The Institute for Linguistics was established in 1923. In addition to these measures, German professors were hired. Thus Eduard Sachau (1845-1930) succeeded Goldenthal in the chair for Oriental languages in 1869. Although he left for Berlin in 1876, his Viennese researches demonstrated how much light might be shed on Iran by using the sources from neighboring cultures. In “Neue Beiträge zur Kenntnis der zoroastrischen Literatur” he published fragments of Avestan in Arabic script; his expertise in Arabic sources bore fruit in his still authoritative Chronologie orientalischer Völker von Albîrûnî (Leipzig, 1876; English tr. The Chronology of Ancient Nations, London, 1879) and in his “Zur Geschichte und Chronologie von Khwarizm”; and he undertook the scientific edition of the Christian Syriac law texts in Syrische Rechtsbücher (Berlin, 1907-14), which remains irreplaceable for the laws compiled in the Sasanian empire (for the Byzantine tradition see now W. Selb and H. Kaufhold, Das syrisch-römische Rechtsbuch, Vienna, 2002). Friedrich Müller was succeeded in comparative linguistics by the Berliner Paul Kretschmer (professor, 1898-1938). The professor for Roman law Paul Koschaker (1879–1951) turned, under the influence of Hugo Winckler and Nikolaus Rhodokanakis, to Mesopotamian and Elamite law during his stays in Graz (1905-08), Innsbruck (1908-09), and Prague (1909-14). Alois Musil (1868-1944, cousin of the litterateur Robert Musil) was professor of biblical auxiliary sciences and Arabic at the Catholic Theological Faculty, 1909-18, and, after World War I, professor in Prague; he is mainly known for his Omayyad excavations, but he also studied medieval and modern Iran.
In other universities of the Austrian empire the German model was introduced generally earlier and more easily. In Graz, the first professor for comparative linguistics (1871-77) was Johannes Schmidt, the co-editor of the leading journal Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung. His successors Gustav Meyer (1877-97) and Gustav Meringer (1898-1930) were not particularly interested in Iranology, but in 1902 a professorship for “Orientalische Philologie, Arische Abteilung” was created for Johann Kirste (assistant professor 1895-1920), a Pahlavi paleographer who held fast to some unlucky asseverations of his master Friedrich Müller, such as the phonetic value /r/ for the Bactrian letter taken from Greek aspirate rho (which actually is Bactrian /š/) or the interpretation of the Semitic ideograms in Pahlavi as loanwords.
In Prague the Indo-Europeanist Georg Curtius was invited as early as 1845, followed in 1850 by the equally famous August Schleicher, who, however, felt himself uncomfortable in the neo-absolutist “Bach System” and the devout Catholic ambience; after him came Alfred Ludwig (1832–1912; associate professor 1860, professor 1871–99), who earned fame for his translation of the Rig Veda, but also studied the Avesta, Baluchi (Balōčī) epics, and Pashto. In 1877 and 1879 were appointed the first Privatdozents (unpaid professors)—respectively, Max Grünert (1849–1929, for whom a professorship was created in 1886) and Jaromír Břetislav Košut (b. 1854, d. 1880). Grünert defined himself as a “schoolmaster” and wrote a successful Neu-Persische Chrestomathie (Prague, 1881); Košut’s published Nachlaß included a rendition and a study of Ḥāfeẓ. After the division of the Ferdinand-Charles University into a German university and a Czech one in 1882, Grünert stayed in the former; and Rudolf Dvořák (1860-1920) was appointed as assistant professor at the latter in 1884 (in 1896, professor). Dvořák was primarily an Arabist, but he published a study of the Persian loanwords in the Koran (SKAW 118/4, 1889, pp. 481-562) and fine translations of Persian poetry in Czech. His students were Jaromir Borecky, Jindrich Endlicher, and Jan Rypka, who similarly devoted themselves to New Persian literary history.
In Cracow, Jan Hanusz’s (1858–87) untimely death delayed the creation of a chair for comparative and Sanskrit studies until 1894, when it was assumed by Jan Baudouin de Courtenay (1845-1929). This great linguist did not publish on Iranian languages and resigned in 1900 in favor of a call to St. Petersburg. His successor was Johannes von (Jan) Rozwadowski (1867–1935), whose researches on Iranian languages appeared from 1914 onward in the journal he had co-founded, Rocznik Orjentalistyczny. Working at the same time was the first Cracovian orientalist, Tadeusz Kowalski (1889–1948). The Iranologist Hans Reichelt (1877–1939), author of the Awestisches Elementarbuch, held the chair of comparative linguistics at the University of Czernowitz (endowed 1875) from 1911 to 1919.
In Hungary, Oriental studies developed in a different perspective. Since the time of the Byzantine historiographers, the origins of the Hungarians had been ascribed to the Huns and the Turks. This view, based on history rather than on linguistics, was adopted by Joseph Deguignes (Histoire des Huns, et des peuples qui en sont sortis, Paris, 1751; Histoire générale des Huns ... jusquà present, Paris, 1756-58) and by the first Privatdozent in Oriental languages at the University of Budapest, Johann Repiczky (lived 1817–1855); it remained commonplace in Hungary until J. Budenz. Thus Turkology and Central Asian studies, not Indo-European studies, benefited from the Romantic, passionate search for national antiquities, whilst Iranology was not deemed worthy of a separate professorship before 1946, when it was created for Sigismund Telegdi. The quest for the ancestral fatherland led Alexander Csóma de Korös to the Himalayas in 1823-30. The same urge took Ármín Vámbéry (Hermann Wamberger 1831–1913), disguised as a dervish, to Bukhara and Samarkand (1863-64), the first European scholar after the Russian spy Alexandre Demaisons to visit these cities. He brought back with him the New Persian and Turkic manuscripts collected by Daniel Szilágyi, one of H. L. Kossuth’s fellow exiles. In 1865, Vámbéry procured a position as teacher at the university, and he held a professorship from 1870 to 1905. His popular geographic descriptions enjoyed the greatest success, but his Geschichte Bocharas oder Transoxaniens (Stuttgart, 1872) is not reliable. He came from a very poor family and remained a lifelong autodidact more apt at discovering the Orient and at evoking it empathically than at studying it scientifically. J. Neméth, whose contributions to Iranian studies came after the war, filled his vacant chair only in 1915.
Eventually, Austria-Hungary had its share in the publication of Old and Middle Iranian primary sources. Karl W. Geldner’s (q.v.) edition of the Avesta (Avesta. Die heiligen Bücher der Parsen, 3 vols., Stuttgart, 1886–95) was commissioned by the Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Wien following the recommendation of Sachau and Fr. Müller. Josef von Karabaček became keenly aware of the chance discovery in 1877-78 of papyri in dump tumuli near Arsinoë in the Fayum. The carpet-dealer Theodor Graf facilitated the purchase of a substantial part of them by Archduke Rainer, who made a gift of them to the Emperor Franz Josef (r. 1848-1916) in 1899, and so they entered the Hofbibliothek. These papyri date from the 7th-8th centuries and constitute a rich collection of early Arabic texts. The archive also contains some papyri in Middle Persian, dating from the Sasanian occupation (619-29). Of this group, 580 (not 463, as Hansen, 1938, p. 10, gave erroneously) were kept in Vienna (fully catalogued; see Weber, 1984, p. 27); 66 were acquired by the Prussian consul Travers and are preserved in Berlin; 17 went to St. Petersburg, 6 to Straßburg (present-day Strasbourg), 1 to Göttingen, 7 to Oxford, and 20 to Philadelphia. Unfortunately, in 1937 the Vienna collection was entrusted for restoration to H. Ibscher in Berlin, where it shared (unduly) the fate of the Prussian estates in 1945 and was transferred as war booty to St. Petersburg (then Leningrad), where it still awaits publication. All attempts to negotiate the return of the papyri have so far proved in vain. Only 30 fragments, which resurfaced in Berlin in 1963, were handled back to Vienna in 1981. Thus the Papyrussammlung owns now 21 papyri, 8 parchments (including 3 bilingual), and 1 leather document.
Brilliant individuals but disrupted development (1919–65). The post-World War I period witnessed grave difficulties, and the disintegration of the Austro-Hungarian empire scattered the academic network. The Republic of Austria inherited only three universities—Vienna, Graz, and Innsbruck. Nevertheless, three eminent Iranologists were active between the two world wars: Bernhard Geiger (q.v.), Hans Reichelt, and Paul Tedesco. At the University of Vienna, Geiger was appointed as successor of Leopold von Schroeder in 1920. His scholarly output was irreproachable but spare. Iranology did not thrive in Vienna; of 185 Ph.D. degrees awarded in the Oriental Institute from 1873 to 1938, only 20 had Iranology or “Arisch” (i.e., Indo-Iranian) as major or minor subject, while there were 39 in “Ägyptologie” or “Afrikanistik,” and 110 in Semitic philology (excluding cuneiform studies). It was not Geiger’s fault; between 1923 and 1939, he examined eleven Ph.D. dissertations, almost matching the 12 directed by the Egyptologist W. Czermak. However, he inherited no tradition, worked in isolation, and did not exploit the Rainer papyri. Only one of his pupils took up an academic career (another, the ethnologist Robert Bleichsteiner [1891–1954], who earned his Ph.D. in 1920 with a thesis on the Šāh-nāma of Ferdowsi, had been supervised by Schroeder). That was Paul Tedesco, who during his Viennese years published classics in Middle Iranian studies. In 1921, he proved that the two orthographies used in the Iranian Manichean texts actually represented dialectal variation between Middle Persian and Northwest Iranian (i.e., Parthian); he also reconstructed the verbal endings of Middle and New Iranian languages, identifying the interchange of -a- and -aya-stems; and his 1926 assessment of nominal endings in Sogdian and Khotanese remains valid despite having been based on the meager evidence available at that time. It is still unique in being founded on exhaustive and sorted philological data, which enabled him to define the Sogdian “Rhythmic Law” that governs the whole morphology of that language. However, he procured no position and had to earn his living as a secondary school teacher. In 1938, after the “Anschluß” of Austria to Hitler’s Germany, both Geiger and Tedesco were dismissed for being Jews and left for the Asia Institute of Columbia University in New York, and later for Yale (Otto J. Maenchen-Helfen [1894-1969], a specialist in Central Asian studies, underwent the same exile). Geiger was replaced by the Indologist (and National Socialist) Erich Frauwallner. Once again Iranology was partitioned, in keeping with German tradition, between scholars of Oriental studies and those of comparative linguistics. Thus, Herbert W. Duda (1900-75), professor of Turkic and Islamic studies from 1943 to 1971, published a New Persian text on Saljuq history (Die Seldjukengeschichte des Ibn Bibī, Copenhagen, 1957). After his retirement and the short professorship of Berthold Spuler (1971-73), the chair was transferred to the Turcologist A. Tietze, and Persian disappeared as a major from the Oriental curriculum. When in 1964 the former k.u.k. Konsularische Akademie, became the Diplomatische Akademie, the two-century old course in New Persian similarly was discontinued.
From 1921 to 1930, Georg Hüsing (1869–1930), a student of Spiegel and Andreas, held a professorship of History of the Ancient East and Iran (he had been Privatdozent since 1912). His contributions to the (pre)history of Mazdaism are, like most others in that period, vitiated by the Andreas theory (see ANDREAS iii.); they appeared bold even to contemporaries in their explicit rejection of Bartholomae. Hüsing was more successful in interpreting Middle Elamite (although somewhat misled by his belief that Elamite was a Caucasian language) and in editing all Elamite texts available to him. His student Franz Wilhelm König (1897–1972) wrote extensively on Achaemenid history and authored, in a forty-year period, two editions of the Middle Elamite corpus (the second one is still authoritative). Severely wounded during World War I, he only taught for a few years at the university (as Privatdozent in the history of the ancient Middle East, 1931-39, professor, 1948-51). He bequeathed his own translation of the Avesta to the Austrian National Library.
The Iranological tradition in Graz was admirably perpetuated by Hans Reichelt (1920-26 as professor of Indo-Iranian, Kirste’s successor, and 1930-39 as professor of Indo-European and Indo-Iranian, succeeding Meringer). Among his works, two studies stand out and are still highly useful: Die soghdischen Handschriften des Britischen Museums (Heidelberg, 1928-31) and “Iranisch" (in Grundriß der indogermanischen Sprach-und Altertumskunde, II. Die Erforschung der indogermanischen Sprachen IV/2, Leipzig, 1927, pp. 1-84). Reichelt also connected the Sogdian potential verb construction of kar-/ßw- + the past passive participle with a feature of the living Yaγnōbī language, which had been discovered by H. C. Salemann in 1913, with Old Pers. ditam čaxriyā, and with Khotanese (parallels exist in Balōčī too, but not in Avestan pace Reichelt). His successor was Wilhelm Brandenstein (1898–1967, professor from 1941 to 1967); in addition to Elamite studies, in 1958 he and his former student Manfred Mayrhofer published an esteemed handbook on Old Persian grammar (German revised edition, 1964). Another noteworthy pupil of Reichelt was the historian of religion Alois Closs (1893–1984). Private scholars at Graz included Fridrich von Suhtschek-Hauschka (1863-1944), who published four articles between 1928 and 1932 in which he attempted to prove the idea (already proposed in 1864 by Gustav Oppert and possibly containing some truth) that Wolfram von Eschenbach had resorted to Iranian Manichean sources for his Parsifal. However, gross exaggerations and hazardous etymologies discredited his attempt (cf. Reichelt’s review in WZKM 11, 1933, pp. 37-49), so that his opus magnum Parsiwal found no publisher and ended up in the University Library in Graz (Slaje, 1989). Another such scholar was Uto Melzer Edler von Tapferheim (1881–1961), who, besides some articles which refurbished Kirste’s ideas and received a cool response, left to the university library his own translations (e.g., Nāser-e Ḵosrow’s Safar-nāma, published in 1993). He also left two unpublished dictionaries, one for New Persian, the other for Middle Persian, which, although uncritical, are probably the most complete extant in a Western language (cf. El Zarka and Scheucher).
Fieldwork also was resumed in the period between the two World Wars, notably by Alfons Gabriel (1927, 1933, 1937; he collected numerous specimens of desert fauna), Hans Strasser, M.D. (1935, 1961, 1963-66; he made a few Balōčī, New Persian, and also Sanskrit, Bengali, Syriac, and Turkish recordings, now in the Phonogrammarchiv), Reinhold Löffl;er (ethnology), K.-H. Rechinger (1937-67, d. 1998; he initiated the publication of Flora Iranica beginning in 1963), Franz Kasy (1962, lepidopterology), H. M. Steiner (amphibiology), Helmut Flügel and Othmar Friedrich (geology). A long series of limnological expeditions since 1949 have also appeared in print (Ferdinand Starmühlner, Heinz Löffl;er). The geologist Anton Ruttner mapped Iran with the help of his wife, and Otto Thiele and Herwig Holzer worked at the Geological Survey Institute in Tehran. Eminent geographers have been the Viennese professors Gustav Stratil-Sauer (1894-1975; holder of the chair of human geography 1955-62), who traveled to Afghanistan by motorcycle in 1924, and Hans Bobek (1903-90; professor for physical geography 1951-71), who launched six expeditions to Iran between 1934 and 1978. More recently, Hans Pozdena and Martin Seger worked for some time in Tehran.
By the end of the 1960s, Iranian studies was falling into abeyance in Austria and undergoing a progressive deinstitutionalization. The great development of numismatics arose from a private initiative, as Robert Göbl (1919-97), who worked in the auction house Dorotheum between 1953 and 1962, catalogued the Kushan and Hephthalite coins and seals. Even if his earliest readings and absolute chronologies have lost ground, they for the first time set the subject in a scientific and systematic light. His catalogue of the Kushan coins is authoritative. The anthropologist Karl Jettmar (b. 1918) submitted his Ph.D. dissertation in Vienna in 1941. Acting as scientific member of the mountaineering Österreichische Himalaya-Expedition, in 1958 he discovered at Danyor one of the first of the inscriptions to be found on the Upper Indus, which have proved a treasure trove for Prakrit, Sanskrit, and Sogdian alike; he began the publication of the inscriptional material in 1978 (both this epigraphic enterprise and his fieldwork on the Kafirs were carried out under the aegis of the University and the Academy of Heidelberg). Another Iranologist active outside Austrian academic circles is Cardinal Franz König (b. 1905), archbishop of Vienna 1956-85, whose publications (from his Ph.D. thesis at the Gregorian University in Rome, Die Aməša Spəntas im Awesta und die Erzengel im Alten Testament, to Zarathushtras Jenseitsglaube und das Alte Testament, 1964) concentrate on the Iranian influence upon Judaism.
The modern situation (since 1965). Since 1974, the Oriental and Indian Institutes of the University of Vienna have made do with lecturers in New Persian; a practical initiation into Persia’s language and culture is also available of at the Orient-Akademie Hammer-Purgstall (created in 1958). Conversely, Vienna has become, for the first time, a major center for pre-Islamic Iranian studies, mainly due to the organizing efforts of Manfred Mayrhofer (b. 1926) and Robert Göbl. The Institute for Linguistics, which has published the scholarly journal Die Sprache since 1949, has remained a leading facility for Indo-Iranian studies under the professorship of Mayrhofer (1966–89), Jochem Schindler (lived 1944–94; professor, 1987-94), and Heiner Eichner (since 1989). Mayrhofer’s etymological dictionaries of Indic are of paramount importance for Iranian (the evidence of which is always sifted); Schindler’s articles have shown how far-reaching inferences concerning the reconstruction of Indo-European may be drawn from nugae philologicae Avesticae. Amongst his students, Chlodwig Werba habilitated in Indo-Iranian Linguistics (1997), and Agnes Korn in 2003 submitted a Ph.D. dissertation to the University of Frankfurt, entitled Towards a Historical Grammar of Balochi: Studies in Balochi Historical Phonology and Vocabulary. The chairs for Indo-European in Salzburg (O. Panagl, T. Krisch), Innsbruck (H. Schmeja, Privatdozent 1967, assistant professor 1975-94) and Graz (rendered dormant in 2003; H. Mittelberger, professor 1971-2003; his student Manfred Hutter, assistant professor 1991–2000), also provide lectures in Old and Middle Iranian. Manfred Hutter (D.D., Ph.D.) engaged in research on the contacts between Mesopotamia, Judaism, the Aramaeans, and Iran with special regard to Manicheism, but he left for Bonn in 2000. The Grazer professor for classics, Franz Ferdinand Schwarz, has produced an edition of Arrian with extensive commentaries.
In 1965, an Institute for Numismatics (also intended for the pre-Islamic history of Central Asia) was created at the University of Vienna for Robert Göbl. Other departments have touched upon the subject of Iran. Indo-European and Indo-Iranian loanwords in the Uralic languages have been dealt with by Károly Redéi. The Pamir has attracted ethnologists: Karl Graz and Roger Senarclens de Grancy to the Wakhan (three expeditions, 1962, 1970, and 1975) and Maximilian Klimburg to Nuristan. The last-named scholar also investigated the chronology of the Buddhist paintings in Central Asia and established, together with Alfred Janata and Karl Wutt, the small Kafir collection of the Museum für Völkerkunde in Vienna. Erika Bleibtreu is an esteemed specialist of Achaemenid art. G. Rasuly-Paleczek (Institute for Ethnology) has studied the tribal system in Afghanistan.
The most noticeable development has occurred at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Its ongoing project Tabula Imperii Byzantini covers some parts of the Sasanian empire. R. Göbl instituted in 1970 the Numismatic Commission (now directed by M. Alram), with the projects Sylloge Nummorum Sasanidarum (cf. R. Gyselen) and Coins and History of Bukhara from the first Arab attacks to the Abbasid revolution. Above all, M. Mayrhofer (secretary of the Phil.-Hist. Section, 1970-82; secretary of the whole Academy, 1970–73) founded in 1969 a commission for the elaboration of an Iranian onomastical dictionary (to replace F. Justi’s Iranisches Namenbuch, Marburg, 1895). By 2002, this had grown, under Mayrhofer as chairman and under his successors J. Schindler and H. Eichner, into the Institute of Iranian Studies, headed by Bert G. Fragner. The Institute of Iranian Studies is today unique in Austria in being solely devoted to Iranian studies and in supporting two publication series, the Iranisches Personennamenbuch and the Veröffentlichungen der Kommission (now Institut) für Iranistik. The latter has 29 publications to date, by Ronald E. Emmerick and Prods Oktor Skjærvø, Wolfgang Felix, Jost Gippert, Karl Jahn, M. Mayrhofer, Rüdiger Schmitt, O. Szemerényi, X. Tremblay, L. Zgusta, and others, as well as the edition of the Avestan Aogəmadaēča by K. Jamasp Asa.
No comprehensive history of Iranian studies in Austria exists. This reflects the nineteenth-century paradigm that did not regard the field as an autonomous discipline (see text above). The following abbreviations are used in addition to those in the EIr. “Short References and Abbreviations of Books and Periodicals”:
AfO: Archiv für Orientforschung, Graz, Horn, and later Vienna.
ArOr: Archív Orientální, Prague.
DKAW: Denkschriften der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
DÖAW: Denkschriften der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse.
ÖAW: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.
SKAW: Sitzungsberichte der Kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Classe.
SÖAW: Sitzungsberichte der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Klasse.
General bibliographies. Karl Acham, ed., Geschichte der Österreichischen Humanwissenschaften, Vol. I. Historischer Kontext, wissenschaftssoziologische Befunde und methodologische Voraussetzungen, Vienna, 1999. Anton Baumstark, Geschichte der syrischen Literatur, Bonn, 1922.
Theodor Benfey, Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft und orientalischen Philologie in Deutschland seit dem Anfange des 19. Jahrhunderts, Munich, 1869.
Bio-bibliographies de 134 savants, Acta Iranica 20, Leiden, 1979; articles concerning Austria: “Alois Closs,” “Franz König,” “Manfred Mayrhofer,” “Hans Schmeja,” and “Ronald Zwanziger.” Dokumentation zur Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 1847–1972, Vol. I. Die Schriften der philosophisch-historischen Klasse, Vienna. 1972.
Bernhard Fabian, ed., Deutsches Biographisches Archiv [microfiche], Munich, 1960-99.
Bert G. Fragner, “Iranian Studies in German-speaking Countries: Federal Republic of Germany, German Democratic Republic, Austria and Switzerland,” Iranian Studies 20/2-4, 1987, pp. 53-98.
Alfons Gabriel, Die Erforschung Persiens, Vienna, 1952.
Leo Santifaller, ed., Österreichisches biographisches Lexikon 1815-1950, 11 vols., Graz and Cologne, and later Vienna, 1957–.
Constantin von Wurzbach, Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Öesterreich, 60 vols., Vienna, 1856–91.
Institutional histories. Jiří Bečka, “L’iranologie tchécoslovaque,” in Hommage Universel I, Acta Iranica 1, 1974, pp. 374-88.
Idem, Iranica Bohemica et Slovaca. Litterae, Prague, 1996. Josef Eiselt, “Forschungsarbeit des Naturhistorischen Museums Wien in und für den Iran,” in Hommage Universel, Acta Iranica 1, 1974, pp. 335–47.
Max Freiherr von Gemmel-Flischbach, Album der k.k. Theresianischen Akademie, Vienna, 1913. Fritz Freiherr Lochner von Hüttenbach, Das Fach Vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft an der Universität Graz, Graz, 1976.
Fritz Freiherr Lochner von Hüttenbach, Manfred Hutter, and Walter Slaje, Indo-iranische Sprachen und Kulturen. 100 Jahre Forschung und Lehre in Graz, Graz, 1991.
Manfred Mayrhofer, “Irans Kultur- und Sprachenwelt in der Arbeit der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,” Hommage Universel I, Acta Iranica 1, 1974, pp. 328–34.
Richard Meister, “Das Werden der philosophischen Fakultät Wien,” Almanach der ÖAW 86, 1936, pp. 357–76.
Idem, Geschichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Denkschriften der Gesamtakademie, ÖAW I, Vienna, 1949.
Oskar E. Pfeiffer, “75 Jahre Institut für Sprachwissenschaft und wie es dazu kam,” Sprache 38/3, 1996 , pp. 3–70.
Idem, “Die Früh- und Vorgeschichte der Sprachwissenschaft in Wien,” Sprache 39/3, 1997 , pp. 25–78.
Nosratollah Rastegar, “Iranistische Tradition in Österreich,” WZKM, forthcoming. Heinrich Pfusterschmid-Hardtenstein, “Von der Orientalischen Akademie zur k.u.k. Konsularakademie,” in A. Wandruszka and P. Urbanitsch, eds., Die Habsburgermonarchie 1848-1914 VI/1, Vienna, 1989, pp. 122-95.
L. Reyckman, “Orientalistyka,” in Bogdan Suchodolski, ed., Historia Nauka Polski III, Wrocław, etc., 1977, pp. 751-62.
Anton Cornelius Schaerdinger, “Die Turkologie und Iranistik in Österreich,” Bustan 4/4-5/1, 1963-64, pp. 8–11.
Helmut Slaby, Bindenschild und Sonnenlöwe, Die Geschichte der österreichisch-iranischen Beziehungen bis zum Gegenwart, Graz, 1982.
Johann Georg Wenrich, Commentatio historica qua quantum linguarum orientalium studia Austriae debeant, exponitur, 2 vols., Vienna, 1822 and 1824.
Zur ersten Säkularfeier der kaiserlichen Akademie der orientalischen Sprachen im Jänner 1854, Vienna, 1854.
History of related fields of research. Franz Babinger, “Die türkischen Studien in Europa bis zum Auftreten Josef von Hammer-Purgstalls,” Die Welt des Islams 7, 1919, pp. 103–29.
Johann Fück, Die arabischen Studien in Europa, Leipzig, 1955.
Hans L. Gottschalk, “Die Arabistik in Ös terreich,” Bustan 4/4-5/1, 1963-64, pp. 3–7.
Suzanne Kakuk, “Cent ans d’enseignement de philologie turque à l’Université de Budapest,” in L. Ligeti, ed., Studia Turcica, Budapest, 1971, pp. 7–27.
Ernst Dieter Petritsch, “Die Wiener Turkologie vom 16. bis zum 18. Jahrhundert,” in Germano-Turcica, Zur Geschichte des Türkisch-Lernens in den deutschsprachigen Ländern, Bamberg, 1987, pp. 25–34.
Ernst Windisch, Geschichte der Sanskritphilologie, 3 vols., Leipzig, 1917–21.
Library catalogues and papyri collections. Iraj Afshar, Catalogue of Persian Manuscripts in the Austrian National Library and in the Austrian State Archives in Vienna. First part: Austrian National Library. The Acquisitions 1868-1994. Second Part: Austrian State Archives. Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Tehran and Vienna, 2003.
Dorothea Duda, Die illuminierten Handschriften und Inkunabeln der österreichischen Nationalbibliothek. Reihe I: Islamische Handschriften. 4: Persische Handschriften, DÖAW 117, 1983.
Gustav Flügel, Die arabischen, persischen und türkischen Handschriften der k.k. Hofbibliothek, 3 vols., Vienna, 1865–67.
Adolf Grohmann, Corpus Papyrorum Raineri Archeducis Austriae III.I/1, Allgemeine Einführung in die arabischen Papyri, Vienna, 1922.
Olav Hansen, Die mittelpersischen Papyri der Papyrussammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, APAW 1938/9, 1938.
Josef von Karabaček, Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer, Führer durch die Ausstellung, Vienna, 1894.
H. Krafft, Die arabischen, persischen und türkischen Handschriften der k. k. orientalischen Akademie zu Wien, Vienna, 1842.
Dieter Weber, “Die Pehlevifragmente der Papyrussammlung der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek in Wien,” in Festschrift Erzherzog Rainer, Vienna, 1983, pp. 215–28.
Idem, “Pahlavi Papyri und Ostraca (Stand der Forschung),” in W. Skalmowski and A. Van Tongerloo, eds., Middle Iranian Studies, Louvain, 1984, pp. 25-43.
Numismatic collections. Paul Z. Bedoukian, Coinage of Cilician Armenia, Numismatic Notes and Monographs No. 147, The American Numismatic Society, New York, 1962.
Robert Göbl, “Sammlung orientalischer Münzen in Österreich,” Bustan 4/4-5/1, 1963-64, pp. 83–92.
Alexander Ritter von Petrovicz, Sammlung Petrovicz. Arsaciden-Münzen, Vienna, 1904.
Eduard von Zambaur, Manuel de généalogie et de chronologie pour l’histoire de l’Islam, Hanovre, 1927.
Idem, Orientalische Münzen, Vienna, 1906; idem, Orientalische Numismatik, Vienna, 1907.
Special studies (in addition to those cited in the text). M. Alram and D. E . Klimburg-Salter, eds., Coins, Art, and Chronology. Essays on the Pre-Islamic History of the Indo-Iranian Borderlands, DÖAW 280, Vienna, 1999.
[Theodor Benfey], “Briefe an Theodor Benfey,” Beiträge zur Kunde der Indogermanischen Sprachen 8, 1884, p. 267.
Hans Bobek, Die natürlichen Wälder und Gehölzfluren Irans, Bonner Geographische Abhandlungen 7, Bonn, 1951.
Wilhelm Brandenstein and Manfred Mayrhofer, Antiguo Persia. Gramatica, inscripciones, Madrid, 1958; German version: Handbuch des Altpersischen, Wiesbaden, 1964.
C. Bucher, “Hammer-Purgstall,” Ph.D. diss., Universität Wien, 1949.
[Alois Closs], Obituary and bibliography, Anthropos 79, 1984, pp. 637 ff.; 80, 1985, pp. 677–89.
Ernst Diez, Churasanische Baudenkmäler, Berlin, 1918.
[Rudolf Dvořàk], obituary and bibliography, ArOr 29, 1960, pp. 529–46.
[Herbert Duda], bibliography, WZKM 66, 1960, pp. 1 ff.
Dina El Zarka and Bernhard Scheucher, “Eine lexikalische Fundgrube: Uto von Melzers Wörterbuch,” ZDMG 151, 2001, pp. 70-101.
Godfried E. Friess, Die Reise des Hans Christoph Freiherrn von Teufel in das Morgenland 1588-1590, Programm des k.k. Obergymnasiums der Benedictiner zu Seitenstetten, Linz, 1898.
R. Göbl, System und Chronologie der Münzprägung des Kušânreiches, ÖAW, Vienna, 1984.
[R. Göbl], obituary, Numismatische Zeitschrift 106-107 (Robert Göbl-Gedächtnisschrift), 1999, pp. 9-21.
Karl Gratz and Roger Senarclens de Grancy, Hindukusch, Österreichische Expedition in den Wakhan 1970, Graz, 1972.
[Max Grünert], obituary, ArOr 1, 1929, pp. 247–50.
Ryka Gyselen, Arab-Sasanian Copper Coinage, DÖAW 284, Vienna, 2000.
Josef Freiherr von Hammer-Purgstall, Erinnerungen aus meinem Leben 1774-1852, ed. by R. Bachofen von Echt, in Fontes Rerum Austriacarum, Abt. II, Diplomataria et Acta, 70, Vienna, 1940.
[Josef Freiherr von Hammer-Purgstall], obituary, Feierliche Sitzung der KAW, 1857.
Dora Heinz, “Persische Teppiche im Österreichischen Museum für Angewandte Kunst,” Acta Iranica 2, 1974, pp. 401-13.
Georg Hüsing, Die iranische Überlieferung und das arische System, Leipzig, 1911.
Idem, Krsaaspa im Schlangenleib und andere Nachträge zur iranischen Überlieferung, Leipzig, 1911.
Idem, Die einheimischen Quellen zur Geschichte Elams, I. Altelamische Texte, Leipzig, 1916.
Idem, Der Mazdahismus, Vienna, 1935.
Paul Hultsch, “Der Orient in der deutschen Barockliteratur,” Ph.D. diss., Universität Breslau, 1938.
Manfred Hutter, Manis kosmogonische Šābuhragān-Texte, Wiesbaden, 1992.
[Jan Jesen] Iohan. Iessenii a Iessen, Zoroaster. Noua, breuis, ueraque de universo Philosophia, Wittenberg, 1593.
Joseph Ritter von Karabaček, Die persische Nadelmalerei Susandschird, Ein Beitrag zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der Tapisserie de haute lisse, mit Zugrundelegung eines aufgefundenen Wandteppichs, nach morgenländischen Quellen dargestellt, Leipzig, 1881.
Max[imilian] Klimburg, The Kafi;rs of Hindu Kush: Art and Society of the Waigal and Ashkun Kafi;rs, Stuttgart, 1999.
Friedrich Wilhelm König, Corpus Inscriptionum Elamicarum, Hanover, 1926.
Idem, Die elamischen Königsinschriften, AfO Beiheft 16, Graz, 1965.
[Friedrich Wilhelm König] obituary, Almanach ÖAW, 1972, pp. 352-55.
[Paul Koschaker], obituary, ZDMG 104, 1954, pp. 1–44.
Theodor Kotschy, Die westliche Elbrus bei Teheran in Nord-Persien, Vienna, 1861.
[Theodor Kotschy], obituary Almanach KAW 17, 1867, pp. 215–64.
August Kržiž, Plan von Teheran, Tehran, 1857; repr., Graz, 1977.
George Kunoth, Die historische Architektur Fischers von Erlach, Bonner Beiträge zur Kunstwissenschaft 5, Düsseldorf 1956.
[Alfred Ludwig], obituaries, Jahresbericht des deutschen Vereins für Volkskunde und Sprachwissenschaft in Prag 20, 1912; and Bibliographisches Nachbuch und deutscher Nekrolog 17, 1912 , pp. 128-33.
Uto von Melzer, Farhangnewis. Persisch-deutsches Wörterbuch, ms., to be published as a CD-ROM by the Academy of Sciences, Vienna. [Uto von Melzer], bibliography, in Nosratollah Rastegar and Walter Slaje, Uto von Melzer (1881–1961), SÖAW 477, Vienna, 1987.
Alois Musil 1868–1968, Brünn [Brno], 1968.
V. Hans von Mžik, Beiträge zur historischen Geographie, Kulturgeographie, Ethnographie und Kartographie, vornehmlich des Orients, Vienna, 1929.
H. Pohlig, “Geologische Untersuchungen in Persien,” Verhandlungen der k. k. geologischen Reichsanstalt 1884, pp. 40-64.
Jakob Eduard Polak, Persien, das Land und seine Bewohner. Ethnographische Schilderungen, Leipzig, 1865.
Heinrich von Poser und Groß-Nedlitz, Lebens- und Todes-Geschichte, worinnen das Tagebuch seiner Reise von Constantinopel aus durch die Bulgarey, Armenien, Persien und Indien ans Licht gestellet von dessen Sohne Heinrich von Poser und Groß-Nedlitz, Jhena [Jena], 1675.
Károly Rédei, “Die ältesten indogermanischen Lehnwörter der uralischen Sprachen,” in Denis Sinor, ed., The Uralic Languages, HO, Achte Abteilung, vol. 1, Leiden and Cologne, 1988, pp. 638-64.
Alois Riegl, Altorientalische Teppiche, Vienna, 1891.
J. Russegger, Reisen in Europa, Asien und Afrika, mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die naturwissenschaftlichen Verhältnisse der betreffenden Länder ..., Stuttgart, 3 vols., 1846–49.
Eduard Sachau, Chronologie orientalischer Völker, Leipzig, 1878.
Idem, “Neue Beiträge zur Kenntnis der zoroastrischen Literatur,” SKAW 67, 1871, pp. 805-52.
Idem, “Zur Geschichte und Chronologie von Khwârizm,” SKAW 83, 1873, pp. 471-506; 84, 1873, pp. 285-330.
[Eduard Sachau], bibliography, in Gotthold Weil, ed., Festschrift Eduard Sachau, Berlin, 1915, pp. 1–14.
Paulus a Sancto Bartholomaeo, Systema Brahmanicum Liturgicum mythologicum ciuile, Romae, 1792.
Idem, Dissertatio de antiquitate et affi;nitate linguarum Zendicae, Sanscritanicae et Germanicae, Padovae [Padua], 1798.
Idem, Dissertatio de latini sermonis origine et cum orientalibus connexione, Romae, 1802.
Ottokar Freiherr Schlechta von Wssehrd, “Fethali Schah und seine Thronrivalen,” SKAW 54, 1864, pp. 14-44.
Idem, Der Frühlingsgarten von Mewlana Abdurrahman Dschami, Vienna, 1846.
Idem, Der Fruchtgarten von Saadi, Vienna, 1852. Idem, Ibn Jemin’s Bruchstücke, Vienna, 1852, 2nd ed. 1879.
Idem, “Die Kämpfe zwischen Persien und Russland,” SKAW 66, 1864, pp. 4-67.
Franz Ferdinand Schwarz, Geschichte und Geographie Bhāratas in Arrians Indike, Graz, 1973.
Rogers Senarclens de Grancy, Großer Pamir: Österreichisches Forschungsunternehmen 1975 in den Wakhan, Graz, 1978.
Idem, Wakhan, Graz, 2000.
Walter Slaje, “Fridrich von Suhtscheck und das «Pārsīwalnāmä»,” ZDMG 139, 1989, pp. 93-103.
Gustav Stratil-Sauer, Geographische Forschungen in Ostpersien, 2 vols., Vienna, 1953-56.
Josef Strzygowski, Altai-Iran und Völkerwanderung. Ziergeschichtliche Untersuchungen über den Eintritt der Wander-und Nordvölker in die Treibhäuser geistlichen Lebens, Leipzig, 1917.
Idem, Die Baukunst der Armenier und Europa, Vienna, 1918.
[Festschrift] Studien zur Kunst des Ostens. Josef Strzygowski zum 60. Geburtstage, Vienna, 1923.
Georgius Tectander von der Jabel, Kurtze und wahrhafftige beschreibung der Reiß von Prag aus, durch Schlesien, Polen, Moscaw, Tartareyen, bis an den Königlichen Hoff in Persien, Leipzig, 1608.
Paul Tedesco, “Dialektologie der westiranischen Turfantexte,” Le Monde Oriental 15, 1921, pp. 184–258.
Idem, “a-Stämme und aya-Stämme im Iranischen,” ZII 2, 1923, pp. 281–315.
Idem, “Ostiranische Nominalfl;exion,” ZII 4, 1926, pp. 94–166.
Giovanni Christophoro [Teuffel] barone de Gunder storff, Viaggo fatto di Constantinopoli verso Levante, Vienna, 1598.
Josef Tieffentaller, S.J., Des Pater Joseph Tieffenthaler d. G. J. und apostolischen Missionarius in Indien historisch-geographische Beschreibungen von Hindustan, 3 vol., Berlin, 1785-86, 1788, and 1787.
Wilhelm Tomaschek, Centralasiatische Studien. “I. Sogdiana,” SKAW 87, 1877, pp. 67-184; “II. Die Pamir-Dialekte,” SKAW 96, 1880, pp. 735-900.
Idem, Die Goten in Taurien, Vienna, 1881. Idem, “Zur historischen Topographie von Persien,” SKAW 102, 1883, pp. 145-231; 108, 1885, pp. 561-652.
Idem, “Kritik der ältesten Nachrichten über den scythischen Norden,” SKAW 116, 1888, pp. 715-80; 117, 1889, pp. 1-70.
[Johann Georg Wenrich], Francisci I. Imperatoris Augusti patriae parentis Festum Natalitium... Inest Commentatio de Adfi;nitate priscae Indorum linguae, quam Sanscritam dicunt, cum Persarum, Graecorum, Romanorum atque Germanorum sermone, Vindobonae [Vienna], 1827.
Julius Ritter von Wiesner, Mikroskopische Untersuchungen alter ostturkestanischer Papiere, DKAW, math.-naturwiss. Klasse, 72, 1902.
Idem, Ein weiterer Beitrag zur Geschichte des Papiers, SKAW 148/6, 1904.
Idem, Über die ältesten bis jetzt gefundenen Hadernpapiere, SKAW 118/5, 1911.
K. M. Woschitz, M. Hutter, K. Prenner, Das manichäische Urdrama des Lichtes, Vienna, 1988.
|اتریش، مطالعات ایرانی||Austria||motaleat e irani dar otrish|
(X. Tremblay and N. Rastegar)
Originally Published: July 20, 2005
Last Updated: August 17, 2011